Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Why not statehood for New England?

In an opinion piece in the Sydney Morning Herald's National Times George Williams, Professor of Law at Sydney University, argues in favour of full statehood for the Northern Territory.

Why not statehood for New England?

We have been seeking self-government first as a colony and then as a state for over 150 years. Despite the structural decline in New England's position that has taken place in the absence of statehood, we are still far larger on every key measure than the NT.

If, as I believe, that statehood is justified for the NT, then surely New England should be given a go.       


Greg said...

Absolutely right Jim. How do we get this message out and how do we get it to be taken seriously?

Jim Belshaw said...

By hammering away, Greg. In saying this I am conscious of my own lack of follow up on certain things. Yet some things give me comfort.

Awareness of New England or the North as an entity has increased. Recent example here -http://www.urbaninsider.com.au/pop-up-wants-to-bring-melbourne-fashion-to-newcastle/

Interest in broader Northern history has increased. I base this on responses to my own writing. This was the background to this post - http://belshaw.blogspot.com/2011/07/joy-of-history-in-internet-world.html.

We continue to build up interest in and content on specific NE issues. Railways is an example. This gives us a new base for later work and networking.

The NT statehood movement provides a base and a trigger. Because this is backed by the NT Government and has money behind it in a way that we do not, it has a self-sustaining element. I think that we piggy back on this as hard as possible.