It was interesting to recently read in the "Launceston Examiner" that once more there has been discussion on once again on local government amalgamations. This has been tried and yes we have reduced the number of local councils to reduce duplication and make them more economically manageable but naturally there will be opposition from vested interests who prefer the status quo.
Originally we had 46 councils or municipal regions and these were reduced to 29.
The proposal is to cut them back to 11 and it makes sense economically yet most ratepayers are naturally very wary of the creation of super councils which will seem distant and remote from them. Most would prefer a local council that would concentrate on needs closer to home.
Do we need state governments at all? I wonder if we bypassed them and only had the federal and local governments, what a lot of duplication would be cut.
What do you think?
Robin
No comments:
Post a Comment