Labor Ads - Is Kristina Believable?

Give credit to NSW Labor for putting together a slick advertising campaign. The "Presidential" style campaign run by Maurice Iemma worked against all odds - Kristina Keneally's new ads which were run back to back were high on style, low on substance.
How can she be believed? The arrogance of a campaign that totally ignores the betrayal perpetrated on NSW by the Labor Government over the last four years is breathtaking. For Kristina Keneally to introduce a fear campaign about the privatization of Hunter Water and Sydney Water is the height of hypocrisy after her Government's incompetent and highly unpopular disposal of publicly owned energy assets. How can we believe anything they say when State Labor also sold off the highly lucrative NSW Lotteries?
These policies weren't part of Labor's policy platform going into the 2007 election and there is no reason to believe that Labor is listening to the people now but rather that they are saying whatever they believe they need to say to cling to power.

Electricity Infrastructure upgrades

There's no doubt that making the right political decision for the long term can often be tough. Premier Rees and Ian MacDonald, as Energy Minister, have another hard sell to do, arguing the case for a greatly needed upgrade to our power infrastructure with NSW residents having to pay more for electricity to cover the cost.

During the great Power Sell-Off debate, I had contact with industry sources who raised just this issue, that the infrastructure, particularly in high density and long developed areas such as the Sydney CBD, had been badly run down.  It was assumed that this would constitute part of the "poles and wires", the transmission network, that the Premier of the day and Michael Costa were arguing would be be kept in public hands.  The hidden liability was never discussed.

Well, the fact is that the infrastructure does need upgrading.  But doesn't that beg the question as to how this came about particularly as the Labor Government used, and still does, our energy utilities as General Revenue cash-cows for so long?

Common sense says that dividends should only be payed after running costs and depreciation have been paid for.  If this had been done it would seem unlikely that we could now be in this position.  Some of this cost might be for new and unforeseen needs - most of it is to fix the years of neglect of Labor.  The unfortunate fact is that Labor aren't that good at business; the other side of the coin of course is that the Liberals when in power have been too good at business!  In the end I have no doubt that we will have to pay more for our power, and perhaps that will help us reduce our usage - that doesn't change the fact that utility income should have been paying for, or saving for this, for many years.