An interesting point was raised by Mark Hamilton in this SMH Article:

Irwin’s brand of conservation is one that conservative
governments feel comfortable with. His emphasis on individual
responsibility takes the pressure off government. And no powerful
interests are threatened by it. Only public ignorance, solved by
watching Irwin’s TV programs, stands in the way of saving the
animals.

This is why Howard has been so full of praise for his work. The
Irwin circus distracts us from the otherwise conspicuous failures
of environmental policy over the past decade.

They are particularly cruel to him over at catallaxy. I’m in two minds about this. I certainly don’t see a problem with the fact that his zoo is private or trying to make people more individually responsible for their choices. But I do think there is something in his argument. I’ve been disturbed in the past when I find out about a service that would seem pretty important, like flying doctors, soup kitchens and rape victim support, is funded and staffed through private charities. I do wonder why it isn’t the responsibility of the government (even if it’s then outsourced) and if by being charitable, we have let them off the hook. I can see a lot merit in the argument that government should be small and that we can provide charity for that which we feel requires help, but at the same time I find a lot of charities hideously inefficient, with needless duplication and often tied to dubious religious strings. I also feel there should be some base level of support, a safety net to ensure that people have their urgent medical (inc mental health), nutritional and housing needs met. Anyway, I figure if we are going to live in a big government state, it can at least benefit people in need rather than supporting paperwork. While they still collect vast amounts of taxes, I can’t see how they can justify not paying for important services and maintaining public assets but insist on supporting the largest Australian bureaucracy ever (it would seem to manage the ever expanding bureaucratic requirements on enterprise).

,