One of the remarkable things about the spread of new state agitation in the 1920s was the way it encouraged new ideas. Once you propose fundamental changes to existing systems, then you are free to develop alternative ideas in their place. Not all those ideas were sensible, but together they provided an alternative view.
The same is true today. Do we want rotating Parliaments, how should Government be structured, what do we want our Government to focus on, how do we capture the talents of our area?
At a purely personal level, one of my frustrations has been that as a New Englander I really have no way of contributing directly to the area that I love.
Assume that I want to use my skills in public policy and public administration to benefit the North? How can I do it?
If I join the NSW Public Service and want to stay in the area, then I am locked into lower level positions. If I go to Sydney, then I am locked into a system that makes it hard for me to focus on my regional interests. I cannot in all conscience argue a New England position when I have to take broader state interests into account, including the positions of my political masters. The most I can hope to do, and this is actually not a small thing, is to ensure that New England is not actively disadvantaged.
Now that we have a revival in new state interest, now that we are tracking in towards the possible reformation of the Movement with the aim of forcing another referendum, we can again think of what we might want New England to look like.
As in the 1920s, some of the ideas are not going to be sensible or doable. But they do give us a chance to look afresh, freed from the bounds imposed by increasingly rigid existing structures.