2014 Victorian Election

Knobby22 said:

The Greens would close down the Melbourne Cup.
I have three green voters in my office.
All vegetarians and acting morally superior all the time. Putting labels on our front door to respect aboriginals. Providing organic chips at our Friday drinks.
Drives me nuts.

Click to expand...

Do they drive a Toyota Prius or do they catch the foot falcon?

trainspotter said:

Do they drive a Toyota Prius or do they catch the foot falcon?

Click to expand...

They all catch public transport in so I wouldn't know.

Knobby22 said:

They all catch public transport in so I wouldn't know.

Click to expand...

Saving the planet with biodiesel bus transportation makes them feel all warm and fuzzy I spose.

Tink said:

Tisme, there are many reasons.
We may have different views, but these are mine.

As I have already said, the unions have destroyed this state.
I have spoken to many, and they agree.
They were useful once, but not like they are now.
You don't vote for one man, you vote for the party.

I don't agree with over bloated public systems, the wastage is sickening.
I don't like that the left have hijacked our public education system and media (ABC).
I put a lot of that behind the loss of our election too.

Don't get me wrong, the Libs aren't perfect, but if you want fairness, run it along the board.

Labor and the Greens, I don't agree with their ideology, since when is everything free?
Where did this thinking come from?
Where is the responsibility?

I don't agree with what they did trashing company cars to get their point across (the unions).

We seem to have a generation of feeling that they don't have to pay a thing in life, and I am not just talking about young people here.
As was said by a Lib, this is a privilege, not a right.
I fear Victoria will be another tourist hub, as is Tasmania.

Jobs have been stopped in Victoria.

I have already given examples in the past of what I have seen regarding the Labor/Greens in government.
Nothing has changed from their perspective.

The Greens are disliked in the bush where the fires were, they asked many times for trees to be cut around those power lines and around homes.
The CFA were concerned also with Labor being elected again.

We align with journalists or people we agree with, and though Bolt may be over the top for you, I also agree with others, Miranda Devine, Rowan Dean, the list goes on.
I also listen to people around me and what they see and think of the situation.

These are my views, we have four years of watching.

Click to expand...

You what, I really appreciated that post because it was a considered opinion, rightly or wrongly and as we all know the only thing that is 100% faithful to you is your opinion.

I have trouble peeling back layers on many political parties to justify what they actually stand for. The Labor Party used to be for nation building and the working class. The Liberal party was the middle class beacon and there wasn't much of a need for a mercantile party because the UK owned and controlled that sector and perhaps that is the problem:- as the financial and investment markets have been released back to our own citizens, the two majors have spied it as an opportunity to expand their sphere of influence?

In marketing there is a well proven event where change (negative or positive) will cause a hysteresis of increased activity in line with the Pareto 80-20 rule and in some ways if a political party can manipulate that with a national fervour we can actually increase productivity by a factor of 1/0.8, the decay time can also be manipulated by introducing integral and derivative instances. We see the negative effect leading up to elections.

So I am rather sceptical at a govt's ability to wreck an economy when there is a dominating opposing force in the electorate. Unions blockading an Aldi site is rather minor and having had experience with the closed shop preferred contractor tendering regime Aldi has, it was eventually going to spill out anyway, if only because of the impotence of the various fair trading depts. around the country. I am also very much aware how the large retailers would be encouraged by industrial action waged by unions who have sympathetic tentacles all the way up the logistics ladder.

I rather admire Victoria for its can do people:- a little bit of industrial zeal in Qld would be a welcome change from merely being a coal based spade and wheelbarrow economy.

Ijustnewit said:

I will agree about the McDonalds rubbish. But that's more about consumer education and also the mental state of those demographics that consume such garbage as food. If Tasmania is the " way we all need to go " how to you envisage a viable economy to support the population that is ? People need jobs and communities need money to make them work. Tasmania is an economic basket case , do the Greens want this for the rest of Australia as well ?
Basically where is the money going to come from ? What are we to do ? Modern society had developed to a point that we can't just walk away and live in a cave. Sorry for diverging from the original thread. Happy to continue the discussion on the Greens thread.

Click to expand...

The unfortunate fact is that we can no longer support a viable economy. People are starving and perishing in cold conditions in the middle east. Population growth must hit a wall. Economic expansionism is being replaced by economic survival. We can bury our heads in the sand but the world is changing rapidly and governments should have the vision and leadership to show the way. These are just some of the issues troubling the Greens and on our agenda.

Sure I drive a Hilux ute, but the way its rigged I have to work with the situation now. I use it to carry manure to my and others gardens and to visit family, don't like it but stuck like everyone else.

It is time to wake up and start thinking outside the square. But I know people will not take it in and continue down the slippery slope. But I have to try for a clear conscience.

Thanks, Ijustnewit, I know Tasmanians have suffered with Greens/Labor, as I mentioned in an earlier post.
I am hoping you can get your state back on track also.
From what I have seen, they seem to be making inroads, the Libs, good luck

Tisme, thanks for your post and though you can't see it, I do, living here.
Labor wants to add more layers and bloat themselves up even more.

We now have strikes on the dock.
Seems to be an in thing with Labor and the unions around Christmas.

I would like to see the day the union thugs don't get paid for holding up business.

The sad and sorry saga that East-West Link has become,

https://www.businessspectator.com.a...ink-lunacy-threatens-australias-credit-rating

The Victorian tragedy gets worse: some 200 families were flown to Australia to prepare for the massive tunnelling required and have now been flown home. Victoria had a brilliant set of engineers able to organise such contracts. They have been sacked and snapped up by the rest of the world.

In the case of the tunnelling equipment, Victoria ordered the very best from German contractors. Two machines were ordered for around $70 million each. These were custom-built machines and almost certainly the bill on the two machines will be in the vicinity of the contracted $140m. There will also be substantial losses on the finances as the agreements are unwound. My guess is that the financing losses will get to $50m, but it's just a guess.


My Sydney merchant banking mates say my suggestion that the upfront fees could be $100m is ridiculous. The Victorian Coalition government would have been milked for much more than that, they say. A figure of $150m is a better starting point. So in just these three items we can see where $300m has gone, but there is much more.

Click to expand...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...r-daniel-andrews/story-fni0fh8t-1227248328337

Given how grim options one and two are for the Government, legislating might seem like the least worst option.

But it would be a disaster.

The damage to Australia’s — not just Victoria’s — international reputation would be immense and last for years. Indeed, the fact the Government is even threatening to legislate out of a contract is already doing us damage. Labor MPs know that, which is why some of them are privately very worried about where this might be heading.

Leaving that aside, however, there is the question of where legislating would leave the Government’s metro rail tunnel.

Two weeks ago the Premier promised the $9 billion-$11 billion project would be under way by the next election.

But last month members of the International Tunnelling Association — yes, there is such an organisation — wrote to the Premier warning him that legislating to annul the East West contracts would have a dire effect on the way the tunnelling community viewed him and his Government. It might even black-list Melbourne Metro, in which case Dan might have to start digging it himself.

Click to expand...

I mentioned this in the useless labor party thread, drsmith,
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2942&page=25&p=863120#post863120

where Daniel Andrews is trying to legislate contracts out, which will be damaging to not just Victoria, but to Australia as well.

The consequences to Australia if the Victorian government does not honour in full all the overseas obligations involved in the East West Link contract are serious. Australia is one of seven countries where all three major rating agencies give a AAA credit rating. If one of our sovereign states fails to meet its international obligations that rating will be in jeopardy and that will result in an increase to Australia’s borrowing costs and ease of trading.

Former Victorian premiers John Brumby, Steve Bracks, Jeff Kennett, Joan Kirner, John Cain and Rupert Hamer would never have dreamt of abandoning a big international contract signed by their predecessor.

They understood the rules of government.

Contracts take months, even years to negotiate.

Typical Labor with no care for consequences, and the taxpayer always has to foot the bill with nothing to show.

This guy is an incompetant fool, and reason NOT to vote for Labor.

All these costs should be placed on Labor and the Greens, as this east west link was talked about for years.

Tink said:

I mentioned this in the useless labor party thread, drsmith,
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2942&page=25&p=863120#post863120

where Daniel Andrews is trying to legislate contracts out, which will be damaging to not just Victoria, but to Australia as well.

The consequences to Australia if the Victorian government does not honour in full all the overseas obligations involved in the East West Link contract are serious. Australia is one of seven countries where all three major rating agencies give a AAA credit rating. If one of our sovereign states fails to meet its international obligations that rating will be in jeopardy and that will result in an increase to Australia’s borrowing costs and ease of trading.

Former Victorian premiers John Brumby, Steve Bracks, Jeff Kennett, Joan Kirner, John Cain and Rupert Hamer would never have dreamt of abandoning a big international contract signed by their predecessor.

They understood the rules of government.

Contracts take months, even years to negotiate.

Typical Labor with no care for consequences, and the taxpayer always has to foot the bill with nothing to show.

This guy is an incompetant fool, and reason NOT to vote for Labor.

All these costs should be placed on Labor and the Greens, as this east west link was talked about for years.

Click to expand...

The term " Economic Vandals " has been used on these forums before. Labor and the Unions bring business to it's knees . The Greens have some great ideas in a fanatsy world , but in the real world who foots the bills ?

This contract with its $1billion break cost is just BS. In business terms it is called unconscionable conduct. Essentially you create a contract which is appears legally enforceable but is so unjust and onerous a court of law can end up setting it aside.

What the contract is effectively demanding is the entire estimated profits that were going to be accrued on the project - without actually doing a thing. It is blackmail with the threat of destroying the States credit rating as the stick.

If you wanted another example of such unconscionable conduct think about the huge late fees the banks gouged from account holders. They blithely said these were extra costs when it was always clear the amount charged was way, way over actual costs and eventually became 25% of the banks annual profits.

East West Link: Is Victoria open for blackmail?

he side deal between the consortium partners for Melbourne's now-abandoned East West Link project and former Liberal treasurer Michael O'Brien, for the payment of $1.1 billion compensation to East West Connect if Labor won the 2014 state election and, as promised, cancelled the agreement, was designed to achieve one of two ends.

The first was to blackmail intending Labor voters to switch their vote back to the Coalition. The second was to persuade the consortium to sign the public-private partnership before the election to trigger the blackmail threat.

There was no benefit to Victorian voters from the deal. The benefit to the Coalition was the hope that enough voters would choose to avoid the "poison pill" of massive damage to state finances and the chance of repair to rundown essential services.

The benefit to the consortium was that if an incoming Labor government cancelled the $6.8 billion public-private partnership agreement, the $1.1 billion payment was equal to more than the total present-day value of the profits over the 25-year life of the PPP.

The inducement was equal to a 16 per cent return on the total capital cost of the project. The return on the money actually spent on the project by the consortium – no more than $20 million in my estimate – would be an astronomical 550 per cent if the $1.1 billion was paid.

According to apparently well-informed speculation (in The Australian last week), the consortium partners are hanging out for "as little as $220 million ... The figure is based on the understanding that the financiers have spent $100 million on arranging the debt while the consortium has paid about $100 million in early work on the project, the bid and design costs. A further $20 million could be added as 'sugar' on top of the deal, although the margin could be higher."

...On my judgment, the state would be financially and environmentally better off if it paid $220 million or even $1.1 billion to avoid building the East West Link under the unconscionable PPP contract, but this is not the prime point at issue here.

Recognition that compensation in the case of contract cancellation – even if the contract was shown to be void under standard contract law – would be open to negotiation based on profit forgone, rather than legitimate expenses incurred, would establish a terrifying precedent: that the state was open for blackmail as well as business

Click to expand...

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/com...toria-open-for-blackmail-20150222-13k8pw.html

Ijustnewit said:

Tink , I feel for all Victorians. The Greens in Tasmania have made the place an economic basket place

Click to expand...

The Greens have had a few good points in Tas. Forestry isn't a viable "industry" and likely never will be again, for the simple reason that it loses money. The more trees they cut, the bigger the taxpayer handout to fund the operation. That's not a viable business model.

That said, forestry and the now defunct fine paper industry would have looked very different today had we gone ahead with a new pulp mill at Wesley Vale back in 1989. Value adding to wood and a new pulp supply, to replace the then aging (now closed) pulping operations at Burnie and supply pulp to the paper machines at both Burnie and Wesley Vale. It would have ended the horrendous pollution from the Burnie operation years earlier than it actually stopped whilst securing the future of the paper industry.

But that mill was stopped and we've since been through a cycle of exporting the wood overseas (no longer even close to being profitable) and closure of the existing pulp and then paper mill at Burnie and the one at Wesely Vale too. Yes, you read that correctly, the "pristine" area at Wesley Vale already had a pulp and paper mill there when the new mill was proposed. What All we've got now is a levelled site at Wesley Vale and at Burnie there's a national chain hardware store on part of the site where "the Pulp" once stood. So far as industry is concerned, it's gone forever along with thousands of jobs in a region of the state that has been economically depressed ever since the big factory closures began.

If they had their way, have no doubt that every other large factory in the state would go the same way. The zinc works, Bell Bay Aluminium, TEMCO, Norske Skog (Boyer) and so on. All gone. The zinc works alone accounts for one sixth of the state's overseas exports and the others are highly significant too.

But the Greens do have some valid points. There's a definite future in tourism, fine food, arts etc if we get it right. But I'd argue that David Walsh has done more for tourism and the arts, at his own expense too, than all politicians combined over the past 30 years. He just got on and did something, and chose a location (suburban Hobart, and a "working class" suburb at that) which avoided dealing with anyone difficult.

What the Greens fail to comprehend is that if you're going to have tourism, then that means you're going to have tourists and you need facilities to accommodate, transport and feed them. And if you're going to base the entire economy on it, then you're going to have an awful lot of tourists not just a bus load or two. And if you're going to take all those tourists to the wilderness? Well at that point it ceases to actually be a wilderness - there's a definite limit on the extent to which you can have tourism in such a place without destroying the very thing they came to see. And that limit means, of course, that the state needs industries other than eco-tourism. Which reminds me of those mines, farms and factories....

basilio said:

This contract with its $1billion break cost is just BS. In business terms it is called unconscionable conduct. Essentially you create a contract which is appears legally enforceable but is so unjust and onerous a court of law can end up setting it aside.

Click to expand...

From what I dimly remember from law school they aren't going to have much luck proving unconscionable conduct when they are the Government. No doubt the company's response will be that the Government has basically unlimited resources to buy advice before entering into a contract so they walked in with their eyes open.

Smurf1976 said:

The Greens have had a few good points in Tas. Forestry isn't a viable



But the Greens do have some valid points. There's a definite future in tourism, fine food, arts etc ....

Click to expand...

'
I'll work on the 'etc'

'Etreeemme' sports. there's the money ... how long before we get the Greeens on board for a bit of whale hunting the olde fashioned way, a couple of celery top and huon pine hand built whale long boats a thousand yards hemp and sisal cordage, harpoon 'n' lance ... Red Bull, Mother and that other thing in the green can' all paying a $100k+ to a good cause to have their bronzed and tone warriors in their clouded caffinated comfort zone, squatted to 'Davy jones's' by a southern right .... el toro. or el willy or whatever

I would rather he built this much needed road, bas, rather than being hijacked by the Greens.

He lied, and voters were fooled, that a contract is not valid, placing our state in jeopardy.

Now rather than pay money for nothing, build it, and admit you were wrong.

This state is gaining more people, not less.

If it doesn't get built now, it will come up again in the future.

There wasn't much difference between Liberal and Labor in the end result, at the Vic election, so I am pretty disappointed that Daniel Andrews is working just for the public sector and the unions.

A majority of people wanted this east west link, which was jobs for over 7,000 people, plus we needed it.

Any other Victorians in this forum and what do they think of this all?
Should he be paying this $1.1 billion with nothing to show, or build it?
I would be interested to hear what others think, we have heard from a few.

Daniel Andrews should have known the Rules of Government.
Many works that Labor set up were disastrous, and we are still paying for them, desal plant, myki, the pipeline.
Too bad they couldn't be stopped.

Never give Labor a job to do because they always stuff them up as we are seeing now, blowing the budget and the time to do it, costing the taxpayer double.

The east west link was not well concieved and I have no doubt was the main reason why the Liberals lost the election.

When first proposed the cost was put at 10 billion but as opposition grew it was revised down to 8 billion. The past has shown that these sort of projects blow out and this one would certainly have gone to 12 to 14 billion. Andthe people remember these exorbitant blow outs. Even at 8 billion the drag on the public purse would have limited other projects for about eight years with full federal support.

A freeway project privides jobs but they are temporary so to my mind this is but a tepid advantage.

Its bigger hurdle was where it was going. Sure it would have made the ride into the city for some much quicker. However the great mojority of traffic was to feed into the already clogged Tullamarine and Westgate freeways. The Monash Freeway completed just 14 years ago is now a nightmare. It also feeds onto the Westgate and Tullamarine freeways. East west link would only further add to this nightmare.

Just a quick look at the Melbourne map will show the potential for a very good outer ring road by connecting the Metropolitan ring road to eastlink. This would take a huge amount of heavy and through traffic right away from the city altogether. The cost of this connector would also be great but the benefits enourmous.

Having been part of a future planning team for Victoria at one time I could discuss solutions till the cows come home. But governments today are only interested in outside multinational lobbyists for advice. And of course the profits also go offshore.

So in failing to listen to the plea's and ideas of the general public, the libs only have themselves to blame.

The election is now well over and this discussion therefore off topic.

Perhaps we should have a thread on transport solutions or similar.

Thanks for your reply, explod, and yes, I know you don't agree with the freeway, but it wasn't just about the freeway, as such.

I agree the Vic election is over, but just looking at Labor and Liberals -- it was something like 37 to 38.
That isn't a big number, and if you are running on just that, and it was to do with the east west link, then that is not a big - NO.

Secondly, this isn't just about the east west link, this is about putting our country and state at risk, and ripping up a contract.
As I said, these can take years to set up.

So you think what he has done is the right thing, be it east west link, myki, and any of those other grand plans that govts have created beforehand, you think that now govts should be allowed to rip up contracts?

I would have been quite happy to see a couple of those Labor plans tossed in the bin, but they weren't, and govts worked together for the betterment of our nation.

What I am saying is this is not a good thing for any government to be doing, be it if they agreed or disagreed with what the previous government did.

That is just my opinion.

Tink said:

Thanks for your reply, explod, and yes, I know you don't agree with the freeway, but it wasn't just about the freeway, as such.

I agree the Vic election is over, but just looking at Labor and Liberals -- it was something like 37 to 38.
That isn't a big number, and if you are running on just that, and it was to do with the east west link, then that is not a big - NO.

Secondly, this isn't just about the east west link, this is about putting our country and state at risk, and ripping up a contract.


That is just my opinion.

Click to expand...

The slide to the ALP was massive. They won 47 seats, the libs 30, Country Party 8 and the Greens (for the first time represented) with 2.

The contracting process conducted by the Liberals was done under total wraps and in my view this was underhand and sneaky. There was a lot of community concern at this lack of transperency and the voters let them know clearly and accordingly.

explod said:

The slide to the ALP was massive. They won 47 seats, the libs 30, Country Party 8 and the Greens (for the first time represented) with 2.

The contracting process conducted by the Liberals was done under total wraps and in my view this was underhand and sneaky. There was a lot of community concern at this lack of transperency and the voters let them know clearly and accordingly.

Click to expand...

The cost of transport infrastructure construction exploded during the first decade of this century due to competition with the resources construction boom.

These costs have since eased in response to the recent decline in resources construction. In Western Australia for example, a number of recent transport projects have either been expanded or completed under budget due to the cost savings.

If anyone's interested -- Build the Link.

http://buildthelink.com.au/#anchor2