Privatisation has damaged the economy, says ACCC chief

Quote:

Selling public assets has created unregulated monopolies that hurt productivity and damage the economy, according to Australia's consumer and competition tsar, who says he is on the verge of becoming a privatisation opponent. In a blistering attack on decades of common government practice, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chairman Rod Sims said the sale of ports and electricity infrastructure and the opening of vocational education to private companies had caused him and the public to lose faith in privatisation and deregulation. "I've been a very strong advocate of privatisation for probably 30 years; I believe it enhances economic efficiency," Mr Sims told the Melbourne Economic Forum on Tuesday. "I'm now almost at the point of opposing privatisation because it's been done to boost proceeds, it's been done to boost asset sales and I think it's severely damaging our economy." Mr Sims said privatising ports, including Port Botany and Port Kembla in NSW, which were privatised together, and the Port of Melbourne, which came with conditions restricting competition from other ports, were examples where monopolies had been created without suitable regulation to control how much they could then charge users. "Of course you get these lovely headlines in the Financial Review saying 'Gosh, what a successful sale, look at the multiple they achieved'," Mr Sims said. "Well of course they bloody well did: the owners factored in very large price rises because there's no regulation on how they set the price of a monopoly. How dopey is that?" Mr Sims, who recently launched legal action against Medibank Private alleging it concealed changes to health insurance policies to boost profits ahead of its privatisation, said billions of dollars had been wasted in the scandal-plagued vocational education sector since it was opened up to the private sector. Deregulating the electricity market and selling poles and wires in Queensland and NSW, meanwhile, had seen power prices almost double there over five years, he said. "When you meet people in the street and they say 'I don't want privatisation because it boosts prices' and you dismiss them ... recent examples suggest they're right," he told the room of influential economic and policy experts. "The excessive spend on electric poles and wires has damaged our productivity. The higher energy price we're getting from some poor gas and electricity policies are damaging some of our productive sectors." Mr Sims said he was growing "exasperated" as governments including the Commonwealth became more explicit in trying to maximise proceeds from asset sales.  "I think a sharp uppercut is necessary and that's why I'm saying: stop the privatisation," he said. Mr Sims also used the forum to continue a public stoush with opponents of a proposed "effects test", saying they were relying on "bogus" arguments against the Harper review proposal to give the ACCC powers to block action that had the purpose or effect of substantially lessening competition. The Productivity Commission last week joined the Business Council of Australia, the federal Labor opposition and the supermarket giants in opposing the so-called "effects test", which is a pet policy of National Party MPs including Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce.

This bloke is earning big bucks and is saying what many of us have been saying for years.

5 will get you 10 that Mr. Sims won't have his job for much longer.

It's a failed experiment. All the political parties tried it, it hasn't worked and it's time they stopped using the sale of assets as a substitute for good budgeting

I think they have fixed terms like most statutory officers.
Moreover, he has been the most effective ACCC leader ever. Compare him with the wimps of the past who never said boo to Woolworths & Coles.

And I would agree that there are areas that should remain in govt control.
But the trouble is the unions, which of course you won't agree with.
Union control + public ownership = inefficiency + poor service.

BTW I live in NSW and my electricity bill hasn't doubled in five years. In fact deregulation of retail providers has given us the opportunity to shop around for better deals.

Privatisation should be a capital offense.

Anything that is a monopoly should not be privatised because there is no competition to constrain prices. Any tangible infrastructure like roads, railways, power grids, communications networks or water distribution networks cannot be privatised effectively because it is impractical to create duplicate, competing networks. The only way these monopolies can be privatised without excessive price rises is if they were privatised strictly not-for-profit, but there would be few buyers.

This is why privatisation isn't popular. We can vote out governments that hike prices of government services too much, but voting out the boards of privatised monopolies can only be done by shareholders, not by the customers. So up the prices go.

The rejection of privatisation is just one aspect of the rejection of neoliberalism that is taking place all over the world. It explains Brexit, the popularity of Trump and Sanders in the US Presidential race and why One Nation got a substantial share of the vote at the recent election. Neoliberalism has made many promises that are not being met, and the world is waking up to it.

Bammy gives the "Politically Correct" sanitized version of the lying Lefty Propaganda.

.

juliar wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 12:32pm:

Bammy gives the "Politically Correct" sanitized version of the lying Lefty Propaganda.

More nonsense from Juliar.  As usual.

Instead of those lazy public servants doing what they were employed to do they go and sell off their jobs to private enterprise and then employ more public servants to look out the windows :(

Honcho Blood Sucking Public Servant is against 'privatisation' ---------> how bizarre  ;D

Swagman wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 1:05pm:

Honcho Blood Sucking Public Servant is against 'privatisation' ---------> how bizarre  ;D

It wasn't always so.


Quote:

"I've been a very strong advocate of privatisation for probably 30 years; I believe it enhances economic efficiency," Mr Sims told the Melbourne Economic Forum on Tuesday. "I'm now almost at the point of opposing privatisation because it's been done to boost proceeds, it's been done to boost asset sales and I think it's severely damaging our economy."

What has changed his mind? Maybe because privatisation doesn't achieve its stated goals?

Swagman wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 1:05pm:

Honcho Blood Sucking Public Servant is against 'privatisation' ---------> how bizarre  ;D

Messenger down - we have a messenger down....

If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation.

Like most things, privatization is neither intrinsically right nor wrong. it is HOW i is done, not the notion itself. As for the idiots who think all industry should be run by the government, I am glad you dont get to choose.

Bam wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 12:14pm:

Anything that is a monopoly should not be privatised because there is no competition to constrain prices. Any tangible infrastructure like roads, railways, power grids, communications networks or water distribution networks cannot be privatised effectively because it is impractical to create duplicate, competing networks. The only way these monopolies can be privatised without excessive price rises is if they were privatised strictly not-for-profit, but there would be few buyers. This is why privatisation isn't popular. We can vote out governments that hike prices of government services too much, but voting out the boards of privatised monopolies can only be done by shareholders, not by the customers. So up the prices go. The rejection of privatisation is just one aspect of the rejection of neoliberalism that is taking place all over the world. It explains Brexit, the popularity of Trump and Sanders in the US Presidential race and why One Nation got a substantial share of the vote at the recent election. Neoliberalism has made many promises that are not being met, and the world is waking up to it.

rejection by boofheads like you maybe, but globally, privatisation continues. Your objection is ideological by virtue of the mental disability you have called 'being a leftie'

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 3:30pm:

If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education.

Some of the failures? He's hardly said a single thing positive about it.

Quote:

"When you meet people in the street and they say 'I don't want privatisation because it boosts prices' and you dismiss them ... recent examples suggest they're right," he told the room of influential economic and policy experts. "The excessive spend on electric poles and wires has damaged our productivity. The higher energy price we're getting from some poor gas and electricity policies are damaging some of our productive sectors." Mr Sims said he was growing "exasperated" as governments including the Commonwealth became more explicit in trying to maximise proceeds from asset sales. "I think a sharp uppercut is necessary and that's why I'm saying: stop the privatisation," he said.

Why would he be saying "stop the privatisation" if he was still a proponent?

If the private sector was conducting share floats the way certain assets have been privatised, they would be up before the judge. Some privatisation efforts are little more than pump and dump scams.


Quote:

However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation.

Citation needed. Where are you getting your facts? Are you making them up again or do you have links this time?

Guy's being paid a motza to say what some of us have been saying for years?

Oh, well.. there'll be no solid conclusion here until some Learned Professor comes in with an 'expert' opinion, to explain to us that the alleged efficiency of private enterprise in reality was just the mechanic altering my power generator so that it ran at three times the rate of fuel consumption and required three times the level of maintenance....

I was happy to pay him a substantial fee for that outstanding work....

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 3:36pm:

Bam wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 12:14pm: Anything that is a monopoly should not be privatised because there is no competition to constrain prices. Any tangible infrastructure like roads, railways, power grids, communications networks or water distribution networks cannot be privatised effectively because it is impractical to create duplicate, competing networks. The only way these monopolies can be privatised without excessive price rises is if they were privatised strictly not-for-profit, but there would be few buyers. This is why privatisation isn't popular. We can vote out governments that hike prices of government services too much, but voting out the boards of privatised monopolies can only be done by shareholders, not by the customers. So up the prices go. The rejection of privatisation is just one aspect of the rejection of neoliberalism that is taking place all over the world. It explains Brexit, the popularity of Trump and Sanders in the US Presidential race and why One Nation got a substantial share of the vote at the recent election. Neoliberalism has made many promises that are not being met, and the world is waking up to it. rejection by boofheads like you maybe, but globally, privatisation continues. Your objection is ideological by virtue of the mental disability you have called 'being a leftie'

You are a fool, longy....
Shut up!!!

Bam wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:47pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 3:30pm: If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. Some of the failures? He's hardly said a single thing positive about it. Quote: "When you meet people in the street and they say 'I don't want privatisation because it boosts prices' and you dismiss them ... recent examples suggest they're right," he told the room of influential economic and policy experts. "The excessive spend on electric poles and wires has damaged our productivity. The higher energy price we're getting from some poor gas and electricity policies are damaging some of our productive sectors." Mr Sims said he was growing "exasperated" as governments including the Commonwealth became more explicit in trying to maximise proceeds from asset sales. "I think a sharp uppercut is necessary and that's why I'm saying: stop the privatisation," he said. Why would he be saying "stop the privatisation" if he was still a proponent? If the private sector was conducting share floats the way certain assets have been privatised, they would be up before the judge. Some privatisation efforts are little more than pump and dump scams. [quote]However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation.

Citation needed.* Where are you getting your facts?** Are you making them up again*** or do you have links this time?****
[/quote]

*Don't hold your breath.
**Out of his arse.
***Yes
****Bwhahahaha.......

Privatisation is a very business supported process and should produce efficiencies in theory. However the fact is that every know privatisation in Australia has resulted in increased costs and productivity losses.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 3:30pm:

If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation. Like most things, privatization is neither intrinsically right nor wrong. it is HOW i is done, not the notion itself. As for the idiots who think all industry should be run by the government, I am glad you dont get to choose.

What a load of rubbish. I never experienced an unreliable network under the SEC. Under the private scammers I've seen a 22kV line literally fall off a power pole which could have easily killed someone simply because there is no preventative maintenance. It's a case of wait till it fails or kills someone before they do anything. Also they are stingy with their street lighting now.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 3:30pm: If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation. Like most things, privatization is neither intrinsically right nor wrong. it is HOW i is done, not the notion itself. As for the idiots who think all industry should be run by the government, I am glad you dont get to choose. What a load of rubbish. I never experienced an unreliable network under the SEC. Under the private scammers I've seen a 22kV line literally fall off a power pole which could have easily killed someone simply because there is no preventative maintenance. It's a case of wait till it fails or kills someone before they do anything. Also they are stingy with their street lighting now.

How many lives were lost in Victoria in 2009 as a consequence of insufficient maintenance of power lines? 119 at least.

Bam wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 5:47pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 3:30pm: If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. Some of the failures? He's hardly said a single thing positive about it. Quote: "When you meet people in the street and they say 'I don't want privatisation because it boosts prices' and you dismiss them ... recent examples suggest they're right," he told the room of influential economic and policy experts. "The excessive spend on electric poles and wires has damaged our productivity. The higher energy price we're getting from some poor gas and electricity policies are damaging some of our productive sectors." Mr Sims said he was growing "exasperated" as governments including the Commonwealth became more explicit in trying to maximise proceeds from asset sales. "I think a sharp uppercut is necessary and that's why I'm saying: stop the privatisation," he said. Why would he be saying "stop the privatisation" if he was still a proponent? If the private sector was conducting share floats the way certain assets have been privatised, they would be up before the judge. Some privatisation efforts are little more than pump and dump scams. [quote]However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation.

Citation needed. Where are you getting your facts? Are you making them up again or do you have links this time?
[/quote]

I worked for ETSA and was at one point helping schedule substation maintenance which was as much as TEN YEARS behind. basically, they had given up maintaining all but the milliondollar plus transformers and simply fixed or replaced them when they failed. As a result, blackouts were regular and now... they are almost nonexistent other than cars hitting poles etc.

Bam wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:39pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 3:30pm: If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation. Like most things, privatization is neither intrinsically right nor wrong. it is HOW i is done, not the notion itself. As for the idiots who think all industry should be run by the government, I am glad you dont get to choose. What a load of rubbish. I never experienced an unreliable network under the SEC. Under the private scammers I've seen a 22kV line literally fall off a power pole which could have easily killed someone simply because there is no preventative maintenance. It's a case of wait till it fails or kills someone before they do anything. Also they are stingy with their street lighting now. How many lives were lost in Victoria in 2009 as a consequence of insufficient maintenance of power lines? 119 at least.

Rogue poll involving two major incidents that stand alone... that's like saying the Teneriffe air crash was indicative of a total failure of air travel.

Privatisation is profit for some.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:23pm:

Privatisation is a very business supported process and should produce efficiencies in theory. However the fact is that every know privatisation in Australia has resulted in increased costs and productivity losses.

You missed the source for that piece of B/S?  :D

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 10:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 3:30pm: If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation. Like most things, privatization is neither intrinsically right nor wrong. it is HOW i is done, not the notion itself. As for the idiots who think all industry should be run by the government, I am glad you dont get to choose. What a load of rubbish. I never experienced an unreliable network under the SEC. Under the private scammers I've seen a 22kV line literally fall off a power pole which could have easily killed someone simply because there is no preventative maintenance. It's a case of wait till it fails or kills someone before they do anything. Also they are stingy with their street lighting now.

You have a long record of lying in your posts or exaggerating. This no exception.

stunspore wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 11:59am:

Privatisation is profit for some.

Privatisation means the Government can do more for less.

Therefore Privatisation is a defacto tax cut 

That's why lefties don't like Privatisation, as most lefties don't pay much tax, preferring to bludge off the minority that pays the majority of tax.

That's also why Lefties constantly whinge about mythical 'structural' deficits and tax cuts to 'the rich' because they deem that because they pay hardly any tax that they are somehow missing out on something..... ;D ;D ;D

We have all seen the deterioration of these services when profit rather than the interest of the people becomes the driving factor.  No government has ever had a a mandate to sell the peoples property to  a private entity. Services like power, water, public transport and hospitals are necessary for society to function and should be operated by the government for the benefit of all the people, not be used as a profit making resource for private individuals.

Belgarion wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 8:47am:

No government has ever had a a mandate to sell the peoples property to  a private entity.

Every Govt has a mandate to do exactly that, otherwise they wouldn't be the Govt.  ;D


Belgarion wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 8:47am:

We have all seen the deterioration of these services when profit rather than the interest of the people becomes the driving factor.

The very fact that the vast proportion of the economy is private enterprise is testimony to the incorrectness of this statement.  ::)

Swagman wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 8:26am:

stunspore wrote on Jul 28th, 2016 at 11:59am: Privatisation is profit for some. Privatisation means the Government can do more for less. Therefore Privatisation is a defacto tax cut  That's why lefties don't like Privatisation, as most lefties don't pay much tax, preferring to bludge off the minority that pays the majority of tax. That's also why Lefties constantly whinge about mythical 'structural' deficits and tax cuts to 'the rich' because they deem that because they pay hardly any tax that they are somehow missing out on something..... ;D ;D ;D

Nonsense. 

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Jul 28^th, 2016 at 11:04am:

Bam wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:39pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 10:33pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2016 at 3:30pm: If you bother to actually read ALL of his comments, he is still a PROPONENT of privatisation, but has instead pointed out some fo the failures eg Vocational education. However, his comments about electricty privatisation were dead wrong. Most govt electricity assets were in bad state of maintenance and govt was unwilling to spend what was needed for the future. Also, the reliability of the network soared AFTER privatisation. Like most things, privatization is neither intrinsically right nor wrong. it is HOW i is done, not the notion itself. As for the idiots who think all industry should be run by the government, I am glad you dont get to choose. What a load of rubbish. I never experienced an unreliable network under the SEC. Under the private scammers I've seen a 22kV line literally fall off a power pole which could have easily killed someone simply because there is no preventative maintenance. It's a case of wait till it fails or kills someone before they do anything. Also they are stingy with their street lighting now. How many lives were lost in Victoria in 2009 as a consequence of insufficient maintenance of power lines? 119 at least. Rogue poll involving two major incidents that stand alone... that's like saying the Teneriffe air crash was indicative of a total failure of air travel.

I have made no such assertion.

It's correct to remind people that insufficient maintenance of power lines by a privatised power network has caused fires and many deaths. Would these deaths have occurred if privatisation had not occurred 15 years previously?

Swagman wrote on Jul 29^th, 2016 at 9:04am:

Belgarion wrote on Jul 29th, 2016 at 8:47am:   No government has ever had a a mandate to sell the peoples property to  a private entity. Every Govt has a mandate to do exactly that, otherwise they wouldn't be the Govt.  ;D Belgarion wrote on Jul 29th, 2016 at 8:47am: We have all seen the deterioration of these services when profit rather than the interest of the people becomes the driving factor. The very fact that the vast proportion of the economy is private enterprise is testimony to the incorrectness of this statement.  ::)

You fail to understand the difference between normal private enterprise and the private ownership of utilities that people are dependent on. 
You also fail to understand what a mandate is. 
Look at  your power bill and note the rate of increase since privatisation. This is blatant profiteering. Utilities belong to the people, not to private enterprise.

Interesting... has anyone called him a racist or a redneck yet?  One Nation from its very beginning said the same things and that all Essential Services should never be sold off or privatized.  ESs should remain in government hands.  But hey, what would ON know right.

Grendel wrote on Jul 30^th, 2016 at 3:21pm:

Interesting... has anyone called him a racist or a redneck yet?  One Nation from its very beginning said the same things and that all Essential Services should never be sold off or privatized.  ESs should remain in government hands.  But hey, what would ON know right.

just a guess on my part, but they probably weren't referring to her policy on privatisation when they called her a redneck  :D :D

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2016 at 11:16am:

I think they have fixed terms like most statutory officers. Moreover, he has been the most effective ACCC leader ever. Compare him with the wimps of the past who never said boo to Woolworths & Coles. And I would agree that there are areas that should remain in govt control. But the trouble is the unions, which of course you won't agree with. Union control + public ownership = inefficiency + poor service. BTW I live in NSW and my electricity bill hasn't doubled in five years. In fact deregulation of retail providers has given us the opportunity to shop around for better deals.

Don't know who said bills were going to double in 5 years. Do you have a link? The only thing I recall is Bairds 'iron clad guarantee' my bill would be lower in 2 years than before privatisation. Mind you , that was before the shonk took his own appointed regulator to court to stop him lowering charges. The people of NSW deserve it though for believing the crook in the first place. :( :( :( :( :(