THE two rural independents who sided with Labor have told Tony Abbott to be constructive, not destructive, and rejected his attempt to have them switch sides over the government's broadband policy.

Mr Abbott confirmed yesterday it was his intention to effect a ''baton change'' well before the minority Labor government's three-year term expired.

The key would be having the new communications spokesman, Malcolm Turnbull, demolish the national broadband network as a waste of money.

The independents, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott, said Mr Abbott was wasting his time. ''We had a fortnight to make a decision. My case was based on the NBN. At the end of week one, I'm not about to make another decision,'' Mr Windsor said.

While it was ''technically possible'' to have a baton change via a byelection or a death, Mr Windsor said: ''I'm not going to get involved in a dutch auction and change the baton on a whim.''

Mr Oakeshott was similarly resolved, saying the opposition should make sure the government delivers the broadband policy as promised. ''It's to build, not to wreck - that's the challenge for Malcolm and the Coalition,'' he said.

They also warned Mr Abbott they would not side with Coalition motions designed solely to inflict political damage on the government.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/no-takers-leaping-for-abbotts-baton-20100915-15crz.html

From letters at the MSH (16/09/10)

The appointment of Malcolm Turnbull as communications spokesman, with a brief to demolish the plan for the national broadband network, may seem like the mark of a brilliant tactician. But I wonder if it is not Turnbull who will end up being demolished and whether this possibility isn't accidental.

The government's scheme is thoughtful, visionary and provides much-needed infrastructure. The opposition's plan is regarded by experts (other than those with vested interests) as a temporary solution that will ultimately be close to a complete waste of money - more wasteful than any spending by Labor in its first term.

Poor old Malcolm is being asked to sell a crock. I can't believe he doesn't understand that.

Peter Rosier Leura

Poor Malcolm. Sacked for reaching agreement with Labor on climate change. Back in the cabinet and given the job of defeating the policy that most encouraged the independents to support Labor. Obviously Tony Abbott doesn't trust him. To remake his bones Malcolm must destroy something.

Bill Twyman East Balmain

---------------------

Gus: meanwhile Malcolm wastes no time in wasting our time with a rich man's diatribe — a business dictum trick in how to provide the worst value for money — which of course would leave you smiling with more money in your pocket while the buyer would get a lemon.

"Labor wants to frame the national broadband network debate as being between modernity and reaction, between the future and the past. But there is no debate about the merits of broadband, the opportunities offered or the need for all Australians to have fast and affordable access to it.

The real question is about the government spending $43 billion on an infrastructure project and asserting, but not demonstrating, that it will deliver value for money. This is a plan devised, we are told, on the back of a drink coaster on Kevin Rudd's VIP jet.

The government must urgently publish the financial model for the broadband network. This will include all the assumptions about take up and pricing. It will enable us to have a fully informed debate."

----------------

Gus: was Malcolm asleep all of this year on the backbenches in Parliament? The debate has been done and sealed way before the elections and then peeled carefully by the independents who would go with the Libshits at any other times but on the issue of Broadband had no choice but go with the best option.

The full cost of the gizmo at this stage is somewhat irrelevant as long as the firms that provide the roll-out do not do so by screwing the government nor turn their cable trenches into gold-digging beyond the acceptable.

So I believe Malcolm wants to place his snooty nose into commercial documents in confidence — something he would TOTALLY oppose should his businesses and that of his fellow Libshitters — the miners, say — be forced to divulge commercial arrangements — just to be a busy body.

The more Malcolm is huffing and puffing the more he look likes a smiling toad, soon about to blow up.

In the end the network WILL belong to the government — not to any commercial enterprise — contrary to Malcolm/Abbott muddle that would lead to a mishmash of already obsolete medium/consortium.

--------------------

TONY Abbott has made sure to set expectations for Malcolm Turnbull's new frontbench job so high they will be difficult - maybe even impossible - to fulfil.

The Coalition leader had little choice but to elevate the still-ambitious man he defeated for the top job, the only big change to an opposition frontbench that forced Labor to the brink of defeat.

Abbott famously confessed during the election campaign that he was ''no tech-head'' as he struggled to explain his own broadband policy. But he said he expected Turnbull, his new communications spokesman, with all his ''business experience and technical expertise'', to use Labor's national broadband network to destroy the minority Gillard government's credibility in the same way school halls and pink batts were used to undo Kevin Rudd.

Turnbull, he confidently predicted, would ''entirely demolish the government on this issue''. Talk about setting the bar high.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/malcolm-put-on-the-path-to-greatness-20100914-15ay7.html

--------------------------

The old policy of "accuse them of anything" - and with media assistance, they will have to explain the accusation.  Something like illegal evidence being allowed to be used against an accused in a Court of Law.  But of course the feast of Lawyers in the remnants of the Howard "New Order" would know that wouldn't they?

So now to the Parliament where the most divisive politician since Rattus has been blessed - not only by Cardinal Pell - but also by the next best thing - the Murdoch Media Empire.

It is a disgrace to our once proud nation, with even a prouder history of a "fair go", that the lack of regulations concerning the various forms of the media have deceived  the Australian people with their "unlawful" false information. 

We even have laws which require standards to be maintained in the contents of the Australian Meat Pie!  Fair dinkum.

So we - as Bernard Keane says - yes WE are responsible because we let them do it.

If it is true and I believe it is, that the methods used by the elite in past centuries was to keep the people hungry and poor - and it still survives under the law of "who is the richest?"

A friend of ours has just returned from a programmed trip virtually around the world and she has told us that the most shocking of her tour was of Saint Petersburg in Russia. She was totally in awe at the beauty and opulance of the city but equally saddened by the poverty and desperation of the citizens in the outback - as we would call it.

That is not Communism surely? Nor is it Socialism. It seems to me to be blatant example of Capitalism in its gross "Tourist" form.

As far as I am concerned, Capitalism is the system which makes a lot of millionaires (like in corrupt India) but - many, many more poor and disadvantaged citizens.

And if we really consider the policies of the Abbott conservatives and their wealth, with the policies of the Labor party and their efforts to establish a spread of Australia's wealth, then the Abbott nightmare will have to be completely destroyed, even if it has to be by Malcolm Turnbull.  NE OUBLIE.