NBN which Option is a Better Bet

There are two distinct plans being put up by the parties for the NBN. There are massive differences in the cost and what the outcome will be.

If you keep doing what you've always done in the midst of rapid change, you’ll lose your competitive advantage. You either change with the times or you get left behind. Which option makes the most sense for Australia?

I watched the debate last night on ABC Lateline and I have to say I felt so sorry for Malcolm Turnball. He was trying desperately to put up a valid argument. I have to say that if I am ever in need of a good mouth piece when I know that I am in the wrong then he will be my choice.

The simple fact of the matter is that the LNP option will cost the Australian Public more than the Labor Party NBN in the long run and makes absolutely no economic sense. Please see my blog a few weeks ago regarding the NBN on the cost differences.

Today I want to talk about capacity differences.

When we look at the NBN  we have to look at our three change accelerators—processing power, storage, and bandwidth. The exponential advances that have been taking place in all three areas have reached unprecedented levels. You’ve likely heard the story about what happens when you double a cent every day. Tomorrow you’d have two cents; the next day, four, the next eight, and so on. By the end of the week, you would have a whopping sixty-four cents. By the end of week two, your cache of cash would have grown to $81.92. Not too exciting. But by day twenty-eight, just two weeks later, your pile of pennies would exceed $1 million; on day thirty it would be over $5 million. If this happened to be a thirty-one-day month, you would end the month with more than $10 million.

There is a distinct and very clear move to Cloud based solutions. We will no longer be storing information on localised servers as it is just not cost effective. When we consider the amount of data that is being collected and stored we are starting to realise that we are getting to the point where we will need to be able to access this data in a accelerated manner. We will not want to wait for the information.

Consider this: what was considered the world’s fastest super computer two years ago was recently disassembled because it was obsolete. And of course, as the power of those three change accelerators continue to increase dramatically and exponentially, their price continues to drop. So we can do much, much more with much, much less.

So what does that look like when we consider the rate of growth of broadband speed.

If we look at average speed in red - yes the coalition will cover average speed up until 2024 (10 years) but will be at full peak speed capacity by 2016 only (3 years) where as the maximum capacity of the Labor NBN will not be reached till around 2032 plus.

We also need to consider the following facts about where we are positioned in the world as far as internet speeds.

A study, which looked at more than 8.8 million Australian internet connections, found just 4.1% of Aussie internet users were downloading content at speeds greater than 10 megabits per second - the speed required to stream 720p high-definition movies.

Only 38% of Australians were connected at speeds higher than 4Mbps.

By comparison, 86% of net-connected South Koreans enjoyed speeds of over 4Mbps and more than half were connected at speeds higher than 10Mbps.

Australia's average peak internet connection speed of 22.8Mbps won the country 34th place, putting it sixth in the Asia Pacific region but well below the 54.1Mbps of world leader Hong Kong where users could download high-definition feature films in minutes rather than hours.

Find out more on this study here (Yes it is a News site believe it or not)
http://www.news.com.au/technology/state-of-the-internet-australia-web-speeds-ranking-dwindles-to-40th-place-globally/story-e6frfro0-1226560992748#ixzz2XwNUzAzm

This therefore negates the ridiculous argument from Turnball that a 1G internet connection would cost a household $20,000 per month when it becomes available. The fact is that by the time it is available there will be a range of infrastructure that is able support the connection and the appropriate levels of competition to drive the price down.

His other assertion that the NBN will just be a price gouger is another rediculous argument. Yes we will be paying additional cost but it will be for a superior service. Let's take the example of the Next G network with Telstra when it first came along. The pricing was in the order of $79 per month for very limited data at very low speeds we now have a 4G service for the same price.

Yes there will be people saying well there you go we don't need fiber we can do it with wireless. Please have a look at these following graphics taken from a NBN comparison site.  http://howfastisthenbn.com.au/

So let's take the following example.

 As you can see it still takes awhile under the Government's current speeds. But in the future we will have the job done in minutes while we are still waiting for the job to get down by the coalitions NBN.

In fairness there has been some flak from Malcolm Turnball on the fairness of the comparison site. http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/05/that-nbn-speed-comparison-site-now-looks-more-realistic/

Wreck the People Smugglers Business Model- Easy take away their customers

Both the ALP and the LNP say they want to wreck the people smugglers business model but in fact they are not going to achieve this by locking up the people who are seeking asylum. The basic fact is that these people are looking for a place where they can be safe and can be allowed to exist in a manner that gives them the dignity to be able to work and raise a family with.out the fear of persecution.

Trying to get to Australia and then receiving the protection of the Australian government is what they seek initially. They then seek to get settled either in Australia or another country. Locking people up does not stop them from coming. All it does is ensure that they get the protection and a standard of care that means they will be able to survive until they get to a country that will give them asylum.

In order to be able to achieve this goal they need to get to a country that will provide that protection under international law and will also allow them to achieve the goal of living a life with dignity. That country in the region is Australia as none of the other country's in the region are able to offer the protection that they seek.

What is not fully understood by the electorate and in turn by the major political parties is that in order to be able to stop the people smugglers' business model and stop the deaths at sea,. we need to remove the clients from their insidious grasp.

Currently in the region people are able to seek protection in transit countries like Indonesia and Malaysia. But even though they are protected they are not able to achieve the goal of living a dignified life as they are unable to work or conduct business etc. There are huge economic and social reasons as to why the region is unable to support these people. Anyone who has lived or worked in the region will attest to the extreme levels of poverty that exist across the region.

I do agree with both parties that there needs to be a regional approach but these discussions are ongoing. And as with all discussions and agreements on the international stage if it does not involve a trade agreement it appears to take an exorbitantly long time. The Bali process commenced in 2002, 11 year ago and all we have to show for it is an agreement to agree at some point in the future.

People who are Fathers, Wives, Sons, Daughters, Sisters, Brothers, Uncles, Aunts, or Grandparents are dying NOW trying to seek asylum. Just to spell it out a bit further for the MP's in this world "Humans".

The amazing fact is that in offshore processing we have actually had a reduction of numbers from approximately 13,061 in 2003-04 to only 8500  in 2010-11. The actual number of people processed, in total, has remained steady at approximately 13,700 so we have seen a steady increase in the number processed onshore.

Another interesting fact is that the period of the greatest intake was actually during 2005 -06 when the Howard government allowed 14,144  people to migrate to Australia.

Working with the region  and UNHCR we should develop a methodology for the fast track processing of refugees, not only to Australia but to all countries that take refugees. We should be allowing peole the right to arrive in this country under protection and to live and work in our communities while they endeavour to seek a better life in what ever country they eventually settle in.

The interesting part of the debate is that there is in fact a short term solution available. It would be cheaper than the current solution and put an end to the deaths at sea.

 We should immediately increase the refugee intake to 30,000. These people should be encouraged and provided incentives to ensure that they live in regional locations and areas where they are able to gain work. So rather than being a burden on the tax system they become tax payers.

The current cost of maintaining  people on Nauru will be approximately $253,000 per person or 1.9 Billion dollars.

There is an interesting article on the economic cost of asylum seekers here Economic Cost of Asylum Seekers

We currently have a system where we are punishing people for taking the trip by boat and then putting them into environments where we are causing damage.

It is my contention that a better solution is to allow these people into the country. If it costs us $9,000  a year in Newstart and they get rent assistance of say $9000 per year we are still a long way from $253K

We can in fact help 12 people for everyone that we lock up.

If people are paying the Smugglers to come to Australia, those that meet the refugee criteria and pay a fee get here first.

This will wreck the People Smugglers Business Model. We compete with a safe method of getting to Australia and the ability to provide a decent and protective environment  where you are able to live in dignity.

Australia is a country that has been multicultural since the arrival of the first settlers by boat. And as an indigenous leader once said we have had a boat problem ever since. We are not people who don't give people a fair chance. Our lives have been enriched by the influence of a range of cultures. Surely we have the maturity and the compassion to open our borders to people and grant them a place of refuge.

Below is a link to a very interesting article from Anne Mc Nevin a Lecturer in Politics and International Relations at Monash University on which I have based some of my points.

http://inside.org.au/why-we-would-gain-from-a-regional-approach-to-refugee-protection/

Here is a link to another article which discusses the futility of  border protection.

http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-the-people-smugglers-business-model-16426

Here is the link to the Bali Process

http://www.baliprocess.net/

Here is the link to the Numbers I quoted on intakes. It makes for a very interesting and enlightening read especially when we look back at our history and see what we have contributed in the past.

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/r/isub/2012-13-IntakeSub-stat.pdf

So the economy will be the issue well lets look at the NBN

We have a situation where if Abbott gets in he will reward his mates at News Limited. He will do this by ensuring that the NBN is watered down so as to ensure that Foxtel doesn't lose any market share or can truly get an advantage over any potential entrants into the market by slowing down the speeds and distribution.

The NBN will in either form help the economy but let's consider the economy on two other factors first and then take that into consideration with the NBN

Abbott says he will honor all deals with the states on Gonski. That should have been a no-brainer from the start. We would not have the drastic skills shortage if the Howard government had started increasing money for education and training back when it first got into government 19 years ago. We would have a range of graduates in a lot of areas that would have jobs rather than having a youth unemployment rate of 25%.

What I find interesting is the LNP saying they will increase jobs by 1 million. What I want to know is how? And the retort will be by reducing regulation and the burdens of taxation on business. This is not the reason why people are not employed. The reason is that the people who are in the market don't have the right skills or there is no incentive for them to become engaged in being in the work place. We import a huge number of workers under 457 visas. Why haven't we trained our people in these skills?

The coalitions policy in Healthcare is one of privatisation and fragmentation to give the people on the ground more say on what occurs in the delivery of services. Sounds great in practise but expensive in delivery and who pays? "The Patient"?

This election is going to be about the economy. It is my belief that the ALP needs to be selling a message that includes the combination of the following as they relate to the economy:

NBN is a big infrastructure project that will be a game changer for Australia in the new economy. We have led the world in the provision of service-based businesses and if we don't continue in this area we will be left behind by our trading partners. We have an opportunity to truly export great internet businesses across the world from anywhere in the country. The NBN will also change the way we live and where we live enabling us to reduce the impact on cities and allowing us to decentralise over time.

There will be the creation of new jobs in a greener and more connected economy. This means we can have people working in a manner that suits their life style as well as provide employers with a flexibility that suits their needs. This is through the NBN.

Healthcare needs to focus on the benefits that can be achieved by having a single e-health system, and by getting the states to recognise the savings that can be achieved through a centralized and well managed single management system. A system that is able to provide services where they are needed regardless of where the service provider is located (A Radiologist in Melbourne providing consultation to a Doctor in Marble Bar in remote WA). Nearly all major enterprises in the world are moving to single ERP (Enterprise Resource Program) systems that enable them to have a transparency to increase efficiency and reduce wastage. Surely this has to make sense in what is one huge enterprise that is health care.

The LNP, even though they profess to be the productivity experts, have in each of the states in their control cancelled or suspended work on eHealth. Hate to be cynical and start to sound like a conspiracy theorist but could this be because they have outsourced a majority of the services to the private sector on a per service basis and any efficiency gain would reduce the private sectors income stream? Below is an article regarding the cancellation of HealthSMART which yes had its issues but with appropriate leadership and drive could have delivered outstanding benefits.

http://delimiter.com.au/2012/05/21/victoria-dumps-healthsmart-e-health-project/

Education being able to be provided regardless of where you are and in a manner that is engaging and able to take into account your special needs. This will then enable people to undertake studies of their choice in areas of interest that suit them rather than the current model of providing study at local institutions that is only relating to the local economy eg in Barossa they offer wine making courses but not much in the way of mine supervision or being a Nurse.

The LNP solution for the NBN is to provide us with an inferior and what will become an unreliable system. This is from the people who call themselves good economic managers.

So let's look at the difference in cost for benefit

LNP

So lets look at the numbers 29.5 Billion gives us FTTN. We, the home owner, have to pay if we want the last mile as they call it in fiber at a cost of lets say $2000 (Estimates say $6000) so lets say we have 5 million homes who chose to get connected to fiber (that is only 13% of the total connections under the ALP) that is an additional 10 Billion in cost. so we have a total cost of 39.5 Billion we will then have cost of maintenance of two systems. Fiber network at say 1 Billion and the copper at $700 million so total cost of ownership over ten years is 56.5 Billion that is connected to 5 million premises at high speed and another 32 million to be connected in the future so an additional 64 Billion impost on the economy or we have a two tiered system with all the disparity and issues that we get with that. Total cost to get equal network to the economy 110 Billion odd dollars


ALP

37.3 Billion this is the cost estimates by NBN so lets say they are out by 25% it is 46.8 Billion gives us FTTH with all the copper replaced we have all 37,632,000 premises connected we are only up for the maintenance on the fiber network of 1.2 billion give us a total cost of ownership over 10 years of 56.5 billion.  So we have 36 million more premises connected at a higher speed and with the ability to be able to achieve higher speeds sooner.

Here is the article about BIS Shrapnels assessment of the maintenance cost
http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-to-save-up-to-au700m-in-copper-maintenance-costs-7000002846/ 

As I said before the LNP are trying to say they are the economic managers

So what is our return on investment then? Well we first of all save 700 Million per annum on not having to maintain the copper network.

We spend 121.4 Billion on Health, 76 Billion on education so lets say we get a 2% productivity gain in each of these sectors. That is a saving of 3.94 Billion a year but lets not be that generous.

If we look at the total GDP and say we have a productivity increase of .05% we are looking at 6.5 Billion per annum so taking just the economy as a whole with a .05% improvement the Return on investment is just over 8 years on a piece of infrastructure that if it lasts as long as the copper will be here for 100 years.

We want to give the economy over to these dolts. I did this based on simple maths garnered from government published numbers so even on the back of a postage stamp the numbers are pretty easy to see.

So When Will Malcolm Turnbull remove Abbott

The Main Stream Media are reporting the fact that Mr Rudd has got Labor a boost. What really has amazed me is that they are not talking about the positive aspects of these results but are just putting it down to the honeymoon (which there is an element but a 7% turn around is more than just Honeymoon)

What has to be remembered is that Rudd has had some of the highest polling in Australian history. When was he really behind in the polls? When Malcolm Turnbull was his opposite number.

There has been no talk or investigation of what the situation would be in the Liberal side of politics and a destabilization of the Liberal leadership like there was for Julia Gillard.

Turnbull is a unique character. He is able to cross over the divide of Labor and Liberal politics. He actually holds a very strong place right in the middle with the ability to pickup votes from Labor disaffected centrists. 

Amongst a straw poll of female friends, not done in any scientific manner, Malcolm has the "X-Factor"

I would expect over the coming weeks we will see a further erosion in the Liberal Party position and especially in the support for Tony Abbott. There will be a strong swing to Malcolm Turnbull as preferred leader of the opposition and more importantly as preferred PM. The polling, I would suggest, will show that Malcolm could win. Whether this is actually how it is reported, published  and how opinion is made in the MSM is another matter.

I talk politics with people on a daily basis and even the most staunch of Liberal supports that I have spoken to, really struggle with the idea of an Abbott led government. The fact is that Abbott is disliked especially amongst women and younger voters.

This dislike is of Abbott's own making. He is a very divisive individual as Rob Oakeshott said in his valedictory speech-:

''The fringe has invaded the middle. It's got to be put back on the fringe,'' he said.
''I have been shocked, frankly, over the last three years, to meet ugly Australia and just to see the width and depth of ugly Australia.''

While Oakeshott didn't say it outright. Tony Abbott is the face of ugly Australia. Tony Abbott has been a nasty and spiteful politician, his negative 3 word slogans are not policy no matter how they try and spin it. He has shown a very disturbing element of what Australia could become and I have to say it scares the hell out of me. And I know for a fact it scares a lot of people in the general public.

All you have to do is look at who are his major supporters in the Media and it is a who's who of the right.

If an Abbott led government gets in, we are in for a period of austerity and also a step back in time. Back to the days of racist and sexist policy not nearly as bad has having say Pauline Hanson but it would be pretty damn close.

John McTernan served as Julia Gillard’s head of Communications  from 2011, having previously worked as a senior adviser to Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman. In an article in the Telegrath he discusses the fact that Australia is so far behind the UK in the area of sexism and racist remarks in the public domain.

What is needed is for the debate to be brought up from the gutter. For politicians to return to a level of respect for the office that they hold. But more importantly to a level of respect that truly reflects the standards that are being set by mainstream Australia.

From what I have seen of Turnbull, he is a decent and respectful person who does not go to the gutter to get his message across. I am a Labor voter but if I was to turn it would be for a character like Malcolm.

Don't stress folks I won't be turning any time soon.

Thank You Ms Gillard

Dear Ms Gillard

It is a very sad day for Australia that we have lost you as our Prime Minister and also as a parliamentary member, I want to thank you for all that you have done for us the Australian people and especially want to thank you for what you have done for future Australians.

I have had the good fortune to meet you on two occasions, once when you were Minister for Education and another as Prime Minister. On both occasions you showed charm and charisma. I pointed out to you on both occasions that I considered you a "Bloody Legend" and this was confirmed in the manner in which you acted as PM and accepted the verdict of your caucus colleagues.

You have been a victim of the main Stream Media and the men in blue ties on both sides of the political divide. It is a point of reflection that we in Australia have still not gained the maturity to accept that women have the capability and right to lead.

I will be reminding people of the great achievements during your time as Prime Minister and will remind any young women that I meet of what is possible by using you as an example of what great leadership is about.

You managed to put together a Government made up of a coalition of  Labor, Independents and Greens and then go on a program of change that  has laid foundations for our future. To pass approximately 580 pieces of legislation shows that you had a government that was prepared to take action and implement a real change that had to be negotiated every step of the way. This is the true meaning of democracy.

I want to thank you for having the courage to implement the Carbon Tax and to actually fight all the way to ensure that the doomsayers and commercial interest were dissipated. And we managed to lead the world in what is now proving to be the correct way to go, as shown with the recent announcements from China and the US.

Thank you for the compassion that you have shown implementing the Disability care scheme and making it a levy that removed it from being  an area of the budget that could be manipulated by future governments.

Thank you for the belief in the importance of Education and the fact that it is our future hope for all children to be able to achieve what they want to achieve regardless of their socio economic background or geographical location.

Thank you also for helping us to grow emotionally and to accept that there are parts of our society that are unacceptable. Parts that we need to change and have the bravery to discuss openly so as to be able to heal through the Royal commission into child Sexual Abuse.

I want to congratulate you on the Misogyny speech, another area of Australian society that needs to be addressed. As you said in your Exit Speech let us hope that we are able to have the maturity to recognise that things need to change and people deserve respect regardless of their gender. I promise I will try and push the boundaries on the shades of grey so that women are able to go into leadership roles knowing that they are supported on both sides of the gender divide.

You said that your colleagues showed conviction in the two previous spills and you wanted to thank them for their support and you understood the pressure that they where under to make a change. I have to say you are a better person than I. It is my belief if they had stayed the course the truth would have won out and you would have been able to win the election.

You prevailed as our first Female Prime Minister under enormous pressure from the conservatives on both sides of the fence and did it with grace and dignity. You have changed the nation and made it a much easier path for women in parliament now and in the future.

You said you were proud to have led the country. I say to you we have been proud to have you as our leader. I wish all the very best in your future endeavours and hope that our paths may cross again so that I can remind you again of what a "Bloody legend" you really are.

For those that need reminding http://whathasthegovernmenteverdoneforus.com/

Why is knitting suddenly an Issue

Well the MSM are at it again. They just need any old excuse to slam into the PM.

I find it amazing how the PM is coping so much flak for what is considered a recreation and is not unknown to the media fraternity. On June the 8th I became aware of Julia's passion for knitting and to be honest was a bit surprised as it was not what I expected from her (especially as she professes to be a Game of Thrones fan that is more my cup of tea)

But I then did a bit of research and discovered that there was an actual International Knit-In public day on the 8th of June hence why there was the photo on Julia's Facebook page. It has also been known in the Press Gallery for a long time that Julia is an avid knitter and it is something that she finds relaxing and assists her to reduce stress.

So why is it that today is the day for a fuss about the fact that the PM is photographed knitting? Oops perhaps it might be that the new sport in town is kick the female leader!

I go sailing. That is my choice of relaxation and it works for me. Others I know, write poetry, some do exercise, some make cheese and others do gardening. We have had PM's who have unusual hobbies such as Keating and his clocks.

Please forgive me but when did the Women's Weekly become a forum for political commentary and why is it expected that all subject matter be about policy? Tony Abbott had spreads in the Women's Weekly along with many other leaders including Malcolm Turnball and John Howard. As the journalist in charge of the story said during an interview this morning these are all contrived setup photos and take forever to get organised and agreed upon.

I could not believe the comments about the fact that as a feminist she should not be seen to be knitting. How is this a factor in the argument for feminism? And then there was the argument that as a republican she shouldn't be knitting for the new royal baby. How does this become a factor? I have met lots of liberals that I consider friends. Do I stop buying presents when they have a child. Sorry makes no valid sense to me.

I see the photo as a clear indication of Julia Gillard's sense of humor and the fact that she, like all good Aussies, has an appreciation of self deprecating humor. Look at the staged manner of the photo with the wool scattered everywhere and Ruben posing so well for the camera. Really the photo is a piece of stage managed art.

All politicians of all persuasions stage manage photo opportunities. Some are less offensive than others, like do we really need to see Mr Abbott in budgie smugglers or lycra?

So back to why knitting is an issue? Well it really just isn't an issue to most people in the electorate and  this is going to be another one of the cases where the MSM are going to get it so wrong again.

The MSM is continuing with its campaign to oust the PM and cause as much disruption as possible to ensure that they get the result they are looking for. They try and say that they need the government to be talking about policy and when it is fed to them all they want to do is talk about distractions that they are creating.

All over the internet there is support for Julia Gillard her Parties Policy's and her knitting and some journalists are changing their tune as the day progresses. Please lets keep this alternative dissemination of opinion

and facts going.

Now I want her to knit me a really woolly beanie to keep my head warm
with these freezing winter mornings in Melbourne.

Respecting the office of Prime Minister

Why are we allowing the office of Prime Minister to be denigrated.

I have been following politics very closely since the sacking of Whitlam in 1975 and I have say I don't think any PM has copped as much disrespect as Julia Gillard has in her term as PM.

As a gentleman on face book put it so perfectly last night 

"After everything Julia Gillard has been through - the personal attacks and vilification from Abbott and his LNP stooges as well as the MSM - not once has she resorted to the same personal attacks on any other person. And she has been subjected to more personal attacks than any other Prime Minister of this country! "Ditch the Witch", "Bob Brown's Bitch", "Her father died of shame", "A dodgy lawyer at best", "Slit her throat", "back stabber", "make an honest woman of herself", and others! Yet she remains a strong, dignified and respectful person. Julia Gillard has treated her position as Prime Minister of Australia as a privilege and an honour and deserves the same respect in return for the position she holds!"

I just had to have a laugh when I heard the best that Hockey could come up with was that Julia called him "Fat " and that because he was referred to as a man wearing a white shirt and blue tie she must be calling him a misogynist. To then say he had no knowledge of the Menu at a small party gathering of Liberal supporters at a restaurant of a paid up member of the party - Please give me a break there would have been the usual nudge and a wink and a laugh over a glass of red. 

Don't worry it goes on for both sides of politics the joking and the poking of fun it just doesn't degenerate into sexism is most cases, if you look at the menu there was some actual humour about Swan and it probably wouldn't have got a airing but rightly it has as it crossed the line and displays the Liberal Party's total disregard and lack of respect for women and the Office of Prime Minister.

For Julia to call Abbott a misogynist is actually a intelligent and articulate way to have a level of debate that is mature and actually shows that there is no need to get down to the gutter of name calling to actually describe the political cut of ones Jib.

In 1971 Fraser ran a campaign against Gorton and forced him into a position where he would be rolled and supported the insertion of McMahon as the Prime Minister did he get denigrated for that no. McMahon was shown the respect of the office and then ran as leader.

After the Whitlam sacking people where baying for Frasers blood and calling him all sorts of denigrating and actually very unfortunate descriptions  but once he was duly elected the Media and the public gave him the respect that comes with being the Prime Minister.

I have to say that regardless of your opinion as to the method on how she came to be leader she was elected via the process that is determined by the parliamentary system and she was the leader of choice for Labor during the last election.  I will remind people that they do not elect the prime minister they elect their parliamentary representative and from them a leader is chosen based on a majority process. 

The government is made up of  the 72 members of the Labor Party (The largest party) and the 3 Independents and one Green the Coalition is made up of 5 parties (not one) Liberals, LNP, Nationals, Nationals WA and CLP with Katter supporting the Coalition. this is 76-74 with the speaker coming from the Government there is a democratic government. Abbott would have accepted power if he was able to convince the independents to come across but he failed, since then all he has done is try to disable the government and run a negative campaign despite this the Gillard Government has continued to implement major reforms and affect change.

The coalition is not a single party they are as fragmented as ever and are only holding it together to get them selves back into power. Once power is achieved there will be the usual jockeying for certain promises to be fulfilled and the minor parties will try to get as much of their agenda through as possible. 

I can assure you that if they get a majority in both the House of representatives and the Senate we will have the opportunity to call Abbott on his "promises"that are broken but I would like to think that we would still give him the respect that comes with being the PM of Australia.

The alternative of cause is to make sure that he doesn't get the majority and to ensure we keep him out of government.