The Abbott Government

banco said:

Averaging helped WA when the mining boom was in its early stages. Swings and roundabouts.

It's been most amusing to see Barnett touring Australia like an aging hooker looking for one last payday. There are going to be a lot of cheap second hand jetskis for sale in WA as the cashed up bogans aren't so cashed up anymore.

Click to expand...

I don't have the figures to hand, but I read yesterday that when WA was a net beneficiary, the amount in question was only about 20% more than they collected and the "donor" states at the time were only receiving about 20% less than they collected. A 70% difference is out of the park IMO.

bellenuit said:

I don't have the figures to hand, but I read yesterday that when WA was a net beneficiary, the amount in question was only about 20% more than they collected and the "donor" states at the time were only receiving about 20% less than they collected. A 70% difference is out of the park IMO.

Click to expand...

$7B over 4 years is what WA received in excess GST payments on the upswing. Not what I call small change.

Now if they were willing to say see what the average would end up being over this and the last 4 years, then I might have a bit of sympathy for them, but to only complain about the system when you lose is a bit much.

Their treasury boffins also need to be sacked for their incompetence in making the Govt think they had revenue galore coming in. That lead to a lot fo wasteful spending.

The states are going to have to accept they need to bring in land taxes because GST reform will unlikely ever get through. Might happen when the AAA rating has been trashed all around the country and borrowing costs start to escalate.

sydboy007 said:

Now if they were willing to say see what the average would end up being over this and the last 4 years, then I might have a bit of sympathy for them, but to only complain about the system when you lose is a bit much.

Their treasury boffins also need to be sacked for their incompetence in making the Govt think they had revenue galore coming in. That lead to a lot fo wasteful spending.

Click to expand...

My perception of the WA government is one of arrogance.

According to what they say, WA put in the hard yards to get mining happening in that state. Government policy made it all happen apparently, and it's the fault of the state governments in SA, Tas and any other place not doing so well that they didn't do the same. Paraphrasing there obviously, but that's essentially what the WA Treasurer has been saying.

OK then, how about SA or Tas decides to do the same as WA? What policies, exactly, do we need in order to suddenly end up with billions of tonnes of iron ore sitting just below the surface and heaps of gas just off the coast? What policies, exactly, do the other states need in order to have these minerals magically appear?

There's a huge benefit to WA if they tell us, since then we won't need their GST revenue you see. And if they're worried about competition with iron ore, then presumably the same policy could be used to make other minerals appear?

I tell you what, I'll fly every member of the WA government down to Tas at my personal expense if they can just tell me how to do this mineral making magic. I'll take them up to Great Lake, get them to put their policies in action, and then we'll have a lake with $1.35 Trillion worth of oil at current prices. Even better, we can use the existing Poatina penstock to get the oil out of the lake and we can even run the stuff through the turbines and generate power from gravity without burning it. And Tas will never again need so much as 1 cent of WA's GST revenue. The only downside would be loss of irrigated agriculture and aquaculture downstream, since the current water flow would stop, but for that sort of money I think we'll be able to pipe water from somewhere else quite easily.

OK, I'm being a bit silly here but back in reality, WA just happened to get lucky. The state was propped up by NSW and Vic for decades until mining came along in a big way and it's pure luck that they happen to have easily extracted minerals just below the surface that are in high demand. It's pure chance that those same minerals are in WA and not somewhere else.

Smurf1976 said:

OK, I'm being a bit silly here but back in reality, WA just happened to get lucky. The state was propped up by NSW and Vic for decades until mining came along in a big way and it's pure luck that they happen to have easily extracted minerals just below the surface that are in high demand. It's pure chance that those same minerals are in WA and not somewhere else.

Click to expand...

That's what annoys me. They act like they've built silicon valley out or something. Rather than the stuff just happened to be buried there.

I'm really suprised by the lack of insight by you guys.

In the last 10 years, W.A's population has risen by an enormous amount, add to this the infrastructure required to support the mining development.

Then think about the fact it is the biggest state by a fair margin, that started with a small population to support the infrastructure.

Jeez you guys are hard to understand.

Tasmania, small state, that struggles to make ends meet, shuts down any manufacturing it has and tops it up with handouts.

Victoria, small state, large population close to the epicentre of Australia, don't give a rats about anyone else.

NSW, Old school centre of wealth, again small state large population, don't need anyone else.

The infrastructure W.A has put in recently is long overdue, to penalise W.A while bleeding it dry is somewhat a reflection on our society.IMO

Some need to look at a map of Australia, then get their head around the logistics of supporting a massive influx in the north of W.A, with a population 1/3 that of Victoria.

Also the road , power , medical, housing, education, water, sewage. etc

Really look at a MAP.

That goon from Victoria, should be taken out the back by Barnett and given a stern talking to.

Better than saying, punching his lights out.lol

Barnett's not saying "give us more", he is just saying "don't take a greater amount".

We're not talking about reducing the amount all the rest get, just about not increasing it.

But we saw in the budget, how people see, not getting more.lol,lol,lol

Australia, wow, we are a really impressive country.lol

I suppose the other side of the coin is, when the W.A royalties = FA

Their GST goes from 30% to 100+ %

Then N.T, Tas and S.A, have to bleed NSW and Vic, for more money, beautifull. Can't wait to see that.

Then they will say, $hit we don't produce anything , how can we support Tassie that does FA.lol

NSW will say, $hit we can support ourselves , but we can't support Tassie , NT and S.A.

Absolute FW's. It makes me sick listening to these self centred idiots, that can't look past themselves.lol

My rant for this year. It just epitomises where we are at.IMO Sad very sad

Looks like Uncle Rupert is very much going to get just what he's been asking for from teh Abbott Govt. Help to prop up his old world business against the leaner and meaner new internet kids on the block.

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...der-proposed-copyright-legislation-say-choice

VPNs are used by hundreds of thousands of Australians to access overseas content online.

But they could be blocked by the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015, which was introduced to parliament last month.

If it is passed, copyright owners would be able to apply for a federal court order requiring internet service providers to block overseas sites whose primary purpose is infringing copyright or facilitating the infringement of copyright…

The campaigns manager for Choice, Erin Turner, says at least 684,000 Australian households currently employ VPNs to bypass geoblocks and access overseas content at globally competitive prices…

The Australian Copyright Council said using a VPN to circumvent a geoblock may be considered copyright infringement if it requires downloading or streaming in a way that is without the permission of the copyright owner.

Click to expand...

Lest you come out swinging that's it's just a leftist whinge, let's revisit what the IT pricing committee had to say on this issue. The Abbot Govt is siding with some of the largest multinational companies to ensure Australians are restricted in the media content they can access and forced to pay the Australia tax for the digital breadcrumbs we're given. If they sign the TPP we'll be rightly rogered with all Ip based products escalating in price, with the PBS gaining even more than the current $200M in extra costs due to the evergreening rights provided to US big pharma.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...atives_Committees?url=ic/itpricing/report.htm

Copyright, circumvention, competition, and remedies

Recommendation 4
The Committee recommends that the parallel importation restrictions still found in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) be lifted, and that the parallel importation defence in the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) be reviewed and broadened to ensure it is effective in allowing the importation of genuine goods.

Recommendation 5
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government amend the Copyright Act’s section 10(1) anti-circumvention provisions to clarify and secure consumers’ rights to circumvent technological protection measures that control geographic market segmentation.

Recommendation 6
The Committee further recommends that the Australian Government investigate options to educate Australian consumers and businesses as to:
• the extent to which they may circumvent geoblocking mechanisms in order to access cheaper legitimate goods;
• the tools and techniques which they may use to do so; and
• the way in which their rights under the Australian Consumer Law
may be affected should they choose to do so.

Recommendation 7
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government, in conjunction with relevant agencies, consider the creation of a ‘right of resale’ in relation to digitally distributed content, and clarification of ‘fair use’ rights for consumers, businesses, and educational institutions, including restrictions on vendors’ ability to ‘lock’ digital content into a particular ecosystem.

Recommendation 8
The Committee recommends the repeal of section 51(3) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.

Recommendation 9
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government consider enacting a ban on geoblocking as an option of last resort, should persistent market failure exist in spite of the changes to the Competition and Consumer Act and the Copyright Act recommended in this report.

Recommendation 10
That the Australian Government investigate the feasibility of amending the Competition and Consumer Act so that contracts or terms of service which seek to enforce geoblocking are considered void.

sptrawler said:

I'm really suprised by the lack of insight by you guys.

In the last 10 years, W.A's population has risen by an enormous amount, add to this the infrastructure required to support the mining development.

The infrastructure W.A has put in recently is long overdue, to penalise W.A while bleeding it dry is somewhat a reflection on our society.IMO

Some need to look at a map of Australia, then get their head around the logistics of supporting a massive influx in the north of W.A, with a population 1/3 that of Victoria.

Click to expand...

So lets put a bit of perspective to your claims

Below is the populations of the states

2000

NSW - 6.463 VIC - 4.765 WA - 1.88

2014

NSW - 7.544 VIC - 5.866 WA - 2.589

Net POP growth

NSW - 1.081 VIC - 1.101 WA - 0.709

Nearly 400,000 less than NSW and VIC, but only WA deserves sympathy for the growing pains and extra infrastructure spending required. Put another way NSW and Victoria both had to fund infrastructure for 50% more people than WA.

I think a lot of people all over Australia would think recent infrastructure investments were long overdue. The infrastructure deficit is not WAs alone.

My understanding is that one of the reasons WA received $7B in excess GST revenues over 4 years was due to the fact that the interest rate they were paying on the borrowings for infrastructure development was over inflated ie WA got extra money because they invested in their economy. But no, it's all boo hoo for them.

In 2014-15 WA received $249m more in GST than it would have received under a strict per capita distribution, purely due to the extra cost of providing education in that state.

The Commonwealth Grants Commission noted that WA’s budget has taken a hit from falling iron ore revenue is not in itself a reason to increase the amount of GST it should receive. Rather pointedly, the commission stated that the distribution of GST “seeks to equalise fiscal capacities, not states’ budgetary circumstances which include their policy choices”.



WA received plenty of extra revenue the last few years. How much more should they receive? What states will lose funding to allow this to happen? What infrastructure or services need to be cut to allow this to happen? Why are people in WA more deserving on overal funding?

WA has for a long time received far more $$$ that it would if we had funding based purely on population



Saul Eslake, suggests the state is “to some extent, like a pensioner who’s won the lottery and then complains about having lost the pension and having to pay income tax”.

Population growth needs to be considered in percentage terms relative to its base.

In relation to the WA's share of general revenue to grants graph, WA as an individual state has a much smaller population relative to its eastern seaboard mainland peers. In other words, the period while WA received a net benefit, other states would not have been reduced to the extent WA currently is as they had and still have a bigger population (economic) base from which to absorb the equalisation.

As I said Syd, it is much cheaper and easier to build infrastructure in Victoria, than W.A.
For one, you are near the most densely populated area of the Country, therefore wages by virtue of competition, is much cheaper.
Secondly the main manufacturing hub of Australia is there also.
Thirdly Victoria has an area of 237,000 sq km, with a population of 6million, very compact and relatively easy to service.

From W.A's perspective, most of the population is located in the SW corner, yet the infrastructure, materials and manufactured equipment, needs transporting 1,000's of klm's to the NW.

W.A has an area of 2,500,000 sq km, with all the towns requiring first world services, no matter how remote they are.

The cost of everything is much higher than Eastern States, due to the remoteness.

90,000 workers, fly in and out of the State, they need services and facilities.

The logistics of doing things in remote areas of the State adds a huge cost.
While the taxes are coming in obviously there isn't a problem, however to say tough when the main income drops so rapidly, is ridiculous.

The analogy of the pensioner who won lotto and complains when he loses his pension, is another stupid remark.

W.A won nothing, it gets royalties and has to supply services and infrastructure, to areas like the Pilbara, Goldfields and mid West, so that the mines can operate.

If it doesn't have the money from royalties and or GST and can't provide the infrastructure, everyone loses.

sptrawler said:

As I said Syd, it is much cheaper and easier to build infrastructure in Victoria, than W.A.
For one, you are near the most densely population area of the Country, therefore wages by virtue of competition, is much cheaper.
Secondly the main manufacturing hub of Australia is there also.
Thirdly Victoria has an area of 237,000 sq km, with a population of 6million, very compact and relatively easy to service.

From W.A's perspective, most of the population is located in the SW corner, yet the infrastructure, materials and manufactured equipment, needs transporting 1,000's of klm's to the NW.

W.A has an area of 2,500,000 sq km, with all the towns requiring first world services, no matter how remote they are.

The cost of everything is much higher than Eastern States, due to the remoteness.

90,000 workers, fly in and out of the State, they need services and facilities.

The logistics of doing things in remote areas of the State adds a huge cost.
While the taxes are coming in obviously there isn't a problem, however to say tough when the main income drops so rapidly, is ridiculous.

The analogy of the pensioner who won lotto and complains when he loses his pension, is another stupid remark.

W.A won nothing, it gets royalties and has to supply services and infrastructure, to areas like the Pilbara, Goldfields and mid West, so that the mines can operate.

If it doesn't have the money from royalties and or GST and can't provide the infrastructure, everyone loses.

Click to expand...

You know I have been engaged in the NW to construct this and that and they get a pretty good deal, and I'm staffing and resourcing from Brisbane. The truth is that the Perth building contractors, for instance, were profiteering and finally put themselves out contention by making it viable for Asian dudes, Asian KDKs and Asian prefab high rise to be shipped in ... you can thank your own (soon to be a banana bender) Roy Hill owner, Gina for that and a weak government who wouldn't stand up to her.

sptrawler said:

As I said Syd, it is much cheaper and easier to build infrastructure in Victoria, than W.A.
For one, you are near the most densely populated area of the Country, therefore wages by virtue of competition, is much cheaper.
Secondly the main manufacturing hub of Australia is there also.
Thirdly Victoria has an area of 237,000 sq km, with a population of 6million, very compact and relatively easy to service.

From W.A's perspective, most of the population is located in the SW corner, yet the infrastructure, materials and manufactured equipment, needs transporting 1,000's of klm's to the NW.

W.A has an area of 2,500,000 sq km, with all the towns requiring first world services, no matter how remote they are.

The cost of everything is much higher than Eastern States, due to the remoteness.

90,000 workers, fly in and out of the State, they need services and facilities.

The logistics of doing things in remote areas of the State adds a huge cost.
While the taxes are coming in obviously there isn't a problem, however to say tough when the main income drops so rapidly, is ridiculous.

The analogy of the pensioner who won lotto and complains when he loses his pension, is another stupid remark.

W.A won nothing, it gets royalties and has to supply services and infrastructure, to areas like the Pilbara, Goldfields and mid West, so that the mines can operate.

If it doesn't have the money from royalties and or GST and can't provide the infrastructure, everyone loses.

Click to expand...

the costs in Sydney and Melbourne to build new roads or train lines is massive compared to what it would cost in Perth. Just look at the cost of the East West link in Melbourne. $1M a meter for the tunnel. $3.3B just to get the first stage of Westconnex built in Sydney, with a final cost of $10B.

Perth was able to build a 30Km rail line to Joondalup for around $2B in todays dollars, but Melbourne is looking at a cost to reach Doncaster by rail of $8-12B for just 20Km. Underground stations are generally in the order of five times more expensive than at-grade stations to construct, and they're pretty much what you have to build in Sydney or Melbourne.

The fact is a large part of the problems WA is now facing are due to the poor economic management of the Govt during the boom years. They predicted the good times to not only roll on forver, but to get better and better year after year and started funding glory projects. A Liberal Govt is responsible for the loss of the state's AAA rating. Spending was outstripping revenue during the largest resource boom in the country. You're scathing of federal Labor during that time, yet seem to be giving the WA Govt a free kick.

WA elected Colin Barnett. Colin Barnett knew about the GST cliff ahead. Colin Barnett knew he was running a state budget with a history of boom and bust cycles. Thus Colin Barnett has proven to be a spectacularly inept commodity state budget manager and one implicitly reliant upon moral hazard. Why should everyone else bail him out so that WA is stuck with a dill at the tiller?

sydboy007 said:

You're scathing of federal Labor during that time, yet seem to be giving the WA Govt a free kick.

Click to expand...

Fair comment.

Sorry to be discursive.

I feel that the Australian Parliament House should go to open plan offices. Which is where they'd like send us, but not themselves.

Silicon Valley got it wrong: the open-plan office trend is destroying the workplace - April 20, 2015
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/silic...destroying-the-workplace-20150420-1molwh.html

I wonder if Abbott and Turnbull will be wiling to admit they were wrong is claiming NBN were building the rolls royce gold plated satellite internet platform now that their claims the private sector could have provided the service has fallen into voluntary administration.

If NBNCo had followed Abbott and Turnbull we'd be in a situation now with a barely half finished satellite and years behind schedule. Compare that to NBNCo getting ready to launch their first satellite later this year on time and on budget that was set 5 years ago.

One has to wonder if Turnbull stands by his claims from 2012.

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tes-amid-newsat-collapse-20150420-1mopac.html

"There are Australian companies, there's one Australian company in particular NewSat ... which was in the press today which provides satellite services to the United States Defence Department in the Middle East, in Afghanistan and so forth so they're presumably pretty capable at what they're doing. Anyway, they've been brushed, they don't get a look in here. There is no need for the NBN to own this infrastructure itself..." Mr Turnbull said on February 8, 2012.

Click to expand...

So we finally have to concrete data to show how Direct Action is failling.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2015/abbott-blows-his-carbon-budget-in-first-direct-action-auction-26282

The Abbott government appears to have already blown its carbon budget, selling emissions abatement in the first round of auctions at a price that would make it impossible to meet even Australia’s modest 5 per cent cut in emissions by 2020 (from 2000 levels).

The Clean Energy Regulator said on Thursday said it had contracted to spend $660 million buy more than 47 million tonnes of abatement – mostly from carbon farming and landfill gas projects at an “average” price of $13.95.

It means that the government has theoretically met one quarter of its target at the first go, although nearly half the abatement bought in the first auction will not be delivered before 2020.

Unless the government can find much cheaper abatement, it will not be able to meet the target of buying around 236 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent to meet that 2020 target.

The Climate Institute said at these prices, the government would deliver only 15 per cent of its own 2020 target, but had already spent one quarter of its money.

Click to expand...

So Direct Action is already over budget, but Greg Hunt is out trumpeting what a success it's been. Just another privatise the profits and socialise the losses project by the Liberals.

Yes they canned the carbon tax, they should dump that piece of crap also.

wayneL said:

Yes they canned the carbon tax, they should dump that piece of crap also.

Click to expand...

You mean you want Abbott to break yet another promise?? Does he have many left?

sydboy007 said:

You mean you want Abbott to break yet another promise?? Does he have many left?

Click to expand...

You believe pollie promises?

Personally, I don't care about promises, I just want good policy. Promises get you elected, good policy doesn't.

wayneL said:

You believe pollie promises?

Personally, I don't care about promises, I just want good policy. Promises get you elected, good policy doesn't.

Click to expand...

A policy is no more than a party or Government idea.

Where there is no action, there is no substance and no result. So far the Rabbit Guvmints policies are about absolute nought.