Australian Politics Forum - Just 64% of BER spent on buildings

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › Federal Politics › Just 64% of BER spent on buildings

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2

Just 64% of BER spent on buildings (Read 1608 times)

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings
Reply #15 - Sep 24^th, 2011 at 3:36pm

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 2:38pm:

stryder wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 1:19pm:

Quote:

Howard had done all he was going to do with the Campbell report, the stuff left may(well did) require guts, and would cost votes.
I'll not try and defend NSW Labor, who would, but stop trying to pass off the benifits of Keatings guts, vision and desire to see Australia succeed as Howards/Costello's work.

By dsmithy

In 1979, Treasurer Howard established a committee of inquiry, the Campbell Committee, to investigate these matters, and it was clear from the composition of the Committee that it was likely that it would favour a move to a less regulated financial system. In the event, it did, when it reported 2-1/2 years later. And the implementation of its recommendations, at first under the Fraser government and later,

on a bigger scale, under the Hawke government, transformed the Australian financial system and much of the economy as well.

The reform process did not wait until the Committee's report had been fully digested and a number of changes were implemented between 1979 and 1982. One was the removal of all interest rate ceilings on bank deposits, but the most important change was the introduction of the tender system for the sale of Treasury notes in 1979, and Treasury bonds in 1982. This changed the method of selling government securities was a major reform, which has not been accorded the recognition it deserves It was second only in importance to the float of the Australian dollar in 1983..

BOYER LECTURES, Lecture 3, REFORM AND DEREGULATION, Ian McFarlane, former reserve bank governor

Like I said, Howard did stuff and fidling with treasurey bonds whilst an inportant thing is still not a difficult reform and certainly not a vote loser with average joe.
Abolishion of tarrifs, pegging wages to productiveity, deregulation,floating the dollar, these are the tough vote loseing but necessary reforms Howard baulked at and Keating took the hits for.

and the GST - originally Keatings preferred option - had to wait until Howard and it was the biggest tax reform in 30 years.

lets not pretend that keating is the only reformer. so was howard and so was Costello. but you cAN say that Swan has done zero reforms.

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

philperth2010 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20542 Perth Gender:	Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings Reply #16 - Sep 24^th, 2011 at 4:34pm Spot the spin!!! Thread title..... Just 64% of BER spent on buildings Article..... Just 64 per cent of the BER funds allocated to NSW public schools went towards building costs
Back to top	If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992) IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings
Reply #17 - Sep 24^th, 2011 at 5:00pm

philperth2010 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 4:34pm:

Spot the spin!!!

Thread title.....

Just 64% of BER spent on buildings

Article.....

Just 64 per cent of the BER funds allocated to NSW public schools went towards building costs

Spot the hypocrisy

Your first instinct is to defend the Labor party despite your veil pretense of being neutral

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 14213
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male

Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings
Reply #18 - Sep 24^th, 2011 at 8:38pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 3:18pm:

Quote:

Just 64 per cent of the BER funds allocated to NSW public schools went towards building costs. The remainder was spent on "agency and management fees", "unique project costs" and "external works and services".

By comparison, in NSW independent schools, 90 per cent of BER funding went towards construction costs, while the figure was 88 per cent for Catholic schools in the state.

In other states, construction costs ranged from 74 per cent to 91 per cent of all spending on BER projects in public schools.

And that is the way of ALL Federal, state and local government building projects WITH or WITHOUT the Building Education Revolution and GFC stimulus

The way it has ALWAYS been - and the way it will always BE

MUCH of it is money "on paper" - with
one government department "billing" another
for its contributions over the life of the project

Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations
Leader of the Government in the Senate
8 July, 2011 Media release

Government welcomes final BER implementation report

The Australian Government today released the final report of the Building the Education Revolution (BER) Implementation Taskforce.

Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations, Senator Chris Evans, welcomed the independent taskforce’s thorough investigative work and said the Government has agreed to progress all five recommendations in the report.

“The Taskforce’s report shows that overall the BER was a success, with the majority of education authorities found to have attained value for money and delivered quality facilities,”

Senator Evans said.

“This was an enormous undertaking involving nearly 24 000 construction projects.
I am pleased to see more than 92 per cent of projects are now complete and the vast majority of schools and communities are enjoying the benefits of their new facilities.

“The Australian Government is committed to ensuring that all projects are completed to a high level of quality with the best possible outcomes for school communities.”

“The Taskforce also notes the majority of school principals expressed appreciation for major new investment in school infrastructure which will deliver improved educational outcomes and is highly appreciated by their school communities.

“This investment has transformed the learning environment for thousands of students across Australia.

“Modern and innovative learning spaces, libraries and classrooms, language centres and science laboratories will improve the educational outcomes for students of all ages and this will be the permanent legacy of this historic program”

Earlier independent research commissioned by the Taskforce showed the BER made a material contribution to Australia’s economic growth and was projected to support around 120 000 jobs over the life of the program.

“As well as delivering high quality, much-needed facilities to our schools, the BER helped protect the Australian economy from the full effects of the global financial crisis,”

Senator Evans said.

“The BER kept industry going, kept people in jobs and kept skills in our economy”

http://www.deewr.gov.au/ministers/evans/media/releases/pages/article_110708_1516...

« Last Edit: Sep 24^th, 2011 at 8:45pm by buzzanddidj »

'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.
Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'

- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings
Reply #19 - Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:19pm

The trouble with the report Buzzard is that the targets are so low it is easy to call it a success. after all, it was a STIMULUS project not a school building project. its major criteria was spending monmey which labor has always done well. but spend it wisely? no. cost benefit? whats that? and spending 36% of a project on non-building?? only in a government can that be considered a job well done.

Now when there is a REAL report on the BER that looks at the results using commercial guidleines like value for money, suitability etc. THAT will ahve a different outcome!

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

nairbe

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2587
Rural NSW
Gender: male

Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings
Reply #20 - Sep 25^th, 2011 at 3:09pm

Maqqa wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 5:00pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 4:34pm:

Spot the spin!!!

Thread title.....

Just 64% of BER spent on buildings

Article.....

Just 64 per cent of the BER funds allocated to NSW public schools went towards building costs

Spot the hypocrisy

Your first instinct is to defend the Labor party despite your veil pretense of being neutral

Actually maqqa as per the normal you are full of it. Phill has a good point, i can not find the numbers off hand but WA had a much better ratio of cost to building success on the BER over there demonstrating that the problem was a state one. And mostly centred around state labor. You really need to get the separation worked out for yourself before you rave.

"Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage."
Confucius

IP Logged

adelcrow

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20133
everywhere
Gender: male

Re: Just 64% of BER spent on buildings
Reply #21 - Sep 25^th, 2011 at 3:20pm

The neo cons would rather we were sucked into the vortex of the GFC than spend money to keep our economy ticking along.
Instead of going to work, enjoying good incomes and economic growth and enjoying weekends with friends and family we would all be standing in line at soup kitchens begging for scraps from the Packers and Murdochs if we had followed Abbott economic policies when the GFC hit.
Even if Gillard gets booted out in 2 yrs time lets just be thankful Abbott was not at the reigns when we needed a steady hand to guide us through the GFC.

Go the Bunnies

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page