Remember the economy stupids?

Bill says:

05:04pm | 09/08/10

Howard and Costello introduce banking regulations before the GFC. It wasn’t done by the labouur party

Tim says:

05:35pm | 09/08/10

“I can’t remember the legislation that Labor introduced to ensure that didn’t happen here”

Perhaps not. But do you remember the deposits guarantee and the ban on short selling on banks? Two pretty important measures that provided much needed assistance for banks here.

guru says:

06:16pm | 09/08/10

You must have forgotten the government gaurantee for bank deposits and the billionsof dollars that the government gave banks access to as well as undertaking to take up the risk for banks dodgy lending.Also legislation was presented to ensure that banks do not engage in such dodgy behaviour again. If the Libs had been in power they would have relied on “market forces” and some banks may have gone to the wall as depositers pulled all their money out to stash under the beds. Why do you think the big end of town supports the coalition

blocker roach says:

06:20pm | 09/08/10

you do realise that due to the gfc the countrys earnings dropped by $100m, liberal or labor that remains a fact that could not have been avoided.

Evan Findlay says:

06:22pm | 09/08/10

Bill,
A small lesson in Australian politics. The regulation of the banking industry was introduced by Paul Keating, it was aptly called the “Four Pillar Policy” It was introduced after Keating deregulated the banking industry only to find that the banks were reckless and irresponsible in their lending and were a danger to our economy. It was also designed to stop any two of the big four merging.
Only last year the former Reserve Bank Governor, Ian Mc Farlane and the ACCC chief Graeme Samuel, credited the policy with “shielding us from the worst of the financial crisis”
Howard and Costello had nothing to do with it.

Keith Hammersmith says:

07:30pm | 09/08/10

just to let you know, the government guarantee on savings deposits was completely unwarranted and actually hurt our economy.  At the time our banks were the second most secure in the world -behind canadian banks. Bringing in the savings guarantee created unwarranted panic and caused people to pull money out of term deposits and building societies in order to “protect’ their money - THUS costing jobs.
There was never a threat to anyones savings in this country, it was simply a ploy buy the labor party to act as though they were doing something, but like most things they did, they created a problem where there was none.

dovif says:

08:02pm | 09/08/10

Guru

The bank gaurantee was not needed, the banks in Australia are still making billions and billions $$$ of profit

Our banking system was at no risk of ever falling over, the government just wasted a lot of money for nothing

Northern Steve says:

08:27pm | 09/08/10

Backing up Evan there, it was Hawke & Keating, not Howard, who introduced good banking rules that had such a big positive impact for us during the GFC.
By comparison, the Bank Guarantee was an awful piece of legislation.  Everyone already believed that Australian banks were safe, but the new legislation made people wonder if the government knew something noone else did.  Cuased people to remove money from small banks and other investments, unnecessarily, and put them into savings accounts in the big banks - caused quite a bit of grief for the non-bank lenders, and arguable resulted in less stability than we already had.
That’s why they won’t talk about it.

Damo says:

08:51pm | 09/08/10

Evan,
If Keating hadn’t deregulated, perhaps he wouldn’t have had to re-regulate with that policy. It’s like saying that Rudd is responsible for insulation safety checks, despite his policy being the reason they were necessary!
Fact is, Liberal has consistently performed better on the economy. Liberal delivers a surplus, Labor spends it.

Justin G says:

09:52pm | 09/08/10

Evan Findlay…. A little History and factual Lesson for you.

Whilst Keating did implement those reforms… they were based on a report that was commissioned and championed by none other than John Winston Howard…. the fact that Howard never implemented these ideas is only due the fact that the Liberals lost the Election to Labour. However, John Howard was magnanimous enough to place this report on the desk of the new incoming Treasurer.. the one and only Paul Keating… who not being a mug, realised a good idea when he saw it. Thus he implemented the plan.

So you are wrong to say that Howard had nothing to do with it… he had everything to do with it. It was his idea.. the fact that Keating implemented it is only a matter of right place right time.. because you can surely bet that JWH would have come back to this had it not been done.

Astonished at the sycophants says:

12:52am | 10/08/10

APRA people… Peter Costello’s baby. Paul Keating my foot, you ALP stooges never tire of lies.

Evan Findlay says:

07:51am | 10/08/10

Justin G,
The report you mention was the Campbell report and John and Malcolm had plenty of time to do something with it. They were back then as Howard was when Prime Minister, too gutless to make the big decisions. They both blame each other for not acting on the submission but at the end of the day it’s the treasurer’s responsibility for economic and tax reform, hence it was John Howard who dropped the ball.
I don’t need the history lesson Justin as I am very well read and across my political history.
By the way, it’s Labor not Labour.

Bigdog says:

06:18pm | 09/08/10

The Libs introduced the GST. From that moment on there have been quite a number of real tax cuts. I spent my first 10 years of employment under Labor and I can tell you that around the time of every budget, I was waiting and worrying over what the tax increase would be. There is a dramatic difference between the retoric and the reality of these parties.

Peter from the bush says:

06:51pm | 09/08/10

Macca,
I wouldnt trust the Libs with our local footy team finaces.They would send us broke…OVERNIGHT….

Northern Steve says:

08:29pm | 09/08/10

Based on what, Peter?
The BER?  Pink Batts?  Green Loans?

Nicole says:

04:39pm | 09/08/10

Absolutely agree dovif. Swan is idiot who doesn’t have a clue. He’s a puppet, just like his Queen. Hockey, I’m not sure if he’s up for the job (Libs will romp it in). Bring back Costello. The man certainly knows what he’s doing and has proved that.

klpess says:

06:23pm | 09/08/10

When you are out of a job and are told that it is only a “mild recession” I hope you can see the “funny” side when you are standing in line at the soup kitchen.

Evan Findlay says:

06:34pm | 09/08/10

Dovif,
How do you know explain our domestic economy which is suffering from smaller profit margins(deflation). This is the problem with our economy. The mining sector is surging, RIO announcing a 260%, half yearly profit which makes a mockery about their concerns on the mining tax! And a domestic economy that is slashing profit margins just to get people through their doors.
The fact of the matter is that consumer confidence is waning, not so much because of our economy but because other nations have double our unemployment figures, they have barely, if at all, turned the corner. China is intentionally slowing their economy because of their residential and commercial property bubble, a slower demand for their manufacturing industries and then there’s Europe.
So, whilst we wait for these countries to get back into the game the question remains, Will we need to stimulate the economy again or do we follow Tony’s and Joe’s lead and sit on our hands?

Evan Findlay says:

06:41pm | 09/08/10

Nicole,
If Costello knew what he was doing, he certainly kept it a secret. Please explain to me, and many economist’s for that matter, what were the policies that he initiated that delivered such economic prosperity.
I’ll let you in on a secret. I ask the question because I know the answer. I just want to see what your level of understanding is in matters relating to economics and tax, and they will probably be the same little lies he forced upon the great unwashed.

dovif says:

08:14pm | 09/08/10

Evan F

The problem is the local economy was Stopped because of incompetant policies from the Treasurer and RBA, quite simply, up to November 2007, our economy was going great, and then had 3 unneeded interest rate rise, which accompanied with the Treasure making a big deal over how much we were spending stopped the economy .... the economy was in disarray after February 2008, because everyone stopped spending… this was caused by

a interest rate hike stopping people spending
b government raising fear stopping people spending and
c GFC

As for the “lie” LOL you know very little about economics ... the problem with Australian mining in the 70s, 80s and 90s was industrial relation and efficiency… our mining sector struggled because we cannot sustain supply ... this was solved because of the following

a. Deregulation - industry and floating of AU$, this improved efficiency in the sector and make AU export cheap, this was supported by ALP and Liberal
b Waterfront reform - supported by Liberal and not by the ALP, reduces export cost and increased efficiency means we can export more, export quicker and ensure customers are happy
c. Labour market reform, all through the 80s and early 90s, there was lots of strike at the mines, under the Liberal reforms, not supported by the ALP, there are now vertually no strikes, which hurts Australia’s operation
d. During the late 90s, Mining sector was struggling, support offered to the construction industry, first home buyer grant etc, increased demand for mining material, which helped expend the mining sector in Australia
e. the halving of Capital gain tax in 1997 inproved return on share investment, leading to increasing of investment in the mining sector, which means that Australia is able to capitalise of eventual demand from China
f. expansion of the skill migrants program, which supplied the mining industry with a lot of skilled labour required from the mines

with your “extensive knowledge” you must know all this already

Evan Findlay says:

08:01am | 10/08/10

Dovif,
The problems in the 70’s and 80’s with mining was more to do with pricing and slower demand.
It’s a bit of a stretch to be blaming three interest rates over two years ago with a slowing in demand for consumerables now. Why not twenty years ago!
The rest of your statement is reasonably correct although I would contend that it was Corrigan and Combet that finally ended the Waterfront dispute. Reith and Costello left Corrigan out to dry.
Could you please quantify Liberal party labour market reforms of the nineties.

dovif says:

08:28am | 10/08/10

Wrong again Evan

The reason Australia prospered so much more than other countries like canada and africa is our ability to deliver on time. This have everything to do with waterfront reform and IR reform

During the 80s and 90s, the militant unions backed by the ALP caused havoc on the miners, costing Australia Billions in contracts and penalties in delay of supply

The efficiency and reliability gained in waterfront reform was vital in making Australia the preferred supplier for minerals worldwide, and improving the wages of all miners, this filters through to other area of the economy, through spending by miners and investors

To further prove that u r wrong, Australian mining company start improving in performance since around 2000, much earlier than the China fed, commodity broom

Steve says:

10:36pm | 10/08/10

To dovif & Evan For ten years plus Howard and Costello did a really good job of educating the Australian public to think that the kinds of things they’ve pushed through have been responsible for the boom ( it did cost us about $3mil a week in advertising to do so) Australia’s prosperity was the result of reforms made by labour governments claims by Howard and treasurer Peter Costello that their economic management skills were superior are misleading. They’ve argued that the surpluses they’ve presided over generated the boom. They’ve argued that paying down Australia’s public debt is very important for the boom. But the budget surplus is a consequence of a strong economy, not the cause of it. The reforms of the Hawke/Keating years- floating the currency, overhauling tariffs, liberalising the financial system, managing industrial relations through the Accord and enterprise bargaining – were massive economic changes that transformed our economy. So like now as then the treasurers role is not as significant as it use to be in the days when John Howard completely wrecked the economy for the first time as treasurer no great waves of cash then to cover the holes… ah the seventies great reform days of Johnny, sold countless government business with soaring interest rates of 22% oh yeah deepest recess this country as ever know..  Does anyone still think Costello and friends were the great debt busters after reading the following? Interestingly Labor’s stimulus package comes in at about 1% of the total, enjoy: “‘Tony might happily forget that while his former government colleagues were steering the good ship Australia, the nation’s total debt soared from a mere $700 billion in 1997 up to $3.2 trillion by the close of their term. An increase of 387%’‘. Deregulation brought growth all right. But there is a yin for every yang. The Opposition may well brag that it left office with zero debt - zero government debt that is - as the upshot of policy was to lump it onto the consumer. Now there’s a thought

Barbara says:

05:30pm | 09/08/10

Not as bad as Labor’s 10 billion shortfall in their estimates from the Mining Tax

Timothy Vukomanovic says:

07:57pm | 09/08/10

Are you employed by the Labor Party ??? Joe Hockey and Abbotts numbers appeared to match fairly well. Hockey included 8-10 billion from the mining tax, Abbott expressly discounted that.. That would be where the difference is.

Marg says:

06:59pm | 09/08/10

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t it Swan who said he would stop the banks raising interest rates when the Reserve Bank didn’t announce any increase?  Just curious..

JasonCR says:

04:58pm | 09/08/10

James, I was led to believe that Rudd was knifed as he wouldn’t consult with other cabinet ministers and lost direction.  He has been blamed by Labor for everything that went wrong under his watch as he was a one man band.

However, Gillard and Swan now brag about keeping us out of recession blah blah blah.  If they want to claim this, shouldn’t Rudd be the one receiving their praise??  Hmmm

According to Labor everything that went bad (and there is plenty) = Rudd.
Everything that went well = Gillard / Swan.

They can’t have it both ways.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

06:23pm | 09/08/10

JasonCR that would be logical to think that, but why would the words logic & Labor party be used in the same sentence? ?

Evan Findlay says:

06:45pm | 09/08/10

James,
I didn’t realise that Joe was part of the government. I know they think they’re born to rule, but on this one they got it so wrong and now it’s coming back to haunt them.

Northern Steve says:

08:48pm | 09/08/10

Would love to see some of the BER stimulus actually being spent in my town.  Three local schools were given halls and more.  All being built by big city builders.  I’ve got local builder mates either not working, or doing seasonal work for the sugar harvest and crush.
And to top it off, with the millions spent at the high school on a new building, we still can’t spend the DER money on computers because the rest of the school is riddled with asbestos, so no wiring, no network, no projectors in rooms.  Hmmm.

The Badger says:

05:54pm | 09/08/10

“I know who I’ll be offering the job to - the guy who has actually done what he says he can do.”

You must be talking about Swan, cause Hockey hasn’t done anything but manage to muddle his numbers so far.

Evan Findlay says:

06:52pm | 09/08/10

Steve,
When did Hockey deliver a surplus? I didn’t even know he had been Treasurer!!! This is the man that said ” That by stopping the mining tax the government would save 12 Billion dollars” Hmmm. It doesn’t sound like he knows the difference between revenue and debt!
I wouldn’t even bother interviewing him let alone offering him a job. Maybe you could offer him a job as a janitor.

Steve Putnam says:

07:47pm | 09/08/10

Former World Bank chief and Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz commenting on the Australian Govt stimulus pakage, described it as being the best timed, best directed and correct amount. He also said re Australian debt levels that if you are earning $100,000 a year why are you worried about a $6,000 debt?
You can’t be serious about Hockey. On the proposed Federal/State 60/40 funding of health, Hockey using the hypothetical example of a $10,000 operation sagely opined that the feds would pay $6,000, the state $4,000 fair enough. He then added “who pays the extra $2,000 if the operation costs $12,000”?

Steve_of_Cornubia says:

08:19pm | 09/08/10

@Badger and Evan Findlay:  While you may think nobody will notice that you misinterpreted/misunderstood my comment, I can assure you that most will.

So, getting back to my analogy, we have at this election to make a choice between a candidate (i.e. PARTY) that has a pretty good CV showing actual success in running a surplus economy and minimising debt versus a candidate with a CV that lists only failure to produce surplus results, in fact listing debt after debt.

All we hear from Labor are promises of surpluses. Ignoring, for the moment, that Labor has an abysmal economic record running back as far as you care to look, we could instead judge them on their other promises:

Grocerywatch (still waiting), Fuelwatch (still waiting), computers in schools (still waiting), 260 new childcare centres (still waiting), 750 houses for remote NT communities (still waiting), etc, etc, etc, etc.

But of course they will keep their promise to balance the budget. Right?

The Badger says:

05:58pm | 09/08/10

If you say so John.

Please tell those in America and Europe that the GFC has subsided and it’s safe for them to come out of their economic bunkers.

I’d call Greece first.

By the way, did you realize the G in GFC stands for Global?

Richard says:

07:32pm | 09/08/10

Badger, do you know how Greece got into their current predicament? By racking up government debts in the exact same fashion as our Labor government has been doing. You can try to point out that our debt is much lower than theirs is, but by doing so you must then concede that the reason why is.because we had 11 years of Liberal government leading up to the GFC, unlike the poor Greeks (or the British for that matter).

The fact is that after only 3 years of Labor we are already borrowing money at a rate of $100 million per day, and imagine the interest payment on those cumulative figures once interest rates inevitably rise off their all time lows… It would be madness to continue trusting the clowns who got us into this mess with the keys to the treasury so that they can eventually bankrupt our nation, just like England and the PIIGS are from following such profligate government policies.

elhombre says:

06:22pm | 09/08/10

You mean squirm like little kruddy with the knife in his back? Your pitiful party has already admitted they are not fit to govern by deposing a first term prime minister. what more is there to say?

JT says:

05:57pm | 09/08/10

Why do people like Arios continue to pretend they are Liberal voters now voting Labor. If you were ever a Liberal voter, you could not in good conscience vote for this government. Simple as that. The enormous waste and incomptence they have shown us in 3 short years is on par with what we have put up with in NSW for over a decade.

And to top it off you claim your vote has changed because of the greatest white elephant Australia has ever seen, the NBN, infrastructure apparently so essential it cannot withstand a simple business case study. 43 billion dollars to download faster, let that sink in for a moment. 43 billion could build 25 new hospitals across Australia (using the 1.7b the new Adelaide hospital is appox costing) and yet you think downloading faster is the essential policy that should dictate your vote. Mind boggling (and this from a guy who is a geek stuck with adsl1).

The Badger says:

06:03pm | 09/08/10

Arios

I agree, Hockey like most politicians are generally chosen because they can memorize facts, figures and speeches.

Hockey is a jack of all trades and a master of none.

You can bet if there already was an NBN, the first thing the Liberal action man would do is sell it so they could by the populace some lollies at the next election.

Stewart Henstock says:

06:23pm | 09/08/10

Whoa!
They have to go to every house to lay the fibre…..8 yrs…...8yrs if they don’t stuff it up.
Trains?
Don’t mention trains.
We don’t need more trains.
We need the ones we have to work.
Maybe if money was spent on safety we wouldn’t of had 2 fatal train crashes…Sydney to Brisbane line in 2009

Oh…considering Labor is running a deficit and paying 40 million a week in interest where are they getting the money to pay for all these new policies they’ve been running out every 5 minutes.

Show Me The Money

Jason says:

06:25pm | 09/08/10

No one is saying that we don’t need a faster broadband, but at a cost of $43 billion dollars??  Are you fair dinkum?
Are you telling me that the health or education systems are that good that some of this money wouldn’t be welcome there instead?? 
$43 billion under Labor will be $50+ billion. 
Meanwhile my 4 year old niece waits for a hospital bed for surgery… Good to see where your priorities lie Arios.

Front Bar says:

07:04pm | 09/08/10

Arios,
If it’s that great an idea, it should pay for itself within five years.
It won’t.
Most people don’t want or need the kind of speeds you’re talking about, and certainly not at that sort of price.  It’s a bit like saying people who want to buy a newspaper delivered should in fact have - and pay for - a fully staffed newsroom individually dedicated to them.
You write “they have actually shown a lot of foresight with this huge ($43b) investment and I don’t mind paying for it with my tax…”
If you’re happy to pick up the $43 billion, good luck to you.  I daresay Wayne Swan would love to catch up for a chat about which account you’ll be putting it into.

sarah swift says:

07:16pm | 09/08/10

i have no available wired internet in metropolitan melbourne other than wireless. joe hockeys comments are spot on. wireless is not going to give you the same speed as the nbn, but it will be affordable for people to use, quicker to deploy and it is what we need. we need internet connections that we can afford. you underestimate the advantages of mobility provided by wireless. we have landline adsl2+ already to alot of the population so not everyone is going to be need wireless so wimax is a perfect solution for people who can’t get a landline connection. with the proposed internet filter under labor, which is a far more important issue, i cannot support labor. the nbn is useless is we must pay the price of the internet filter. we can bypass the filter already but that is not the point. the filter is bad policy, will not protect any children from anything and has far reaching implications on freedom of speech. this election will be won over the internet filter issue. joe hockey you have my vote. as for the economy the liberal party has already proven themselves. labor has already said that the economy will go into surplus. even if tony abbott isn’t the best person to mange the economy voters will be able to take the risk and chance on him given the economy will go into surplus. labor are basically saying it is safe to vote for the liberals by saying it will go into surplus. bring on the new government. this election will be close.

TheRealDave says:

07:17pm | 09/08/10

Calling the NBN a way to download stuff off the internet faster is showing pure and utter ignorance of what the NBN is and what it can do. No wonder you vote Liberal.

For over a decade now the telecommunications infrastructure of this country have been held to ransom by Telstra. Take a look at their so called ‘Business plans’ and high end connections. You thought paying $70 a month for basic internet was expensive, try being a business with monthly, yes monthly, bills anywhere from $2k-20k a month AND MORE. A simple 4mb up/down account will set you back over $4000 a month AND you pay for all the data you use on top of that. Ever since DSL was switched on Telstra have being playing silly buggers with ALL of us. Remember when ADSL with a max speed of 8mb was artificially caped by Telstra to 1.5mb? It was only a couple of years ago when they graciously allowed us to use the full 8mb. Of course uploads are still crippled - wouldn’t want people actually having decent upload speeds and being able to shift of those expensive plans now huh?

Moving to FTTH means 100mb (if you want to pay for that) direct to your door. No more archaic copper wire that was laid anywhere from a few years ago to 50 years ago. Fibre Optic. Light traveling down the tube. Best of all, future upgrades to 1000Mb (and better inthe comming decades) are just a matter of upgrading your exchanges ie the backbone and not the fibre optic to your house. Anyone who tries to push a faster wireless scenario is just plain pig ignorant or has other motives. Wireless cannot compete with Fibre - ever. Ditto with Powerlines, sattelite, copper etc Fibre is the only way to go.

We will finally be able to combine ALL voice, internet, data and TV services all down the one cable. Businesses will have faster backbones and pipes between their offices allowing for faster secured connections around the country. They can integrate their business phone systems, hell they could use full video conferencing and dump the humble phone all together. School will have bigger and better connections to multimedia and internet resources. All that data that routinely pipes between government departments, multinational corporations, educational institutions etc all done better and more efficiently.

Working from home also will get a lot easier as anyone who tries to do it will tell you its the upload that slows it all down making it downright unusable a lot of the time.

I think medicine will be another area that will take a huge leap forward as well with a lot more data, real time video/diagnosis/consultation etc

So when you say just ‘faster downloads’ or some people facetiously imply it means I can download more porn - its so far from the actual truth its not even the same topic. Its disingenuous at best.

I am very much anti-net filter BUT I’d far rather an alleged Kiddy porn filter on my 100mb FTTH connection than no filter on my shitty Telstra monopolized ADSL/ADSL2 connection.

A vote for the Libs is a vote for a giant leap backwards in telecommunications infrastructure and a vote for the return of Telstra screwing us all over again. End of Story.

We have two choices here people. Its simple really. We either bite the bullet and do it now and step onto the front foot for a change OR we take a giant leap backwards…and then eventually have to do it in 10-15 years time and at 10-15 times the cost it is now.

Matthew says:

09:13pm | 09/08/10

Working in IT, the NBN is a con.

$43 Billion to provide faster download and upload speeds?

Will it reduce the gridlock on our streets? No.
Will it reduce the crowding on our public transport ? No
Will it provide water security ? No
Will it provide energy security ? No
WIll it change lives ? No
I already work from home on a 1.5Mbps connection,  I can control my work PC from home .. so in affect,

Will it save Greenhouse gasses? ha, I’m using twice as much green house gasses to do the same job.  More because now I’m using heating/cooling at home as well and 2 PC’s.

New Zealand recently did a study that showed (I’m trying to keep it simple)  there is good benefit going from non-broardband to broadband, but almost no benefit going from broadband to fast broadband.

The NBN is not worth the $40 BIllion outlay.  It’s not infrastructure and to compare it to the snowy scheme is ridiculous.

paddy says:

09:14pm | 09/08/10

Arios, when Labor won in 2007 they stopped the roll out of wireless for the regional areas through OPEL, they then wasted 2 years discussing fibre to the node and then fibre to the home. What NBN is doing is building another Telstra, with fibre. This is where the waste is, fibre to the home will not deliver faster internet if there is no overseas cable capacity to handle it, it is like trying to empty a swimming pool with a garden hose, you are not going to get the capacity. Think about it, 7 million houses at 100M each???? Not going to get out are they. Japan and Korea are both on major Global cable junctions, Australia is only served by 3 cable companies, Telstra, Southern Cross and Pipe Networks. So if you do the sums you might as well have a Gig access at home as it will only ever run as fast as these links allow. Oh yes, if the companies peer here in Aus it will be quicker, but most of the content does come from OS and this is the stage you want us on. Spend the money on Hospitals and Education.

Shane From Melbourne says:

10:01pm | 09/08/10

We wouldn’t be having this conversation if the LIberals hadn’t stuffed up the privitization of Telstra. All they had to do was privatize the retail arm of Telstra with the government holding the infrastructure and leasing to all comers. Instead we have had a Telstra virtual monopoly on infrastructure. Almost as good as the Liberals axing the R+D tax break. No wonder Australia is technologically backward…..

Jason says:

11:38am | 10/08/10

The NBN project is oversized and not really going to deliver much for people in the cities.  I already have cable internet, tv and phone and it costs me less than my phone bill alone 10 years ago.  I rarely saturate my connection because overseas links and servers are usually the limiting factor - not local broadband speeds.

An exception could be heavy use of BitTorrent, but I don’t download pirated dvds or games so not a problem for me.

FTTN would have made much more sense, solved the real problems (rural access to broadband) and reduced Telstra’s monopoly.  For the number of people who will want or need 100mbit, fibre to the premises is like spending 20 billion on fluffy dice - money which really needs to be spent on making our streets safer for internet addicted nerds to go outside once in a while.

S.L says:

05:50pm | 09/08/10

If Joe Hockey was such a great finance lawyer why was Peter Costello treasurer in the Howard Government in which Mr Hockey served?
He’s great at verbaly sticking it up opponents but falls way short on saying anything constructive.

Davo says:

05:57pm | 09/08/10

Wayne Swan - Economist

Joe Hockey - Lawyer

i think I know who I’d trust with economics.

John L says:

06:04pm | 09/08/10

Franko - You mean Joe Hockey’s a finance lawyer like those guys on Wall Street? Gee, that’s a bloke I want ot see in charge of our hithero succesfull economy.

The Badger says:

06:05pm | 09/08/10

I’d pick the one who had been there and done it.

Academic qualifications may get you an interview, experience will get you the job.

Andrew says:

06:18pm | 09/08/10

Honestly, neither. I’d prefer someone with a background in economics to be the treasurer. Joe Hockey being a Finance Lawyer is pretty irrelevant as a qualification for being Treasuer. All a Finance Lawyer needs to know is what laws and regulations exist in the financial sector, whereas the Treasurer needs to be able to determine the policy mix that is going to create an environment for the economy to continue to grow, hardly any similarities in those two jobs.

Evan Findlay says:

07:00pm | 09/08/10

Franko,
Joe couldn’t even tell the difference between debt and revenue when he said that a Liberal party government would abolish the mining tax thus saving the government 12 billion dollars.
He may have been a finance lawyer but from his understanding of all things finance I can now see why he’s a politician.

Christian Real says:

07:26pm | 09/08/10

Evan Findlay:
This Story from the Daily Telegraph,written by Simon Benson,on July 28, 2010 @ 12.00AM
“Lawyer Joe Hockey’s legal Fib”
“Opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey has been caught out about his legal qualifications after wrongly claiming to be still certified to practice law.”
In another paragraph Hockey said:
“Well it’s going to suprise you Lyndal but I haven’t got copies of all the legislation in front of me and even though Iv’e still got a practising certificate as a lawyer, I say to you we all have legal advice that confirms our position,so the story is wrong,” Mr Hockey,a former industrial relations minister, said in part of his recent radio review”
“However, it has been revealed Mr Hockey does not have a practising certificate and hasn’t been certified to practice law since June,1994.”

Northern Steve says:

08:51pm | 09/08/10

Wayne Swan’s a teacher?
I guess that’s one thing Labor has done for education in this country.  Got him away from the classroom.

MarK says:

10:05pm | 09/08/10

Wow CR ypu really got him there.
That sure is the election gone.

Northern Steve says:

08:56pm | 09/08/10

And the ability of companies and workers to be flexible with hours, rather than sacking people, was because of felxible IR laws from the Howard era.  Under current IR laws, companies would be forced to sack people or go under Makes it much harder to recover.
Three hour minimum shifts for after school work, I mean,really?

Realist says:

10:53pm | 09/08/10

Hooble, are you suggesting Labor should take credit for the GFC and employer goodwill putting people onto part time work to hold out for the economy to recover for these items you list?

iansand says:

09:47pm | 09/08/10

Save the luvvies!!!!

Rob r Charteris says:

09:16pm | 09/08/10

Greg Perth says:08:48pm; You have just confirmed you have an uunderstanding of nothing.

Richard says:

10:33pm | 09/08/10

You’re the one demonstrating a lack of understanding Rob r Charteris: no refutation, no evidence, just a glib statement that’s meant to imply some sort of sinister meaning, but all it ends up doing is prove that you will swallow Labor party spin hook line and sinker on any subject, even one that you know nothing about.

E says:

01:06pm | 10/08/10

point of order, the ALP supports the Nurses UNION, clearly neither organisation supports Nurses. The Unions are just political parasites on groups of workers, essentially nothing more than a protection racket and a PR company rolled into one.

Steve_of_Cornubia says:

01:57pm | 10/08/10

Yup, the combined might of Labor’s economic giants came up with a plan that was stunning in its scope and breathtaking in its vision:

Step One: Spend a heap of money.
Step Two: Errrrrr, spend a heap more?
Step Three: Keep spending!
Step Four: See above.

Where is the intelligence in that? The banks had already been brought into line and the Reserve set free, China very helpfully continued to buy as much ore and dirt as we could dig up, so besides spend money, what else of note did Swanny and Gillrudd do? Nothing.

Also, despite the GFC being behind us, Labor continue to pump money into the economy.

Ziggy says:

12:16pm | 10/08/10

I really do despair! Of course they did. They benefited most. Not our industries or our workers. Where is their stuff made?
The stimulas was neede but for heavens sake spend it on infrastructire so we could have had roads, more public housing, high speed rail etc, etc. The list is endless. Jukia is quite correct re her programme on schools - there may have been some waste but we all have somethinh concrete to show for it - real assets that will contribute for years to come.
The multiplier effect in the economy is enormous.
The level of ecomic debate and knowledge in this country is pitiful.