Who can you trust?

Warren Bird | 8 October 2007

Font size: + - | print | email to a friend

ISSUE IN FOCUS:
by Jeremy Halcrow

INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT:
provision of high speed broadband

Coalition policy: Encourage open competition for private sector fibre roll-out in the cities and a joint venture with $1 million of public money for a wireless network in the bush and regional centres. Their proposed method is a system called WiMAX.

ALP policy: Invest up to $4.7 billion - in partnership with the private sector - to build a fibre to the node network, that is, fibre optic delivery very close to your home or business. The ALP says this will deliver 98 per cent of Australians a broadband service 40 times faster than they currently enjoy. Half of the funding ($2 billion) will be drawn from the existing communications fund. The remainder will be taken from the Future Fund’s 17 per cent share of Telstra.

CHECKLIST

Jesus commands Christians to love their neighbour. When it comes to voting, Southern Cross suggests that Christians should think beyond mere self-interest to how the policy impacts the entire community. This checklist could help you to assess ‘the big picture’ for any policy. As a model, SC has included some additional information to help you assess the ALP and Coalition broadband policies.

1. Will this policy benefit the entire Australian economy? ALP [ ] LIB [ ]
2. Will this policy benefit less well-off Australians? ALP [ ] LIB [ ]
3. Are there any ‘unintended consequences’ that could derail the policy?

ALP: The Future Fund has been created to pay public sector superannuation. How will the ALP’s proposal impact government’s ability to meet this liability?

LIB: Critics say the WiMAX system is unreliable, particularly in bad weather. Is the Coalition’s proposal a sufficient improvement on the current network?

Read Jeremy Halcrow's Indepth analysis He's not the Messiah....

Read the Rev Paul Sampson's Insight column Navigating the IR Labyrinth.

In his letter to Timothy, Paul instructed Christians to pray for political leaders so that we can live ‘peaceful and quiet lives’. Sound economic management plays a big part in delivering that outcome.

Economic prosperity is not the be-all and end-all, so other factors need to be considered, but it is much better to live in an economy where jobs are plentiful, price rises aren’t rampant and opportunities abound for everyone rather than a select few.

Therefore, the capacity of the candidates as economic managers is important to keep in mind when deciding whom to vote for.

Looking back at the economy

As we head into the 2007 election, the Australian economy is doing well. This is a remarkable turnaround.

Only 21 years ago, the then Treasurer Paul Keating was warning that we could become a ‘banana republic’ if there weren’t significant changes in the economy.

Thankfully, those changes have been made in the years since – by governments of both persuasions it needs to be said.

As a result, Australia has been able to experience a sustained period of strong growth with low inflation, despite several global developments that may have derailed the economy if changes hadn’t been put in place.

The Asian crisis of 1997-98 could have caused a recession, but it didn’t, as could the ‘tech wreck’ in the US in 2000-01. The commodity boom and rising oil prices we’ve been going through in the last few years could have easily triggered a dangerous rise in inflation, but haven’t.

Economic management is undertaken by the government in both big picture ways and in the details of specific policies. Everything government does has some economic dimension to it.

Where the two parties agree

At the big picture level, a consensus has emerged between Australia’s two major parties that Budget policy needs to steer a steady course over time, rather than swinging from one extreme to the other in an attempt to finetune the economy’s growth rate.

Both the major parties claim to be fiscally responsible. In truth, both also probably exaggerate their claim, for it’s almost impossible for politicians to resist spending increases and tax cuts.

However, because the Coalition and the ALP both also support the independence of the Reserve Bank to fight inflation, in government they would face the discipline of what loose fiscal policy would mean for interest rates.

Where the two parties differ

More differences exist between the major parties in relation to specific economic policies and how they fit into the big picture. The ALP presents itself as the party which ties the individual policies together in a way that delivers better big-picture outcomes. Voters will need to evaluate whether they believe that claim or not.

The main economic policy issues where we see significant policy differences include:
• workplace reform;
• education (eg apprenticeship training);
• infrastructure development (eg provision of high speed broadband and dealing with water shortages); and
• how to improve the health care system and cope with the ageing of the population.

An issue to watch

Another issue that will get plenty of airplay is the question of housing affordability.

Policies which claim to help first home buyers and the like should be particularly scrutinised. Most of them are ineffective because in the end they create an extra demand for housing that pushes up the price, wiping out the intended benefit.

The true nature of the ‘problem’ also needs to be carefully investigated. For instance first home buyers have always faced hurdles entering the housing market because they are usually young and on lower incomes. Is there really a larger hurdle now, or is this just another case of politicians wanting to be seen to be doing something?

In reality, the best thing to do for young people to help them get set up financially is to ensure that the economy is growing solidly and that job opportunities are plentiful.

Your vote is quite a powerful tool for change. It is very important that we take seriously our responsibility to weigh up how our governments have been using their power over the people.

In a democracy we can influence the reallocation of resources. We may have to “give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar”, but in exercising our democratic right to vote, we also have a say over what Caesar thinks belongs to him!

Click here to comment on this article for the next edition of Southern Cross