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

A blueprint for real reform - it’s time

By Tristan Ewins - posted Thursday, 18 October 2007


The crisis of confidence in the public health system, however, is not so easily addressed, and many on lower incomes might feel compelled to take out private health insurance for fear of their well being; perhaps even their very lives. Here, means testing of the Private Health Insurance Rebate would prove a more popular measure than its immediate and outright abolition.

A Federal Government commitment of $24 billion or more over four years would be guaranteed of making significant and lasting inroads into the waiting lists crisis, supplying vital funding and infrastructure: perhaps even providing affordable dental care for all.

Rather than “tinkering around the edges” with piecemeal and incremental change, such “root and branch” reform would imprint itself deeply in the public’s consciousness: beyond the immediate reach of conservative sabotage.

Advertisement

Additional funding for such reform could be drawn from a variety of sources. Already, Labor Finance Shadow Minister, Lindsay Tanner, has outlined $3 billion in possible savings. This is nowhere near enough in itself, but it can be seen as a starting point.

A less adventuresome approach to foreign affairs might also justify significant cuts in defence expenditure.

The budget surplus could also well be halved to somewhere in the vicinity of $5 billion, while the proposed emissions trading scheme could also be tinkered with so as to raise $5 billion a year: one means of raising revenue without technically raising tax.

Altogether, it could be reasonably estimated that over $15 billion in additional revenue and savings might be allowed for without increasing tax as a proportion of GDP. Allowing for a 1 per cent increase in the tax base as a proportion of GDP, this could rise beyond $25 billion.

There are many other policy areas which demand immediate attention.

There is a regrettable lack of in depth research into the extent of crises in Australia’s health, education, aged care and welfare systems, not to mention the glaring omission of detailed research into poverty and social inequality. A new “Social Modeling, Inequality and Poverty Commission”, though, could undertake desperately needed research into poverty, wealth distribution and concentration, including access to public services and social infrastructure.

Advertisement

Labor’s proposal for a fibre-optic broadband network is also deserving of scrutiny. As the proposal stands, it appears to be a recipe for a private part-monopoly. In many instances there are still firm arguments for natural public monopoly in areas of essential infrastructure: communication, roads, water, power. Attempts to promote competition in telecommunications infrastructure, for instance, has only seen a radical increase in the cost structures of the industry for very limited public gain. And in other areas of private oligopoly such as energy, limited competition has only led to frustration and confusion from consumers who would rather take the provision of essential services for granted.

It is not too late for Rudd to commit to a fully public fibre-optic broadband network: funded along with other essential infrastructure projects by diverting capital from the Future Fund.  Investment in public education infrastructure is one area in dire need of attention. Such moves are anything but fiscally irresponsible: comprising as they do an investment in overall productivity and growth, as well as in the skills base of the nation.

Briefly, the housing affordability crisis demands a greater investment than the $500 million earmarked by Kevin Rudd for Labor’s Housing Affordability Fund.

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


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

10 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

Tristan Ewins has a PhD and is a freelance writer, qualified teacher and social commentator based in Melbourne, Australia. He is also a long-time member of the Socialist Left of the Australian Labor Party (ALP). He blogs at Left Focus, ALP Socialist Left Forum and the Movement for a Democratic Mixed Economy.
.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Tristan Ewins

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

Photo of Tristan Ewins
Article Tools
Comment 10 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy