August 25, 2017

Don’s Dynamite – A New Democracy

A new democracy!

In the great depression last century we had President FD Roosevelt promote and implement the ‘New Deal’. A game changer for the masses.

At the end of the last century we had Treasurer Peter Costello and the A New Tax System (Goods & Services Tax) Act 1999. A game changer for Australian citizens which gifted the Commonwealth enormous levels of unexpected tax revenue which successive government then set about wasting.

At August this year, Australia moved to the cutting edge of a new democracy.  Move over Greeks [who can arguably claim to have invented democracy], Malcolm the Marvel has speared your ideas of democracy and come up with a revolutionary idea supported by his trusty assistant Barnaby the Brilliant [yes I have seen the error of my ways as expressed in the last issue of Don’s Dynamite and wholeheartedly embrace the brilliance of the ‘Big B’].

So how does this all come about?

It’s simple and straightforward.  MM has come up with the idea of a postal vote on same sex marriage. Whether or not you’re a supporter of legislation permitting SSM, just think of the brilliant rationale behind the postal vote.

Firstly, the vote, irrespective of the outcome, is not binding on the Parliament. So even if you do have your say, the parliament is not bound to take into account a majority view on the SSM or any other subsequent topic of a postal vote.

Second, the vote will be obtained at what must be seen as a bargain basement price – a mere $122 million if MM is to be believed.

But, above all, it is the future that the postal vote is no doubt directed to.

My reasoning is:

  • if we can conduct government business by postal vote, then we can rid ourselves of a good number of politicians. Clearly redundancies would not arise – why would anyone be entitled to be paid for a job they have been elected to perform but haven’t performed.
  • more jobs would be created in the Bureau of Statistics and Australia Post. The more postal votes, the more the need to have real people involved in the process. More workers than politicians one would assume and the superannuation payments would not be as expensive.
  • there would of course be a real prospect that in the future, the more successful and more time consuming postal votes became, it might just be possible that Australia could do without politicians at all.

So in an effort to present a more balanced argument, there are both some up and down aspects to the postal vote concept. Here are just a couple:

  • A Possible Down Side – Creating employment might well be an upside but if each postal vote was to cost in the order of $122 million then could we make better use of say lumps of $122 million? Let’s forget new hospitals, new roads, new schools and the like. The idea of participating in such a novel undertaking would far outweigh the need for new hospitals, new schools et al and just think about this, instead of blaming politicians for non-delivery of services and infrastructure, we could blame the whole population.
  • A Possible Up Side – With all the sabre rattling going on at the moment over North Korea, [MM and BB have already said that we will be there if there is conflict – though MM clearly mis-stated the effect of the ANZUS treaty] just imagine if we had a postal vote on whether or not to go to war. By the time the postal vote was conducted no doubt the pro-Trump forces would have won the war by sheer ‘fire and fury’ and an Australian contingent would simply miss out on all the glory of participating. Is that such a bad result for Australia and our young men? Seems to me that $122 million for a postal vote on war is good value to save the slaughter of our youth on yet another mis-adventure of yet another ‘Coalition of the Willing’ which could obviously be labelled under many other titles.