<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will big spending John Brumby do a Keating?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/05/06/will-big-spending-john-brumby-do-a-keating/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/05/06/will-big-spending-john-brumby-do-a-keating/</link>
	<description>now with extra source</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:29:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris hobson</title>
		<link>http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/05/06/will-big-spending-john-brumby-do-a-keating/#comment-23566</link>
		<dc:creator>chris hobson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-23566</guid>
		<description>Whilst I am all for budget transparency and in the case of Victoria I favour a clear outline of the budget position including capital expenditure, I think it is well time that we moved to a better analysis than this contribution. I have no problem with governments borrowing money to fund capital projects; this is a sensible and prudent approach. (Providing of course that the level of those borrowings can be reasonably funded over time in successive budgets). The danger of this contribution is that it seems to be arguing that we need to always fund capital expenditure out of recurrent funding; such a policy would be both dangerous and wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst I am all for budget transparency and in the case of Victoria I favour a clear outline of the budget position including capital expenditure, I think it is well time that we moved to a better analysis than this contribution. I have no problem with governments borrowing money to fund capital projects; this is a sensible and prudent approach. (Providing of course that the level of those borrowings can be reasonably funded over time in successive budgets). The danger of this contribution is that it seems to be arguing that we need to always fund capital expenditure out of recurrent funding; such a policy would be both dangerous and wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 433/442 objects using apc

Served from: www.crikey.com.au @ 2012-02-12 17:06:16 -->
