Well theoretically, it's supposed to. The idea is that as a democracy we have voted in politicians who feel the same way we do, and so they vote in line with our beliefs (especially on conscience votes when they're not restricted by party lines). Of course democracy is flawed and we often end up with politicians who do not feel the same way we do, but it's the closest way the government is going to get an indication of how the Australian community is feeling via a vote without going to a referendum. (Of course there are other non-voting ways such as polls and petitions etc but they won't hold much sway in parliament unless specific elecorates are nagging their members… and then that comes back to our members voting in line with our feelings).

That said, I agree with queenstuss, hooray for no dam. I have family who live in the far northern reaches of Brisbane (still not quite the Mary Valley so they have no vested interest) and (if I remember correctly) it was someone from that family telling me what a bad position that was for a dam. Apparently it doesn't have very good rainfall, has/would have a high evaporation rate (possibly due to surface area?), and then of course there's all the valuable agricultural land and threatened species that live there.

I don't know when children became a right. Was it when Madonna started pinching African babies? It seems a strange notion to me that every body has the right to be a parent.

And I'd be further curious to find out how this right to be a parent (assuming that's your stance) translates to how you can bring up your child – if your right to have a child is conferred by the state does the state get to dictate the way you raise them? Like can immunisations be forced onto children against the parent's will? What about religious indoctrination – can a parent teach their child whatever they want?

There's a murky area that appears if we give the state the role of arbiter over childbirth (see China) and if we see childbirth as a right for all citizens.