With the shameful capitulation today of 60% of delegates at the Queensland Labor Party conference, who voted for a "motion acknowledging that the sales are going ahead", before the Bligh/Fraser junta, democracy is effectively dead in that state.

A precedent whereby, a Government can implement policies that are gravely harmful to the public interest, that are opposed not only by its constituents, but even by the membership of its own political party, has been established.

At the recent state elections, even though at least one candidate (myself) did his utmost to make both Andrew Fraser and Anna Bligh reveal to the Queensland public their intentions in regard to privatisation and to debate the issue openly, they chose to keep the Queensland people in the dark, thereby denying them their democratic right to settle the issue at the election.

Had they made known their intentions at the time of the election, there is no way that they would be holding the respective offices of Premier and Treasurer today.

This outrage against fundamental principles of democracy, as well as the basic principle that somebody's property should never be sold without his/her consent cannnot be allowed to stand.

How can the Queensland public rectify this outrageous situation?

I share your concerns Daggett.

But in order to get a better perspective of this issue, could you outline the main arguments for and against privatisation of these assets, or provide a link to this information, and suggest the main reason as to why 60% of delegates ended up supporting Bligh?

Thanks.

Ludwig,

Thanks for your interest.

Firstly, whether privatisation is a good or bad thing, it has been consistently and overwhelmingly opposed by the public for years, and this is in spite of relentless pro-privatisation propaganda from governments and the media.

70% opposed the privatisation of Telstra at the time the full privatisation legislation was passed in September 2005.

When the Iemma Government attempted to privatise NSW electricity throughout 2008 it was opposed by between 79% and 85% of the NSW public according to opinion polls.

An online Courier Mail opinion poll recently showed 91% of its readers opposed privatisation.

Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser know full well that they will never get the consent of Queenslanders to privatise the assets.

That is why they avoided (yet again) discussion of privatisation at the last elections.

The people who push privatisation maintain that because private managers are driven by the profit motive that they must be inherently more efficient.

However, I would say that public managers are also driven by the profit motive, but 'profit' in a far broader sense.

In the broader public sector sense 'profit' would encompass all the services provided, care for the environment, decent working conditions and career structure for its workforce, training for its own needs or for the needs of the broader economy.

In the narrower private sector sense 'profit' is only the net wealth the private corporation is able to extract from the pockets of the community and its workforce to itself. The private managers are discouraged from caring whether many customers are provided with poor service or even miss out altogether, or whether they run down the infrastructure.

In theory, it should be possible by removing so-called feather bedding (or what I would consider a civilised pace of work) and improving workforce efficiency, the rest of the community should gain, but the broader community still seem to lose massively even when the workforces are practically turned into slaves as they were with Telstra.

Almost everywhere that privatisation has been tried it has been a disaster for the public interest. (more later.)

first off i feel were overgoverned..,but as were stuck with states[who predominantly only serve big buisness..[witnes peter beaty..currently serving big buiness openly os..

i feel having another level of govt..[two houses..not just one]..might be a good starting point...and a media that sits on govt reporting the every new act peter rewrote[thousands of em..clearly his 200 plus secerataries did more than just monitor the media

much of the current problems stem from an omnipotant state-run oligopoly..[mainly run by the public service,..via the so called two party system]..peter beaty..[lest we forget]..was a lawyer at sir joes trial...a little known fact...was he defense or offense i wonder

did the young nats take over labour[when it was clear the brand was poluted[hayden disappeard pretty quick[goss came from nowhere...[but how was that young nat sitting on the jury[lawyer making law reveals the law in qld is a joke..the just-us system

i did continue on about more info but the page disappeared..when i tried to post it..[i revealed the lawyer rewriting the constitution into act 70 of 2002..[revealed the half a billion peter beaty gave to his mate for a non egsistant magnesium plant in gladstone..[revealed how we only got one house of govt..[allways run by lawyers

revealed how the unions love the acces to govt..thus sold out the workers..[mentioned that lucrative lurk granted to that mob out west that turned a swamp into a huge dam to steal water..[revealed much more..but it disapeared when i went to post it...so will leave it as it stands

how come there is so much darkness in the sunshine state..[we let govt steal the water rights from council..[after councils put in the water meters..

[we let govt double the price of electricity/rego..[we let govt criminalise a plant..[deem a plant a drug,..via legalistic lawyers rewriting law's...even rewriting the constitution into act 70 of 2002

let govt..give private prison's to big buisness..[let govt give its mates huge infastructure work projects..[that sent the treasury broke]...

ok you got enough of an idea of the dirt i was posting...that conveniantly dissapeard when i tried to post

Daggett I share your pain, and as a unionist have concerns.
We you and I inhabit different parts of the left of center world.
We both do not like the turn coat attitude of union based members of parlement state and federal.
Some of my heros, Robo, Bill Shorten, and our new minister for defence seem to have swam a very wide river[union talk for crossing over.
But we must confront the facts, democracy is not under attack in QLD
A quick look under the blanked of dead hand managment in these enterprises can show its management no the whole that needs contracting out.
NSW has for years and years had an ALP government, failing to even care, yes I think that, who gets the contracts it takes from its own workers.
Anti union under paying far from safe firms get preference from government departments run by local big frogs in little ponds.
We must confront the fact, the ALP is not truely interested in us until needed to man the booths
The 40% who voted against must continue to look for better answers.

Belly wrote, "But we must confront the facts, democracy is not under attack in QLD"

A precedent has been established where a Labor Government can do as it pleases regardless of the wishes of the people of Queensland, the people who elected it, the trade unions for whom the Labor Party was create to represent in Parliament or the rank and file of its own party.

The Queensland Labor Government today is answerable to nobody but the same rapaciously greedy corporate interests that have ransacked the rest of the world and created the financial crisis we face today.

The issue at the weekend should have been open and shut.

The Labor Government failed at the last elections to ask the people of Queensland foo their permission to embark upon the single largest fire sale in Australia's history.

They failed to ask because they knew what answer they would get.

As it happens, public opinion and Labor policy against privatisation are as one, according to every opinion poll taken in recent years.

If nothing else, the Labor conference should have insisted that the Labor Government now ask the people of Queensland, but were too cowardly to even do that.

If an elected Government can get away with that, then what can't they get away with?