Comments on: ACNielsen: 51-49 to Labor in NSW

By: Sinowestie

Sinowestie — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:21:33 +0000

The public transport system in Perth is very good if you want to go to the city, but if you want to go cross town (Gosnells to Malaga, Scarborough to Fremantle, Waneroo to Bayswater) its a pain in the arse.

By: Scotty

Scotty — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:02:54 +0000

bastards*

By: Scotty

Scotty — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:02:08 +0000

If only there was some kind of third party that could use the balance of power to keep those bastard honest

By: Antonio

Antonio — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:48:22 +0000

Harbajan Singh is apparently a tumbleweed

By: vera

vera — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:40:05 +0000

150 I agree

Developer donations to the NSW Government totalled $13,180,793 between 1998-2007, while developers gave the Liberal Party $8.2 million over the same period.

So where’s all the shock horror over the Libs $8mil?

By: Ex Norfik Local

Ex Norfik Local — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 02:16:25 +0000

This post seems to have become a bit of a bash-Iemma forum, and I think some of the criticism is a little simplistic.

There is no doubt that the Iemma Government is perceived by many as scandal prone, and vulnerable in areas like public transport, health and links to developers.

I would agree that there has been underinvestment in public transport going back many, many years. I would agree that NSW, on a strictly economic view, could have afforded to take on more debt during the 1990s to fund return-generating infrastructure. Does this make me want to vote Liberal? No way. Does anyone seriously think a Liberal Government would have been out there making the argument for budget deficits and responsible debt? Of course not. They, and both the SMH and the Telegraph, argued relentlessly at the time that Carr should have been running bigger surpluses and further trimming the role of Government. They’ve changed their tune now, but does anyone really trust them, particularly when the hard right now has the numbers in their party room? Not me.

It is also true that many of the problems that developed in Sydney’s public transport system were not of the Labor Government’s making. The late-running train scandal a couple of years ago was at least in part the result of measures taken, after public inquiries, to slow down the train system and make is safer after the tragedies of the 1990s. The problems that occur when an issue in Sutherland ends up clogging lines at Richmond is a result of bad planning when the lines were laid decades ago – instead of separate lines that confine problems, they are all interlinked, causing problems to cascade.

On health, public spending per head has increased sharply under this Labor Government. Prior to the election last year, health was regarded by many journalists as a Labor strength, and this was reflected in the opinion polls when people were asked whether they thought a good job was being done. If that is not the case now, I think it has more to do with the Telegraph’s attempts to poach advertiser-and-revenue-friendly upscale SMH readers on the North Shore than anything else. The same goes for the Cross City Tunnel campaign and upscale readers in the Eastern Suburbs. What next for the Tele, the Spit Bridge? Some crisis on the Northern Beaches?

On corruption, well, all I can say is that ICAC, a totally independent body, keeps exonerating Tripodi and the others who go before it. And I think our judicial system, and semi-judicial bodies like ICAC, usually do a good job getting to the truth. A better job then the Telegraph, that’s for sure.

By: steve

steve — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:02:28 +0000

Isn’t a ‘tumbleweed’ an ABC Learning director?

By: Scorpio

Scorpio — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:24:10 +0000

hey, nath,

What’s a “tumbleweed” ?

By: Scorpio

Scorpio — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:22:39 +0000

When I was recently in Adelaide, I was amazed at how primitive their rail system is.

The trains looked antique and were diesel for goodness sakes and many of the sleepers, or ties as they are sometimes referred to, looked as though they had been purchased second hand from NSW, some time prior to WW2.

I can’t believe that a piece of timber could have so many holes in it and still be able to hold up a rail in the ballast.

Haven’t they heard about cement sleepers?

By: PeterF

PeterF — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:17:17 +0000

I’m generally an opponent of privatisation, but think it should be viewed on a case-by-case basis.
However, there are a couple of side issues, which I think are worth noting (drawn from the Victorian context, and impressionistically-based).
The negative dimension of public ownership in public transport and electricity generation and supply in Victoria was that the sectors were often seen as hostage to union power, when that was a meaningful concept. It meant that at its worst costs of provision were hostage to unions and the particular impact on Labor Governments.
There was a flip side advantage in that Victorian Railways and the State Electricity Commission were major employers of apprentices, and therefore a significant source of skilled tradesmen, with significantly transferable skills. Privatised operators are unwilling to subsidise the whole work-force needs for tradespeople.
On balance, I think that electricity privatisation in Victoria has been successful, public transport clearly less so. It’s arguable that’s the nature of public transport which inevitably requires public subsidy irrespective of ownership. Right now, Melbourne transport is in strife, due to lack of investment over decades, and the stresses of growth, which are also having a massive impact on the road network.