Cut the crap, independents tell Gillard and Abbott

Davo says:

07:46pm | 25/08/10

100% agree Joe, Labour lost the election more than the coalition won the election. If the independents and the puppet green side with labour they have totally miss read public sentiment.  On the primary vote Labour were miles behind the coalition.  The Greens saved their bacon and I don’t understand why, as the labour government failed to deliver any green initiatives despite all the hype and promise.  Get rid of the back stabbing Julia, she knows, we all know she can’t be trusted,  we don’t want her.

Hard Giant says:

12:41am | 24/08/10

TheRealDave - the young guys who stayed here during WW2 weren’t doing SFA as you bluntly suggest, they actually had jobs and were doing things that needed to be done in Australia, just as we do our jobs while the Aussie guys are in Afghanistan. Back then, there was no dole, so the incentive to do nothing and get paid for it was not an option like it has become here and made easier under left wing Governments, i.e Labor. I don’t remember any Aussies flocking away from Australia to a country with generous welfare benefits during WW2.
The Afghani men who come here are not after a safe place entirely but a safe place that has welfare - accommodation provided and guaranteed cash. There are many safe countries that are bypassed to get here. That is the problem.

TheRealDave says:

08:14pm | 23/08/10

@ Polly - Maybe because nobody is that crass or moronic?

You do know that when the Japanese were sweeping their way down towards Australia in 1942 and the entire AIF was in the Middle East and being round up in Singapore there were still plenty of able bodied Aussies blokes sitting at home doing sweet FA.

Several hundred thousand Afghani have opted to serve and are in the process of being trained.

But like those that elected to sit it out when Australia thought it was about to be invaded and sent untrained militia to PNG to hold them up - some Afghani men just want to live in the same peace we enjoy. Unlike them we’ve been at peace a long time since those dark days of 1942. They’ve been in constant war since 1979 essentially.

iansand says:

07:31pm | 23/08/10

Yep.  Dr Bashir is a psychiatrist (maybe a psychologist).  Well suited to the task.

I don’t think Ms Bryce is a lawyer, and, if she is, few lawyers are versed in the subtleties of parliamentary conventions.  The Clerks of the House and Senate are the whizz kids there.

Reg says:

08:11pm | 23/08/10

The accusation of arrogance and dodgy deals never sits well coming from a Liberal supporter. Wait and see.

iansand says:

06:47pm | 23/08/10

About 5%, i think.  Certainly higher than average.

Farmer says:

07:25pm | 23/08/10

God forbid! Tony Windsor takes the the seat as PM! What are you thinking????? This man is more self-interested than any Labor pollie around. Please,Please,Please,Please,Please,Please, I beg you, don’t even suggest that course of action.

MarK says:

06:45pm | 23/08/10

@kos - I just threw a little in my mouth

Zalgo says:

06:30pm | 23/08/10

It’s perfectly possible constitutionally.  If neither major partly leader could demonstrate to the Governor-General that they could put together a government that had the support of the majority of the House, then Windsor could put together the arrangement you claim, put it to the G-G, receive a commission to form government and off we go.

Whether it’s POLITICALLY possible, ah, well now…

Gregg says:

05:09pm | 23/08/10

Why not a triathlon lostnow!

Jason CR says:

05:16pm | 23/08/10

What about Julia’s performance on Saturday night during her speech.  The first 5 minutes were spent congratulating the independents on their re-election and had even phoned them by that time.
I wonder if she had called all of her Labor colleagues at that stage including Maxine!!!
I thought it would have been better to start off by thanking her staff, Labor voters, colleagues etc…  Then again we’re not talking about someone normal….Never have we witnessed such a more power hungry self centred individual than Julia…then again I said the same thing about Rudd.  Both are definitely cut from the same cloth.

Jane says:

03:53pm | 23/08/10

She will do it until the Independents make their decision. What they have said so far is they want “stable and effective” Government. So naturally Gillard is parroting those exact words. Which is a joke coming from Gillard and her team.

Gregg says:

04:58pm | 23/08/10

You have to remember Philby that what Tony says might at times be interpreted differently by himself when having a clearer moment.
Whereas Julia will say anything that sounds good whether she has thought about it or not.
Not much difference either way!

MarK says:

04:57pm | 23/08/10

No you have it wrong.

He said he is prepared to discuss broadband as a whole and amend his policy which was to deliver fast broadband to as many people as “the NBN” - just not 100mb more in the 12 mb range which would be ample for most home usage.

And Philby remember that the HFC system which Telstra and Optus have in most cities already allows 100mb connectivity. Labor was paying Telstra and Optus millions to shut it down and not compete.

The issue was never should we stop any improvement to the internet system of Australia as a whole. The issue was whether spending $43 billion
- lets put it as a number because it makes more sense $43,000,000,000-
was wise and prudent given no cost benefit analysis was undertaken or any studies done. That was the issue.

What is happening is you are being fooled by the old Kev07 trick of something HAVING to be his way or IT IS WRONG. There is never only 2 options whne you talk about building infrastructure. There are many considerations to look at. Remember Rudd went into 2007 with a $4.7 billion promise….it blew out by a factor of 10 because he and Conroy caught a plane together. I mean really?

$43,000,000,000 - looks impressive eh.

You see you are running a pretty disingenuous argument and one I had with peresphone constantly about the BER.

I abhorred the BER and still do NOT because money was spent but VALUE for money was ignored. I still think that stimulating the economy by building school infrastructure was sound and good policy. But not building structures that were either at an inflated price or were unwanted or poorly designed for the actual location.

That was the issue. You can attempt to play wedge politics if you like on this but you fall short.

It is not do it this way or you do nothing. That was, is and always will be the Rudd/Gillard argument and bullshit. Yet again they have taken an issue and promised the earth when all they had to do was fix it….not declare another bloody war on some inanimate object or idea.

It is pretty easy. There is more than one way to skin the broadband cat in Australia. Does every house need a Ferrari? No. Have all costs to households been disclosed as yet? No. Is a proper and open cost benefit analysis done? No. Etc etc etc.

Lets get some basics right and then move eh? The only reason it was done with such a mad rush is because of the election cycle and the need to actually be seen to be doing something when so little was actually done in the previous years.

$43,000,000,000,000 - once you spend it it will be hard to earn it again. Best we do it correctly first time eh?

Philby says:

04:15pm | 23/08/10

Luke I absolutely agree with you, the ETS dropping was a bad show of fortitude, there is a difference between trying and failing and changing one’s mind the 2 days after the election. Also, yes Rudd was rid off but in seriousness, Rudd’s popularity had drop to very low levels, were you the 1 in 4 who supported him or the 3 in 4 who did not. I have the ask myself my complain about Rudd’s demise when so many did not support him anyway at the time. This arguement that it was up to the people to vote him out, I think this is a ridiculous notion that Labor should have allowed things to continue to deteriorate.

Luke says:

03:04pm | 23/08/10

How do you feel about Gillards and Rudds ETS? That they ran with at the last election and now have dumped and won’t even talk about? How do you feel about the Prime Minister (Rudd) that Gillard and her team put up as Leader at the last election and then dumped, after telling us he was the Leader and she stood by him 100%.

Heather says:

02:30pm | 23/08/10

Actually, one of the few reasons I was concerned about voting Lib was their poor broadband policy. And my partner, a Labor voter, said he would have voted Lib if they had the NBN. I’m sure many people agree. Bring it on, I say.

Bobster says:

09:52pm | 23/08/10

Geoff, I think your tinfoil hat is loose.

Tim says:

02:11pm | 23/08/10

I agree. I think the Chaser boys got this one right. “All of them are f—-ed.”

Dash says:

01:58pm | 23/08/10

I think the point was being made that the ALP couldn’t deliver competent and stable government with a 17 seat majority let alone with a hung parliament. And they are still fighting amoungst themselves. You only need to look at their performance in trying to deliver an insulation scheme and the rorting of the school halls program to see they couldn’t run a p!ss-up at the Fosters Christmas party Dragon!. Look at the Rudd execution, the leaks in the media, the response of the former member for Bennelong, the resignations of Tanner and Faulkner and the fact that the ALP went to the election without key ministers on the front bench. They are a rabble! Add to this, the fact they received the lowest primary vote since WW2. And the three independents sit in seats where there is next to no Labor vote. It’s hard to see how an ALP governement can be considered legitimate.

DougB says:

01:35pm | 23/08/10

Sorry, who’s that second name you mentioned? Garrett?  Garrett? Seems vaguely familiar, I feel like I’ve heard of him somewhere before…....

Reg says:

06:27pm | 23/08/10

Heather, I’ve been banging the drum to hear more from the slightly-esteemed OTHER partner of the Liberal Party, WHERE WERE THEY? Now it is even more important because they, the Nationals, may have to face off with their deadly enemy, the Greens. Although I can’t quite understand why they find themselves opposing each other given their common interest.  Why do you NOT regard the National policies as damaging or potentially damaging? The World Wonders.

Bobster says:

09:50pm | 23/08/10

I thought he was a conviction politician though? Maybe it was a non-core conviction.

TheRealDave says:

07:43pm | 23/08/10

I’m only going on whats in the paper and online - still says the RAbbotts happy to change his policies around - including broadband to get his arse in the PM’s seat.

Maybe you can call Tone and let him know that he’s not supposed to reveal which were core and non-core promises until he was in the chair…  ??

john Williams says:

05:44pm | 23/08/10

@The Real Dave
It is official…The Libs will not change the Broadband Policy to suit the Independents.
You stand corrected…AGAIN….so what point still stands?

TheRealDave says:

04:36pm | 23/08/10

I stand corrected. But the point still stands

Bobster says:

03:37pm | 23/08/10

@ TheRealDave

Tony Windsor was never a Nats MP. Former Nats member but elected independent.

TheRealDave says:

03:19pm | 23/08/10

I agree Rob, Gillard and Co ‘discovered’ rural and regional Australia on Saturday night….and so did Tony Abbott and the Liberals. He could be unpacking his crockery in the Lodge right now if he and his party didn’t piss off 3 rural members so bad they resigned and ran as independents instead.

I agree - its too late to start offering Bribes to the bush - like altering core campaign promises and changing your idea’s on a National Broadband Network…oh wait…that’s the Liberals isn’t it? Were they non-core promises again? Usually you’re supposed wait at least a few months before you renege on your promises…not 24 hours….

Its not pretty when your ‘Born to Rule’ philosophies clash with the need for haste.

Reg says:

09:32pm | 23/08/10

Fortunately the Constitution was written to guard against such superficial thinking.

Let’s run ONE hundred candidates and elect the first to get more than I% of the vote. Yes that should make you happy. The remaining 98.9% being governed by the 1.1% none of them wanted. “Yeah but 51% of use wanted Harry.” “Too bad ” Why should a vote for the Greens be more scary than a vote for the Nationals? At least the Greens don’t conceal themselves behind the word Coalition or the LNP.  I did not hear ONE word of the National Policy during the election and yet the Greens Policy is all around.  Why not?

Bobster says:

05:27pm | 23/08/10

Great idea Heather. Let’s have first past the post so you only need 21% of the vote to win. I’m sure that’s a much more democratic system.

Jason CR says:

05:10pm | 23/08/10

The Labor vote would increase and the greens vote would take a hammering.  Under the ridiculous 2PP method, people can lodge a protest vote (say Greens) yet they know their first preference (Labor) will be the one that counts.  The coalition vote would stay the same.
The best thing about no preferences would be that Wayne Swan would have lost his seat… Woo hoo

Em says:

03:49pm | 23/08/10

Good thought Heather, I’d support this but it’s sadly unconstitutional and we would end up with uncertainty for longer while we battled the constitution in court! I don’t understand though why we can’t vote online anyway - surely as you say it’s much cheaper! The scary thing is though, that a vote for Greens is a vote for Labor.

Amber says:

01:44pm | 23/08/10

We can do that now and it’s clear who would win.

john Williams says:

05:38pm | 23/08/10

Exactly Al.
These figures are there for everyone to see on the official AEC website.
No spin…just the facts and figures.
These three Independents are seasoned politicians.
As such survival is foremost in their minds.
Negotiate tough with both sides sure…but to align with Labor?
Labor is a dysfunctional Government and another poll in twelve months is quite likely.
In other words the three Independents would be hounded out of office in a year’s time by NOT representing their constituents.
Will not happen.

craig says:

03:32pm | 23/08/10

I do tend to agree with this analysis , each represent areas that are conversative , I think all threey would be dumped in the next election if they supported gillard and helped the labor government retain office. say what you will about the good of indepenents in office but at the end of the day they have to act in their best interests. The hardest trying horse in the race is always self interest

Trev_Perth says:

02:37pm | 23/08/10

Amber. Maybe like the rest of Australia. He didn’t think it relevant to the political debate who or what his partner is.  Julia Gillard did her best to do the same as much as possible but was repeatedly maligned for doing so.  I’ve never voted for a politican based on who their wife, husband, partner or family members are. Maybe you should do the same

TheRealDave says:

03:05pm | 23/08/10

As of Saturday night around 9:30pm he became the outspoken defender of Freedom and Democracy and true Australian Values…..its just been the past 20 years he’s been an inbred moron who’s prone to speaking absolute crap and puerile drivel most of the time.

Even better, its been even more fun watching the ‘country/regional voters’ being lauded as ‘valuable conservatives’ by the same people who were calling them two headed inbred ferals only a few days ago

Hard Giant says:

08:18pm | 23/08/10

totally agree. Do refugees even get settled down there?

Northern Steve says:

08:43pm | 23/08/10

Would you call Hobart regional?  They go an independent in (probably). Melbourne voted in a green.  Brisbane had a 21% green vote.

Fred says:

11:34am | 23/08/10

Could be worse, John and Janette Howard as GG.  Peter Costello would still not get an invite to dinner.

Carson says:

11:28am | 23/08/10

Not an issue. The GG has to follow the process as it is laid out. Its as simple as that - she can’t influence anything. Makes for a good conspiracy theory though. No doubt if the ALP get up the GG will be blamed for something.

Jason CR says:

06:48pm | 23/08/10

Um, Gillard spent the first 5 minutes of her speech on Saturday night congratulating the independents on their victory…. I even rang them personally said the wicked witch of the west.  Did she ring all of her Labor candidates and Greens who saved her from an almighty caning???
This woman will do anything for personal power.  Your mob were handed a mandate 3 years ago and stuffed up AGAIN.  This denial isn’t helping you.

Northern Steve says:

08:39pm | 23/08/10

Lee, I think you were watching a different telecast to me Sat night.  No rabbit act from Abbott that I saw.

Dayton says:

11:23am | 23/08/10

MarK - Spot on. Australia wants facts. Right to the point. This is where Gillard lost peoples vote. I couldn’t stand listening to her waffle on for 5 minutes about Labors ‘successes’ and Tony’s ‘failures’ before actually answering, or not answering in some cases, peoples questions.

MarK says:

10:29am | 23/08/10

Hmmmm?

What?

How long do you feel it necessary to say “I will be in negotiation with the Greens and Independents to see if we can form government”

Do tell.

If there is nothing to talk about there is nothing to talk about.

The rest is just filler for tomorrows fish and chip wrappings. You would rather Julia and her presser reciting the lines she has learnt by rote again? If that is the measure of the woman she has again fallen short. What a lie was built around her competence.

Gregg says:

04:16pm | 23/08/10

Every chance jb of going full term barring the need for any necessary by elections and reversals but if the Libs end up with the numbers as I’d reckon there’ll be a far greater chance of there being the required unity between them and the independents than what there’ll be of even Labor itself holding themselves intact.
If Gillard gets the numbers, it’ll be more than interesting to see what comes of Rudd and who is to know but could be a few Labor independents on the horizon, maybe even and energy burst to the reborn DLP!
It would be classical to see some independents side with Labor and then have some in Labor prepared to be independents or even cross the floor!
My money is on a Liberal/Independents government and either side will obviously look to what might be a good time for an election but good times may be few and far apart.

Randal says:

10:56am | 23/08/10

What happens next under what is known as ‘constitutional convention’ initially falls to the current PM Gillard, as the GG acts upon the advice of the PM.

Once the seats have been determined Gillard will go to the GG to advise whether she can form a minority government, if Gillard advises the GG that she can, then the GG will accept this advise and the House will determine ‘confidence’ in her government.

Should Gillard say she cannot, the Abbott will be invited by the GG to form government and undergo the same test of ‘confidence’ in his government.

A new election would only be called once the GG has exhausted all options for a result from the current results, and would only happen if both the ALP and the LNP were unable to survive a ‘confidence’ motion in the house.

The most likely outcome is that either Abbott or Gillard will be able to form a minority government with the support of the Independents/Greens on confidence and supply, how long this alliance would last is anybody’s guess, but a fresh election seeking a clearer mandate would be most likely be expected in 12 to 18 months.

Like all things in this election what happens next is about as clear as mud, but one thing is for certain either Abbott of Gillard will form a government of some sort and it will take some time for all the machinations to play out.

Tails says:

10:36am | 23/08/10

I saw that on Sat night. Could not believe it. There he was, watching a massive swing against his party and a massive swing against himself, and he’s h’yucking it up like he’s at a his kid’s 21st. Just unbelievable…

MarK says:

10:26am | 23/08/10

Whenever jb….whenever

jb says:

09:42am | 23/08/10

Also can anyone tell me the time line of going to another election?

Dash says:

09:54am | 24/08/10

Chris L, one is a coalition and goes to every election with complete transparancy. The other is a preference deal between two parties with often very different policies. I don’t think you can compare the two situations at all. I would suggest to you that if Labor formed a true coalition with the greens, they would lose a significant amount of votes because I don’t think even ALP voters are that far to the loony left. If Labor adopted the tax, drug and border policies of the greens they’d get about 20% of the vote. The LNP would love it to be a formal coalition!

Chris L says:

07:11pm | 23/08/10

Dash, are you also in favour of counting the votes for the Liberal Party and the votes for the National Party seperately? I ask because Labor currently has more votes than Liberal on its own, and it only the National votes being redirected to Liberal that are giving the Coalition that lead. If the system is changed to suit you I guess Labor would just form a coalition with the Greens and clean up.

Dash says:

01:39pm | 23/08/10

Carson, primary votes tell a different story. More people voted LNP than ALP! Labor had only 38% of the vote. Your line is the one Jooliya is using.

Reg, you are wrong. Take all the preferences away, have a first past the post election and the LNP would be in government today. Simple as that. Also, when you look at the three independent definites, hardly any of their electorate voted ALP. As low as 8% in New England and 13% in Lyne. How could they justify siding with the ALP?

You are right Reg on Paul Keating’s comments about a bannana republic. However, I did hear Keating say “read my lips L.A.W” tax cuts. But that was a lie and it took Howard to deliver those!

Reg says:

12:01pm | 23/08/10

Absolute frenetic bullshit Rus. This is our Australian constitution working exactly as intended. Before you start into such ignorant crap again, let us see what the total two party distribution is. It will undoubted be in favour of Labour yet the Liberal and National Parties will reap the benefit from the distribution of preferences. Check out “Iron bar” Tuckey’s seat where the National Party received the preferences from the ALP.

Paul Keating suggested at the time, that unless we improved our trade balance and controlled spending, we would be behaving like a Banana Republic. I heard it first hand.  He did not call Australia a Banana Republic, the press and the Liberals did.

Carson says:

10:18am | 23/08/10

Umm, I just looked at the AEC website and its says the ALP as of 945am has a 2 party preferred vote total of 5041511 and the libs 4908379. Now I might be wrong because you know Im a Labor suppporter and my counting might be a bit dodgy but I think, I could be wrong mind you, but I think the ALP have more votes - I think I need a calculator.

Reg says:

05:37pm | 23/08/10

Gawd i get tired of reading this whinging drivel. Where’s your CLASS Mouse, stand up and be gracious in your acceptance that others are different from you, maybe even nicer or smarter.  .....grumble grumble…

iansand says:

07:03pm | 23/08/10

Gregg - Access to market information and spot commodity markets.

Your comments denigrate the technical competence of farmers.

john Williams says:

06:02pm | 23/08/10

@Gregg
This quote from that site: “NBN Co plans to deliver the best, most cost effective infrastructure….”
Question: They know this how exactly?.... given that
1. There was never a Business Plan
2. There was never a Cost Benefit Analysis
3. There is no end-user cost information .
Based on current data costs viz $79.95/month for ADSL2+ (24 Mbps) 
the NBN (100 Mbps-1000Mbps) data charges will be huge.
This is fact NOT opinion and is easily verifiable in the real world here and overseas where FTTH is very expensive and has a very small pick-up rate by consumers.
Conroy and Gillard evade questions on this for a very good reason.
The start-up in Tasmania has been offered FREE to a limited number to instill in the minds of the electorate that the service is cost-free.

Reg says:

05:24pm | 23/08/10

Gregg I hear what you’re saying, that farmers and cattle-growers should not be concerned with anything besides their wheat crops or the slow growing cattle or perhaps paying their bills by BPay.

This is an unhappy view as some of the most ingenious inventors and lateral thinkers are also farmers and landed “gentry.” What else are they to do while the crops groan through the ground?  Worry and lobby I guess. We do try and be inclusive. Although I’m not sure that our local farmers are yet to the stage of the Canadian wheat farmer who turns his satellite guided tractors loose on his great fields.

However, it does seem that you still regard Australia as a farming, rather than an industrial nation. Fair enough, I’m sure it colours your thinking when you set your priorities. “Every farm with a four lane highway to its gate by 2012.”

Gregg; “that existing internet services have grown on to existing communication services and not as a massive new system.”  Gregg it is within my lifetime that most of these farms did not have electricity.

This was not altered by a piece-meal approach, in the area of my experience it was done with the planned and dedicated intention of improving the lives of some of our most valuable people in Australia. (If people can be allotted a value.). All at a cost that was disproportionate to the number of people being supplied and—-including the free replacement of low voltage household and farm equipment.—-

Of course I see it differently from you, because I regard Australia as an industrialised nation of which farmers and cattle growers are part, not simply as someone to be allocated a low priority.

Reg says:

04:40pm | 23/08/10

Tracker, the electricity authorities solved this problem more than 60 years ago with the redundancy of ring grids. Not suggesting it for a moment, but the structure for replicating such a grid in fibre, is already in place in the form of the electricity grid. Meanwhile the multiplicity of undersea fibres are elbowing each other out of the way for space on the bottom of the sea.

Reg says:

04:30pm | 23/08/10

Dayton 2.07; If we assume a 10 years delay in achieving a high speed service, can you tell us unequivocally that the proposed investment would not be repaid by the benefit over those ten years. Remember also, that any interim scheme would become scrap by the end of that period.  A wasted and ineffective service for TEN years or what-ever.

Gregg says:

03:59pm | 23/08/10

Reg and Simon,
First off, sure we didn’t have much in the way of global internet 25 years ago and sure as it has developed it has got faster but just to say more speed or band width is going to be better!
Well how about a couple of realistic productive examples.

And to your words Simon:

” It will create opportunities that haven’t created yet because of the lack of bandwidth. “
So what are these opportunities Simon?
Are the crops going to grow quicker?
Will we be able to control when it rains?
Will the cattle fatten better?
You say ”  It’s almost impossible to make realistic predictions of the future of the internet.  “
and then
” Whether you think that you yourself need it or not, it is infrastructure that this country needs. “
It’s only almost impossible and so what then are the needs of the country that it will service?

Conroy and Gillard have prattled on about competing with Korea and Singapore.
Aside from the disparity in country sizes and population density, exactly what is it that we would be competing with them on?
” Just like road access in the country, all infrastructure is important. I don’t think anybody should think that it has to be one or the other. We need the NBN as much as we need the better roads, and hospitals. ” 
Everybody ought to think about how infrastructure is financed and because finance is limited, they need to prioritise!
” As much as we need to invest in renewable energy. It all creates jobs, creates opportunities, and gives momentum to the economy. “

What gives momentum to an economy is responsible fiscal management and identifying those productive areas that can grow the economy.

The huge difference you both are missing is that existing internet services have grown on to existing communication services and not as a massive new system.
As such the connect up costs for existing systems has been next to nothing unless it has been a satellite system.

Simon says:

03:11pm | 23/08/10

Tracker. Wireless will never be able to provide any sort of useful capacity. Just look at how badly the current 3G networks perform. The only telco that can claim any sort of reliably fast speed does so only because they they’ve priced themselves so high that most people can’t afford it, and so they have excess bandwidth. And any mention of newer higher speed wireless being developed doesn’t take into consideration the circumstances under which the speed is possible. As a ham you should understand the unreliability of wireless.

Fibre optic cables are cheap when compared to the cost of laying the cable. The reliability of a fibre optic, or any cable system, comes as much from it’s design as it does from the individual cables. Only a very poorly designed network wouldn’t have the redundancy into the system.

Tracker says:

02:32pm | 23/08/10

Reg, 25 years ago amateur radio operators like myself were playing with AX.25 protocol over radio (wireless/packet radio) globally so we have been there and done that. Technology has moved on from the limitations of AX.25 but one thing has remained for wireless technology.. Reliability. Lose your fibre core and it could take weeks to replace it and it is an easy thing to happen given how harsh our Australian outback is. Lose your wireless node and switch over to a backup.. unless you want to spend double the amount and lay 2 fibre cables (in 2 different locations to avoid having them both taken out at the same time). I am with Farmer on this one, better to have roads where you can get to work and earn money than stay at home on a rainy day and play mafia wars on Facebook. Come to think of it, 43 billion could go a long way towards roads, hospitals and schools.

Dayton says:

02:07pm | 23/08/10

Reg: You aren’t listening to what we are saying. The NBN would be fantastic, I’m not disputing that. It’s the cost we are worried about.

Simon says:

02:06pm | 23/08/10

The NBN is inevitable. Sooner or later we will get these high speeds and need it. Do you really think that it will be any cheaper to build in the future? How much will it cost the economy not to have it when it becomes a necessity? It will create opportunities that haven’t created yet because of the lack of bandwidth. It’s almost impossible to make realistic predictions of the future of the internet.

Whether you think that you yourself need it or not, it is infrastructure that this country needs. Just like road access in the country, all infrastructure is important. I don’t think anybody should think that it has to be one or the other. We need the NBN as much as we need the better roads, and hospitals. As much as we need to invest in renewable energy. It all creates jobs, creates opportunities, and gives momentum to the economy.

Reg says:

12:48pm | 23/08/10

Just two observations.

If someone had suggested 25 years ago that a global internet was feasible, most people would have been taking the same negative position as we find here.

If it had been suggested that the capacity and proliferation of international fibre would have made satellites old-fashioned, no one would have believed it.

Given the fact that such capacity is available internationally, why would anyone seek to install a bottle-neck that ensured Australia remained in the digital dark ages for decades?  Optus are already offering even higher speed than my cable connection provides, so I assume there is a market for it.

It is well accepted that three months <and reducing> is currently the time between the conception of a product and the marketing and profit. After that it is superseded by another manufacturer and his imitation. If we want to live in the past as an source of primary products and suppliers of basic non-value added products, by all means, aim LOW.

Dayton says:

11:19am | 23/08/10

Reg: The internet is probably my favorite thing in the world. I work in the industry and love everything about it. I love that it’s the only place where views can be expressed freely (which labor are trying to filter by the way).

However I do not believe that we should spend $8000 per household ($2000 per person) to make the internet that much faster when the most any other country in the world has spent is $300 per person. I don’t think a lot of Australian’s realise just how much money $43 billion is. You could build 43 football stadiums for that much money or enough renewable energy power plants to power the whole of Australia.

Also the cost to wire your house would be in the thousands and not all of the population could afford to connect to it. What is the point in spending 43 billion to connect 98% of households when only 30% of the population connects to it.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

11:10am | 23/08/10

1. No-one will get the touted 1000Mbps due to a limitation in the technology (GPON). The best you will get is 1/32 of that because the cables are used to serve 32 premises.

2. Premises in Tasmania are currently being hooked up for free. That will not continue. There is a so-called ‘‘boundary point’’ on each premises and that is where the NBN NTU will be placed. Everything after that, you pay for.

3. The real benefit of the NBN is to provide high bandwidth, high speed backhaul between population centres and both the Liberal and Labor plans allow for this. It is the last mile that is different. It is also the difference between pricing - much of that $43 Billion ($80 Billion, more likely) is digging trenches around rural Australia.

4. Most people are opting for the ‘slow speed plan’ on the NBN as that is affordable. It is also around the same price for around the same speed as ADSL 2, which is already available to capital cities. All that is required for many more people in cities to get it is to remove Telstra’s RIMs, which they used instead of more exchanges because they were cheap.

5. The Liberal plan does not preclude later fibre to the premises, when labor’s debt is paid off.

6. CSIRO are currently trialling wireless that is faster than Conroy’s NBN.

7. Liberal’s plan does not include censoring the internet. They will facilitate home-based filtering based on choice. Products like Net Nanny, used to protect children, for example.

8. Conroy is a complete idiot. His only redeeming feature is that he couldn’t possibly be a worse Communications Minister than Richard Alston.

Yvonne says:

10:36am | 23/08/10

Spot on farmer. Reg is wrong as are so many others. Typical that 1. He will be in a position to access the new broadband (if he can afford it), unlike the farmer, and 2. The cost of implementing an NBN is so enormous, no-one actually has a grasp on its scale and therefore disregards this aspect.
The cost of the NBN is around the cost of the stimulus package, yes that much. And lets not forget that the liklihood of cost blow outs, and when you talk of money on that scale, thats BIG money. Think about that Reg while you wait for a hospital bed, or whinge about the lack of money spent elsewhere. All for the micro seconds of speed and clarity you will gain (if you can afford it) on facebook.

Reg says:

09:36am | 23/08/10

Farmer, no one asked you or anyone else whether we wanted the internet at all and I am sure that even you can see the dramatic difference it has made in all areas of international exchange.

Forget the idiot games, if the past advances brought by the internet are any indication AT ALL of what it promises for the future, them you just lie back and let someone else make the decisions for you.

Gregg says:

09:34am | 23/08/10

Spot on Farmer and if you have a look at http://www.nbnco.com.au/our-network/fibre-wireless-and-satellite it’s about as clear as mud.

It is a totally unmeasured immeasurable pie in the sky as far as what benefits will come from it and the whole country has been using various internet type activities for years without fibre opric super speeds and quite successfully and the super speed will provide very little by way of real productive output.

The $43+B could be used on so many things and in respect to the value/income derived from rural areas, perhaps there could be benefit in some teethy committees established that could see what expenditure is appropriate in return for rural areas and it’ll vary from region to region.

Northern Steve says:

08:21pm | 23/08/10

Labor showed an inability to negotiate with the ETS, the mining tax and with the teachers unions.  It was Our Way or The Highway over those issues.  It was only ever at the 11th hour they ‘negotiated’ or capitulated.
I don’t think any of the independents will suffer that sort of thing for long.

Steve says:

06:04pm | 23/08/10

Denny you couldn’t trust Rudd. Nobody who knows him well does. The Liberals will not consider such a plan. If Labor can’t trust him he would have to be a shocking risk to the Liberals. The Coalition couldn’t on the one hand say he was an incompetent as they (rightly) did and then say “oh but put him in this important job”. It would be all too convenient and cynical and the electorate would be mightily pissed off.

Denny Crane says:

11:40am | 23/08/10

There is a possible wild card in the whole setup hear, a man who is upste in how he was treated anw would love nothing more, to this time put the knife in himself.

Yesterday there was the suggestion that the Coalition should approach KRudd with the offer of being the speak, with increased responsibilities, as it is know that Rudd is no longer wanted by the labor party this could be certainly a wildcard.

Rudd could stand as independent in his elecorate and win, so be aware this possibility maybe on the tabel sooner then later

jb says:

09:05am | 23/08/10

Yes Denny and lets not forget that once the “deal” is done thats not to say she will stick to her word and actually deliver, any of the indies would be fools to do a deal with the Rudd/Gillard govt.
Anything to get across the line, anything…

Mayday says:

09:36am | 23/08/10

Well said and when I saw the quotes in the article above the eyes glazed over as a natural response to the monotone of content and timbre.
Its not about Julia and she should have realised five weeks ago she would also be joining the host of female corpses laying around the Labor Party Headquarters.
Carmen Lawrence and Joan Kirner, then Cheryl Kernot, now Maxine McKew and in the near future Kristina Kenneally, Anna Bligh and last but by no means least our Julia!
Ladies its not about you but the boys maintaining their power base at your expense, wake up!

Mr Pastry says:

06:27pm | 23/08/10

@MarK - apologies. I foolishy colored you in as a Lib diehard, but we seem to now agree. Labor stuffed up and lost it, Abbot benefitted from their failings, there was no a blistering hot campaign.  He just had to breath in and out and not be Julia.

MarK says:

01:48pm | 23/08/10

Voted Liberal for the first time in the Senate ever this election.

Have not voted Nat/Lib for the past 3 or 4 elections however you count them.

Do not presume to know everything.

I barrack for the right at this point in time because as has been shown and as I have been saying the Rudd Gillard government was one of the worst governments this country has had.

Labor recognised that and knifed Rudd.

The country recognised that and gave Gillard the bird.

There is there record, I am pretty comfortable that my view was pretty wide spread.

Mr Pastry says:

11:21am | 23/08/10

@MarK - its good to have allegiance but I think party members/followers show religious zeal at cultish levels and lose perspective.  Parties never win, floating voters get fed up with sitting governments and shift.  You will always vote Liberal whether they are useless or not, the floating vote is a no confidence vote which you are no part of.  It has nothing to do with the opposition’s brilliant campaign.  Wyatt Roy was the beneficiary of annoyance at the encumbent useless Labor MP’s lazy, ways while trough sucking.  Sure parties will claim credit but that is the way with religious folk, anything to keep the followers believing.  “See I have made the tide come in”  it was coming in anyway.

MarK says:

09:26am | 23/08/10

Why the Liberals.

12 months ago the coalition was looking at being reduced to 20 something seats in the house.

The “unelectable” Abbott was voted in to try and stem the flow.Thst is not me saying he was “unelectable”, that is Hawker and Cameron, various Labor pollies - I distinctly remember them comparing him to Latham.

Fast forward to know and let us wee what we have

1. A sitting PM unable to stand the pressure of having the agenda ripped from him and gone
2. A woman of “unlimited” talent thrust to the fore by her party and a shattering of the myth of her competence
3. The first government since the Great Depression tossed out in their first term. Make no mistake Labor lost on Saturday, They cannot govern in their own right.

So lets not be too critical of the Liberal “machine”. Awesomr job led from the front by Tony Abbott.

Gillard is gone for good. Look at Tory’s piece. What I get from it is more miscalculation from Gillard.

Look critically at her performance in Goverbment

The ETS backflip she supported was the beginning of the end
The Gang of Four - well 2 are sort of still standing
The BER, the most massive waste of government money ever seen
“Building” a refugee processing centre in East Timor without actually asking the East Timorese
The mining tax debacle and no fix where the tax was gutted and plenty are still inhappy
The further no action on the ETS - the we will do something after the NEXT election (not this one) except get 150 random people to help us decide widely seen as one of the most laughingly ridiculous policies ever put forward.
Cash for clunkers scheme which has been shown to be a dud elsewhere in the world
Epping to Parramatta rail- just about sums it up
Her desperation on the last 2 days of the campaign and shrill, the even pleading, tone she used.

Add to all of the above her appeal to the independants on Saturday night in her “closing” speech for the night. By mentioning them fiorst her priorities were clear. Bugger the party, bugger the agenda, bugger everything….lets start the suck up so we retain power. No recognition that the record was so appalling they were told an emphatic no.

She is gone and tarnished beyond repair. She really is not that good. Besides her performance on the unreal world of the floor of parliament which is just a bit above a managed stage show these days she really is incompetent.

That was the big message.

Abbott has two Labor leaders on his score sheet. He can do this last one slowly now. Labor will be fun to watch.

Bobster says:

02:34pm | 23/08/10

@ Adam Diver,

What did you expect from Bob Katter? He is a Queenslander after all and as we all know, as far as Queensland is concerned what’s good for Queensland is good for the country.

DougB says:

01:06pm | 23/08/10

The simple fact that Bob Katter has represented his electorate for 24 years, says enough.  Even when he didn’t belong to a major party, his electorate still voted for him, because he listens and trys to get what they need.  Most other politicians should learn from this.  They should be representing us, the people, not the bloody party line (which just is about power and wealth).
North Queensland is a bloody big picture too, it provides most of Queenslands wealth.  They should in reality split from the “Great South-East” and their lot would improve immensely, instead of being raped by the Brisbane based pollies and robbed.

Bron says:

11:12am | 23/08/10

Maybe I have missed something, but isn’t that what local political representation is all about- taking care of the concerns of your constituents? Why does that make Bob Katter an idiot? Considering how easily he yet again won his seat-does that mean the majority of his electorate are idiots as well? To me, it just means that their priorities are different from ours, but because we live in a democracy, they have as much right to be considered as anyone else & are fortunate that at least their Federal representative stands up for them instead of blindly toeing some party line to protect their political ambitions.

MHT says:

09:07pm | 23/08/10

Dash @  9:11. You’re falling for the same mistake as Tony Abbott and many other commentators…our voting system is preferential and not first past the post , we can’t have it both ways. (I would be interested in seeing the make up of this parliament if it was based on first past the post)

Hard Giant says:

08:14pm | 23/08/10

n_dude - probably the same thing that happened to Andrew Peacock in 1990 who got more of the vote than Hawke but lost the election?

jf says:

05:53pm | 23/08/10

Reg says

By “free kicks” I can only assume you meant the fact that the were campaigning against a grossly incompetent Government. And I agree.

However, they were also campaigning against an incumbent, first-term Government. Something that history shows is very, very difficult.

Jason CR says:

05:05pm | 23/08/10

Dear all Labor supporters in denial.

The coalition received nearly 500,000 more primary votes.  You know the bit there they actually mark a 1 in the box of their choice.  Sure, you are ahead in the 2PP on the back of greens preferences (well done on that).
Did Beazley get the higher primary vote n_dude? You tell us.
I really don’t care about who forms the minority government with the political ransomers being the Independents.  The real highlight is watching Labor ready to self destruct and the knives being sharpened up in NSW.  Once a rabble, always a rabble.  Oh and where is Rob Charteris??

Dash says:

03:08pm | 23/08/10

n_dude, I don’t remember a hung parliament? I’m simply suggesting with the current situation where deals need to be made to form government, that the primary vote is important as is the fact that in the three independents that have been decided, the ALP vote is tiny.

n_dude says:

01:52pm | 23/08/10

@Dash - What happened when Kim Beazley won the majority of the popular vote against Howard but still lost the election?

Dash says:

01:24pm | 23/08/10

Fehowarth, I believe someone has to govern us! And I believe that the ALP should not do that from a bigger minority than the LNP. I’d like to hear your argument why the ALP, having received fewer votes, should prevail. Remember that in the three finalised independent seats the LNP polled more votes than the ALP with the ALP vote being as low as just 8% in New England and 13% in Lyne. Labor can count on the green in Melbourne even though the greens only won on the back of Liberal preferences. It’s a crazy situation. Perhaps we need to go back to the polling booth?

fehowarth says:

01:08pm | 23/08/10

So dash you believe in winner takes all.

Dash says:

12:02pm | 23/08/10

Reg given less people voted for the ALP and they lost a 17 seat majority, by your own reasoning, Labor stinks more. And I agree with you, they do! Fehowarth, of course green votes count. If they had won 44% of the primary vote at this election, they would have deserved to be in government. As it is, nearly 90% of the people didn’t vote for them. Given roughly 38% of the people want Labor, 44% want LNP and 12% want the greens, I don’t see how the ALP can claim a legitimate mandate. Do you?

fehowarth says:

09:59am | 23/08/10

Dash, do not the Green votes count.  The Green vote carries the same weight as for the Coalition.  It might surprise you but they are not born to rule.  It is a pity not all interviews could be of the standard of Red Kezza last night.  The questions were probing but to the point.  A miracle happened and information got from all three. As for Mr. Abbott’s 400000 extra votes outshone by   Mr. Abbott ignores the fact that most of the swing went to the Greens.  The number of votes is immaterial.  All that counts is the number of votes in the house.  Mr. Abbott should heed the warning given by the independents. That is it about stable government not parties

Reg says:

09:41am | 23/08/10

I’ll say it again Dash, despite all the free-kicks at their disposal, all the Coalition could achieve was a hung parliament. I interpret that to mean that most Australians still think the Liberal National Coalition is on the nose.

Dash says:

09:11am | 23/08/10

Nah Reg, I think John just wants stable government and we didn’t get that from the ALP when they held a majority for the last three years. More people voted LNP than ALP and the ALP fell across the line in many seats only because of Green preference deals! There is no way under those circumstances that the ALP should be allowed to form government. Then again, if the LNP form government, the greens will block supply and we’ll end up back at the ballot box! I think even I would have prefered Labor than to have the loony left with the balance of power in the senate. But Reg, Labor got smashed. When you consider their majority before the election and the fact that their primary vote is the lowest for decades, they got hammered. It’s hard to see how they could form a legitimate government since they really have a mandate for nothing now.

Reg says:

08:40am | 23/08/10

So what’s different? You seem to be advocating a ONE party state.

You must be a Liberal.

iansand says:

06:54pm | 23/08/10

All the popular vote crap is just that.  If there is one thing that has become apparent in the last 24 hours it is that the rural independents are not swayed by crap, and at the moment they are the blokes that matter.  In fact I suspect that the spin is counter-productive.  These blokes will see past spin.

PS says:

04:03pm | 23/08/10

Julia has just been on Sky News spin,spin,spinning around again as she says that more Australians had voted for her but she would not be where she is today if it was not for the Greens!  She will do everything in her power to stop us from having another Election, I bet she will!!!!

Nicole says:

12:49pm | 23/08/10

Funnily enough Reg, you’re right. When I turned the TV on this morning and saw Queen Jooolya, I lost it !

Reg says:

12:08pm | 23/08/10

I don’t know how you can keep your breakfast down Nicole. For days now you’ve been spewing on cue. I think it would have been nice to see Tony and Julia sit down together with a big plate of pufftaloons and golden syrup each. In fact I think it should be made a tradition.

Nicole says:

09:37am | 23/08/10

So true Rosie. That publicity stunt that she pulled yesterday was nauseating. Here’s Tim trying to eat his breakfast, cameras everywhere, Jooolya having photo shots with babies, touching everyone like they were long lost friends…..*shudder*. Um, Jooolya, the people have spoken and they don’t like you. When is she going to get it? I think we should go to the polls again.

Gregg says:

09:24am | 23/08/10

You can be sure of two things Rosie and that’s
. There’ll be plenty of behind the scenes discussions
. And unfortunately for you we’ll still see no end of the leaders.

Fred says:

09:02am | 23/08/10

As for the “people have already spoken”, we should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.  For example the Queensland Liberal/ National Party came up with the brilliant idea of using pictures of Anna Bligh (State Government) to convince Queenslanders to vote against the Federal Labor Government and it worked.  Sensible adults only come into it at the margins.

Helen says:

08:15pm | 26/08/10

The highlight of my election night was Michael Kroger taking to Wayne Swan. Swan was squirming.

Against the Man says:

05:40pm | 23/08/10

It wasn’t just Rudd/Gillard that was wrong with Labor. Roxon and Garrett were pointless waste of space as well. Why was Garrett so quiet this election? Did he get castrated by the same great ALP machine that did a job on Rudd? HaHa

Jason CR says:

04:55pm | 23/08/10

Swan was just sh*tty that he had to rely on greens preferences just to keep his seat, let alone being the treasurer.
Has there ever been a bigger sook in politics??  The man is a total disgrace.

Drew says:

04:11pm | 23/08/10

Costello came across as nothing but slime and bile. Every time he spoke I felt like the ghostbusters line “He slimed me”... What a nasty individual.

PS says:

02:14pm | 23/08/10

Greatest show on earth what Kruger said to Wayne Swann should have been printed by the media during the election instead of all the rubbish and insult that was said by Swann the whole election right up until the last day.  What do they call it Karma!!!!Also I like the look on Costello and the arms folded with the grin, priceless!!!Good old Barnaby he always says the wrong thing even if he thinks it is right!!

The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

11:51am | 23/08/10

I agree about Costello - most amusing. I’m afraid I thought Mr Windsor’s effort was as bad as Michael Kroger’s spray against that idiot Swann. There is a time & place and that is not during a national election coverage on TV.

Dommy says:

10:18am | 23/08/10

Roxon is a silly excuse of a minister, I have no respect for her and her useless policies.

MHT says:

07:34pm | 23/08/10

“A Conflict of interest” too funny, problem is…from which angle? BTW is the GG allowed to vote

FTW says:

05:06pm | 23/08/10

Do you think that might mean she will back Labor to form stable government, or live up to the Mother-In-Law tag and create hell for her Son in Law. Our GG has shown herself to be of upstanding commitment to our Commonwealth, so hopefully she tips the ballot in the bin and gets us to go back to the booths to decide the outcome properly.

Drew says:

04:08pm | 23/08/10

Try researching a little bit about the westminster system and its conventions next time before spouting your Piers Albrechtson bile. The current government is always offered the first chance to reform government. That’s standard protocol.

Bionic says:

11:27am | 23/08/10

Yeah, why? Shouldnt you be over readign Piers so called opinion? I think that wil suit your bias a littl better

fehowarth says:

09:54am | 23/08/10

Why

RT says:

11:40am | 23/08/10

The reforms need to go much further than just debates. The whole voting system that rewards the big two in ‘winner takes all’ style needs review, then we might get more choice and diversity in our representatives.

fehowarth says:

09:52am | 23/08/10

Mr. Falkiner was looking at these problems when he took on Defence.  Labor does have a standing commitment to reform house procedures.

Digby Hughes says:

09:39am | 23/08/10

what is the difference between an Independent MP and a political party MP? An Independent MP believes in openness and accountability all the time - not just when they are in opposition!

Julie Coker-Godson says:

11:56pm | 23/08/10

Yes, I, too, wish the media would “cut the crap” .  Even now when the vote counting has not been finalised and there are postal, absentee and overseas votes to come, they still keep coming out with confusing figures about who has won what seat.  I’ve never known such confusion following the aftermath of a general election.

Labor’s factional people are solely responsible for this mess we now find ourselves in and, to some degree, so are the Australian voters who put in 600,000odd informal votes.  They don’t deserve to have the freedom to have a vote.  What we have as a government now (Labor) will be stage managed from woe to go as it was during the election.  They will script/censor every damn thing in sight and I don’t trust them one little bit.  I look forward to seeing just how much more of a mess they can make before we finally wake up to ourselves and get rid of them.

acotrel says:

11:00pm | 23/08/10

The election result was obviously an overwhelming endorsement of Tony Abbott’s policies?

Bobster says:

12:41pm | 23/08/10

@ Steve. Hear Hear! I think Arch Bevis’ comments on Radio National about the Courier Mail range true.

I think this election has proved that, not only are pollies out of touch with voters, but the newspapers are out of touch with their readers.

Look at the surge in interest in broadband and gay marriage when all the media wanted to report on was spurious claims from both sides about school halls and minute national debts and the size of various candidates ears.

Joel says:

11:21am | 23/08/10

@phil: he did have a role to play in OzEmail, but he was also at the center of the media-named “Ute-gate” where he failed to comprehend the technical aspects of email…

yg of sydney says:

11:02am | 23/08/10

Well said Steve, in addision Mr Windsor also publicly backed the mining tax.

Karen says:

10:43am | 23/08/10

As someone who lives in Oakeshotts electorate. from what I read in the local rag from him he seems to favour Labor more than the Libs. He trumpeted quite often for Rudd and now does so for Gillard. He once wrote unfavourable comments about Abbott even participating in the Triathlon and he himself has been a competitor in the triathlon.

John says:

10:36am | 23/08/10

I agree Steve, only thing worse this election than messages coming from the politicians, is the reporting of them by the media. Hopeless job!
The media is so focused on reporting rumours, and hear say, and gossip, that they forget to actually report what is going on. Then on the odd occasion when the media does report what the politicians are saying the media put so much effort trying to twist and scandalise the what the politicians says, then wonder why the politicians don’t actually say anything. It’s a shame we can’t vote the media in and out, because given the lack of quality reporting this election you’d all be out of a job.

Hopeful says:

08:46am | 23/08/10

Yep and Warren Truss as Deputy Prime Minister (who?), Barnaby Joyce deserves another go in Finance (if only for the amusement value), Julie (death stare) Bishop in Foreign Affairs - so much talent, so little time.

Phil says:

07:38am | 23/08/10

My money is on these three holding kep positions in a coalition government. Give one of them communications portfolio or be a second tier minister. Rural and Regional Australia is another that would go down well.
Have Turnbull as communications minister. He set up Ozemail so knows a few things about internet.
Adam Brandt probably has more impact in some ways, possibly an environmental ministers job or a parlimentary secretary role.
As for an ETS, I dont think that will come into play, but lets wait and see.