Ignore the climate change and water bit of this article. Should Australia post be privatised? Do we need to be able to hold it accountable via political measures? Will there ever be a competitive market place for post, or will we always have only one company? What are the risks we face with a private ower having a monopoly on this service? Are we even short on money anyway?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/Australia-Post-worth-7-billion-report/2007/06/03/1180809329653.html

Australia Post should be sold off and the proceeds used to tackle climate change and secure water supplies, a leading economist says.

A CommSec research note on the feasibility of privatising Australia Post found a sell-off would bring between $5 billion and $7 billion into commonwealth coffers.

The CommSec report noted the European Commission had recommended full liberalisation of the postal market by 2009, while the German government had already floated its national postal services business and Japan was preparing to do the same.

Letter volumes were in long-term decline and Australia Post's business was now centred more on distribution, delivery services, retail operations and financial services in competition with private businesses.

Contrary to the popular belief that its main business is to deliver letters, only 34 per cent of Australia Post's profits came from letters, CommSec said.

In contrast, 43 per cent of profits came from parcel delivery and logistics.

A sell-off of Australia Post would be the latest in long line of controversial privatisations including Telstra, Qantas and, in the early 1990s, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia itself.

The sticking point over any sale of Australia Post would be its community service obligations, especially for rural and regional areas, the CommSec report noted.

"While it would have been almost an unthinkable proposition in the 1970s or 1980s to sell Australia Post, now the focus of Australians is on issues such as water security and the environment rather than getting mail delivered to your mailbox on time."

The internet had boosted the need for parcel delivery services while trade was increasingly global, the CommSec research said.

I can't see a problem with it. The govt should sell it off now while it is still a viable proposition and worth something once you take the public sector factor out of the equation.

Like Telstra, the infrastructure that they have is slowly becoming a white elephant as technology takes up their core business.

I'm glad you discounted the climate/water issue garbage.

It would be a smart business decision

Yes, sure.  Good idea to sell it off.

How come they can't sell off some of the busineses that lose money ? eg centrelink ?

heheheh

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Govt-has-no-plans-to-sell-Australia-Post/2007/06/04/1180809388110.html

Australia Post is not about to follow the long line of privatisations such as Telstra, Qantas and the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the federal government says.

GOOD

Why are you against it, AusNat?

Progs wrote on Jun 5^th, 2007 at 5:35pm:

Why are you against it, AusNat?

Im a Nationalist progs. I believe all public utilities should be owned by the government, not by private businesses and especially NOT foreign companies.

If they sold it, it wouldn't be a public utility any more. Problem solved  ;)

Ausnat wrote on Jun 5^th, 2007 at 11:10pm:

Progs wrote on Jun 5th, 2007 at 5:35pm: Why are you against it, AusNat? Im a Nationalist progs. I believe all public utilities should be owned by the government, not by private businesses and especially NOT foreign companies.

Really? If I didn't know any better, I'd say you were a socialist  :P

A national socialist even?

Quote:

I'd say you were a socialist  ;)

No, i believe property should be individually owned- Not collectively, and in democracy, what (utility) is owned by the government is owned by the people.

Ausnat wrote on Jun 6^th, 2007 at 4:15pm:

Quote: I'd say you were a socialist  ;) No, i believe property should be individually owned- Not collectively, and in democracy, what (utility) is owned by the government is owned by the people.

That is exactly what socialists believe. Only commies believe that the government should own everything.

Progs wrote on Jun 6^th, 2007 at 4:17pm:

Ausnat wrote on Jun 6th, 2007 at 4:15pm: Quote: I'd say you were a socialist  ;) No, i believe property should be individually owned- Not collectively, and in democracy, what (utility) is owned by the government is owned by the people. That is exactly what socialists believe. Only commies believe that the government should own everything.

HMMMM. Freediver might be right.