Hi Baz,
There probably is no right answer in all this as clearly people will have different agendas and experiences. For me the bottom line is that it is all about money,
1) those that want to travel and trying to make their savings last a lifetime,
2)businesses that want a fair return for their effort and investment,
3)and lastly governments that want to satiisfy their constituentsat a cost.
I have no problems with 1 and 2 but unfortunately there is a much greater control and consequent concern with 3.
Governments will respond to the will of the people but we know this is not perfect and consequently I feel that the silent majority are often overlooked in achieving the right answer. There are many examples but let's not get bogged down with these. It is much easier for minority groups and businesses to lobby the various levels of government on these issues then it is for market forces to determine the answer.
Generally I'm happy to vote with my feet (or
wheels as is the case here) but that gets increasingly more difficult when there is a national push. Where a councill decides in their wisdom (maybe with a little help from economic interests within its chamber) to close a "free" stop we can chose to move on to the next town where this is not the case - happy to spend my money there! This gets harder when overnight stops are closed by state government due to safety reasons (what a load of - oops sorry) that makes it hard to move on. Equally when national parks say no pets there is no room for compromise - it doesn't matter that I travel with an old bird that is more at risk in these parks and would never breed or survive longer than a couple of hours. The point is there is continued pressure for people to become dissobedient because they are given no room to move - or give up travel altogether.
I believe that there is a fair argument that if we do not want economic forces to control our habits then we should be some measure of freedom on government controlled property. I don't subscribe that there needs to be an additional cost for this either unless there are some clear facilities on offer. I believe that taxes should be enough but would be happy for a modest fee if there are facilities.
The urgument that this leads to
camping places ruled by ratbags and pigs is shallow there are laws that should prevent this but these are never enforced or enforcable as it an easier path to control law abiding citizens.
Sorry for tha rant.
Kind regards
Theo