The Forum > Article Comments > Competition policy evaluated > Comments
Competition policy evaluated : Comments
By Saul Eslake, published 7/12/2005Saul Eslake argues competition is only desirable if it furthers the welfare of the Australian people.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Page 6
-
- All
Why do you keep quoting American Stuff as if they are the masters of the universe.
You didn’t mention November 1854 which I feel was the defining time for Australia’s peoples rights vs the establishment.
The demands of the Ballarat Reform League (which lead to the he Eureka Stockade miners' revolt) encompassed: Manhood suffrage, Abolition of the property qualifications for members of parliament, Payment of members of parliament, Voting by secret ballot, Short term parliaments, Equal electoral districts, Abolition of diggers and storekeepers licenses, reform of administration of the gold fields, revision of laws relating to Crown land..
Public opinion was rallied around the event it is often referred to as "the Birth of Democracy within Australia”.
Poor Old Henry Seekamp of the Ballarat Times had a charge of “sedition” brought against him.
(Hummm strange how history goes around)
Which ties in nicely to Frank Penhalluriack as it was Frank’s relatives who were involved in the Eureka Stockade and he believed the Stockade was about the rights of small business vs the Establishment.
Back in 2003 Frank was still intent on breaking the laws he put in place so he could trade on Easter Sunday. He did what he did because he believed in a community spirit and went on to become an Australia Party candidate for the federal seat of Chisholm, in 1974 and a Director of the Caulfield Park Bendigo Bank.
You are confusing / deliberately muddying the waters with the work of community minded civil rights activists VS Greedy Corporations who just want to take over the market and bully all the small traders out.
Your Original Paper was condescending of the Peoples' Referendum in WA inferring they had chosen the say in the “Dark Ages” but your entire argument is based on the right of the people to choose surely its double standards to criticise them.
After all the coalface argument I have put before you, I cant help concurring with your “Higher Ups” on Page 9 of your speech that there is a lot of “British Bullocks” in your argument.