Originally Posted by GarryP

Err, as you demonstrated above with your referenced article, its best done if its NOT outsourced.

Originally Posted by GarryP

And if you need any further evidence of that, just look at the NPfIT, where £12bn was wasted trying to get outsourcers to do something that should have been done incrementally inhouse.

Originally Posted by Beoz

Err no. The article says there have been some monumental cock ups when government agencies try IT implementation themselves. Then goes onto suggest it could be more beneficial ... go figure?



Its not even a matter of whether government agencies can do IT implementations in house, they just can't and nearly always need to pull in the experts at some point.

I'm not sure why even this topic is an issue. It can't be improved without outside expert help ..... if you want to call it the complete privatisation of Medicare ..... help yourself ...... there are plenty out there who voted on the back of that.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

If the counting has stopped, why is the percentage count on ABC still going up, albeit very slowly?

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

Whichever bits need privatising. What a cop out.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

The LNP's recent record of trying to privatise or deregulate is for the purpose of cutting costs. Not to improve the service. They chanted over and over how we were in a budget emergency, then donated $9 billion to the federal reserve and scrapped a source of income in the carbon tax. Their agenda wasn't to fix our economy or improve public services. It was to demolish everything the ALP built in the 6 years previous. Medicare was definitely in The Abbott governments sights. Joe Hockey preached about it enough and slammed his own electorate for a 'abusing' bulk billing. His claim was that visiting the doctor shouldn't be free. Ignoring the fact that we already pay a levy along with private health insurance (something that actually needs to be made public).

A scare campaign but a very worthy one in my opinion. If it was Bill Shortens belief that the LNP would privatise it, then maybe he done no worse than Abbott accusing Gillard of managing a slush fund or Turnbull and the Yute-gate.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

A real shame that some people like yourself have their priorities all wrong.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

Very different. An implementation is short term.

Originally Posted by Beoz

Is that because it doesn't suit your agenda? Is that because you feel you either need to privatise all of it, or none of it, you can't do the bits that need doing? If my opinion differs does that upset you? Awesome I'm pleased.



At least you admit its was just a scare campaign. We are getting somewhere.



I agree ...... We should all be visiting the doctors just for kicks. ..... We should place as much burden on the economy as possible just because we can, and we feel its our lot on this earth to take as much as we can from the public purse.

Originally Posted by Beoz

What is short term? I've worked in government IT projects that have gone on for several years.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

Don't have an agenda mate, the LNP do though. I never said it was all or nothing but I believe they would use a phase out approach and without you realising it, all of it would be private.

Yes a scare campaign which I already said was the case. But so what? There are plenty of signs to suggest it was possible. It's not like they said SSM would lead to beastiality.

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

If people are actually abusing the system, that needs to be fixed. The fix isn't to privatise Medicare, surely you understand that?

Originally Posted by knockoff nige

I guess that's a good example of the private sector wanting to milk a lucrative government contract.

Originally Posted by ozzieeagle

Here's a Labor how to vote card...I think this was printed on every Labor how to vote card around the country.

Originally Posted by Beoz

Looks like Labor were putting another deception on the voting public with the NXT.

Election 2016: Nick Xenophon threatens legal action over Labor penalty rates 'smear campaign' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Originally Posted by ozzieeagle

If you read the article it says he changed his stance after consulting with the community.... makes you wonder if that was before or after Labour pointed out that at one stage he was definitely pro cutting penalty rates.

Who's to say he won't change his mind again.

Just to put this in context, if Australia post were to come to me and my colleagues and offer us an immediate 25 pct pay rise if penalty rates were abolished.... I'm fairly sure the majority of people would vote against the rise. We would be worse off.... Plus over time that rise would be eroded on a pro rata basis v other industries and workers.

Originally Posted by Beoz

You would be in line with what happens in the UK, US and NZ.

Having one of the highest minimum wages in the world, Australia won't be a special case for ever.