Leigh, no doubt that Howard's govt has not been "small government" conservative, but that ideal has never really been successfully put in practice anywhere (the US got away with a relatively small *percentage* of total GDP being spent by governments for about 50 years, until about 2001, but given how huge the US GDP is, it doesn't sensibly compare with economies like Australia).
Further, there's no in principle reason you couldn't have a progressive low-spending government, if every possible effort was made to provide extensive government services as efficiently as possible.
Ultimately though, why on does it matter if the government spends 20% of the GDP or 50%? Are Swedish voters idiots for consistently voting for governments that take on the responsibility of determining how to spend half the country's wealth? If there were consistent evidence showing that big-spending governments lead to poor economic performance and low-spending governments lead to good performance, it would be one thing, but I'm not aware of any such evidence. Other than being concerned about one's personal material wealth above any other considerations, I can't think of any logical reason for caring so much that a government that taxes as spends as little as possible on maintaining basic services that benefit all

A few points worth noting, a poster questions why Labor is conservative?
Mate remember voters elect EVERY MEMBER to the house, your wish is not shared by enough voters to get any far from conservative party elected EVER.
Howard bizarre as it looks it is never too late, a new leader right now this coming week, not the walking sneer Costello, not any one tainted by this Cabernet, would reduce my party's lead without doubt.
A leader who said sorry for the lies, sorry for workchoices sorry for the massive miss use of that massive mandate in 2004.
Conservatives please! think about it! how did your government turn such a STUNNING victory in ONE TERM into such an impending defeat?
WHY not debate it?

Belly, if Australians are so set on conservative governments then why do polls show that
a) the vast majority of Australians want MORE spending on services, and less on tax cuts
b) the vast majority support gay marriage, legalisation of euthanasia, stem cell research etc.

...all things that are pretty much only ever opposed by conservatives.

Labor knows and understands its likely return to power comes because of real changes in the party.
Me too, well bit of a joke in reality Howard first crafted such actions and willingly took the ground the ALP vacated.
Menzies made it his victory style to do so.
While even mad Mark whats his name? thanks for Garrett dill! was further left he was away from both voters and reality.
Truth is while people do want more spent on services they are unlikely to want other than mainstream government, surely it is clear me too is the future of Australian politics?
Australia even under John Howard has always spent on such services and in truth been a mixture of private and public in service delivery.
We after reading this mornings poll in our most pro Howard news paper ask ,if Howard fails in Benalong, and conservatives win the election can Costello be Prime Minister?
Will that affect next weeks polling?
Rudd's pledge to keep his promises concerns me see I believe him but Garret could better serve the environment on any highway with a bag picking up wast bottles and such.

I am not sure too many of us do not know how to find our way there if we wish.
However in a forum called Australian Politics I am surprised few want to talk about this subject.
I can from personal pain understand the way conservatives who understand the subject are feeling , even this far out from an election ,gutted.
My pain in 2004 started months before the election, clearly those who knew the subject understood Labors impending doom.
And like some conservatives today , I had to walk among my party's faithful and listen to the blind unseeing hope without grimacing, such false hope!
Failure to understand voters are not always fools, how foolish for any party to not understand this.
2004 that dreadful day for the ALP election day, who can say it did not look like 2 more terms for John Howard?
9 years in the wilderness for the ALP!
Without control in the senate it may well have been.
Senate inquiry's into AWB may have helped heal that wound.
No workchoices and far less # we are invincible# from this government.
Even idiotic Garret falling over his ego can not turn these polls ,fear can not do it , lies are a reason for them.
Costello is only the man for some of his side of politics and unlovable, his time is past who will lead the Liberals?
Can you see your self wakening up to a Liberal victory?
And if Howard lost his seat? Peter in charge?
How did this massive turn around happen?

BTW, re the small vs big govenrment debate, interesting article in today's Age: http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/alp-falls-for-coalitions-myths/2007/11/04/1194117878684.html

"[Fred] Argy [former senior treasury official] says the "big government" versus "small government" debate is essentially a difference of opinion based on ideology (and self interest), not economics."