Snowy Hydro sale CANCELLED

Submitted: Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:15
ThreadID: 34541 Views:1964 Replies:18 FollowUps:39
This Thread has been Archived
JOHN Howard has forced New South Wales and Victoria to abandon plans to sell off the Snowy Hydro scheme after saying he would pull out of the deal.

OHN Howard has forced New South Wales and Victoria to abandon plans to sell the Snowy Hydro scheme after saying he would pull out of the deal.
The sale was now impractical following the Federal Government's decision not to sell its 13 per cent stake in the project, NSW Premier Morris Iemma said today.

"The Prime Minister has pulled the rug out from under the sale," Mr Iemma said.

Enter your feedback Your say: Do you support the sell-off backflip? »
Vote PDF: Map of Snowy Hydro Scheme »

The Victorian Government had only ever agreed to sell its 29 per cent share after the NSW and Federal Governments had said they would sell their shares in the scheme, a spokeswoman for Premier Steve Bracks said.

"The Victorian Government will not proceed with the sale of its stake either," she said.

Advertisement:
<a href=" Site Link <img src="http://saturn.tiser.com.au/images/Truelocal_Moneybags_300x250_alt.gif" alt="" width="300" height="250" border="0"> </a>
Mr Iemma said the Federal Government's decision had fundamentally changed the nature of the planned sale through a sharemarket float.

"NSW expected that Commonwealth, Victorian and NSW governments would jointly proceed with the sale," he said.

The Federal Government's decision not to proceed made it extremely difficult for NSW to proceed with the sale, Mr Iemma said.

The proposed privatisation has come in for strong opposition from the public and some government MPs, and prominent Australians have also spoken out against the plan.

Mr Howard said today the Government had been swayed to change its mind.

"For whatever combination of reasons, there is overwhelming feeling in the community that the Snowy is an icon, it's part of the great saga of post World War II development in Australia," he said.

"It conjures many stories of tens of thousands of European migrants coming and blending with each other and in the process of working on the Snowy becoming part of this country. And people feel that.

"I have listened to that, and it is important that on occasions a government have both the courage and the willingness to change its mind on something."

The Federal Government initially decided to sell its 13 per cent interest after the New South Wales and Victorian Governments announced they would sell their larger stakes.

Selling Snowy Hydro had never been part of his public policy plans, Mr Howard said, and the feeling in his party had grown strongly against the sale.

He said Special Minister of State and the member for Eden-Monaro, Gary Nairn, had been "crucial" in persuading him and senior government members to change their minds.

"The decision to sell has created a lot of unhappiness in the Australian community, right across the political spectrum," Mr Howard said.

"I am not such a zealot about privatisation that you sell everything under the sun irrespective of the circumstances."

Mr Howard said the Government had no intention of buying the NSW and Victorian Governments' shares in the Snowy.

"We won't buy out the NSW and Victorian Governments," he said.

"It's for them now to decide what they do. We only hold 13 per cent."

Mr Iemma said the cancellation of the sale left the problem that Snowy Hydro needed to expand interstate but the NSW Government could not afford to fund this without cancelling the construction of schools and hospitals.

"If Snowy Hydro Ltd does not invest interstate, its competitors will and Snowy Hydro will face increased competition and lose market share," he said.

"The NSW Government still believes NSW taxpayers' funds should be spent in NSW, to build schools, hospitals and infrastructure. It should not be spent building power stations and in SA and Victoria.

"This is an issue we now need to take up with the Commonwealth."

Mr Howard denied there were comparisons with the planned full sale of Telstra.

"There's a big difference," he said.

"There's a long term public benefit (to selling Telstra). It's the major telecommunications company in the nation.

"It's been our policy for each election. It was our policy in 1996, it was our policy in 1998, it was our policy in 2001, it was our policy in 2004.

"The sale of the Snowy was not part of our election policy; I've never campaigned around the country and argued the case for the sale of the Snowy."

Mr Howard said the Federal Government had initially not given much thought to the Snowy sale and had simply decided to proceed after the NSW and Victorian governments decided to sell their larger stakes in the scheme.

"We went along with the decision," he said.

"I don't know that it was given, at the time, an enormous amount of consideration."

Mr Howard admitted he had been taken off guard by the level of hostility the proposal had generated.

"I have been surprised by the level of public disquiet - it's turned out to be much greater than I expected," Mr Howard said.

"I don't mind admitting that."

Mr Iemma ruled out NSW making any contribution to the capital the Snowy Hydro scheme needs to grow in a competitive and risky market.

"That capital is not going to come from the taxpayers of NSW," he said.

"I'll make that very clear."
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:20

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:20
hahahahahaha what a lot of backflippers :))) Sad to say, the one i'd trust most is Howard. Iemma and Bracks are lowlifes.

Damn (pun intended) good news though.
AnswerID: 176352

Follow Up By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:32

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:32
G'day gramps,

I'd agree with you but it just does me no comfort to say that we can trust Johnny when he states that he hadn't given it much thought. What a dumb thing to say even for him. I agree a good outcome if it is now finished. We can get back and bash him on industrial reform!

Kind regards

0
FollowupID: 432376

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:35

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:35
"Sad to say, the one i'd trust most is Howard. Iemma and Bracks are lowlifes. "

Yep Gramps - you're right.... especially in reference to Iemma and his old cohort - Carr. These people have been entirely incompetant in running NSW. The last 10 years has seen NOTHING added to the bottom line for this state. Both Carr and Iemma should be bloody jailed!

Where are our petrol tax dollars going? Why are our roads and other infrastructure platforms falling apart? Why do our trains suck? Why are our hospitals understaffed and over-full? Why are our police seeing criminals go free? Why aren't P-platers who terrorise the roads in their WRX's and Godzilla cars picked up and punished?

Throw them all out and start again I think.
0
FollowupID: 432377

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:45

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:45
G'day Beatit,

Just shows you how 'in touch' our venerable politicians are with public opinion. Why do they waste so much money on opinion polls and spin doctors? They're no better than witch doctors examining the entrails of whatever poor thing is destined for the dinner table.

JH definitely needs a belting over industrial reform though.
0
FollowupID: 432379

Follow Up By: Member No 1- Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:49

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:49
you want to see incompetence?....come to SA

0
FollowupID: 432380

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:50

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:50
Omaroo,

The Opposition in NSW has shown SFA but Labour HAS to go, surely.

Yeah, Carr and Egan etc sure new when the gig was up. The absolute injustice of them rolling in dough now while the State's infrastructure, that they were elected to maintain and improve, falls apart. Where did the money go? If there was any justice, they'd be hauled up before an inquiry and thoroughly grilled ( though I'd prefer hung, drawn and quartered, at least ).
0
FollowupID: 432381

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:05

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:05
Sad part is Gramps... that the last three or four polls run found that the incumbent government would be returned.

Are New South Welshmen & women fools? If they return this damn governement they must be!
0
FollowupID: 432386

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:19

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:19
Omaroo,

To tell you the truth, I get VERY worried when I hear people say they've voted for one party all their life or because their father voted for that party. In my opinion they should'nt even have the vote because they've proven they're incapable of exercising it.

I'm definitely a 'swing' voter and not in the least bit influenced by promises of a few bucks extra in tax reform. In my view, that was the biggest mistake Costello made with his recent budget. The money should have gone towards national infrastructure projects that would benefit the country as a whole i.e. a damn sight more could be spent on projects to lessen the impact of drought, etc.

It's well and truly past time this country had some politicians with the balls and vision to embark on projects like the Snowy River Scheme.
0
FollowupID: 432393

Follow Up By: Shaker - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:13

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:13
Omaroo ...... If this Government doesn't get back in, who will govern?

LABOR ????
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha , rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl, lmao lmao lmao lmao lmao lmao lmao lmao!

They couldn't run a chook raffle at the moment!

This really should have been posted under Friday Funnies!
0
FollowupID: 432434

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:17

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:17
Uhmm... are referring to state or federal level Shaker?

I'm thinking both....

:)
0
FollowupID: 432436

Follow Up By: Shaker - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:48

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:48
I was talking federal, but going by the state Labor govt in Victoria, either are a joke!
0
FollowupID: 432446

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 18:04

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 18:04
yep - agreed.

Labor aren't... and couldn't... be referred to as an "opposition".
0
FollowupID: 432452

Follow Up By: A.J - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:49

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:49
Put a "B" infront of lowlife and you might be close to Bracks. . . . what a. . . .
0
FollowupID: 432477

Follow Up By: Steve - Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 13:42

Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 13:42
Gramps: Couldn't agree more with that last post. (so you must be right) ;-)
0
FollowupID: 432600

Follow Up By: Steve - Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 13:45

Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 13:45
Excellent news btw......and credit to Johnny for turning. Iemma must be well pi$$ed off. ;-)
0
FollowupID: 432601

Reply By: ozdragon - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:48

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:48
This is Great News. They should never have tried to sell off an aussie icon anyway.

Peter
AnswerID: 176362

Reply By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:51

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:51
Great. Now that other idiot - Bob Brown is taking the credit. What a tosser.

"Senator Brown has taken credit for the backflip, saying it was a legal opinion sought by the Greens that showed the sale would be illegal unless properly legislated.

The Government faced a "sea of public hostility" when it announced it would legislate the sale, which ultimately led to the pull out, he said.

"This is a Greens political victory."
AnswerID: 176364

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:12

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:12
What, no mention of the NSW Greens voting with Labour in '97 for it to be sold in the first place? Bob Brown is a tosser of the first order (with bar, gold leaf, etc etc)
0
FollowupID: 432390

Reply By: Mike Harding - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:58

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 14:58
Excellent news!

Because of his position (and actions) with regard to ownership of firearms in Australia I shall not consider voting Liberal until he has left the office but he has done an excellent job here.

There should _never_ have been any consideration of selling this asset.

Mike Harding
AnswerID: 176367

Reply By: Barnesy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:01

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:01
What's this? Johnny PREVENTS a successful Australian company from being privatised. That's going against the grain of his policies over the last 10 years. Let's hope it continues for as long as the Libs are in Canberra.

Barnesy
AnswerID: 176368

Follow Up By: Member - Mike DID - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:26

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:26
Libs in Canberra AND Labour in NSW - that's the ONLY reason it happened.

Mike
0
FollowupID: 432438

Follow Up By: Mad Dog (Australia) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:43

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:43
And in Vic Mike. I'm pretty damn sure you are correct on this, it's the only reason that makes sense....listen to the people hahahah what a load of bulldust
0
FollowupID: 432444

Reply By: PeterWH - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:04

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:04
Another 'Back Flip' by Howard...now lets see him do a 'backflip' on Telstra....pigs might fly too.
How do we get rid of this arrogant man
AnswerID: 176369

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:08

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:08
What... you consider it a "Howard" backflip? I think that he's done right by all of us. He had the guts to do it anyway - even though he knew that people will be calling it a "backflip" and getting up him for it.

Credit due where credit's due, huh?
0
FollowupID: 432387

Follow Up By: cuffs - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:11

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:11
Obviously the major majority of voters want him and to prove it they even gave him the senate, it is called democracy. Until the next election when you can vote again stop crying or you will flood the Snowy.lol
0
FollowupID: 432389

Follow Up By: chump_boy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:25

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:25
I don't know about other people, but selling Telstra was actually a pretty smart thing to do.

It is run so much like a government department it is not funny - I don't know how they make any money at all. With competition from Singtel / Optus, and Telstra slowly losing it's market dominance, better to get rid of it now before it becomes a liability.

If the government cuts it lose, Telstra will either sink or swim. If it sinks, it was going to anyway. If it swims, there are an awful lot of taxes to be collected.......

Yes I know there are more issues than that, like remote communications and payphones and stuff, but it is a competitive marketplace.

I think Howard realises politicians are goot at politics, not running a telecommunications company like Telstra.

Cheers,

Chump
0
FollowupID: 432394

Follow Up By: Member - Traveller (QLD) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:51

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:51
"How do we get rid of this arrogant man"

Ya vote him out, mate!

But before you do, have a very close look at the alternative! A very close look.

Remember what they attempted to serve up last time?
0
FollowupID: 432448

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 18:49

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 18:49
You're spot on their Traveller. Beazley, Crean, Latham, Beazley again. They've got to be kidding.

Keating must be pi$$ing himself laughing over his famous remark that 'the souffle (sp?) does'nt rise twice'. Beazley could'nt even control his own party a few short months ago and yet people are seriously looking at him as an alternate PM hahahahahahahahahahaha
0
FollowupID: 432463

Reply By: chump_boy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:12

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:12
Can someone please give me one good reason why we need state governments in this day and age?

Couldn't their functions be split up, and either managed federally or at a local council level? Local councils could look after rubbish collection, park maintenance, and all sorts of things, and let the feds worry about Health, and Schooling, and Infrastructure, and everything else!

I'm sure all the financial problems could be fixed if this middle level of government was removed from the picture.

Come on - we only have 30 million people here. We don't need these extra fingers in the pie!

Or do we???

Chump
AnswerID: 176371

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:17

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:17
I agree old Chump

We are one of the most over-governed countries in the world.

Even stupider thing... "let's have a country where we have a clash of ideologies between federal and state levels as well!"
0
FollowupID: 432392

Follow Up By: Member - John - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 18:44

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 18:44
Only a tad over 20 million population, which makes it worse. Yes, lets get rid of State Governments, great idea. How do we go about doing it though?????
John and Jan

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 432462

Follow Up By: Member - Jiarna (NT) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:55

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:55
The Constitution is why. If we want to get rid of State governments, we need to rewrite the Constitution, which is not a bad idea anyway.
Cheers
John
Those who say something cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 432480

Reply By: PeterWH - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:19

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:19
Why dont we get rid of councils,State & Federal Gov'ts and have a system,where as the people of Australia from each state/Territory and there are 8 vote for either deligate A or B and the one with the most vostes leads or runs the country....gee that would save us heaps of money.
Any Yes Howard has done a 'backflip' and its time that he took more notice of the Australian public instead of doing what HE WANTS and bugger the rest of the country.We are in drought,we reside in rural NSW and does he care...NAW why should he!!!!!

PeterWH
Peak Hill
AnswerID: 176374

Follow Up By: chump_boy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:35

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:35
Peter,

I think the system we have now would work if it were run properly. If we got rid of all the back room deals, scrapped state governments, and actually made politicians accountable for their actions.

We do need different opinions at the top, not some nutter like Bush, or Clinton, or someone like that. The US system is bloody worse than ours - the person with the most money gets in......

Don't get me started on what I think would work for this country. Lol.

Cheers,

Chump
0
FollowupID: 432396

Reply By: Member - Boo Boo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:23

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:23
Chump
I agree. We do not need three tiers of govt get rid of state.Gramps I agree with your thought s and will do my own backflip and by you a beer when you pass through Scone)-))))
Regards Bob
Hell I'm really pleased with myself for not getting on a soap box about Iemma. Must be cause I going out at 4.30 and haven't got time
AnswerID: 176378

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:45

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:45
hahahahaha don't worry Boo Boo, I think I've said enough about Iemma/Carr etc for both of us. I admire you're restraint. We could always discuss it over a few refeshing ales next time I'm northward bound :))
0
FollowupID: 432402

Reply By: Mike Harding - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:29

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:29
I am always surprised that when politicians change their minds it is seen as a "bad thing". Even the word "backflip" is used in a negative and pretentious sense.

Surely _anyone_ who changes their mind is saying; "I am wiser today than I was yesterday"? And that has to be a good thing... doesn't it?

Maybe if we (the public) were more accepting of politicians doing this, rather than pillorying them, they would do it more often and we would have wiser government?

Mike Harding
AnswerID: 176379

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:36

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:36
Absolutely Mike!

It is a terribly derogatory term, and is often mis-used in this context. I agree with you that John Howard changed his mind because he was capable of seeing that the sale would not be good for the people - and ultimately his government. Sensible really!

It was the two state Labor governments who were pushing the sale through anyway, not the federal government! Stop blaming Howard for everything and open your eyes everyone! Think for yourselves!
0
FollowupID: 432397

Follow Up By: chump_boy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:39

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:39
I agree 100% Mike.

It takes a very brave person to admit they were wrong in the beginning, and have now changed their mind accordingly.

Although I do think changing ones mind due to public opinion is a bit weak - all the facts should have been looked at to begin with. What did they think would happen when they announced this? People would say "Hey - thats a great idea".....lol

Cheers,

Chump
0
FollowupID: 432398

Follow Up By: Gramps (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:49

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:49
Mike,

I don't have a problem with the 'backflip' thing. Why not be derogatory when a politician admits they did'nt give such an important decision much thought? I have far more respect for them when they drag things out a bit and thoroughly investigate the issue. Pity none of the three did in this case, obviously.
0
FollowupID: 432405

Reply By: chump_boy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:42

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 15:42
So let me get this right....

2 Labour governments wanted to sell this public asset, and the Liberal government went along with it - kinda like "sure thing guys - we only hold a minority share".

Then when the Liberal government says they aren't going to support it due to public opinion, the Greens/ Labour grab it and start bashing them?

Have I missed something?

Chump
AnswerID: 176385

Follow Up By: Barnesy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:32

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:32
Chump, read my next reply as to why Labor and Greens are bashing Johnny over this.
0
FollowupID: 432417

Reply By: Barnesy - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:29

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:29
Johnny is a very smart man. He probably went along with the sale for a few days so public opinion could build up, then change his mind on the issue making the two state LABOR leaders look like idiots.

It makes all of the arguments Labor has about privatising other public assets look ridiculous.

I'm no fan of his policies over a period of 10 years but he is a shrewd politician.

Barnesy
AnswerID: 176392

Follow Up By: The Bigfella - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:43

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:43
"he is a shrewd politician"

You have to be kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! One has NEVER existed in this country.

The Bigfella
0
FollowupID: 432418

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:11

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:11
EVERY politician who makes it to the top chair in a country is "shrewd".
=========================================

Definition:
1. Characterized by keen awareness, sharp intelligence, and often a sense of the practical.
2. Disposed to artful and cunning practices; tricky.
3. Sharp; penetrating: a shrewd wind.
=========================================

Let's see you make it that high up in politics without being smart enough to trounce your opposition.

LOL!!
0
FollowupID: 432432

Follow Up By: Barnesy - Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 01:57

Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 01:57
Exactly Omaroo. He knows how to make his opposition look stupid and himself look good. He's been doing it for at least 12 years.

If the opposition could make Johnny look stupid over Telstra, industial relations, medicare, medibank, public hospitals, public schools, iraq, children overboard, worsening trade debt.......................
we may have a different PM.

Do not underestimate political leaders Bigfella. They can be cunning. Always read between the lines.

Barnesy
0
FollowupID: 432544

Reply By: cokeaddict - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:59

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 16:59
I have been following this story from day 1. I have to admit, for a while there i really thought they were selling it no matter what. Thank god for media and Allen Jones in particular. He really hammered this issue over the airwaves for ages. Im not a real fan of his BUT i congradulate him for the guts to share the facts with us, the unknown public on many of the issues behind this stupid attempt to sell something that belongs to US...the public.

I will be holding the door open at the next election when this premier is kicked out with all his ignorante mates...fairwell idiot.

Ange.
AnswerID: 176399

Follow Up By: Member - Omaroo (NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:04

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:04
Here here Ange

Allan Jones really HAS been hammering this out for the past few weeks on Sydney radio. I can see why he's number one in the ratings every time. I don't really like the bloke's personality - but I have to say that he really does a lot of good for the downtrodden, and for general interest topics such as the Hydro Scheme.
0
FollowupID: 432429

Reply By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:46

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 17:46
Lets hope everyone remembers that Iemma want to sell of something we already own and throw him out at the next election..
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired 2016 and now Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 176407

Reply By: On Patrol - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:25

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:25
Nothing like a bit of politics to get the juices flowing.

A wise man once said "The desire to be a politician should be a permanent barr from being one" Billy Connelly I think.

Dont vote for them it only encourages them.

What will future pollies sell to raise funds if this generation sells ALL our infrastructures????

AnswerID: 176424

Follow Up By: Member - Banjo (WA) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:38

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:38
Lamingtons?

Banjo (WA)
0
FollowupID: 432470

Follow Up By: On Patrol - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:49

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 19:49
Banjo, Mate
Even Westons bakery is in foreign hands, that means the profit from Lamingtons goes off shore unless we build a goverment bakery from the proceeds of the next sell off.

Nahh, we could have a gigantic international garage sale and sell John, Morris and Steve. But wait, what would we get instead, to lead us????
On Patrol.
0
FollowupID: 432476

Follow Up By: Member - Jiarna (NT) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:02

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:02
The people in a democracy get the leaders they deserve. Maybe it's not just the politicians who have a problem?
Those who say something cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 432483

Follow Up By: On Patrol - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:15

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:15
Jiarna,
You are soooo right.

However with the current party system, voting is like gambling at a casino, It's hard to beat the house, unless you are part of a party/syndicate.
On Patrol.
0
FollowupID: 432488

Reply By: Alan H (Narangba QLD) - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:51

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:51
Can we really have progress without political reform?

Get rid of donkey votes - use a circular vote paper with radial printing

Get a process where politicians can be voted out of office for poor performance (no unfair dismissal claims allowed either)

Get rid of State Governments - communications today mean we can talk to each other on other sides of the country unlike early settlement times.

Governments should provide basic infrastructure to provide life style benefits to all. eg Telstra - govt should provide basic infrastructure and have one set of towers and cables with private enterprise utilising the nation wide structure to provide service across the country as distance costs etc are part of infrastructure.

We certainly only need one health system and one education system across the nation (oops just sacked myself)

We can also do without apartheid by stealth.
AnswerID: 176442

Reply By: Nifty1 - Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:52

Friday, Jun 02, 2006 at 20:52
This is not a political comment, but I think people get carried away by the term 'backflip'.

When you do one, you end up facing the same way you started.

AnswerID: 176443

Reply By: Member - ROTORD - Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 12:41

Saturday, Jun 03, 2006 at 12:41
Oh bugger . It was going to be sold wonderfully cheap and I was going to buy shares in it [ subject to some due diligence on what big maintenance bills are due ] .
AnswerID: 176511

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)