Breaking the deadlock - Election 2010

[straitman]

The Libs did have 13 years to make a go of it. Labor's now got their chance to make it work over the next 3 years.

Remember that Labor have already had three years to make it work and are only in this position because the average punter is not totally happy with what they have done during that time.

Quite frankly I do not believe that the current parliament will last more than six to twelve months.

I really hope things can be made to work but after listening to all the waffle from the independents yesterday and seeing a little of the deals they have done for their own electorates I cannot see this happening.

 

[cove]

Before anyone gets really excited about tax reform in Australia just remember that any big plans need to be funded from you or me or all of us.
Raising the GST rate only helps the States as it is their tax.
Total tax collections will continue to rise and it really comes down to who gets stung the most.Certainly no Government wants deflation as it lowers the tax take so for them they need inflation to grow their tax take.

 

[drron]

Before anyone gets really excited about tax reform in Australia just remember that any big plans need to be funded from you or me or all of us.
Raising the GST rate only helps the States as it is their tax.
Total tax collections will continue to rise and it really comes down to who gets stung the most.Certainly no Government wants deflation as it lowers the tax take so for them they need inflation to grow their tax take.

Very true.Tony Windsor wants the mining tax dropped so tax reform means increase in other taxes to compensate.
As to the GST didn't Kevin take a lot of it back as part of his Health Reform(apart from WA).

 

[medhead]

Before anyone gets really excited about tax reform in Australia just remember that any big plans need to be funded from you or me or all of us.
Raising the GST rate only helps the States as it is their tax.
Total tax collections will continue to rise and it really comes down to who gets stung the most.Certainly no Government wants deflation as it lowers the tax take so for them they need inflation to grow their tax take.

To me tax reform means getting rid of wasteful churning of money. All this taxing and then giving it back as allowances. That reduces the administrative overhead and that is how tax reform is good and also doesn't need to increase the tax take.
The other thing is to change the when and how tax is collected. the mining tax is good, if it gets rid of royalties. Rudd's mistake IMO was trying to push it through too quickly. Instead he should have done want henry suggested, should have sat down with the states to replace the royalties with something else.

Further I don't know about tax raising at all, it has remained in a fairly steady band of percentages of GDP, over the last 10 to 20 years. Sure GDP increases but that does mean increased costs for government. As long as the tax take stays at 20 to 25% of GDP and doesn't go to 30% there is not much to complaint about. But then if we can collect tax more efficiently then it would be good to reduce it to 18% of GDP.

sorry rant over.

 

[cove]

Yes the GST maybe deal for the States excluding WA was a proposed health contra.
Only mug States didnt figure that the GST rate could go up a lot faster than the health bill. But did they sign a binding document before the election was called ?
How will those States feel if and when the GST rate goes up from 10 per cent and/or they widen the catchment to include new items?

 

[medhead]

Yes the GST maybe deal for the States excluding WA was a proposed health contra.
Only mug States didnt figure that the GST rate could go up a lot faster than the health bill. But did they sign a binding document before the election was called ?
How will those States feel if and when the GST rate goes up from 10 per cent and/or they widen the catchment to include new items?

Is anyone suggesting the GST rate will increase (beside Tony Abbott)? Even if it does the states will still get the money. The health deal is only about funding health directly with some GST money. Which is a good thong because it reduces administrative costs by cutting out one layer if transfer payment. Commonwealth - state - health becomes commonwealth - health.

 

[drron]

Is anyone suggesting the GST rate will increase (beside Tony Abbott)? Even if it does the states will still get the money. The health deal is only about funding health directly with some GST money. Which is a good thong because it reduces administrative costs by cutting out one layer if transfer payment. Commonwealth - state - health becomes commonwealth - health.

Wishful thinking methinks.The States are still going to come up with 40% of costs and if past actions are anything to go by no reduction in staff will occur with that change.As well there is the reintroduction of local control of spending-ie another layer of administration hence costs will go up as usual(to be fair both sides are advocating this).

 

[Leumas]

The govt only committed to TALK about tax reform. It hasn't committed to actually DO anything.

The Independents will think they've achieved something, they will soon see they actually haven't achieved very much.

This 'spirit of consultation, co-operation', blah blah is just euphemism for more talk fests and no action.

Look forward to more 'reviews', 'summits', 'due process'...

 

[medhead]

Wishful thinking methinks.The States are still going to come up with 40% of costs and if past actions are anything to go by no reduction in staff will occur with that change.As well there is the reintroduction of local control of spending-ie another layer of administration hence costs will go up as usual(to be fair both sides are advocating this).

Yes I understand it was only a partial funding arrangement. I'm not sure how you get another layer of administration. There should always be some local control on spending. The administrative workload innate state government treasury department is reduced. Hence over time those numbers can be reduced with a possible transfer of staff to a more local level. So that isn't an *additional* layer in the long run.

Of course, IME state treasury isn't good at reducing their own numbers as much as they are good at reducing services. But I'll avoid that rant for now.

 

[drron]

Yes I understand it was only a partial funding arrangement. I'm not sure how you get another layer of administration. There should always be some local control on spending. The administrative workload innate state government treasury department is reduced. Hence over time those numbers can be reduced with a possible transfer of staff to a more local level. So that isn't an *additional* layer in the long run.

Of course, IME state treasury isn't good at reducing their own numbers as much as they are good at reducing services. But I'll avoid that rant for now.

You truly are an optimist.My example is the Hospital I first worked as a consultant.In 1975 it had 230 beds,174 nurses,3 in nursing administration and 22 in general administration.When I left 18 years later there were 130 beds,nurses had been reduced in proportion to 105 but there were now 13 in nursing admin and 66 in general adsmin.Not only that in 1975 the Hospital admin reported directly to Sydney.In 1992 they reported to a sub regional board who reported to a regional office who reported to Sydney.
You should also try and get a transcript of the original Bundaberg inquiry by Mr. Morris.Cross examining the QLD Director of Health he found that 60% of Qld Health salaries went to people who had no contact with patients.As he said that should be able to be reduced to 20% and then you could double the number of doctors,nurses,physios,speecch therapists etc,etc.
Around the world the major problem with Health delivery is the overwhelming numbers of Administrators.Yes Minister got it right-the best performing hospital is one with no patients.

 

[medhead]

You truly are an optimist.My example is the Hospital I first worked as a consultant.In 1975 it had 230 beds,174 nurses,3 in nursing administration and 22 in general administration.When I left 18 years later there were 130 beds,nurses had been reduced in proportion to 105 but there were now 13 in nursing admin and 66 in general adsmin.Not only that in 1975 the Hospital admin reported directly to Sydney.In 1992 they reported to a sub regional board who reported to a regional office who reported to Sydney.
You should also try and get a transcript of the original Bundaberg inquiry by Mr. Morris.Cross examining the QLD Director of Health he found that 60% of Qld Health salaries went to people who had no contact with patients.As he said that should be able to be reduced to 20% and then you could double the number of doctors,nurses,physios,speecch therapists etc,etc.
Around the world the major problem with Health delivery is the overwhelming numbers of Administrators.Yes Minister got it right-the best performing hospital is one with no patients.

That was a great episode.
I guess I'm looking more at government as a whole. In the case of health as you show there are buckets of different work functions. But other departments like treasury are more homogeneous. So if workload decreases as people leave they are not replaced. I was seeing a case where giving the money direct to health will create those extra people in the short term but treasury will have less work load and over time their numbers will reduce.

I left a government department in January as of 3 weeks ago they still hadn't replaced me, that's called a budget saving. God knows they needed someone, just as I was making noises to leave they offered to get 5 more people just to cover the workload. Those 5 have turned to 3 and my replacement is identified and is an internal appointment and they will still have to do their old job by the sound of things.

So while health might be different, IME the rest of the public service will be squeezed especially if work like managing money is being taken off them.

 

[JeniSkunk]

Yes Minister got it right-the best performing hospital is one with no patients.

That was a great episode.

The episode of Yes Minister the pair of you are thinking of was titled The Compassionate Society.
It was about Hacker's failure to get a physically completed, fully administrative staffed, but no medical staff or patients, hospital turned into a fully working hospital. The episode ended with the hospital being turned into a hostel for Cuban refugees.

Jenifur Charne

 

[medhead]

The episode of Yes Minister the pair of you are thinking of was titled The Compassionate Society.
It was about Hacker's failure to get a physically completed, fully administrative staffed, but no medical staff or patients, hospital turned into a fully working hospital. The episode ended with the hospital being turned into a hostel for Cuban refugees.

Jenifur Charne

I'm going to have to dig out my box set now and load them onto iphone for my IFE.

 

[drron]

If Julia gets to 76 her majority would be bigger than if Tony gets to 76.In the first instance I would predict the Member for Fisher will accept the position of Speaker.He is virtually certain to lose preselection next time so has nothing to lose but a bigger salary and pension to gain.

Pretty close-he gets deputy speaker.
Peter Slipper elected Deputy Speaker

 

[Smackbum]

Nice that he gets a big fat pension if he happens to be cut adrift by the Libs, but the $64 question is will he earn it?

 

[drron]

Nice that he gets a big fat pension if he happens to be cut adrift by the Libs, but the $64 question is will he earn it?

Easy answer-NO.