by Scott Pape - August 19th 2010

Thank God this election is almost over.
Neither party has been what you would call inspiring – both are short on vision and long on populist policy. But Politics 101 says that you don’t need to think past the weekend so long as you policies aim at the punters hip pockets.
And their target? Working families, like Mark and Belinda (see box). So lets take a look at what’s on offer from both parties. (Even if you’re not living in the suburbs with 2.4 kids, you should still pay attention. After all, you’re paying for it):
Paid parental leave
This is Abbott’s centrepiece strategy for wooing women voters. His plan, kicking off in 2012 (if he’s elected), offers six months’ paid leave at a person’s full wage (up to $75,000).
To fund it, Big Tone is socking big businesses an extra 1.5 per cent in tax. Which sounds great – so long as companies like Coles and Woolworths don’t handball it back to us in the form of higher prices.
Labor’s parental leave scheme is more modest. It starts next year and offers 18 weeks’ paid leave at the minimum wage of $543 (or $9,774)
The baby bonus and family tax benefits
To ward off Today Tonight doing exposés on teenagers having babies to get plasma TVs, the baby bonus is no longer paid as a lump sum ($5294) when the baby is born (it’s now 13 fortnightly payments). Although the Government plans to allow parents to get a $500 advanced upfront payment to meet the expenses of setting up a nursery.
From 2011 eligible families will also be able to apply for further advanced payments worth up to 7.5 per cent of their family tax benefit, to help with large upfront costs of setting up a household. The coalition is keeping mum on their baby bonus policy.
Childcare rebate
Affordable childcare has been an issue for families for years that not even Eddie Groves could fix.
The Government currently covers half the out-of-pocket childcare costs, but they scrapped indexing the payment to inflation in the budget – which will cost a family around $300 a year.
The Coalition has promised to reintroduce the indexation, and will pay the rebate weekly.
Education tax rebate
Sending your kids to public school may be free but it certainly ain’t cheap – parents are hit up for books, uniforms, calculators.
That’s why lower-income parents can claim 50 per cent of eligible education costs as a tax rebate.
The rebate is currently set at $390 for primary school students and $779 for secondary students, and during the election the Government promised this would now include the cost of uniforms.
The Opposition is trying to steal Labor’s thunder and plans to increase the rebate to $500 for $1,000 of spending for a primary school child, and to $1,000 for $2,000 of spending for a secondary school child. Importantly, the Coalition will open up the eligible expenses to include a wider range of expenses – even private school fees.
The internet
I think I once ate a gigabyte at Smorgy’s Bar and Grill, but I can’t be sure. I’m with Tony Abbott on this one – I’m no tech head. And neither are the majority of voters who are trying to size up each party’s broadband plans. That’s why their decision-making goes something like this:
Faster = Better
Sure, the idea of trusting the Government to spend $43 billion to create a monopoly is worrying. And, OK, the advancements in technology (especially wireless) could leave us with a great white elephant and incur debts that our children will have to repay for years to come. But we want to watch YouTube videos with-out-it-buff-er-ing.
Besides, the Government has a great track record of spending our dough sensibly, right?
Superannuation
The Government plans on raising the Superannuation Guarantee from its current 9 per cent to 12 per cent over the next decade. That will put a smile on the dial of employees, and a frown on the dial of businesses that are footing the bill.
The Government has also said it backs the Cooper Review’s recommendation of introducing MySuper – low-cost, no-frills, no-commission default super accounts that will be around 40 per cent cheaper than current retail offerings.
The Coalition’s position stands at the opposite end of the spectrum: they are not in favour of increasing the Superannuation Guarantee as they see it as an impost on business. Fair enough.
They also don’t agree with banning trailing commissions, which, in my humble opinion, is ridiculous, Tony. So whoever gets your vote today, remember that political promises are made to be broken. And with interest rates likely to continue to rise, it’s up each of us to make sure we spend within our means – something neither leader has to worry about.
Tread your own path!
Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rohit_saxena/3590287653/
Follow @scottpape on Twitter
No related posts.






18 comments
Fibre over wireless. Wireless is too prone to interruptions like steel framing and the faraday cage effect. A hard cabled connection beats wireless any day in speed and stability. Sure you may not want the government to spend more but when it comes to national infrastructure there needs to be some degree of future proofing. Wireless may meet our needs now, fibre will meet it for the next 10 years at least. Trust me here, I work with this technology.
Spot on, Ras. If we are purchasing the majority of the materials for this infrastructure in Australia, there is no ‘waste’ as it eventually ends up in the hands of Australians. I’m all for the fibre as it’ll be one of the greatest accomplishments to date.
After reading your book Scott, it has made so many lives easier because people understand their costs and income more. Tony has no idea about economy so is it smart to be putting him in control? Certainly not… Sure it’s great to be debt free as he wants us to be, but I’d rather have a little debt for a little while and set the future of Australia up than be left behind. We need to get these projects done while the resource boom is still strong. It’ll pay for these things in no time!
I couldn’t be less excited about attending the polls on Saturday. What a choice we have in front of us. And ironically now is the time when I feel we need someone strong to stand up and lead us into a new future.
The Internet.
Scott, I love your work and your site but on your opinion about the Internet and true high speed Internet I think you are well, wrong.
It is easy to look at these costs and say it is really expensive. It is.
The reason it is expensive is that it is replacing what was the Telecommunications Natural Monopoly in Australia… Telecom I believe? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecom_Australia)
Natural monopolies make sense where large scale investment is required for a PUBLIC GOOD.
This is a key job of Government to deliver public services which are a Public Good from our taxes.
We need the new NBN to replace the 100 year old brass and hogdpodge collection of wireless, fibre, HSDPA etc. which are not a single high speed network. The existing networks have only been built where an economic return can be delivered i a skewed market place.
The reason the Telecommunications Market is skewed is due to the ridiculously log and drawn out profit maximizing strategy of the previous government with the snail like ‘privatization’ of Telstra with the final T3 sale.
During this process all investment in the copper network was scaled back to ‘maintenance’ and investment was driven into Mobile networks for the benefit of the incumbent natural monopoly owner Telstra.
In effect, Telstra have been controlling the wholesale market for broadband services and still do – apart from TPG whom owns Pipe Networks and have cheap internet as they have their own cable to the USA (which is the most expensive traffic which Telstra sets at a monopoly price so it can compete…all other players have to pay their monopoly rates for access).
So, we need to create a new natural monoploy to break the old and to also allow for the investment in a new generation national backbone for Telecommunications.
Bugger ran out of room
We need this new network as the we have seen since the privatization that there is not the market benefit for this type of investment.
And back to my key point, as Joseph Stiglitz said about the investment with the stimulus, “would you rather have lost billions in lost productivity through unemployment and recession or have some wastage with the stimulus.” in other words the wastage from the stimulus was marginal (School building issues etc,) compared the the hit our GDP would have taken if we had not had a stimulus.
The same can be said for the investment in the NBN. If we do not invest what is the opportunity cost and loss of not investing, what is the costs in liberating small businesses to connect all over Australia with no lag. What are the economic costs of Australia slipping further down the high speed internet ranking below 50! here (http://www.akamai.com/stateoftheinternet/) I am telling you now it will be much greater than 43Billion and the nonsense that we can spend a 6Billion to gives us a future generation Intent network is nonsense.
I am sorry that my argument is riddled with passion, but I have lived overseas and seen the benefit that high speed internet provides small medium business and entrepreneurs, we are a Nation of Small Medium business at 95% in fact why would we not want to improve our competitiveness and productivity.
And last point, the Australian Government debt is tiny it is a joke, on the other hand as you know Scott the Australian Consumer debt is massive and not a joke (http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2010/08/18/giving-the-bird-to-the-stimulus/) The Australian Government can afford to build the NBN, what Australians can not afford is a housing crash.
Thanks for letting me share my thoughts and thank you for providing such a great site and forum for debate.
I love your work and thank you for keeping great debate going!
Kind regards, The Mainlander.
Totally agree with Mainlander. And I am surprised, Scott, that you query the benefit of faster speeds, especially when we aren’t keeping pace with most fo the rest of the OECD. This isn’t about whether you can download something on YouTube quicker; it’s about efficiency and productivity. I own a small business in a regional area. I know that faster and more reliable internet will improve my productivity. I also know that relying on a cobbled-togehter sustem based on wireless won’t cut it. This is the one issue I will be voting on because I believe ity is about the future.
The increase in super guarantee is a impost on business without putting any responsibility on the employee. How about the 3% increase is based on a $ for $ matching basis. Ie. If the employee contributes 2% the employer contributes 2% up to a maximum of 3%. This could be as personal or salary sacrifice contributions. Hey, the person may even qualify for some Government Co-Contribution to further boost their retirement savings! That shifts some of the responsiblity back to the employee to provide for his own retirement! A “nanny” state we should not be!
I couldn’t agree more . We all need to take some responsibility for our own destiny. I would rather pay off a mortgage than let someone else play with my money in some so called super fund.
Not claiming to have a grasp on the argument for and against the NBN. I do know I’ve waited for a family member (in a queue of ambulances) to see a doctor in a hospital, have also waited a few seconds for a page to load on my PC. I know which one I’d rather have 43 Billion go towards addressing.
Part pf the benefit of the NBN is high speed services and remote services delivered via the NBN in particular large medical files (X-Rays, data) and importantly Video on-demand with specialists and patients. The AMA are behind the NBN. Think you may not quite realise it but just about very device on the plant soon will be connected to the Internet, just ask General Electric (GE) whom make all of their new medical equipment to ‘talk’ on the internet for remote servicing and reducing costs but delivering optimum services to our hospitals with ‘kit’ that works. The benefits are way to latent for most people to have any clue about – the pollies didn’t help.
In regards to Hospital funding it is not all about the money. Cuba had one of the best hospital systems in the world which Western Countries looked at for how efficient it was… but again the Hospital system was set up as a Public Good… it is not supposed to make profit and you can fund and fund and fund and we will still have issues.
Believe me I like to see investment in public services and hospitals are key! No doubt. But the hospital funds and NBN are not in competition and the Australian Government debt is very very low.
Maybe this NBN will help us work smarter!
I am disappointed with the Coalitions policies on superannuation.
Not supporting the raising of SGC to 12% and simultaneously bagging out Labor for reducing the deductible super contribution caps by half – but then not supporting there reinstatement seems hypocritical.
I agree with Luke. I would rather wait a few seconds for a website to come up if it meant better health care. But the burning question I have is why isn’t anybody talking about the education of future generations of Australians. Does anybody know what Labour are planning if they get in? No more ANZAC teachings or celebrations in our schools. No more learning about how our country was founded. No more scripture OR chaiplancy’s in schools no more talks on Christianity BUT our children will get lessons on the teachings of islam and Mohammed. What the? Apparently when dear Julia was the Education Minister this document was prepared. I can’t say I am upset about the lack of Christian teachings but am not happy with the replacement either.
I like your website and the Friday emails, but I am shocked, you admit having no idea about what the broadband network is about and then still make a comment about it. You are jeopardizing your credibility with this one. The broadband network isn’t so much about private stuff and youtube, but will create jobs and opportunities beyond measure for this country (or not). A big part of the $43 billion is by the way privately funded (as far as I recall about 60%).
My main issue with the labors NBN plan is not the cost but the way they are marketing it. Sorry but the remote schools and medical facilities will not get any benefit under Labors scheme at all as their communities are deemed too small to qualify for the network.
I also believe that the Liberals plan not only reflects how most people access the internet, ie on the go not sitting at a PC in an office, but is expandable and better suited to Australia. Cable to nodes, those who want the ultrafast can tap directly into the node and everyone else can use wireless at a cheaper rate.
Btw, Im on wireless, in a ground floor flat in a built up area initially not by choice, there was no phone line into the unit, but no I dont think I will go back to fixed line because I can do everything I do on the net using this connection and I can even take the dongle off my PC and with my laptop roam the house or outside *gasp* This even beats my old internal wireless network at my old place where I did have broadband because a suitcase in a closet doesnt interrupt my signal now
I think you’re missing the broadband point Scott.
1. Broadband to ALL of Australia will make city services available in the country. And provide an opportunity to dramatically shift competition – globally. Sure, people download YouTube but it’s being able to participate in markets globally without being there, medical services for everyone, not having to be based in the city to work for a city firm … in other words its productivity and competitiveness .. not kids and games.
2. The technology proposed by NBN and Libs is vastly different. Imagine Australian without our telephone network. Would Telstra put it in place today if it wasn’t already there? They would install only where it was profitable.
3. Quigley is the right guy for the job. Look at his track record, not Peter Garrets. I mean it! Stop doing what you’re doing now and Google “Mike Quigley” and look at his track record. Look back over his history and tell me he isn’t the right guy to deliver this.
4. Australia has NOT been investing adequately in infrastructure. Some of this is due to waste (your point) but some to poor decision making and some due to uninformed opinions swaying political debate.
Don’t remain uninformed and opinionated Scott – if you want to express an opinion make sure it’s an informed one. You owe it to me as a reader.
I’d have to agree with other NBN supporters. This is about infrastructure. In country areas infrastructure investment will mean:
Direct investment into the area (where there is >15% unemployment)
Creates an attraction factor for people seeking a non-city lifestyle with follow-on investment into country areas for every person who migrates from city to bush
Ability of country people to participate in services such as education, health, markets (where we sell produce) without being unduly impacted by location
The problem with comments like the one made in this article is that city folk are hampered by their perspective bias.
Agree with you Robert but in regards to this one:
“The problem with comments like the one made in this article is that city folk are hampered by their perspective bias”
We are all a market of one and we are all subjective, I think the notion of objectivity is a nonsense!
So I agree with you again but in a different way!
Hi there
Awesome blog, great write up, thank you!