Aidan, in recent times The Greens have also submitted their policy for costing both state and federal. Famously it was The Coalition who refused to submit policies for costing a while back, when Labor was in government. Claiming they did not have time or they said they would get shafted or something, so they came up with their own set of rubbery figures.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2013/sep/05/greens-credit-upfront-costings

Paul1405,

It is easy to tell when you are on the defensive.

Greens 'policies' cannot be assessed without considering the very flawed Greens ideology that prioritises the 'Big State' central planning and control model that has failed elsewhere in the world. The Greens are totalitarian.

I already mentioned (and you ducked) the inconsistent and flawed Greens immigration idealism that rejects the present intake of educated and skilled migrants. Instead, the Greens want to solve the world's overpopulation through opening the doors to economic migrants. State Premiers have lashed federal governments for decades about migrants flocking to the major capitals, overloading available services and housing.

To top it off, the federal, State and local government tax burdens for new infrastructure and services (not forgetting Centrelink) are according to the fed's own reports crushing young income earners and preventing young working couples from ever having the children they want.

-Not that the Greens ideologues are concerned about that, because the lunar 'One World Government' Greens are opposed to young Australian couples having children. That is notwithstanding that the huge growth in population is due to the feds setting new records for migrant intakes, year upon year and for decades.

Here are the Australian Greens in action and never forget their political idealism,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0FmFOGnf10

Since Bob ('Make me the first World President') Brown took his golden handshake from the taxpayer and decamped to sail the Seven Seas as a pirate with Sea Shepherd, the barking mad 'Watermelon' Greens have gained greater strength. Now the 'green' in the Greens serves the sole purpose of being a distraction for the pink and red mass of social policies.

Paul,

10 out of 10 for effort, but no cigar. Because the railway has private operators in way indicates that they are not subsidized. Just as the private bus operators would rapidly go bankrupt if they had to rely on passenger fares only.

Reality (which generally eludes the greens) is that rail is the appropriate mode of transport for a minority of goods in spite of its efficiency.

As for CSG, I am not surprised you are against it, as the greens oppose nearly all forms of industry except windfarms and the production of bunnies and rainbows.

As for the costings, the coalition is the first opposition party to ever submit overall budget costings to treasury, and even then Rudd and Swan crookedly tried to pass off their own biased costings of coalition policy as those of treasury.

As for the greens "costings" these in no way constituted a budget plan only thought bubble policies, of which Labor released only a fraction of the costings that Treasury returned.

When it comes to the workings of Australia's largest container port, Port Botany in Sydney, sadly Shadow you are totally ignorant, like the other conservative posters on the forum, yet continue to make grossly ill-informed comment. You certainly prove the old adage "Empty vessels make the most noise.", or is that "ignorance is bliss", take your pick.
The local Greens around the port have been involved since day one, not much an ill-informed conservative can add to the debate.

Paul,

I have spent a decade within a few hundred meters of port botany, in heavy industry shipping out hundreds of thousands of tonnes of product every year. So I doubt what a effete green like you could ever teach me about port botany. Quoting a few out of context statistics simply shows your ignorance.

Logistics is more than simple point to point efficiency (thus the success of air freight). Handling costs and the time value of product in transport often trumps a few dollars saved. The flatulent noise that is green policy is a joke that anyone with a jot of technical expertise can blow a hole through. Good greens policy is an oxymoron.

Shadow, not only are The Greens opposed to Coal Seam Gas and its inevitable destruction of the environment, take a look at the swings against sitting National Party MP's in the recent state election. Lismore a 21% swing, Ballina, Nationals down 28%. The Conservatives own constituency on the ground, farmers do not support it, it will destroy their way of life. That however never concerns your side of politics when there is a quid to be made.
How about a comment on how wrong the Baird Government is at estimating the gas requirements for the state over the next 20 years. Crying that there was going to be a huge shortage of gas unless CSG came on line only to be shown up a out of touch and in fact there will be a surplus.
Could this be like Liberal Party corruption and developers, a new phase of the corruption saga for the Coalition, looking after their benefactors.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/csg-santos-and-oil-giants-revealed-as-major-donors-to-national-party-20140206-324o3.html