Senator Ron Boswell says there is no need for a broadband upgrade. "We've got adequate broadband for the people out there," he said.
So out of touch is John Howard and the troglodytes who surround him in Parliament that no one would be surprised if they came to work wearing hats. That is the era they all seem stuck in.
Like the old lady across the street who can always be seen clutching her cardigan in fear that something else might change to alter the world of the Fifties where she still lives, Peter Costello nearly had an apoplectic fit yesterday over Kevin Rudd dipping into the "Future Fund" to bring Australia up to speed on broadband. In Parliament he screamed:
Smashed the glass, taken the key, opened the fund and announced a plan to spend the money. Mr Speaker, this is absolutely irresponsible. And if people want to know why they can't have Labor trusted with money, Mr Speaker, this proves it - you cannot trust the Labor Party with money.
John Howard appeared equally stupid. Even Terry McCrann was taken aback:
Earth to PM: trying to characterise a plan for a 21st century broadband network as having "no regard for the future" was sort of clunky with a capital C.
At present Australia is the laughing stock of developed countries, most of which have exponentially higher broadband speeds, the least of them still making ours resemble dialup. The backward-looking Howard Government has done nothing for eleven years.
Here's Crikey:
According to Treasurer Peter Costello, Labor's plan to invest $2.7 billion of the vast Future Fund to usher in a new era of high-speed broadband for 98% of Australians is "financially reckless". It would "steal money from the Future Fund, from the future of all Australians," says Costello.
Bunkum. What Labor is proposing is a) good policy, b) prudent economics, c) crying out to happen and -- the real reason Costello is spewing -- d) smart politics.
What the Opposition is proposing is something that Australia desperately needs to stay competitive and relevant in the modern communications age. The government should have done it years ago, doesn't seem to comprehend its importance, and is still prevaricating.$2.7 billion is a tiny portion of the Future Fund. As long as Kevin Rudd reassures everyone that this isn't the start of a wholesale raid on the fund, the policy is a preemptive, timely, nerve-touching vote winner, especially among business constituents.
Which, of course, is the real reason the Treasurer hates it so much.
And Michael Sainsbury in the Oz:
With its proposal to spend up to $4.7 billion of taxpayers' funds on an open-access independent national broadband network, Labor is taking one step in the right direction and another to right a number of past wrongs.
Labor wants to end the current state of internet access in Australia, with half the nation's population stranded with inadequate broadband infrastructure.
Without action, this situation is unlikely to change soon, with Telstra and the communications regulator stuck in an unproductive round of squabbling, court cases and standoffs that are holding up the rollout of a fast internet network.
It's also worth asking, before we move any further with such a proposal, whether the "need for speed" in internet connections has already moved beyond even Labor's sensible plans. Already, tiny Singapore is preparing to spend $5 billion on better connections and faster speeds with fibre all the way to the home, rather than Labor's proposal of taking fibre to the suburban street corner.
Is it worth Australia taking a longer-term view on an even more substantial project worth $20 billion or more?
Excluding the JHP and the old lady across the street, everyone else in this country wants broadband upgraded to at least the state of the art enjoyed by other countries as long ago as five years.
And what is a future fund good for if not to build a better future, starting with infrastructure. Or does it represent to the JHP way of thinking little more than money under the mattress for the inevitable time when the government's forfeiture of its responsibility to the nation presents a future crumbled beyond repair.
-- Olney Garkle
Yep, you're on the money Olney. Howard knows how to switch a computer on, but he doesn't know what fast or slow internet speeds are because he doesn't use the internet. He thinks that sending an email involves writing it in his email program, then printing it out and faxing it. Or perhaps that's why there's a stack of stamps stuck to his screen. The guy is out of touch, and Bossy is worse. He wouldn't know what a computer was.
All aboard the Rudd Express. Let's hope Australian's wake up to themselves.
Posted by Nahum Ayliffe on March 22, 2007
Am often at a loss with current politics. Recall a friend from a posh school talking about how conservatives don't like politics. A lot of them are intelligent, educated and know that their side of politics is completely corrupt and won't stand up to a moments critical reflection. Pure self interest (short term financial, of course). Just looked up Barbara Tuchman on the internet. She wrote a book called "The March of Folly" which looks at five different periods in history when governments, against all their own advice, acted exactly against their own self interests. She questions why there has been no discernible improvement in governance in thousands of years. The periods she chose were, from memory, the decline of the Romans, the Vatican circa 14C, The English against the Americans in the war of independence, Vietnam. Hmm, that's four. Anyway, for sheer pigheaded stupidity despite what is surely now enough knowledge about the third world, the 'trickle down' theory, etc., I propose the current era to surpass all of Tuchman's in -- looking for a word -- political depravity. What other period might Tuchman have chosen?
Posted by obviously obtuse on March 22, 2007
Ron Boswell puts the cunt back into cuntry, Peter Costello puts the dick back into dickhead and John Howard puts the lie back into every statement.
Posted by Bruce Over at the Garage on March 23, 2007
Barbara Tuchman's book 'The March of Folly' should be required reading at university level. Required in every university in the world. Every parent should buy it for their children, in case they don't make it to university. And their dying wish should be that each child read it sooner rather than later.
Posted by Olney Garkle on March 23, 2007