Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Is it a sin to sell a government asset?

By Everald Compton - posted Thursday, 4 April 2013


So what will be the voter reaction?

My feeling is that it will be hostile if the funds are used to repay debt. It will be positive if the funds are used to build new infrastructure or create new services. The key is that voters know that the running-down of debt by one government is an open invitation to the next government to run it up again. Nothing is achieved except the loss of an asset.

It is also a fact that Superannuation Funds are willing to buy existing assets from governments and make them more efficient and profitable. But, they won’t risk funds on greenfield projects that take years to become cash flow positive.

Advertisement

So, the key is to start a perpetual investment turnover program with those Funds — sell them an asset, use the funds to create a new one and then, when it is earning revenue, sell it to them and build yet another one. The voters will get enthusiastic about this, as their government will always own assets.

So, what would I do in the totally unlikely event that I was in government. I would sell every asset on the books, including schools and hospitals, and use the funds immediately to build new ones. This is an urgent task as Australia is decades behind in meeting the nation’s basic infrastructure needs.

The key issue for voters to remember is that, because a government owns an asset, it does not mean that this asset automatically provides a good public service. Many bureaucrats have no greater sense of service to the people than private entrepreneurs do.

The key factor in selling a government asset or service is to pass legislation that covers the conditions of the sale and sets-out levels of service to be provided. Failure to adhere to this must mean that heavy penalties are payable, including, in the final analysis, the terms on which the assets must be returned to government.

One idealistic hope is that, in many cases, not-for-profit corporations can be established to buy and operate assets. In the case of ownership by Superannuation Funds, a plus will be the financial benefit to millions of ordinary Australians who are their members.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

4 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Everald Compton is Chairman of The Longevity Forum, a not for profit entity which is implementing The Blueprint for an Ageing Australia. He was a Founding Director of National Seniors Australia and served as its Chairman for 25 years. Subsequently , he was Chairman for three years of the Federal Government's Advisory Panel on Positive Ageing.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Everald Compton

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Everald Compton
Article Tools
Comment 4 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy