You don't have to read about Brexit,just have read of this article from the Advocate,We have the same ponzi deal here in Australia that has the same thread as those pork barrelling numph.y in the EU
Article from Tasmazia in part
Hobart is rumbling about the northern electorates getting a far better deal on election promises than the two southern seats.
On raw numbers, the rumbling is completely justified.
Politically, it was never going to be any other way.
The southern seats - Franklin and Denison - were never going to change hands in this election.
Labor’s Julie Collins is safe in Franklin and independent Andrew Wilkie is sure to hold Denison.
So, politically, there is little value for the Liberals or Labor making big promises for those electorates.
Rather, they have focused their promises on Braddon, Lyons and Bass.
Those are the seats which are potentially losses for the Liberals, and which Labor has a chance to gain.
None of this is to argue the parties are taking the right approach morally.
More that they are taking the correct approach politically, which, sadly, can be a very different thing.
The “error” that has been made in the two southern electorates when it comes to getting a good share of pork barrelling is that they are too far one way.
Left in the case of those two, but the principle would be the same in heavily right-wing seats too.
The key then, to getting sports developments on every corner and funding of just about all things for all people, is to be a marginal seat where the result remains in doubt as the election looms.
One says just about because some of the projects which actually should have been backed to the hilt in the three northern electorates have not been, such as the $30 million for Cradle Mountain.
At the same time, there have been some highly significant announcements, and a lot of rats and mice stuff.
The Liberals and Labor have done what parties facing the prospects of defeat or victory will always do at election time, regardless of the
perilous state of government finances.
As this column has noted before, fear of losing seats or power or the hope of gaining power are the key political motivators in Australia.
Many politicians are very concerned with getting the best possible outcomes for people, and will push back against nonsense.
They are to be applauded, but they are not a majority when victory is on the line.
Perhaps the best we can do, as residents, is try to ensure politicians allocate public money - that’s right, it’s our money, not theirs – to the best possible projects.
All proposals should be assessed on their merits.
A basic set of guidelines could be that we prioritise funding which will either allow or unlock ongoing wealth-creating jobs and economic growth, or improve lives or living standards in a best bang for buck kind of way.
If we look at the set of election promises from both sides through that prism, we get a selection of the good, the so-so and the ugly.
Meanwhile, Tasmanian independent Senator Jacqui Lambie has put the heat on both big parties by demanding more clarity on a range of (mostly Tasmanian) issues by election eve.
Some of the most compelling include a long-term commitment to the Mersey Community Hospital and the full $30 million for Cradle Mountain.
If she can force extra clarity before the election, she will have done good work.
.
