Bruce Vaschina - (Former) Independent Candidate for Pine Rivers 2024

Position on public vs. private infrastructure and services

​

• While I have a general preference for private ownership of assets (though as widely and evenly distributed as possible through voluntary charity and self-restraint), I am also happy to accept that many essential services / items are reasonable to be held in public hands (though I do also note that some essential items - like food - seem to operate very successfully and accessibly to all, despite being almost completely privately supplied).

​

• Therefore, for items like water and electricity, I do believe it is wise to retain at least 50% government ownership (and therefore control) of the source supply of these.

 

• In terms of transport networks, in particular road and rail, I would take a similar position though I am not opposed in general to the idea of toll roads (on the general principle of “user pays”). I would also tend to be supportive of any scheme that funded such infrastructure on a more “user pays” basis.​​

  • An example would be a fuel levy offset by a reduction in registration costs. Why should someone who doesn’t drive as much as other people pay as much for road maintenance as those who use the roads much more?

  • Being a bit of a motoring enthusiast. I would also be supportive of a scheme where registration fees are more aligned to issues that directly impact road maintenance such as weight, rather than the current arbitrary system based on number of engine cylinders (though even the issue of weight would tend to be reflected in increased fuel usage and so again, a fuel levy would possibly be a very good / fair system).

  • Having been (and still being) a user of public transport, I am generally supportive of these methods of transportation though again with a view to allow much private ownership as long as the market competitive forces keep prices under control for the average person.

 

• Similar to the above discussion on public infrastructure, I also accept the position that sometimes a service / business provides such widespread benefit that if it takes government intervention to retain it, that that is acceptable. However, I would like to see government investment reflected in actual ownership rather than simply being a gift / grant.  If the public is giving money to some private business to help it out, then the public should gain the direct benefit of being an owner and sharing in the profits.

 

• It may be a little outside of state jurisdiction, but I would also like to encourage (but not mandate) that private businesses consider giving their employees some ownership interest in the company. In this way, permanent wealth is distributed a little more to the ordinary worker while also giving them increased incentive to do their very best for the company as they will also share in its profits.

 

• On public vs. private health care, my view of freedom from coercion in helping others would lead me to move more towards individuals being more responsible to looking after their own health care needs without reliance on the government.  However, having been the beneficiary of some very good public health care services in recent times does leave me wanting to moderate that view somewhat. As there are already some taxation incentives for people to take out private health insurance, I would want to move very slowly in changing our current systems.

 

While some of the above may attract the charge of “economic neo-liberalism”, please note other statements that I do believe that allowing great amounts of economic freedom can go astray and leave too much money / power to be concentrated in the hands of a ruthless and unscrupulous few, and that some freedoms may need to be restricted to prevent this happening.  Also, while not an expert, and wanting to exercise significant caution, I am open to the possibility that the federal government’s power as an issuer of our own currency, could be used to alleviate un / under-employment, and provide more aid to those genuinely unable to lift themselves out of poverty.  Note also that I am not an advocate of rapid change that leaves little time for ordinary people to adjust to different circumstances and so any changes to current welfare or government services that put more responsibility back onto the individual, would need to be implemented gradually.