Comments on: Conflicted Keating’s retro-analysis does him no favours

By: JamesK

JamesK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“Another beneficiary of “NSW industrial obscurantists”, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, might also pause before rubbishing the democratic decisions of the NSW Labor Party”.
This less than subtle threat gives credence to Howard’s warning that a vote for Rudd was a vote for unionists. This was emphatically denied by Rudd & Co. in November. Is Mr. Mitchell suggesting that he change his tune now? It will be a 1 term goernment if so.I agree with David Sanderson’s point below. Does Mr. Mitchell support Collingwood? I wonder because he seems one eyed….

By: Nick

Nick — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Bring back the faceless men I say.

In a democracy political parties should be democratic as they are the conveyor belt between the masses and the government. If a government frees itself of a party structure, or an undemocratic unparticipatory party structure allows a government to become free of a party structure, who then is the government accountable to?

The electors one day every 4 years I hear the cynics say.

Well, that’s great, but if the government spends state resources to win elections and makes policy that reflects the donations of industry lobbyists we will soon be ruled by arrogant self perpetuating nincompoops.

Soon? The Liberals are a Party without a party or a government, and Iemma’s Ministers free float like hot air balloons beyond the community views mediated through a barely democratic party structure.

Bring back the faceless men and women I reckon; worst thing that Whitlam ever did!

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

For the record Michael Easson was on ABC 702 radio this morning in Sydney as a former secretary of the NSW union movement in the early 90ies. He was very concerned about the privatisation plan of Iemma “spinning out of control”. Neither he nor the ABC revealed this grotesque conflict of financial interest and to quote: http://www.pentaclefunds.com/directors.asp “Michael has professional experience across a broad range of industries, is the founder and chairman of the EG Property Group as well as currently a business consultant to Allens Arthur Robinson Lawyers. Michael’s directorships include ING Real Estate, InTech, Stadium Australia Management Limited, ACT Electricity and Water (where he is deputy chairman). Michael is a former director of Macquarie Infrastructure Investment Management Limited, the managers of the Macquarie Infrastructure Group.” And Alex Mitchell omits an even bigger howler in Keating’s sleazy opinion piece ….

By: Black out

Black out — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I can just see the headlines when privitisation, live Victoria’s experiment, leads to lack of infrastrcture and transmission investment by companies intent on squeezing every dollar from the NSW public. Rolling black will be the end result - and the headlines - “It’s the black out we had to have…..” Courtesy of Paul Keating. Same old, same old….

By: Tom McLoughlin#2

Tom McLoughlin#2 — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Keating says in the SMH today: “[in 1997} the power stations were worth $35 billion. A decade later the price discussion for the same stations is about $15 billion. That is, $20 billion in lost value; $20 billion that could have been spent on education, health and vital new infrastructure. A vast sum even by national government standards.” John Kaye MP (Greens) and Phd in electrical engineering no less stated today this was “deeply misleading”.”Mr Keating has conveniently ignored the billions of dollars in the low and high voltage network that then Premier Carr wanted to sell off and was included in the $35 billion price tag. “He has wiped out the value of 12,440 km of high voltage transmission lines owned by Transgrid. “He has written down to zero the $10.9 billion assets of the state’s electricity distributors, including 2.2 million power poles and the 169 thousand substations. [end quote]. Legal advice follows …

By: Ailie Bruins

Ailie Bruins — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Yes, I think Keating was off target this time. What the Labor Party needs to keep in mind is the massive erosion of public trust in the ability of the NSW Government to privatize anything correctly. How do we know if the Government is acting in our interests or in the interests of the moneyed influence peddlers? How does the public, who do not have access to $1000 Ministerial ‘dinners’ - know we are not going to get done over again. Mr Iemma expects us to trust him - we can’t.

By: Tom McLoughlin#3

Tom McLoughlin#3 — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Under s.52 and state equivalents of the Trade Practices Act (Commonwealth) it is illegal to engage in conduct that is misleading and deceptive in the course of business. There may be an exemption for news reportage. However we feel that Keating may be in breach of the law of the land as regards honest business practice. Certainly if he repeats these statements outside the newspaper he will be, and he may still have done so. I do believe this is a case for the ACCC to investigate as the corporate watchdog.

By: Tom McLoughlin#4

Tom McLoughlin#4 — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I’ve just submitted a written complaint by electronic form on their website to the ACCC as described below. Over to you Mr Samuels. It’s only a $15 billion public asset. One might think that that was a priority for the ACCC? Yer reckon?

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Morris Iemma front of the press today 7 May 08, and outside caucus room yesterday as per tv vision last night. All smiles like a man whose hanging has been postponed possibly to be cancelled, possibly not: Iemma and backers are claiming ‘peace in our time’. Echoes of Neville Chamberlain?

By: Peter Simmons

Peter Simmons — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

He with his snout in the trough forfeits the right to grunt. Keating’s consultancy ‘association’ mean he has a damned nerve and no credibility on this matter.

By: David Sanderson

David Sanderson — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

This article has a howler of its own. It is a distortion of the word democracy to describe the state conference as democratic. Fifty percent are union delegates and the rest come from the sadly depleted and/or stacked local branches. The ALP as a political organism is not really representative of grass roots politics and that denies the state conference any genuine sense of political engagement. Needless to say the Liberal Party is in an even sicker state.