December 4th 2004


  Buy Issue 2696
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY: The rise of Condoleezza Rice

EDITORIAL: Corporate power ... and the public interest

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Talent gap widens between major parties

CENSORSHIP: Nicole Kidman in controversial movie

ECONOMICS: Productivity report driven by ideology

FINANCE: Day of reckoning for Australia's debt binge?

RURAL AFFAIRS: The National Party's Telstra sale dilemma

NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION PART 1: Iran backs down on uranium enrichment

NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION PART 2: US doubtful about Tehran's intentions

VIET TAN: New reform party launched for Vietnam

STRAWS IN THE WIND: Uncharted territory / The Zamindars / Labor's performance / The Light on the Hill

SEX EDUCATION: Telling teens the truth - 'cool' virginity, abstinence and faithful marriage

US ELECTIONS: Christians eat lions in 2004 election

China's stand-off with Taiwan (letter)

Labor needs heart transplant (letter)

Saddam's secret weapons (letter)

BOOKS: MONASH: The outsider who won a war, by Roland Perry

THE CRISIS OF ISLAM: Holy War and Unholy Terror, by Bernard Lewis

BOOKS: Non-Alignment and Peace versus Military Alignment and War

Books promotion page

survey link

FONT SIZE:

RURAL AFFAIRS:
The National Party's Telstra sale dilemma


by Victor Sirl

News Weekly, December 4, 2004
For National Party members, no issue is more painful than their commitment to supporting the full sale of Telstra. They proclaim that this will only happen when telecommunications in regional areas are deemed to be up to scratch. Even so, the idea is unpopular with their constituencies.

Nevertheless, Prime Minister John Howard and Treasurer Peter Costello are pushing ahead for the full sale of Telstra.

The Nationals, in trying to work out how to escape from between this proverbial rock and a hard place, have turned to their own think-tank and, oddly, to their two new and most inexperienced senators due to take office in July next year.

Working party

According to Shane Lewis of The Australian (November 15, 2004), over the next five months Senator Fiona Nash will chair a working party of the National Party think-tank, the Page Research Centre, to examine the state of telecommunications in the bush, with Senator Barnaby Joyce as her deputy.

Both senators-elect have expressed reservations about the full sale of Telstra and one wonders if, once down in Canberra, the Sir Humphreys will slowly turn them away from making "courageous" decisions.

Kay Hull from New South Wales is one National Party MP who has put forward the possibility of splitting Telstra into a publicly-owned telecommunications utility controlling basic infrastructure such as cables, while other lucrative assets, particularly related to retailing, are put into the market place.

The Nationals should note that none of our Asian trading partners has a fully privatised telecommunications sector - and few would call Taiwan, Singapore or Japan backward in this field.

Shane Lewis writes of Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowki's desire to protect the structural "integrity" of Telstra.

No such guarantee, of course, exists after privatisation, so why should one exist before? A fully privatised company listed on the stock exchange can always be restructured, so why can't the Government recommend that?

The Australian (Tuesday, November 16) recently reported how, in a rebuff to the junior coalition partner, the Communications Minister, Senator Coonan, at an industry lunch attacked the idea.

But more astonishingly, John Howard's protegée, Jackie Kelly MP, was reportedly running the line that "the Government was restricted in its ability to force structural change on Telstra because it was a shareholder in the company." Any decision regarding structural change was a matter for the board.

However, the Government has the right to tell the board that it will not sell its majority share unless certain conditions are met. The Nationals could say to the Liberals and the Telstra board: "Split it or no sale."

Indeed, they have abundant evidence from the September 2000 Telecommunications Service Inquiry that services would not be up to scratch in regional areas for some years, if ever.

It is obvious that some financial journalists and the Liberals are launching a pre-emptive strike to discourage the Nationals going down the path of recommending a splitting of Telstra.

Those who favour a splitting of Telstra need to outline clearly how it would work in practice and how shareholders (fat cat executives excluded) will not be harmed. The Page Research Institute would do well to heed those economists promoting the idea.

In 2002, Melbourne University economist Stephen King argued that a fully privatised Telstra would be taking a natural monopoly out of public hands and placing it in private ones.

Keeping infrastructure in public hands, however, would ensure transparency and a level playing-field for all telecommunication players in the market.

From the Nationals' point of view, public ownership also allows the Government to cross-subsidise regional areas and guarantee that future services and technological innovations are shared with rural Australia. The move would meet with the approval of rural-dwellers, the Nationals' traditional constituency.

Face-saving

But for this to happen, the Nationals would have to exploit their numbers in the Senate, refusing to sell off the rest of Telstra but offering the face-saving position for the Liberals that some privatisation is better than none and would still result in a windfall for government coffers.

However, Peter Costello has reminded Queensland Senators Ron Boswell and Barnaby Joyce that they are obliged to follow "Coalition policy".

The Nationals would be entirely justified in standing firm and refusing the full sale of Telstra. The media may not like it, the Liberals will not like it, the Telstra board will not like it, but most Australians will.

Who would the Nationals rather be loved by? And who has the most votes?

  • Victor Sirl




























Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Cardinal rebuts commission's 'Get Pell' campaign

COVER STORY Anti-discrimination law validates Safe Schools

U.S. AFFAIRS First Brexit, now Trump: it's the economy, stupid!

INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENT Wikileaks reveals U.S, funding behind anti-coal campaign

COVER STORY QUT discrimination case exposes Human Rights Commission failings

FOREIGN AFFAIRS How the left whitewashed Fidel Castro

ANALYSIS What is possible to a Trump Whitehouse



News and views from around the world

Frequently asked questions about section 18C (Simon Breheny)

Chilean legislators kill explicit sex-ed program (LifeSite News)

France to ban people with Down syndrome from smiling (The Huffington Post)

Child abuse and family structure: What is the evidence telling us (Family First NZ)

Woolworths beats ACCC supplier mistreatment case (Eli Greenblat)

Australia set to ride the quantum computing wave (Science in Public)

Weatherill warns states could introduce carbon prices (Rosie Lewis)

Green-left legerdemain doesn't make religion relevant (Fr James Grant)

Mass murderer Castro dies unpunished (Augusto Zimmermann)

The rise of political correctness (Angelo Codevilla)



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2011
Last Modified:
December 2, 2016, 2:36 pm