Useless Labor Party

[Tink]

Syd, I had noticed that you had mentioned the east west link a few times, so was just giving you an update on what was going on here in Melbourne with this Labor/Greens government.

I have given my views on this already.

 

[sydboy007]

Syd, I had noticed that you had mentioned the east west link a few times, so was just giving you an update on what was going on here in Melbourne with this Labor/Greens government.

I have given my views on this already.

So your argument is that it was ok for the liberals to preempt the election and force the east west link.

Why did labor wear all the blame?

I just don't know how anyone can't support infrastructure that is not self liquidation. If you wouldn't spend $1000 to make $450, then how can you defend what the Vic Liberals and Abbott were trying to force not only on Vic tax payers but the rest of Australia.

 

[noco]

One would have to have rocks in their head to ever vote the Green/Labor democratic socialist back into power.

Shorten has no heart in the welfare of this great nation of ours.....It is all politics with Shorten in doing his best to make the Liberal coalition fail...What a sad situation....If ever reelected Shorten would subtly convert to central control....Labor already has control of the ABC media and accompanied by Fairfax newspaper to promote their propaganda.


http://budget.liberal.org.au/

 

[Smurf1976]

If you wouldn't spend $1000 to make $450, then how can you defend what the Vic Liberals and Abbott were trying to force not only on Vic tax payers but the rest of Australia.

It partly depends on how the benefits are calculated.

Eg a water supply scheme might not make a profit as such, but the resultant benefits to agriculture, cities, industry or whatever else is going to use the water may vastly exceed the cost of the scheme, despite the dam itself being unprofitable.

For a more complex example, rail. Building a rail line and running trains may itself result in a financial loss, but if it avoids the need to build an even more expensive highway duplication then it may be the lesser of two evils. Not profitable as such, but a means of cutting losses and in that case it makes sense to do it despite not being self liquidating as such.

To throw another cat amongst the mice, return on capital is a big problem with infrastructure and we are seeing some ridiculously high rates being applied in some cases. There's just no reason to pay a private owner anything more than what it would cost if government borrowed the money and owned the asset and that's not much in view of the current financial environment. There's nothing inherently wrong with borrowing to build long life, useful assets which self liquidate, it's only a problem when governments borrow in order to fund recurrent expenditure but unfortunately the two issues have become merged into one over the past 25 or so years.

For the record, all the major parties have confused the debt issue although I'm pretty sure it was the predecessors of what is now the Greens who came up with it first (though that was only because it was convenient in the context of an environmental debate at the time).

 

[sptrawler]

So your argument is that it was ok for the liberals to preempt the election and force the east west link.

Why did labor wear all the blame?

I just don't know how anyone can't support infrastructure that is not self liquidation. If you wouldn't spend $1000 to make $450, then how can you defend what the Vic Liberals and Abbott were trying to force not only on Vic tax payers but the rest of Australia.

I'm not from Melbourne and am only guessing, however.

Another way of looking at it, may be the East West link, would unclog roads that are major freight routes.

What if trucks are moving important produce along those arteries, and are being held up a cumulative 2 hours per day per truck?

The cost to business would be huge, add to that, the increase in fuel and limits on produce moved.

 

[noco]

I'm not from Melbourne and am only guessing, however.

Another way of looking at it, may be the East West link, would unclog roads that are major freight routes.

What if trucks are moving important produce along those arteries, and are being held up a cumulative 2 hours per day per truck?

The cost to business would be huge, add to that, the increase in fuel and limits on produce moved.

SP, surely you would expect the useless Labor Party to think of those things....Most of them are union hacks with very little knowledge of how business operates.

 

[sptrawler]

SP, surely you would expect the useless Labor Party to think of those things....Most of them are union hacks with very little knowledge of how business operates.

Who knows noco, neither party seem to have a coherent plan, other than try to get re elected.

Labors plan, for spending billions on a new section of underground rail under Melbourne, sounds like it makes life easier for people.

The LNP plan to unblock major traffic routes, may have been to facilitate business?

I know which one gets the most votes, boils back to the me, me,me mentality.

We really are in the manure as a country, I think.

Fortunately, we are near the end of the road, not the beginning.

 

[banco]

The East-West link was of questionable value and the way it was handled by the libs (the secrecy etc.) was disgraceful but the main reason Labor went so hard on it (they aren't usually that adverse to spending money on questionable infrastructure projects) is because the CFMEU would have been locked out of the East-West link. The CFMEU is victorian labor's main financial backer and they couldn't/wouldn't tolerate being locked out of Victoria's biggest infrastructure project.

 

[Tink]

With the waste that this Victorian Labor/Greens government has accrued in six months, they should be tossed out.
They have sacked all the boards and replaced them with their own.

Syd, CityLink runs on the same as the East West link would have run, no difference.

What we were told is they want no roads, and that everyone had to catch public transport, that was how they fix the problem.
In all your days of politics, have you ever seen this sort of wastage.

I do blame Labor and the Greens for this mess.

 

[sydboy007]

Seems like there's plenty of support for Liberal boondoggles where $1M a meter tunnels are considered a good way forward.

If you can be bothered having a read of the actual business case the files can be found here:

http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/east-west-link-announcement

To sum it up the East West Link project was estimated to deliver a benefit to cost ratio of just 0.45, and would have taken an estimated 56 years to pay-off. So far from delivering a “more productive Melbourne”, the project would have delivered negative economic outcomes to Victorians.

To make matters worse, the former Liberal Government then signed a side letter with the consortium partners agreeing to pay both their bid costs and “opportunity costs” even if the contracts were declared illegal, invalid or unenforceable. In turn, Victorian taxpayers have been left with two painful alternatives:

p100 forecasts traffic rampup to % of steady state volume: 91% by month 6. 96.5% by month 12. 100% by month 22. I wonder: Is this in line with recent experience?

A NSW Auditor-General report on Sydney’s Cross City Tunnel found that projections of 80% initially, and 88% after a year were about double the traffic levels that actually eventuated. Brisbane’s Clem7 and Airportlink tollways, and Melbourne’s EastLink had similar problems.

Note that in East West Link’s case the taxpayer bears the risk.

p176 Benefit Cost Ratio of stage 1 is 0.8 (eg it costs more than it makes) when “Wider Economic Benefits” (WEBs) are excluded. Including WEBs is 1.3-1.4.

Now for soemthing a bit dodgy with the whole economics of the project. The earlier estimate, using the methodology preferred by Infrastructure Australia, came out at just 0.45. In later versions of the document, the methodology changed and the estimate rose to 0.8. The version released by the Herald Sun has the higher figure, and it’s been speculated that someone supportive of the project dropped that version to them deliberately to pre-empt reporting of the lower figure. Josh Gordon at The Age http://www.theage.com.au/comment/analysis-why-the-east-west-link-proved-such-a-hard-sell-20141215-127dfm.html has some nice analysis of how the figure grew from 0.45 to 0.8 with some WEBs, and then to 1.4 by including other projects such as the Tullamarine Freeway widening, and even Wider WEBs.

In an extraordinary admission, cabinet documents reveal the former government decided not to release the full business case to Infrastructure Australia – the independent umpire – because it was worried the low benefit-cost ratio "may be used as a justification for not supporting the project".

WEBs are notoriously wibbly-wobbly in their calculation, and often controversial. For instance it’s not clear how they claim $2153m in agglomeration economies (specifically “growth in Melbourne’s competitive central core”) when the tollway doesn’t directly serve Melbourne’s central core.

It also claims a lot of benefits from travel time savings, but we know these never last.

Compared to the 1.4 the road gets with WEBs, the metro rail tunnel (which is also an incredibly expensive project) apparently got 1.9. And compared to the 0.8 for EWL without WEBs, the metro rail tunnel got 1.17 — so at least it isn’t loss-making when evaluated without possibly dodgy WEBs.

p209 summarises the revenues and outlays, and if I’m reading this right, seems to show toll revenue of about $200m per year against availability service payments from the government to the operator of about $345m each year. I assume by June 2023 that’s the “steady state”.

If the toll revenue doesn’t get that high, then taxpayers foot the larger bill. And remember this is only stage 1.

It's just another classic version of privatising the profits and socialising the losses. Far better to take advantage of the historically low borrowing costs for Governments - currently around the 2.65%-2.70% for 10 year Vic Govt bonds.

But it's all Labor's fault, even though it was the Liberals that forced the issue on to tax payers when there was no economic reason to sign the contracts before the election.

On a side note, why isn't anyone commenting on the competency of Barnett. Just handing down the biggest deficit in WA history. Surely that can't be Labors fault too, considering they've not been in Govt there for a long long time.

 

[sptrawler]

I must admit I have been burnt by road infrastructure investments. Connect East and River City Motorway, sounded good on paper, but I did my money.

Having said that I wonder how well they are patronised now? Somebody made a killing at the expense of us investors. Also Melbourne and Brisbane recieved some terrific infrastructure.

Barnett in W.A obviously got caught up in the euphoria of mineral income, a lot of the infrastructure is long overdue, but will take some paying off.
I don't think the public in W.A, is going to be too out of shape about it, at least we have something to show for the debt.

Usually we end up with debt, and nothing to show for it.

 

[Smurf1976]

If there's a problem with transport in Melbourne then the sensible thing to do is to look at all the options for resolving it.

Building roads is one option. Diverting passenger traffic onto rail is another. Shifting load away from the peaks is another. Etc.

Rationally you'd come up with a list of all the options and score them based on cost, effectiveness and any other relevant points (eg environmental or aesthetic). Then pick the best one.

The notion that the only way to fix road congestion is to build another road is a very outdated way of thinking.

 

[SirRumpole]

If there's a problem with transport in Melbourne then the sensible thing to do is to look at all the options for resolving it.

Building roads is one option. Diverting passenger traffic onto rail is another. Shifting load away from the peaks is another. Etc.

Rationally you'd come up with a list of all the options and score them based on cost, effectiveness and any other relevant points (eg environmental or aesthetic). Then pick the best one.

The notion that the only way to fix road congestion is to build another road is a very outdated way of thinking.

I wonder if there have been any studies on just why people have to travel from one side of the city. Obviously we know that some work at a different place than they live. so that indicates that the commercial and residential centres need to be closer together to minimise travel time, rather than just building more roads.

In Sydney there has been a lot of commercial development above railway stations which seems a good idea for commuters and getting traffic off the roads, also the effect of the NBN and it's ability to cut down on the necessity to travel needs to be considered.

 

[Tisme]

SP, surely you would expect the useless Labor Party to think of those things....Most of them are union hacks with very little knowledge of how business operates.

I have had run ins from the union reps myself, so I am no fan of their tactics, but to distinguish union leaders from political leaders is closeted thinking. The LNP, Lab aristocracies generally have no business acumen, are heads of memberships, have rules of governance likes, accept annual dues like unions, have pecking orders like unions, have ballots like unions, et al .... they are unions of another name, but unions nonetheless.

We have a full blooded divided loyalty Roman Catholic treasurer, in denial about having an Australian birthright through his maternal mother, who crows (with a personal air of trauma and neglect) about a tenuous link to business knowhow, that is built on the toil of his shopkeeper parents, who apparently were worth much more to the nation than the labourers who also worked six days a week for their Toorak bosses to put food on their poverty street tables. I can only assume his parent's success is predicated on affording to send him to a Catholic private school, thet I'm sure the rest of our similarly poor parents subsidised. He has displayed no business acumen at all. The closest he would come to business is via his wife and the hobby cattle farm they both own ( he on a politician income and her on a forex wage), where he is presumably Oliver Wendell Douglas and she is Lisa Douglas .

The other full on talking head of the LNP, Cormann, graduated as a lawyer, then onwards as a public servant, which makes him eminently qualified to talk business, presumably because he was schooled by the Court family in WA. Yet another of the diehard Catholic boys in charge of the nation who has split loyalties to a crusty old bloke far away in Italy.

Where are your loyalties Noco? Are you proud of the nation those before us began, or are you so full of hate, spit and vitriol you can't spare or bear the thought of those filthy workers who needed a union to standup for their rights against men in power who could and still will bleed their workforce into starvation wages in pursuit of power and profit? Those same antichrists who presumably put money into the pension pot with their grubby hands, but died early from poor health, so you can draw down a part pension? But then again, by your own admission, you are a self made man who worked all his life to earn a living that wasn't under written by minimum wage won by the unions, a man who would not take a cent of pension that was won by the unions, or benefitted from an education won by the unions instead of going down the mines at 10 yearsold only to die by 30 of lung diseases.

You monotonous hate posts don't do any favours to those of us to actually own business', pay large taxation, build workforces and believe in Australia. You post like you speak for free enterprise and Liberal party values, but you don't seem to have a handle on what the true Liberal party doctrines were and how far they have strayed from their roots, how the Liberal party are far more imposing on business than even Paul Keating was, how even as recently as Campbell Newman who usurped the tried and tested legal process to force business into obeying new rules on who they could or couldn't employ by using police records as a, means to withhold newly mandated licences to conduct business (just like Nazi Germany did).

 

[SirRumpole]

how even as recently as Campbell Newman who usurped the tried and tested legal process to force business into obeying new rules on who they could or couldn't employ by using police records as a, means to withhold newly mandated licences to conduct business (just like Nazi Germany did).

Could you give some more detail on that ?

 

[Tisme]

Could you give some more detail on that ?

Yes you can look at the Attorney General's dept new licencing regimes required to conduct business in a supposed anti red tape governance.

I myself was forced to have my finger prints taken to ensure that part of my business was not being run by a convict or person of interest. I cannot believe the legal profession allowed that to happen.

The building industry also had knew licencing regimes put in place that was tantamount to making sure developers (like Campbell's father in laws') could have unfetted freedom at the expense of builders, subbies and suppliers. Even the PPP arrangements that Gillard put in place who have eventually been usurped if the LNP hadn't been ousted.

 

[noco]

The unions are well and truly back in control of the Labor state government in Queensland.

More public servants inoculated with the Green/Labor socialists needle.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/28063428/qld-govt-backs-unions-in-public-service/

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...nion-secret-pact/story-fntuy59x-1227358882652

Annastacia Palaszczuk has some explaining to do over the takeover of the Queensland Government by the trade union movement.

READ THE EXCLUSIVE STORY: Government told to recruit for unions

The union deal to promote unionism in the public service is intolerable, yet she hasn’t said much at all, leaving Treasurer and IR Curtis Pitt to fend off media questions.

The new deal means Queensland taxpayers are subsidising Labor’s union mates. Palaszczuk didn’t bother to announce it and sneakily put it up on her department’s website.

Federal Employment Minister Eric Abetz said the deal showed Queensland had the most “unashamedly pro-union government” in its history.

“All employees have the right to choose to join or not to join a union, however this Queensland government appears intent on destroying that right, ’’ he said.

“This is a government that doesn’t seem to be governing for all Queenslanders. Instead it just sees itself as a branch office of the union movement.”

Managers in the public service have been instructed to actively promote unionism.

It’s a dangerous area of the law.

 

[Tink]

Tisme, I know you say you sit on the fence, but I don't agree with bloating the public service.
I call it 'organised chaos'.

Noco, we have the powerhouse here in Victoria -- Bill Shorten, Daniel Andrews and so was Julia Gillard -- all from the same mould.
They all owe their positions to the union.

We all know how they won the Vic election, dressing up as paramedics etc and vandalising company cars with their graffiti.
They are now being paid off, and us taxpayers, have to fork the bill.

Bill Shorten’s union menace
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ens-union-menace/story-e6frg71x-1227360721000

Anyone that has worked in Victoria when Labor are in control know what they are like.
Banco, exactly right, they were locked out of the project as I mentioned in my last post.

The Public Service and the Unions will be the only winners out of this Andrews Labor government.

Property owners face dramatic Fire Services Property Levy rise
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/ne...operty-levy-rise/story-fnkfnspy-1227351716535

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28524&page=12

 

[Tisme]

Tisme, I know you say you sit on the fence, but I don't agree with bloating the public service.
I call it 'organised chaos'.

.

Me too Tink. I think it's original purpose has been skewed into a shock absorber for govts to manipulate the employment numbers. Upto the 70's when the USA went into recession and then in the 80's when the rest of the world went into delayed sympathy, employment in Oz was so good we imported migrants to fill the voids, so no real need to play silly buggers with the PS apart from the father/son rules and jobs for rellies.

It makes me angry to think back watching the PS go from less than private enterprise wages in exchange for jobs for life, to the largesse of hyper superannuation, salary sacrifice, 120% of average wages, flex time, PD, etc. And then to rub salt into the wounds the govts have successively imposed PS rules, protocols, permissions and mandated behaviours onto the PE workers so that business can't compete profitably with overseas competitors.

My blood stills boils to think the Howard govt sold OUR assets to create a future fund, the sole purpose being to secure the uber superannuation "entitlements" of federal PS'. I shook my head back in the day watching the head of the fed PS enthusiastically telling the nation's housewives watching Mike Walsh (actually I think it was the Midday Show ) that the PS self evolved KPI system showed it to the most efficient workforce in the nation, thus the entitlement for monetary and conditions rewards; and I still get angry at the impudence of him his behaviour like a boy with two dicks.

To say the PS is organised chaos is giving them an excuse for their self absorbed, almost ghetto attitude. They don't seem to get promoted on ability or self determination, but on tenuous academic pieces of papers, personal development day releases, gender cards, obedience, etc. I even have an acquaintance whose job is to deliver the latest in govt "innovation" ideas via workshops to the plebs ... this is to people with degrees and the like who apparently can't read and need guidance on how to fill out a form that their own pointy heads made up to create a job for someone to deliver it to fellow workers ... full on self articulating circular net zero worth to anyone.

Yes Tink. in my industry we call it entropy. And by now you would realise that not only do I hold political "parties", religious institutions and rusted ons in disdain, I especially don't like the metatalking public service for how it soaks money into a monofunction polis that should restrict itself to public health, public welfare and capital works and of course sending memos between heads of dept who are too lazy and too risk averse to speak to someone face to face.

 

[sptrawler]

Well at last Labor has found its voice, and as per usual are showing their fiscal ineptitude.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...x-back-in-play-for-labor-20150520-gh5sws.html

The fabulous mining brain fart tax, in Chris Bowens words:

Mr Bowen said the world had changed since 2010, rendering a mining super-profits tax no longer relevant.

But Mr Bowen you forward spent billions on its relevance. Dumb.

However Mr Bowen will re introduce a carbon tax.

Well why not it is a gst on electricity, you will always make money, who cares what damage it does to small industry?

I would like to ask him, how is imposing a tax on small business when they are struggling, any different to not having a mining tax because miners are struggling?

Talk about a shoot from the hip tax policy, absolute dicks, unfortunate but expected.

I always thought Bowen may have been o.k, obviously trying to find policy that reduces debt without reducing spending, is beyond him.

The Bill and Chris show will derail before the Abbott, Hockey show.IMO