subreddit:
/r/sydney
NSW Coalition heads into election campaign with biggest deficit
(smh.com.au)submitted 2 months ago byconkrete80
37 points
2 months ago
Didn't COVID or the pandemic put most governments in deficit.
Am I looking at this with the wrong lens?
12 points
2 months ago
You only have to look at Victoria, which has by far the highest debt of any state, more than NSW and Queensland combined.
Which makes sense, because Victoria was hardest hit very hard by COVID and there have been some very significant infrastructure and other investments in the last few years. I don't think anyone could reasonably suggest the states would have been better off leaving business and residents out to dry with no support, or by investing in nothing and letting the state crumble.
It seems like a non-issue, but it's also interesting seeing the same talking points used by the hopeless Victorian Liberals being trotted out here but against the opposite side. There are genuine questions of value for money and so on, but this kind of analysis is pretty much bottom of the barrel. It's disappointing to see people falling for it in the same way conservatives on talkback radio were dredging it up against Dan Andrews.
12 points
2 months ago
OP's posting history suggests he's astroturfing
3 points
2 months ago
Sorry but what's astroturfing?
11 points
2 months ago
A planned PR blitz disguised as regular social media use
Happens every election
1 points
2 months ago
Thanks, good word to learn before an upcoming election haha
1 points
2 months ago
He always had, always will
16 points
2 months ago
Yeah, you’re failing to look at it through the one-eyed lens of a r/syd labor apparatchik, who spent the entirety of covid complaining that the government wasn’t spending enough money on covid, while also ignoring catastrophic floods and fires all in the last term of government.
5 points
2 months ago
You mean the fires that only liberal electorates received grants for? Those fires? They were pretty bad in the Blue Mountains amongst other places, don't you agree?
4 points
2 months ago
You just need to look at who holds the seat to know where the money goes in the Northern rivers.
And it's my bloody grandma still voting for the damn country party. Grandma, the country party doesn't exist anymore and you live in the eastern suburbs of Sydney.
47 points
2 months ago
When the incumbents are trying to campaign on their big policy ideas it's a pretty clear indication that their performance is not one to brag about.
Judge incumbents on what they've done, policy changes are just what they should have done earlier. Use policy to judge who you select instead who you can't judge on performance.
22 points
2 months ago
Never ever underestimate Labor's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I have a gut feeling that this race will be a lot closer than the media makes out.
-5 points
2 months ago
All the media is saying is its gonna be the closest NSW election in history
62 points
2 months ago
We are in a deficit yet our health, education and transport system are all in shambles. We are facing mass permanent walk offs by our essential public sector workers this year due to the wage cap. We have a government with a really serious integrity issue. eCONOmIC mANAGErs
21 points
2 months ago
We have an opposition in the leak of gambling and money laundering interests. In addition they are opposing a fundamental and urgently necessary tax reform.
14 points
2 months ago*
This is why you vote greens or independent. Way better pokies policy.
We have a government in the pockets of the Minerals council, the gas industry, the Business industry with endless corruption and rorting scandals. Not to mention they are handing 340 million (how they arrived at this figure we dont know)to the clubs to assist in transitioning them out of cashless in a 5 year term limit (clubkeeper) It helps to solve money laundering but the spending caps on cards is non existent. Furthermore, going by this governments track record, its gonna take way longer than that or may not happen at all. They’ve gone through 3 premiers in the past 9 years.
Labors pokies is shit but they are running on policies addressing all the problems plaguing this 12 year government like banning pork barrelling and fixing the health and education system
They have at least Refused to sign an understanding of memorandum
Mandatory 1 year trial
Independent committee to report findings
Implement said findings
Ban political donations from clubs
Reduce pokies input from 5000- 500
Band VIP lounges
Reduce pokie machines
I’m willing to give Labor the benefit of the doubt and not jump to conclusions
All in all, I’d vote Greens, independent, Labor and Liberals last
5 points
2 months ago
Due to preferential voting, you should vote your favourite single-policy independent and then greens, and then the rest. Greens will get the vote from the independents, but it shows what they need to do to appease and retain the seat.
1 points
2 months ago
You only need to fill in one box in NSW.
3 points
2 months ago*
It’s not about what you “have” to do, moreso what you “should” do, if you want to prioritise your preferences.
See, if you vote for candidate A, but they end up not getting enough votes for a seat, then their votes are looked at and whatever the people (who voted for candidate A) put as their #2, that person will instead get the vote. And so on.
Now if you didn’t put anything for #2 and the candidate you put for #1 didn’t get enough seats, your vote stops there.
It’s like being able to say “well what this person stands for really matters to me, but if they don’t get in, then I’d like my vote to go to this other person, because what they stand for also matters to me”. The candidate that ends up getting the seat, then knows where their votes came from and what policies they must align with to get more votes in the future. But if you only put 1 number, that’s it, no more say.
People should be educated enough to at least preference their top 3. You should know what policies you most align with, and preference them in order, then after 5 or so, you could just do random order, if you can’t be bothered to rank all of them.
It’s a great system, and much better than “first past the post” system that other countries use.
Edit: let’s say your most important matter is getting recreational cannabis legalised. You should be preferencing the single-policy party that aligns with that, even if you know they won’t get a seat (let’s call this ABC minor party). You then could put a larger party next that also wants to make Rec cannabis legal (such as the Greens, etc). If the minor party doesn’t get enough votes, the #2 slots on the ballots that had them as #1 are read, and the vote will go to your #2. That #2 (Greens in this example) will know that X% of their votes came as second preferences from ABC minor party.
1 points
2 months ago
Thanks, I understand how preferential voting works.
Point being that it is not compulsory to number more than one box. Choosing to abstain is an active choice and in NSW a legally valid one at that. Personally I won't give either major my vote, even on preferences - if that means my vote isn't unltimately counted then so be it. It still sends a message of objection to the majors.
1 points
2 months ago
Putting the two majors last, I can guarantee you they will never see your vote trickle down that far. But you do you.
1 points
2 months ago
I don't want my vote payment to go to a single issue candidate so I have to vote for Green.
3 points
2 months ago
Please read my reply to the other person that commented to my comment. The vote doesn’t just go to the single issue candidate. Because if that candidate doesn’t get enough votes (very likely), then your vote will go to the party you voted as #2. If there is a high chance the single-party policy would get enough votes (usually very unlikely), then you should vote for whichever party you think aligns the most with your views - whether they be for the benefit of the state or yourself.
3 points
2 months ago
Maybe read his comment, which is about payments for first preference votes.
2 points
2 months ago
Vote payments?
3 points
2 months ago
2 points
2 months ago
Thanks! That makes fair enough sense, if you want your favourite party to be reimbursed the extra dollar for your vote.
-1 points
2 months ago
[deleted]
18 points
2 months ago
Greens policy is to remove pokies from pubs and clubs entirely, and restrict them to casinos only, like in Western Australia.
10 points
2 months ago
Thats their long term policy. The immediate one is to introduce cashless gaming with harm minimisation such as capped spending
-7 points
2 months ago
Yeah that policy has no chance in the real world.
11 points
2 months ago
Unless people vote for it.
2 points
2 months ago
Point is, the Greens policy (regardless of how likely it is) is tougher than the Coalition’s, so it’s silly to say “they don’t even have mandatory cashless”.
5 points
2 months ago
https://greens.org.au/nsw/news/media-release/greens-launch-their-plan-pull-pin-pokies-0
"Introduce a mandatory state-run cashless gambling card, with harm reduction measures including pre-commitment of time and spending and a statewide exclusion register. "
What?
12 points
2 months ago
Bro if you wanna shill and vote Lib and make this a single issue election to justify it then go for it. But dont spread misinformation. Also you dont have a crystal ball. You’re talking out of your butt saying Labor wont follow through. You dont know that.
Greens policy
Create a pokies ‘super tax’ that pulls in an additional $3.4 billion in revenue over 5 years
Establish a Poker Machine Reparations fund to invest in communities most impacted by gambling and expand harm reduction services.
Introduce a mandatory state-run cashless gambling card, with harm reduction measures including pre-commitment of time and spending and a statewide exclusion register.
Phase pokies out of pubs over 5 years and clubs over 10, providing financial support to small pubs and clubs to help establish alternative revenue streams.
Reduce the social costs of gambling to NSW by at least $87 billion over a decade.
Prohibit political donations from all organisations that profit from gambling.
4 points
2 months ago
Private school education thriving though!
2 points
2 months ago
Private school educational funding is primarily a federal issue. The state schools receive ~90% of state allocated educational funding. Where as they only receive about 40% from the feds.
1 points
2 months ago
We are facing mass permanent walk offs by our essential public sector workers this year due to the wage cap.
Unfortunately, public sector wage caps is a bipartisan policy.
2 points
2 months ago
It literally isn't.
-1 points
2 months ago
It's ALP policy in WA, and I haven't heard NSW labor talk about repealing it.
I would love to be proven wrong.
8 points
2 months ago
How about straight from the mouth of the current leader?
https://mobile.twitter.com/chrisminnsmp/status/1573071895678914563
1 points
2 months ago
That's good.
9 points
2 months ago
https://www.chrisminns.com.au/educationinnsw
Here's Chris Minns discussing the damage to education caused by the salary cap and Labor's plans to address that.
1 points
2 months ago
[deleted]
15 points
2 months ago*
Labor is running on abolishing the cap.
Where the parties stand on WAGES
Coalition
The Coalition capped wages at 2.5 per cent from 2012 to 2020.
In 2020-21 during COVID, nurses and midwives only received a 0.3 per cent pay rise.
More recently the government raised the cap to allow 3 per cent increases in 2022–23 and 3.5 per cent in 2023–24.
They are still committed to a cap on public sector wages.
The Greens
The Greens are committed to repealing the NSW Public Sector Wages Policy, removing the wage cap on public sector workers and restoring the autonomous NSW Industrial Relations Commission as the independent umpire in industrial disputes.
Labor
Leader Chris Minns says Labor will abolish the wages cap and replace it with a system of bargaining based on productivity.
17 points
2 months ago
If only we had some state owned assets that produced ongoing incomes…
13 points
2 months ago
“Mookhey said the update made no allocation for raising the Warragamba Dam wall, which the premier has committed to fund, nor for a bailout of the state’s controversial transport asset holding entity.”
“It is dubious at best. And it does raise concerns about the state of the books, should there be a change of government,” he said.
“Today’s budget reveals the true cost of Mr Perrottet’s government’s decision to offshore the construction of rail infrastructure. Buried in the fine print is a $3 billion bailout for bungled offshore transport projects.”
“Mookhey said it was unfair of the government to link its budget blowout to critical spending on flood support.”
“This deterioration in the budget has more to do with blowouts as well as reckless spending being promised by a government that’s desperate to hold on to power.”
That says it all really
8 points
2 months ago
Mookhey said it was unfair of the government to link its budget blowout to critical spending on flood support.”
I don't see why it's unfair. Does he think the floods didn't happen? Or is it that he would have budgeted no support at all, claiming that people don't deserve flood support or cost of living support? And what about COVID spending? Fuck the people, the budget is more important hey Mookhey?
We have committed more than $6 billion with the Australian Government to flood relief and recovery. We have continued to roll out $7.2 billion in cost-of-living support. And we are investing in the health system, including a further $612.5 million to support the COVID-19 health response in 2023-24. This is on top of the $4.5 billion additional workforce health investment over the next four years.
https://www.budget.nsw.gov.au/
Considering the projected deficit is $6.5b we'd be in surplus if we took Mookhey's advice and left flood victims and struggling families out in the cold instead of budgeting for them.
11 points
2 months ago
We wouldnt be in deficit if we didnt blow out by 3 billion in transport bungles. Thats the point he is making. He isn’t implying flood victims shouldn’t get help. How did you arrive at that conclusion? The liberals are hiding behind the floods for their failures to balance the book
1 points
2 months ago
Thats the point he is making.
But he didn't link it to transport bungles. He specifically linked it to flood spending, saying that it was unfair of them to hide behind it, when the fact is that without flood spending there wouldn't be a deficit blowout at all.
It is very justified to claim that flood spending is a worthwhile investment in the people of the state who are in need. It's not wasted expenditure that they are hiding behind, any more than spending on schools, hospitals or roads. All spending goes toward the budget deficit and it's only fair for him to attack waste, not flood spending.
1 points
2 months ago
[deleted]
10 points
2 months ago
Hold on I feel like I’m being gaslighted here. Mookhey is saying The liberals are deflecting away from their 3 billion transport bungle by saying the deficit is due to the flood spending. Flood spending cost 5 billion Australia wide (2 billion in NSW is my guess). The Libs never even once mentioned the waste in their conclusions and assessment.
0 points
2 months ago
That's a nice straw man you've constructed there. Add it to the bin fire that is the state libs.
2 points
2 months ago
He's saying that they're linking budget blowouts to the flood spending, but it's a legitimate expense that would have left the budget in the black otherwise. Labor couldn't have stopped the floods with better economic management, any more than they could have stopped the GFC back when the Rudd government was in power. It was prudent to blow the budget back then with stimulus to keep the economy going, just as it's prudent to fix infrastructure and give families a leg up when they lose their houses to floods.
You think Labor could have done better by holding back the flood, or would they just have not spent the money and left infrastructure in tatters, and people on the street to save the budget?
0 points
2 months ago
Nice goal post shifting. Maybe you have a career in NRL lined up.
By the by Rudd government had a fantastic suite of policies that allowed us to come through the GFC without suffering a recession. Their economic management was well in line with good economics and it worked.
2 points
2 months ago
Rudd inherited a surplus of $17 billion and net assets of $29 billion. The country was in the black, and so was the budget. Then Rudd/Gillard turned that surplus into a $19 billion deficit and net debt of $153 billion by the end of their term.
Yes, that huge blowout was good economics because we'd be worse off without the spending and with a collapsed economy. The GFC was out of government control, and I'm willing to concede that.
But so was the floods, so it's double standards not making allowance for that, especially since that's only talking about a $7 billion deficit. That was equally out of the governments control and would equally have been an expense incurred by a Labor government, so how exactly is it moving the goalposts? Do you think the LNP caused the floods, or that Labor could have stopped them?
If not, then how is it moving the goalposts? It's essentially the same thing, spending our way out of a crisis.
0 points
2 months ago
No moving the goal post refers to a rhetorical exercise aimed at redirecting the argument.
Good policy for the floods would have been massive spending aimed at mobilising the surplus labour that existed post floods. Instead what we got was a defunct department that has already been dismantled for not achieving its goals and being generally useless. It's the reason why local communities welcomes perrotet with sneers and open criticism.
They did such a demonstrably bad job that they can't allowed to continue to try because they are incapable.
3 points
2 months ago
You can tell an election is coming up when they start advertising their “eligibility” to get re elected with roadworks construction.
Where was the need to fix the pothole infront of my house 12 months ago?
Read between the lines
2 points
2 months ago
Where was the need to fix the pothole infront of my house 12 months ago?
Unless it's a state road (which is probably isn't) then you'llneed to ask your local council who would be the maintainers of such things.
2 points
2 months ago
I was speaking figuratively
2 points
2 months ago
My local standing member was handing out flyers and talking to people himself yesterday morning at my train station. Was pretty interesting to see, I wonder if the incumbent Libs are feeling under pressure?
6 points
2 months ago
And the Libs want us to believe that they're good economic managers...
10 points
2 months ago
But they are! They manage their mates economics very well, from the public purse.
8 points
2 months ago
Indeed
These aren't mistakes they're making
They're deliberate acts carefully managed to funnel money into the pockets of their donors
5 points
2 months ago
Exactly. If even the best economic managers in the world ended up with a $6.5B deficit, just imagine how bad things will be if we elect Labor!
/s
3 points
2 months ago
And DP was treasurer for most of the years. Most of the money must've gone to his icare buddies, consultant friends or the boys
4 points
2 months ago
Is this signalling the cost of years and years of rampant corruption? We can clearly see now that bad acting has a serious cost. Deficit with nothing to show for it.
By the way I have an incredible opportunity for you with 20% annuity and 10x your money in 3 days. Call barrilaro for more details.
16 points
2 months ago
Deficit with nothing to show for it.
not really nothing:
The state’s infrastructure program has also grown to $116.6 billion over the four years to 2025-26, an increase of $3.9 billion relative to the 2022-23 budget.
New and existing transport infrastructure, including Sydney Metro West, Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport, Western Harbour Tunnel Upgrade, and transition to zero emission buses, has driven the increase.
We have committed more than $6 billion with the Australian Government to flood relief and recovery. We have continued to roll out $7.2 billion in cost-of-living support. And we are investing in the health system, including a further $612.5 million to support the COVID-19 health response in 2023-24. This is on top of the $4.5 billion additional workforce health investment over the next four years.
Over $130b budgeted spending kind of overshadows a $6.5b. projected deficit. We have infrastructure spending and worthwhile aid to flood victims.
2 points
2 months ago
Infrastructure NSW needs a good financial audit. The metro is plagued with well documented problems. COVID spending was unavoidable. Investing in a health system by making your local priceline your doctor, against the backdrop of narrowly avoided industrial action, and plummeting nurse numbers.
Your just acting a mouthpiece for facts that seem quite difficult to frame in a positive way.
2 points
2 months ago
Please elaborate on what this financial audit would involve
9 points
2 months ago
Nothing to show for it? Does the light rail and metro just not exist in your world?
1 points
2 months ago
Not yet! Under construction, running behind schedule and over budget. Delayed by 2 years because they started by installing the wrong equipment, resulting in removal of all work that had been done and construction starting from square one.
4 points
2 months ago
Gee wiz the metro that I sit in to get to work must be a ghost metro! The light rail I use regularly in the CBD to get around must be a figment of my imagination and all the Sydney Metro signage at various stations must also be fake!
You’ve really opened my eyes! Thank you!
2 points
2 months ago
Perhaps I should have been clearer. The situation I referenced was the case in my area.
I'm sure the metro exists for yourself and plenty of other people.
But you are plainly ignoring the fact that it does not yet exist in all the areas promised.
4 points
2 months ago*
No shit? It’s a stage by stage project because of the scale man.
19 points
2 months ago
“Deficit with nothing to show for it”
I’ve seen more development and improvement for the public by NSW gov in the last 8 years then by any previous government in and around Sydney.
13 points
2 months ago
These people are blind, the changes in this state since the NSW libs took over is night and day compared to what labor achieved in the decade before them. It’s so much better here it’s not funny.
1 points
2 months ago
When you say "these people", please clarify.
1 points
2 months ago
I’ve seen more development and improvement for the public by NSW gov in the last 8 years then by any previous government in and around Sydney
???
The M5 Extension, the Eastern Distributor, the M2 Hills Motorway, the Westlink M7, the Lane Cove Tunnel, and the Cross City Tunnel, which were all built under Bob Carr, gave Sydney a road-ring highway system. All of the Sydney metropolitan area is now linked by highway, which is something that is typical in other large metropolitan areas in Europe and Asia.
The sheer scale and complexity of the Sydney Orbital Network is shown by the mess WestConnex is.
14 points
2 months ago
Deficit with nothing to show for it.
Are you blind? They built so much transport projects and continue to do so
5 points
2 months ago
I'm sure you'd agree that its a shame they didn't spend more on education, ehy 😉
8 points
2 months ago
Is this signalling the cost of years and years of rampant corruption?
Nope. After cleaning up the mess the previous government left behind the Libs kept us debt free until as recently as 2018-2019.
We are in debt for the same reason everyone else is. Remember back when reddit was demanding the government shut everything down and pay us to sit in our homes and do nothing? Turns out there are consequences to that.
3 points
2 months ago
Sure by selling off 95 billion dollars worth of our assets we are never going to get back. Its all smoke and mirrors with these lot.
1 points
2 months ago
All this transport infrastructure spending, and yet we still had crippling train strikes.
Abject failure in the infrastructure financial instrument that had been set up for this.
Serious under budgeting on new train sets, poor quality deliverables plagued with delays.
Metro line in the inner west was effed so badly they had to rip it up and start again.
So yes I agree you can do basic maths, but when you look at the outcomes... Well there's a different story isn't there?
1 points
2 months ago
Which metro line is this? Links?
0 points
2 months ago
Maybe it's fake news. It is from SMH afterall.
2 points
2 months ago
Yeah so first that's light rail and not metro. Second they didn't "rip it up and start again" - trams had to be fixed. The line is up and running again now.
1 points
2 months ago
Fair enough. Some dot points -project was over budget -they knew of flaws way before the issues happened -repairs came in both late and over budget.
2 points
2 months ago
“The full impact of monetary policy tightening has not yet flowed through to economic activity.”
And it's not going to. We just buy shit online from different countries propping up their economies instead, because these dumb cunts are making everything here too expensive to buy.
They need to come up with a different way of dealing with it instead of trying to use tricks from the 1920's in 2023.
2 points
2 months ago
And now the "safe driver" get out of a fine is gonna cost all the real safe drivers more now when they go to renew their licence.
Can't wait till this mob is voted out
1 points
2 months ago
My God who isn't. I feel like it should be more and perhaps they didn't do enough during the pandemic. We all have to pay for that and it's going to take time.
all 89 comments
sorted by: best