- Sep 29, 2008
- AFL Club
- West Coast
No, we don't need less government in the absolute sense, we need greater oversight and to cut the ties between vested interest and government.Indeed. In the end these whistleblowers have pretty much wasted their time because, as usual, people are unwilling to see the forest for the trees: we need less government involvement in our lives, not different government.
We have inherently corrupt governments because the nature of government is inherently corrupt.
Corporate rule is an unacceptable alternative. It is villainy in the private sector, which has largely eroded the integrity of the system.
However, I do agree that there are many things which the government does that are overbearing. The TPP should be canned, the intelligence services reined in, the DSTO subject to thorough review and greater oversight. Anti terror laws scrapped, allowing greater foreign competition into the domestic home loans market and so on and so forth.
Banning corporate electoral donations, stricter oversight of COI's and clamping down on the revolving door, by penalising political pensions, of politicians that promote legislation for jobs, would do far more to fix the system, then arbitrary or selective deregulation and cutting the public service. Otherwise we will just end up following the yanks in their slow slip towards corporatism.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of limited government powers and a more accountable, less wasteful public service, I just don't think this is the end game for faux conservative think tanks like the IPA, or bunk political movements like the Tea Party. More a Trojan Horse, disguised by appealing (to some) ideals.