01-23-2020, 10:27 AM
The difficulty is that there isn't government for the greater good - there is government to suit their ideology, and if that means stopping a program that works, or not starting one that may, then they will do that. Government departments are now politicised and instructed what to do by pollies that often have little experience in that field. Governments used to go to the public service for advice. This meant that ideological changes weren't as extreme.
There was a stark difference between parties at the last election. One had policies that were spelled out, but couldn't convince the electorate to accept them. The other had policies that strongly align to the top couple of % of the country.
Good example is East-west link in Vic. Liberals gung ho and going to do it at any cost. Labor gung ho and not going to do it at any cost. Reports not really read/acted upon.
Another current example is MacKenzie going against the advice of her department to award grants.
Sorry for going off topic - there will be bushfire implications in all of this as well!
There was a stark difference between parties at the last election. One had policies that were spelled out, but couldn't convince the electorate to accept them. The other had policies that strongly align to the top couple of % of the country.
Good example is East-west link in Vic. Liberals gung ho and going to do it at any cost. Labor gung ho and not going to do it at any cost. Reports not really read/acted upon.
Another current example is MacKenzie going against the advice of her department to award grants.
Sorry for going off topic - there will be bushfire implications in all of this as well!