The election campaign has

started.
This state goes to the polls next March. It's a fixed term government so the date has been fixed since the last election.
I don't like the idea of fixed terms. Certainty? Yes, that's a good thing. Getting rid of a government which is not performing or has done something improper or illegal? Apparently impossible.
The present government needs a shake up. Although it is claiming "underdog" status sources tell me they are still "very confident" they can retain power, especially since the planned return of a political identity.
But it isn't just that. 
We have the state's Education Minister holding out for more funding. She is claiming that the state is "losing" around $230m in funding. Actually we aren't. The money was never there in the first place. Of course she would like it. No doubt everyone in the state would like it but it was never more than a "perhaps" and then only "if" many people agreed to many things. 
In politics of course that makes no difference. You simply tell the voters the naughty federal government is diddling the state out of a lot of money. Yes, people will believe it. It doesn't matter which flavour of state or federal government you are talking about - or even if they are both left or both right (or central) - it is something which can be used as an election issue.
And then there is the "big" announcement in this morning's paper. This involves the major development of a tourist attraction to make it "world class".  At present it is an interesting but small wildlife park. The plan is to turn it into something big and glitzy - hotel, shopping mall and more, complete with cable car and tree top walkway.  
Maybe. There have been other big plans announced before. There is a zoo outside the city which is at the site of what was supposed to be a "satellite city". The city has never eventuated - possibly because people don't want to travel that far to work in the city or the surrounding suburbs. It may happen when the land runs out down here or it might not.
I can think of two major problems with the announcement made in this morning's paper. One of them probably, almost certainly, applies to the satellite city. That's water. A lot of people require a lot of water. Where would you get it from? We already tend to have water restrictions in summer because the dams in the hills don't hold enough for the increasing numbers of backyard pools being built. The other problem with the proposed wildlife park development is the location. It's in an area where a fire could be disastrous. Trying to get a lot of people out very quickly could be extremely difficult - if not impossible.
So, it might sound good if you like that sort of thing but I think there might need to be a lot more homework done.
Oh well, I guess it's part of the election campaign.