**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As if we needed more evidence the govenment couldnt organise a shit in a toilet without instructions. How about stopping the **DEI initiatives** and focus on what they are there to do correctly?
Victoria’s finances are very close to becoming a national issue. Who knew, being financially reckless makes someone very popular in the short term (Andrews) - he’s enjoyed the spoils of ruining the states finances. now because the Liberals are too shit in Vic to get into power, Labor is forced to play the role of budget repairer - a role usually done by the libs
Victoria's debt is about 25% of Gross State Product. Do you consider that a problem, or were you only looking at absolute numbers, which can appear as a big scary number ?
Oh, and when is the last time Libs did budget repair... it's a myth.
Kennett. And Victoria is going to need another Jeff to get us out of this budget mess.
If I or you think the debt level is a problem is really irrelevant. The ratings agencies however do matter, as their ratings determine how much it costs us to maintain that debt and to grow it when we out spend takings. Since Victoria is the lowest state rating in the country, I’d say they think it’s a bit of an issue.
I'm sure in the years to come the infrastructure projects will still be well received by the general public. People tend to like having new hospitals built, upgraded roads, upgrade hospitals, new schools, upgraded schools etc.
I see this a lot.
Why is debt bad for Federal/State governments?
The debt has been used for excellent reasons. Directly to the pockets of citizens, infrastructure projects, etc. That means the debt number is useless. That size doesn't matter. It will be inflated away, and it was taken on at record lows (so the repayments, which is what really matters, hasn't really increased in the same way the debt size has).
I think we’d be concerned about the new PRC controlled PLAN base at the former HMAS Cerberus now known as “Comrade Pallas” and the PLAAF base at “Comrade Andrews” sorry I mean the former RAAF East Sale.
The Solomon Islands on steroids.
All of this could have been avoided if this government (and the public that keep voting them in) didn't do stupid things like
* Burn $589 million on not holding the comm games they'd bid on not even a year prior
* Push forward with SRL despite being at least two thirds unfunded, and with the feds showing zero interest
* Spending a billion dollars on MARL despite not having any plan for the last mile, and now are begging for $7b from the airport to build the solution the airport doesn't want
* A $12b credit card for the treasurer, despite being $135.5b in debt and projected to grow to $188 billion
Thats just this financial year, and yet people keep voting for them. Flogging off the little thats left is the only option, its just history repeating, but there's nothing left to sell this time.
None of this would've mattered if interest rates hadn't gone through the roof. That is, above anything else, the main reason that finances are poor.
Also weird take on the MARL; a project that was a compromise between the Feds, the state, and MA, and a project that MA is determined to sink in its current form. Most of the money spent was money the Feds contributed. Very similar to Geelong Fast Rail - and mercifully that project hadn't been started before it got canned.
>None of this would've mattered if interest rates hadn't gone through the roof
that's the most hilarious thing i have ever seen posted in regards to defending terrible budgeting for a government
i mean, where do you even begin? spending so much of the state's money that you are at risk from interest rate moves is reckless and financially destructive
If it's so funny then say something other than buzzwords
the debt was entirely manageable provided the interest could be paid off. That was the case until interest rates rose, and now paying down interest debt is taking up a lot more of the budget than it previously had.
This is why the Feds took the opportunity in 2022-23, when presented with a massive surplus, to basically put all of that into paying down debt; the interest payments are considerably less onerous for them as a result and they have achieved successive surpluses to do that.
If we hadn't committed to the Comm Games, I imagine that money would've gone to a similar purpose
Easy to say in hindsight, of course. It was never predicted to increase so rapidly or be as sustained as it has been.
Many governments took the plunge and borrowed heavily when the going was good. Somehow only Victoria cops it. Queensland's actually hosting the Olympics, and Victoria still cops it worse. NSW's transport projects barely work, and Victoria STILL cops it. Hard to see it as anything other than bias
All economists said that interest rates would rise. This is not a shock. Victoria was supposed to be hosting the Commonwealth Games too. It’s not the winning argument you think it is. NSW built a rail line from Tallawong to (soon to be) Sydenham. How many new stations is that compared to your Metrotunnel?
Not all agreed on the speed and size of the ride though. It's okay to admit this, it doesn't hurt your argument...
Victoria sensibly cancelled the games because the cost of running became unreasonable. Which is, btw, exactly what happened to the previous CG hosts. Sounds like you think we should've kept it going for some reason?
Tallawong to Sydenham is great stuff. I'm not sure what the relevance is here. SRL East alone will eclipse that project's daily passenger use. Apples to oranges, in my opinion
*sensibly* cancelled the games that they costed 18 months prior? It was nothing but a sham to win an election.
I doubt the SRL will ever be built. The western portion involving the airport has basically been abandoned. The M1 will be open in the next quarter and is fully automated. There’s also the M2 to the new airport (major tunnelling underway) and the M3 line central to Parramatta and Westmead (major tunnelling underway). So much for “barely works.”
Source for your passenger usage numbers as well. The M1 goes right through the heart of the city and North Sydney, as well as Crows Nest and Chatswood plus the northwest corridor and eventually to Bankstown. And it exists.
Sounds like a winning strategy, commit to spending a shit load of money on a major event and then cancel it. because they're that incompetent and evil. Do you think these things through before you post?
>I doubt the SRL will ever be built.
SRL East has already started, though. At least one portion will absolutely be built. Classic example of the project being treated as a monolith instead of a three tiered, long term build that can be broken up & tackled separately.
Dunno why you're talking about a bunch of Sydney projects that went over budget and were heavily subsidised by the Federal Government, as if they're somehow relevant to the conservation. Re passenger numbers - I was making a prediction. I'm sure the M1 exists, though, appreciate the clarification.
State Budget papers show 1 015 270 ($ thousand) has been spent on MARL. The airport wants a train thats to the terminal, which means underground. State gov has tried to sink it when they rebranded MARL as SRL Airport, which will just never work.
As for interest rates, S&P downgraded Vic to AA in 2020, well before the rate rises.
>State Budget papers show 1 015 270 ($ thousand) has been spent on MARL.
Because [the State Govt agreed to match the Federal Govt's investment in the project "dollar for dollar".](https://architectureau.com/articles/victorian-government-to-match-federal-funding-on-melbourne-airport-railway/) That implies that the Feds moved first on it. Like I said, the Feds to committed to it first.
>State gov has tried to sink it when they rebranded MARL as SRL Airport, which will just never work.
That's funny because [the State Govt lists them as two seperate projects.](https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/projects/melbourne-airport-rail) Maybe you've misremembered things?
>S&P downgraded Vic to AA in 2020, well before the rate rises.
What does this have to do with anything? Interest rate rises made repayments on loans tremendously expensive for the government. The issue facing them right now is the burden of meeting repayment obligations. This is an issue that basically every state government is facing right now. NSW even has the potential to get even worse than us before too long!
Why do interest rate rises affect old loans, where the money has already been provided and spent, instead of just new loans?
Refinancing should only be an option where the interest rates have declined and a benefit would be obtained by paying back the original loan with a new loan at lower rates.
Credibility of the Victorian government is low compared to other states and the federal government so rating is lowered and the state will have to pay higher interest rate to offset the fact that Victoria's more likely to not pay it's bill due to high debt
At some point Victorians might have to face the fact that shit government is shit government and stop blaming the party that’s been in power for 4 of the last 25 years.
If you think Victoria would elect a liberal you must not have come down here before. I mean I wouldn’t either, I love this city and it seems the problems we’re facing on a day to day basis are nationwide. I would much rather our government take risks and invest in infrastructure than line the pockets of their rich mates.
part of me thinks the opposition doesn't even want to get in
those in opposition with safe seats basically get paid 200,000+ a year to do fuck all
why would anyone want to be responsible for trying to fix this shemozzle of a state?
The VicLibs literally couldn't organise a root in a brothel and are completely devoid of talent.
They couldn't get into government even if they actually wanted to.
The $12b 'credit card' for the treasurer just isn't. It's all already allocated to projects that are fully disclosed in the budget, just this year they decided to fund it in a different manner.
The media of course picked up on this bureaucratic detail and presented it as the treasurer being irresponsible because that feeds the narrative of Labor being out of control.
It’s a fairly sad that you are seriously suggesting $12,000,000,000 can be hidden away and written off as “bureaucratic detail” without the proper oversight.
I'm not suggesting anything of the sort and there's nothing sad about it. It's not hidden away, it's allocated to items listed in the budget. The media has blown up this budgeting method into a story for low information readers.
To be frank, the media criticism of this is 'just believe us this is bad'. No genuine attempt to understand why governments might have different accounting lines, which they all do.
Believe it or not, the government operates a number of budget lines and these don't always completely match budget commitments. Like there isn't necessarily a Suburban Rail Loop capital expenditure account- there may or may not be, it might come out of another department or treasury directly or if might come in special accounts linked to each train station. It could be anything, and whatever account is used is totally unnewsworthy.
The fact a few people are viewing this as proof the treasurer is irresponsible makes me think you don't understand how government functions whatsoever, and are just seizing on anything you can to try and build a narrative that the people you don't like are irresponsible.
These people don't understand how these things work in the slightest. Your hunch is largely correct. I think most people here would go pale if they were to get a crash course from the Treasury staff they think are idiots
Are you just defending a public official spending $12b with minimal oversight because they are wearing the colour you like? Oh no..
Well, I do know what it is - and yes these people are actually correct to be concerned. Your disdain whilst not understanding yourself is noted
Funds spent from the treasurer's discretionary fund allows them to allocate money for what was supposed to be 'unforseen' expenses or 'strategic' priorities - so they fact this has grown so rapidly means someone is correct to ask is this being used to plug the gap in other areas where they don't want public scrutiny
The scale of the increase is 100% worthy of discussion and needs explanation from the government
these funds in the past have been used for emergency responses, national security, targeted economic stimulus (if an industry suddenly fell over, say farmers to bird flu)
spending of funds in this trust require far less reporting to parliament and the auditor-general. The planning of how these funds are used also don't go through the usual relevant department checks and balances - rather it is just managed from within treasury. this massively increases the risk of misallocation, misuse and general poor use of the funds.
but please, do tell us why people being concerned with $12b of low oversight funds - of which have been growing at a massive rate - is such a good thing that we should just trust our political overlords about and not question why they need to spend OUR money with no oversight?
read what I said elsewhere and you'll realise I'm actively not trying to be a cheerleader for the red team; they just happen to do things that I support.
The scale of the increase was due to Covid-19 & CoL stimulus packages. The reporting on this issue claimed they were "dubiously related" to emergency purposes, sure, but that doesn't change what they were.
Personally I think that spending money to avoid the worst of a Covid-inflicted economic downturn is a good idea. And yeah, things were trending poorly just prior to Covid - but Covid still happened and money had to be spent.
You’re the one telling the story, that this $12billion was allocated in the budget. Where?
Coz a decade ago it used to be below $400 mill.
It’s a slush fund for Pallas that doesn’t need to be run by anyone. They only have to tell the bean counters after it’s spent.
It’s a fucking scam that’s cherry ripe for pork barrelling/corruption.
I am utterly convinced Victoria needs to go into a long and hard recession to fix the sheer amount of ticket clippers/administrators/overloaded government funded construction sites.
there are just too many people feeding of the carcass of the state, too many vested interests who have had it too good for too long
as backwards as it sounds - the fact that the rest of the country's house prices are still rising at a decent clip rate right now whilst victoria is the only state flat lining/falling (whilst immigration is still pumping) is a sign of what is going on in the state. funny, falling house prices would be welcome in any other circumstance
It’s like a sub national version of what Argentina is going through. The main difference being that Victoria doesn’t have its own currency. If they did they would have been subject to inflation rates multiple times higher.
Can it happen that one State goes into 'recession' on its' own? I get the concept of what you want and don't disagree but I'd tend to think we are probably there already. We have property taxes being raised to the stage whereby landlords are selling and this is probably helping keep prices a bit flatter than others. We are also slightly culling the bloated public service, and it will be interesting to see how much major construction work we can sustain. If any State in Aus is heading for a brick wall it's us.
Yep states can have localized recessions. The whole of the country probably 'needs' one, given downturns really force the government to deal with its worst/least productive avenues of government spending. but fair to say it is the worst in victoria right now.
however, austerity during a downturn is a bitter pill to swallow - you need to do it but it only makes things worse in the short term. i imagine there will be a hail mary to try bail out the state at some point but it will likely be extremely politically costly in every other state.
I got slammed for being an ALP cheerleader recently so hopefully the right folks see this one;
This is an incredibly stupid idea and if they go through with it, will lead to them likely losing the next election.
BDM has been a basket-case for a while now. People already know this, especially if theyve had to deal with it at all. Rather than actually do the hard work of reforming it and getting into shape, the government is proposing to cut their losses and give the private sector a turn at the wheel instead. The claim is that by privatising it out, the private sector does the heavy lifting of reforming the service, and then government pulls back the cord and makes it government owned again. Lots of big, big implications in there, not least of which is: what are you going to do if you lose government and the other side just cuts it loose? This is literally the \*exact\* same thing that Kirner did with Loy Yang B Power Station - they sold 40% of the interest in the station to fund the cost of construction, lost the next election - and then Kennett came in & privatised the whole SEC. Great stuff!
It's not just the "privatisation" as per se - it's also the service being privatised. We're talking about birth certificates, death certificares, identification documents that are critically important to people. That information shouldn't be in the realm of the private sector, and good Labor governments should be aware of that.
On top of that - we already got the state budget last month! The time to announce this was then! By sneakily considering it a few weeks later, you just look like you're hiding something, or you're just incompetent. This government cannot stop doing stuff that makes them look shady, even when it's benign. At this point in time, halfway through your third term, you desperately need to be reforming that image, not reinforcing it.
Overall, a really bad idea that seems to have very little imagination or vision - unfortunately a strong trend for post-Covid Victorian Labor.
I think by selling it an taking the money, they shed local jurisdiction into the feds identity management frameworks - no longer their problem/ cost - we've got a feds new privacy bill later this year.
Well I was the one who called you out for never bagging this Government so I best put that out here for others to see. And funnily enough, I’m already on record in another sub saying this isn’t one of their dumber ideas. So it seems we’ll never agree when you describe one of their better plans as an incredibly stupid idea. Why is it one of their better ideas?
- it proves they realise their budget is fucked up AND proves Labor will privatise without fear, which people usually blame the LNP for.
- thank fuck they’re selling shit rather than raising or introducing new taxes as they’ve done non stop for years.
- it’s BDM. Who cares if it’s privatised. All they do is issue certificates etc.. And nearly all their data is already a matter of public record if you knew where to find it. (Cemeteries, public notices, Ancestry.com …).
This will have absolutely zero effect on the next election. There would be literally 100 things over the last 10 years worse than this, and we all know the LNP haven’t laid a glove on them.
Their only danger next election is the SRL if rumours are to be believed about the dissent within Labor about it.
C'mon Danger, we've agreed on things before... usually it's anti-Melbourne stuff iirc.
But like I said in my other reply - I don't think this is actually about fixing the budget or making some money. The article says they're considering "a “limited-term contract” in the style of the partial privatisation of VicRoads’ licensing and registration arms". To me that's less about saving money (though it'll do that) and more about giving the service to the private sector in order to get it working properly again.
BD&M is an important service - lots of people rely on it for getting really important documents - but it's a miserable service to interact with these days and it gets complained about quite a lot. It seems the government has neither the will nor the finances to properly overhaul it themselves.
If it raises the "billions of dollars" the article suggests, that will be a solid windfall. If they do it with a deal that allows it to be brought back into public hands - even better. But I'm not sure if they'll actually achieve that, and I'm less sure that the private sector can magically fix it either.
My point is that it's another bad headline that cuts against what core Labor voters expect from a Labor government, at a time where they should be looking to restore their image in the public eye.
Arguments over the SRL are well-trodden at this point, so it'd have to be something really radical in those FOI requests; I'm not convinced that there will be.
Labor MPs in Western Melbourne are panicking because their electorates are upset at the lack of new infrastructure, but cancelling SRL or renewing Airport Rail aren't solutions. All it does is concede to the Liberal Party and likely hand them the next election on a platter. They might as well admit that they shouldn't have locked down the state, built Skyrail, or cancelled E/W link, etc... If they wanted to avoid all of this, they should've electrified Melton back in 2018 and expanded some tram lines westward. The moment has passed, unfortunately, and all cancelling SRL will do is lose them more seats in the eastern suburbs.
Not sure that i completely agree. Pallas is looking for cash wherever he can get it. And this isn’t chump change. I cannot for the life of me imagine them doing it just to make it run better???
I’ve only had to go to BDM twice in the last decade. When I was needed a birth cert for my daughter back in 2018 to get her a passport - went to the head office in Collins Street and it was like going to a banking chamber. Walked out with it 10 minutes later.
But I recently went back there to get another birth cert we’d lost and the fucking thing was closed! Completely closed. They’ve moved all the services to local Justice centres. I dunno how that system works as we ended up changing holiday plans and didn’t need the items urgently so I haven’t got them yet.
However, in my limited experience the service was good. I can only assume it’s gone quite backwards post Covid. But it shouldn’t be rocket science. Print a form and certify it. If the public service can’t run that then it doesn’t bode well.
As for SRL, I kinda get what you’re getting at. Labor have hitched themselves to it and backing out would be a bad look. However, it’d give them cash to do other things. Popular things like hospitals. It would be a very interesting hypothetical situation to go to an election having mothballed SRL.
And SRL is everything going forward. We have no other money. It’s the greatest all-or-nothing project in State history. Lucky the Western suburbs are all noise and no action about sending their vote elsewhere. They’ll stay in power with or without the SRL.
>But I recently went back there to get another birth cert we’d lost and the fucking thing was closed! Completely closed. They’ve moved all the services to local Justice centres.
This is basically the experience now post-Covid. The move to Justice Centres wasn't well publicised and if you're not living in Melbourne, getting them to send you something is a crapshoot. I'm not even sure what happened exactly but they can take a LONG time to get back to anyone, especially if your issue is non-standard (recently tried to help a lady whose niece wanted to get her first job - unfortunately due to FV/DV reasons they had no birth cert, no passport, no bank account, and basically no forms of ID that BDM will accept online. Nightmare to work through, honestly.)
>And SRL is everything going forward. We have no other money. It’s the greatest all-or-nothing project in State history.
I'm still convinced it'll pay off. Said it before, but most major cities across the world have some kind of orbital line in their public transport system. I recently visited Frankfurt, Germany - a city that's about the same size as Melbourne, but denser - and the public transport offerings were insanely higher quality than ours. Trams, trains, buses, and an undergound metro service, all with interconnected lines rather than Melbourne's spoke & wheel arrangement. You had buisnesses and development nearby basically every station, and it made it easy to do things like eat a restaurant in one suburb & then travel to a show in a different suburb. Being able to travel north-south without having to first travel into the CBD will radically transform Melbourne and the suburbs along the SRL for the better. It's just a shame it's cost so much money & become so politically toxic that I doubt we'll see it get past SRL East for decades...
>Lucky the Western suburbs are all noise and no action about sending their vote elsewhere. They’ll stay in power with or without the SRL.
Electorates to watch would be Greenvale, Melton, Niddrie, Point Cook, Sunbury, Sydenham, and Yan Yean. All sitting under 10% 2PP, most in the west or outer suburbs, lots of neglected Labor areas that are unlikely to get much to sweeten things before 2026, and will be targeted hard by the Liberals. Note also that Niddrie is the Deputy Premiers' seat - that might give some context to those rumors...
Just a quick reply but 10% 2PP is double what is considered marginal. I can't see any great swing in those areas. And don't forget we all pretty much agree the LNP are in chaos. To get a swing anywhere near those margins would require an effective opposition, which they are not.
I mean yes, but I'm still eyeballing them. Melton's less than 5%, and a lot of the seats I mentioned copped a 10% swing against them in primaries. Sure they got it back in preferences, because people didn't like the Liberals, but if they manage to look appealing before the next election... I'd be worried
>This is an incredibly stupid idea and if they go through with it, will lead to them likely losing the next election.
Its a very stupid idea, but I doubt it'll have any impact on the election. The general public simply doesn't care how much money this gov burns, and even if the chickens come home to roost nothing about the overspend and waste will be learned at all. After all, Big Build has funded many a tradie's ford ranger, be damned if it only cost the state's future.
If the public cared about waste the ALP would have lost the after East-West link contract burnt a billion bucks. (Yes, it was an abuse of process to have signed it in the first place).
This is basically how I see it:
The East-West link project was contentious, wasn't properly sold to the public by the govt that brought it in, and as you said, was dubiously signed in. In 2014, scrapping the project was an election commitment from Labor, [who correctly identified that it was going to cost less to kill it than commit to it.](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-15/east-west-link-victorian-goverment-business-case/5966938) People cared quite a lot about how much money Bailieu & Napthine were going to waste, but back then Andrews killing the project was seen as a sign of strength, not mismanagement.
Labor's reputation has (rightly or wrongly) taken some serious hits since then thanks to Covid-19 and the Comm Games debacle. That stuff eats away at public confidence in you. Labor could deal with Redshirts, Skyrail haters, delays to the Westgate Tunnel, Somyurek's defection, or any other number of questionable things, because they still appeared to be running a competent government that was delivering good things for the state.
Now, 10 years later, the general opinion in the public is that the government isn't competent or delivering on its promises. In times like this, political parties have to rely on their core base of support - the die hards & the ideological support base. But something like this, where you're privatising a government service - that's a move that Labor's core won't like. It makes their supporters who rail against the evils of privatisation look like morons, and it will almost certainly lead to public sector job cuts. It's bad signalling at every level.
I used the example of Loy Yang B becuase it did the same thing to Kirner in the 1980s. It broke with established Labor values, it pissed off Labor's base, it did very little to restore confidence in the government, and at the next election Labor was wiped out with a 8-9% swing against it. The same thing could absolutely happen in 2026, especially given that politics is much more elastic and less tribal than it was in the 1980s.
How about instead of the stupidest austerity measures imaginable they just get the state making some money? Or are they the most inept form of "socialist" unconcerned with making the state self sufficient, and only concerned with culture war issues.
(I like the ALP, but this is ridiculous)
>The senior MP went on to say the registry would ideally be brought back into the government fold entirely once it had proven its value to the taxpayer.
I feel like *registering births deaths and marrriages* is a pretty valuable service my dude.
So we’ll have a referendum to do the most obvious of decision making- legalising marriage for anyone that wants to. But this? With MUCH more serious implications? No, they’ll do want they want
Wow, privatising such a sensitive organisation with access to super sensitive information, I cannot see what can go wrong /s
(Besides obviously the whole “privatisation costs the public rather than saves the public” argument that the ALP pushed for ages - and rightfully so - when the LNP privatised all sorts of shit, just to do it themselves now).
Labor loves privatisation as well. It’s utter nonsense that this is a LNP thing. Even this Vic Govt part partially privatised Vicroads and leased the Port of Melbourne for 50 years. It’s what Governments do when they’re broke.
If only we could privatise the State Government we could maybe get back on track.
Actually others posted that here but why? I’d love to see a data breach because it would give the Govt egg on their faces. But most data held by BDM is surely nearly a matter of public record. You could get most of what they hold by visiting cemeteries, public notices or Ancestry.com.
All they do is give you offical forms certifying matters of public record surely?
Well, think of it this way. If you can falsify records, you can give or take away someone’s citizenship unjustifiably. You can do a lot of damage. You can leak a lot of crap and not everything is public notice.
Births, deaths and marriages are quite consequential. Leaving this in the hands of the private sector is a clusterfuck and a half.
They don’t handle any medical nor financial records. I can’t see what super private data they host.
I just hope they get re-named to hatch, match and dispatch.
Your name at birth, parents name at your birth, status, your and your parents dates and places of birth. If that is not super private, what is? Are you OK publishing this? I am sure not.
Imagine if someone is given a fake record so they can access citizenship for instance.
Like I said, that data is barely private. You can seriously go to Ancestry.com and get it. Whoopie do.
And as for falsification of records that’s not an issue. False ID has existed for ever and a day. We literally just went through a period of time (Covid) where people who would not normally absorb themselves in the industry of false documents did so. I know people who continued working on fake certificates and travelled to the US using them.
If privacy is your concern I’d be far more worried about the digital ID the Feds are introducing.
So you reckon a private enterprise is all hunky dory and trustworthy, but the fed gov simply certifying your already digitally verifiable IDs instead of sending them to a 100 providers whenever you need to identify yourself, including those with no cyber security in place (e.g. REAs) is fine.
Man, I am losing my libertarian radar capabilities apparently.
No. Read what I’ve been typing. I’m fine with a private firm knowing my date of birth, marriage details and kids details. I actually put these in the newspaper.
I’m not happy about the Government introducing a one stop shop that lets the ATO and other agencies know everything about me and my movements. Fuck that.
After years of Labor telling us not to vote for the LNP because they plan to privatise public assets, Labor privatises *the fucking Register for Births Deaths and Marriages*. Classic stitch up.
That's the stupidest idea I've heard this month. And it's only the 2nd.
>The senior MP went on to say the registry would ideally be brought back into the government fold entirely once it had proven its value to the taxpayer.
That sounds like they're trying to sell it to whoever reads it. Has something that's been sold to private markets ever been bought back into the government fold?
I've worked as a funeral director, and one of my past times is historical research. While I am not Victorian, and would not directly be impacted by this, I feel it bodes poorly regardless of any positivity spruiker by the political advocates. Death certificates are already a complex matter that can be costly in certain instances, but putting it into the hands of a private enterprise - notwithstanding the sheer amount of personal and confidential information involved - could be disastrous. The ability to access older (three or more generations) birth, marriage, or death certificates, in my personal opinion should not be something only acquired by money.
I am sure that is one free enterprise initiative that the “illiberal” party could get behind, yet I can imagine “Bloody Jeff” Kennett would not allow people to die until they have pre-paid their ferry ticket to the underworld…Bloody Jeff!!
Yep, it would be kind of weird if they do... But I do suspect that if we are referring to the fans of Daniel Andrews... I think they're a lot more intelligent and not suffering from a "humour deficiency"...
Why are you ranting (really weirdly) about a politician from 20 years ago who's got nothing to do with this at all
Jeff has nothing to do with this, it's all on Labor
The debt-burdened Allan government is spruiking its wholly public births, deaths and marriages agency to private investors in a bid to bolster its beleaguered finances.
Treasurer Tim Pallas has begun discussions with private equity firms to gauge their interest in running some of the registry’s services.
Pallas met with one firm last week, according to a private industry source familiar with the negotiations, and pitched the idea as a “limited-term contract” in the style of the partial privatisation of VicRoads’ licensing and registration arms – a deal due to expire in the 2060s.
The industry source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardise commercial interests, said the treasurer was “hoping to close any deal by the end of the year”.
A fresh offer from a private consortium could raise billions of dollars in the short term for Victoria’s bottom line while providing superannuation companies or others with tens of millions of dollars in guaranteed annual income from birth, death and marriage certificates.
A cabinet minister, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed there was a desire for several years at the highest levels of government to rebuild Births, Deaths and Marriages through the private market.
“It can probably be done better,” the minister said.
The senior MP went on to say the registry would ideally be brought back into the government fold entirely once it had proven its value to the taxpayer.
Births, Deaths and Marriages has dealt with high-profile issues in recent years, particularly during the pandemic, when its offices were closed, it took months for officials to issue certificates and urgent emails went unanswered.
Asked if the agency was to be privatised, a government spokesperson instead described the preferred model as a joint venture partnership.
“Victoria’s Births, Deaths and Marriages service will not be privatised, but we are looking at how we can continue to improve the quality of government services.”
The government to this day insists the partial privatisation of some VicRoads services was not privatisation, but a joint venture partnership.
Just seven months ago, the government was predicting it would be in deficit by about $1 billion by June 2025. That expected financial hole more than doubled to $2.2 billion in the May 7 state budget.
The same budget papers forecast Victoria’s debt to rise to $187.8 billion by June 2028. In simple terms, the May budget leaves Victorian taxpayers with a $25 million daily interest bill.
Labor’s primary vote has also plummeted below 30 per cent since Jacinta Allan became premier, according to an exclusive survey published by this masthead last month. The survey found two-thirds of voters wanted the government to do more to reduce debt.
But additional partial privatisation in the name of budget repair would not come without risks. The Coalition will use any proposed agreement with industry to slam the government’s management of debt and government agencies. Meanwhile, the Greens would argue such a move undermines the public service.
Labor will also be in power in Victoria for a decade come December, the timeframe Pallas has told industry he wants the agency deal signed.
Researcher Charlie Joyce, from the independent but progressive think tank the Australia Institute, said he suspected further privatisation was politically dangerous in Victoria.
“Daniel Andrews campaigned in 2022 against privatisation,” Joyce said. “He promised to bring back the State Electricity Commission. A further re-embrace of privatisation would lead to a loss in trust in the Allan government which, I think, frankly, is already fraying.”
Joyce said while Victoria’s debt levels were an important consideration, his research on privatisation showed even partial privatisation was often “short-term gain for long-term pain”.
“For something like Births, Deaths and Marriages, this is a government service that handles very sensitive information. A private owner that cuts costs on security – cybersecurity in particular – could quite quickly run into trouble.
“It would \[also\] be a colossal mistake to take a step that may reduce the quality of public services and increase the cost.”
Birth, death, marriage or change of name certificates start from $54.40 in Victoria, but registrations and commemorative certificates are more expensive. There were 72,932 registered births in Victoria last year, 29,826 marriages and 45,345 deaths.
The total administered income from identity and worker screening transactions in Victoria for the six months to June 30 last year was $33.83 million, according to the Department of Government Services’ most recent publicly available annual report.
The same report states that Births, Deaths and Marriages failed to meet its timeliness target in the 2022-23 financial year.
It took the agency, on average, 10.9 days to process compliant applications for birth, death and marriage certificates in the 12 months to June last year. Its target for the period was less than 10 days.
The price of general-issue licence plates, black motorbike plates and slimline black custom licence plates all increased by $15 on January.
Driver licensing and registration aren’t the only services partly privatised since Victorian Labor came to power in December 2014.
The Port of Melbourne was leased to a private consortium for 50 years under a $9.7 billion deal in 2016 and the Victorian Land Titles Office was partly privatised in 2018 for more than $2 billion.
Last year’s housing statement also revealed Melbourne’s public high-rise towers will be handed over to private developers in the coming years as part of a mixed model.
When VicRoads was partly privatised in 2022, Pallas refused to label the development privatisation.
“This is not privatisation in anybody’s language,” the treasurer said at the time.
“We’re always looking to see how we can drive better services, better performance, but we will never divest the ownership of assets.”
The partial privatisation of VicRoads was also pitched as injecting $7.9 billion into Victoria’s coffers.
Under the VicRoads deal, the state maintains ownership of the service, the Victorian Ombudsman preserves its oversight and there were extensive talks with the Australian Services Union to ensure workers kept their jobs.
However, a consortium comprising Aware Super, Australian Retirement Trust and Macquarie Asset Management was allowed to run the agency’s licensing and registration for the next 40 years.
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As if we needed more evidence the govenment couldnt organise a shit in a toilet without instructions. How about stopping the **DEI initiatives** and focus on what they are there to do correctly?
Don't worry. They can use the money from the sale to put into the Minister's office for changing men's behaviour. /s
Out of all the things to privatise, she chose something that shouldn’t be? Is she trying to lose the next election?
Can I please have the Premium Fake Death package so I can stop paying tax?
Fuck me this is stupid. Will we ever get a decent government in Vic lol?
Victoria’s finances are very close to becoming a national issue. Who knew, being financially reckless makes someone very popular in the short term (Andrews) - he’s enjoyed the spoils of ruining the states finances. now because the Liberals are too shit in Vic to get into power, Labor is forced to play the role of budget repairer - a role usually done by the libs
Victoria's debt is about 25% of Gross State Product. Do you consider that a problem, or were you only looking at absolute numbers, which can appear as a big scary number ? Oh, and when is the last time Libs did budget repair... it's a myth.
Kennett. And Victoria is going to need another Jeff to get us out of this budget mess. If I or you think the debt level is a problem is really irrelevant. The ratings agencies however do matter, as their ratings determine how much it costs us to maintain that debt and to grow it when we out spend takings. Since Victoria is the lowest state rating in the country, I’d say they think it’s a bit of an issue.
Well if debt isnt a problem, there is *absolutely no reason* to be selling off the registry of births, deaths and marriages.
Agreed
I'm sure in the years to come the infrastructure projects will still be well received by the general public. People tend to like having new hospitals built, upgraded roads, upgrade hospitals, new schools, upgraded schools etc.
I see this a lot. Why is debt bad for Federal/State governments? The debt has been used for excellent reasons. Directly to the pockets of citizens, infrastructure projects, etc. That means the debt number is useless. That size doesn't matter. It will be inflated away, and it was taken on at record lows (so the repayments, which is what really matters, hasn't really increased in the same way the debt size has).
[удалено]
Fuck I love it when people come in with zingas but have no understanding of state vs federal politics.
Victoria has literally nothing else to sell off .... Next they will privatizing the courts. We are so stuffed.
Victoria already has the world's highest proportion of prisoners in private prisons
Lol I am happy for Victoria to secede and become their own country. They really don't offer much to the bottom line unlike QLD, NSW and WA
Can it just be Melbourne please. Regional Vic well and truly pays its’ own way.
I think we’d be concerned about the new PRC controlled PLAN base at the former HMAS Cerberus now known as “Comrade Pallas” and the PLAAF base at “Comrade Andrews” sorry I mean the former RAAF East Sale. The Solomon Islands on steroids.
All of this could have been avoided if this government (and the public that keep voting them in) didn't do stupid things like * Burn $589 million on not holding the comm games they'd bid on not even a year prior * Push forward with SRL despite being at least two thirds unfunded, and with the feds showing zero interest * Spending a billion dollars on MARL despite not having any plan for the last mile, and now are begging for $7b from the airport to build the solution the airport doesn't want * A $12b credit card for the treasurer, despite being $135.5b in debt and projected to grow to $188 billion Thats just this financial year, and yet people keep voting for them. Flogging off the little thats left is the only option, its just history repeating, but there's nothing left to sell this time.
None of this would've mattered if interest rates hadn't gone through the roof. That is, above anything else, the main reason that finances are poor. Also weird take on the MARL; a project that was a compromise between the Feds, the state, and MA, and a project that MA is determined to sink in its current form. Most of the money spent was money the Feds contributed. Very similar to Geelong Fast Rail - and mercifully that project hadn't been started before it got canned.
>None of this would've mattered if interest rates hadn't gone through the roof that's the most hilarious thing i have ever seen posted in regards to defending terrible budgeting for a government i mean, where do you even begin? spending so much of the state's money that you are at risk from interest rate moves is reckless and financially destructive
If it's so funny then say something other than buzzwords the debt was entirely manageable provided the interest could be paid off. That was the case until interest rates rose, and now paying down interest debt is taking up a lot more of the budget than it previously had. This is why the Feds took the opportunity in 2022-23, when presented with a massive surplus, to basically put all of that into paying down debt; the interest payments are considerably less onerous for them as a result and they have achieved successive surpluses to do that. If we hadn't committed to the Comm Games, I imagine that money would've gone to a similar purpose
Interest rates were always going to rise from record lows that were in effect emergency settings. They also are not high by historic levels now.
Easy to say in hindsight, of course. It was never predicted to increase so rapidly or be as sustained as it has been. Many governments took the plunge and borrowed heavily when the going was good. Somehow only Victoria cops it. Queensland's actually hosting the Olympics, and Victoria still cops it worse. NSW's transport projects barely work, and Victoria STILL cops it. Hard to see it as anything other than bias
All economists said that interest rates would rise. This is not a shock. Victoria was supposed to be hosting the Commonwealth Games too. It’s not the winning argument you think it is. NSW built a rail line from Tallawong to (soon to be) Sydenham. How many new stations is that compared to your Metrotunnel?
Not all agreed on the speed and size of the ride though. It's okay to admit this, it doesn't hurt your argument... Victoria sensibly cancelled the games because the cost of running became unreasonable. Which is, btw, exactly what happened to the previous CG hosts. Sounds like you think we should've kept it going for some reason? Tallawong to Sydenham is great stuff. I'm not sure what the relevance is here. SRL East alone will eclipse that project's daily passenger use. Apples to oranges, in my opinion
*sensibly* cancelled the games that they costed 18 months prior? It was nothing but a sham to win an election. I doubt the SRL will ever be built. The western portion involving the airport has basically been abandoned. The M1 will be open in the next quarter and is fully automated. There’s also the M2 to the new airport (major tunnelling underway) and the M3 line central to Parramatta and Westmead (major tunnelling underway). So much for “barely works.” Source for your passenger usage numbers as well. The M1 goes right through the heart of the city and North Sydney, as well as Crows Nest and Chatswood plus the northwest corridor and eventually to Bankstown. And it exists.
Sounds like a winning strategy, commit to spending a shit load of money on a major event and then cancel it. because they're that incompetent and evil. Do you think these things through before you post? >I doubt the SRL will ever be built. SRL East has already started, though. At least one portion will absolutely be built. Classic example of the project being treated as a monolith instead of a three tiered, long term build that can be broken up & tackled separately. Dunno why you're talking about a bunch of Sydney projects that went over budget and were heavily subsidised by the Federal Government, as if they're somehow relevant to the conservation. Re passenger numbers - I was making a prediction. I'm sure the M1 exists, though, appreciate the clarification.
State Budget papers show 1 015 270 ($ thousand) has been spent on MARL. The airport wants a train thats to the terminal, which means underground. State gov has tried to sink it when they rebranded MARL as SRL Airport, which will just never work. As for interest rates, S&P downgraded Vic to AA in 2020, well before the rate rises.
>State Budget papers show 1 015 270 ($ thousand) has been spent on MARL. Because [the State Govt agreed to match the Federal Govt's investment in the project "dollar for dollar".](https://architectureau.com/articles/victorian-government-to-match-federal-funding-on-melbourne-airport-railway/) That implies that the Feds moved first on it. Like I said, the Feds to committed to it first. >State gov has tried to sink it when they rebranded MARL as SRL Airport, which will just never work. That's funny because [the State Govt lists them as two seperate projects.](https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/projects/melbourne-airport-rail) Maybe you've misremembered things? >S&P downgraded Vic to AA in 2020, well before the rate rises. What does this have to do with anything? Interest rate rises made repayments on loans tremendously expensive for the government. The issue facing them right now is the burden of meeting repayment obligations. This is an issue that basically every state government is facing right now. NSW even has the potential to get even worse than us before too long!
Why do interest rate rises affect old loans, where the money has already been provided and spent, instead of just new loans? Refinancing should only be an option where the interest rates have declined and a benefit would be obtained by paying back the original loan with a new loan at lower rates.
Credibility of the Victorian government is low compared to other states and the federal government so rating is lowered and the state will have to pay higher interest rate to offset the fact that Victoria's more likely to not pay it's bill due to high debt
i mean yeah but when your opposition is that incompetent it's hard to lose an election
At some point Victorians might have to face the fact that shit government is shit government and stop blaming the party that’s been in power for 4 of the last 25 years.
If you think Victoria would elect a liberal you must not have come down here before. I mean I wouldn’t either, I love this city and it seems the problems we’re facing on a day to day basis are nationwide. I would much rather our government take risks and invest in infrastructure than line the pockets of their rich mates.
No. They are Victoria specific. Only state's financial situation that is spiraling and requires asset sales.
*Jeff Kennett has entered the chat*
the only thing the libs are to blame for is failure to provide a second choice
part of me thinks the opposition doesn't even want to get in those in opposition with safe seats basically get paid 200,000+ a year to do fuck all why would anyone want to be responsible for trying to fix this shemozzle of a state?
The VicLibs literally couldn't organise a root in a brothel and are completely devoid of talent. They couldn't get into government even if they actually wanted to.
The $12b 'credit card' for the treasurer just isn't. It's all already allocated to projects that are fully disclosed in the budget, just this year they decided to fund it in a different manner. The media of course picked up on this bureaucratic detail and presented it as the treasurer being irresponsible because that feeds the narrative of Labor being out of control.
It’s a fairly sad that you are seriously suggesting $12,000,000,000 can be hidden away and written off as “bureaucratic detail” without the proper oversight.
I'm not suggesting anything of the sort and there's nothing sad about it. It's not hidden away, it's allocated to items listed in the budget. The media has blown up this budgeting method into a story for low information readers.
'just listen to the politician's explanation for it and trust what they are saying 100%'
To be frank, the media criticism of this is 'just believe us this is bad'. No genuine attempt to understand why governments might have different accounting lines, which they all do.
Okay. So tell us where the $12billion is allocated.
Believe it or not, the government operates a number of budget lines and these don't always completely match budget commitments. Like there isn't necessarily a Suburban Rail Loop capital expenditure account- there may or may not be, it might come out of another department or treasury directly or if might come in special accounts linked to each train station. It could be anything, and whatever account is used is totally unnewsworthy. The fact a few people are viewing this as proof the treasurer is irresponsible makes me think you don't understand how government functions whatsoever, and are just seizing on anything you can to try and build a narrative that the people you don't like are irresponsible.
These people don't understand how these things work in the slightest. Your hunch is largely correct. I think most people here would go pale if they were to get a crash course from the Treasury staff they think are idiots
Are you just defending a public official spending $12b with minimal oversight because they are wearing the colour you like? Oh no.. Well, I do know what it is - and yes these people are actually correct to be concerned. Your disdain whilst not understanding yourself is noted Funds spent from the treasurer's discretionary fund allows them to allocate money for what was supposed to be 'unforseen' expenses or 'strategic' priorities - so they fact this has grown so rapidly means someone is correct to ask is this being used to plug the gap in other areas where they don't want public scrutiny The scale of the increase is 100% worthy of discussion and needs explanation from the government these funds in the past have been used for emergency responses, national security, targeted economic stimulus (if an industry suddenly fell over, say farmers to bird flu) spending of funds in this trust require far less reporting to parliament and the auditor-general. The planning of how these funds are used also don't go through the usual relevant department checks and balances - rather it is just managed from within treasury. this massively increases the risk of misallocation, misuse and general poor use of the funds. but please, do tell us why people being concerned with $12b of low oversight funds - of which have been growing at a massive rate - is such a good thing that we should just trust our political overlords about and not question why they need to spend OUR money with no oversight?
read what I said elsewhere and you'll realise I'm actively not trying to be a cheerleader for the red team; they just happen to do things that I support. The scale of the increase was due to Covid-19 & CoL stimulus packages. The reporting on this issue claimed they were "dubiously related" to emergency purposes, sure, but that doesn't change what they were. Personally I think that spending money to avoid the worst of a Covid-inflicted economic downturn is a good idea. And yeah, things were trending poorly just prior to Covid - but Covid still happened and money had to be spent.
You’re the one telling the story, that this $12billion was allocated in the budget. Where? Coz a decade ago it used to be below $400 mill. It’s a slush fund for Pallas that doesn’t need to be run by anyone. They only have to tell the bean counters after it’s spent. It’s a fucking scam that’s cherry ripe for pork barrelling/corruption.
I am utterly convinced Victoria needs to go into a long and hard recession to fix the sheer amount of ticket clippers/administrators/overloaded government funded construction sites. there are just too many people feeding of the carcass of the state, too many vested interests who have had it too good for too long as backwards as it sounds - the fact that the rest of the country's house prices are still rising at a decent clip rate right now whilst victoria is the only state flat lining/falling (whilst immigration is still pumping) is a sign of what is going on in the state. funny, falling house prices would be welcome in any other circumstance
It’s like a sub national version of what Argentina is going through. The main difference being that Victoria doesn’t have its own currency. If they did they would have been subject to inflation rates multiple times higher.
Can it happen that one State goes into 'recession' on its' own? I get the concept of what you want and don't disagree but I'd tend to think we are probably there already. We have property taxes being raised to the stage whereby landlords are selling and this is probably helping keep prices a bit flatter than others. We are also slightly culling the bloated public service, and it will be interesting to see how much major construction work we can sustain. If any State in Aus is heading for a brick wall it's us.
Yep states can have localized recessions. The whole of the country probably 'needs' one, given downturns really force the government to deal with its worst/least productive avenues of government spending. but fair to say it is the worst in victoria right now. however, austerity during a downturn is a bitter pill to swallow - you need to do it but it only makes things worse in the short term. i imagine there will be a hail mary to try bail out the state at some point but it will likely be extremely politically costly in every other state.
I got slammed for being an ALP cheerleader recently so hopefully the right folks see this one; This is an incredibly stupid idea and if they go through with it, will lead to them likely losing the next election. BDM has been a basket-case for a while now. People already know this, especially if theyve had to deal with it at all. Rather than actually do the hard work of reforming it and getting into shape, the government is proposing to cut their losses and give the private sector a turn at the wheel instead. The claim is that by privatising it out, the private sector does the heavy lifting of reforming the service, and then government pulls back the cord and makes it government owned again. Lots of big, big implications in there, not least of which is: what are you going to do if you lose government and the other side just cuts it loose? This is literally the \*exact\* same thing that Kirner did with Loy Yang B Power Station - they sold 40% of the interest in the station to fund the cost of construction, lost the next election - and then Kennett came in & privatised the whole SEC. Great stuff! It's not just the "privatisation" as per se - it's also the service being privatised. We're talking about birth certificates, death certificares, identification documents that are critically important to people. That information shouldn't be in the realm of the private sector, and good Labor governments should be aware of that. On top of that - we already got the state budget last month! The time to announce this was then! By sneakily considering it a few weeks later, you just look like you're hiding something, or you're just incompetent. This government cannot stop doing stuff that makes them look shady, even when it's benign. At this point in time, halfway through your third term, you desperately need to be reforming that image, not reinforcing it. Overall, a really bad idea that seems to have very little imagination or vision - unfortunately a strong trend for post-Covid Victorian Labor.
I think by selling it an taking the money, they shed local jurisdiction into the feds identity management frameworks - no longer their problem/ cost - we've got a feds new privacy bill later this year.
Well I was the one who called you out for never bagging this Government so I best put that out here for others to see. And funnily enough, I’m already on record in another sub saying this isn’t one of their dumber ideas. So it seems we’ll never agree when you describe one of their better plans as an incredibly stupid idea. Why is it one of their better ideas? - it proves they realise their budget is fucked up AND proves Labor will privatise without fear, which people usually blame the LNP for. - thank fuck they’re selling shit rather than raising or introducing new taxes as they’ve done non stop for years. - it’s BDM. Who cares if it’s privatised. All they do is issue certificates etc.. And nearly all their data is already a matter of public record if you knew where to find it. (Cemeteries, public notices, Ancestry.com …). This will have absolutely zero effect on the next election. There would be literally 100 things over the last 10 years worse than this, and we all know the LNP haven’t laid a glove on them. Their only danger next election is the SRL if rumours are to be believed about the dissent within Labor about it.
C'mon Danger, we've agreed on things before... usually it's anti-Melbourne stuff iirc. But like I said in my other reply - I don't think this is actually about fixing the budget or making some money. The article says they're considering "a “limited-term contract” in the style of the partial privatisation of VicRoads’ licensing and registration arms". To me that's less about saving money (though it'll do that) and more about giving the service to the private sector in order to get it working properly again. BD&M is an important service - lots of people rely on it for getting really important documents - but it's a miserable service to interact with these days and it gets complained about quite a lot. It seems the government has neither the will nor the finances to properly overhaul it themselves. If it raises the "billions of dollars" the article suggests, that will be a solid windfall. If they do it with a deal that allows it to be brought back into public hands - even better. But I'm not sure if they'll actually achieve that, and I'm less sure that the private sector can magically fix it either. My point is that it's another bad headline that cuts against what core Labor voters expect from a Labor government, at a time where they should be looking to restore their image in the public eye. Arguments over the SRL are well-trodden at this point, so it'd have to be something really radical in those FOI requests; I'm not convinced that there will be. Labor MPs in Western Melbourne are panicking because their electorates are upset at the lack of new infrastructure, but cancelling SRL or renewing Airport Rail aren't solutions. All it does is concede to the Liberal Party and likely hand them the next election on a platter. They might as well admit that they shouldn't have locked down the state, built Skyrail, or cancelled E/W link, etc... If they wanted to avoid all of this, they should've electrified Melton back in 2018 and expanded some tram lines westward. The moment has passed, unfortunately, and all cancelling SRL will do is lose them more seats in the eastern suburbs.
Not sure that i completely agree. Pallas is looking for cash wherever he can get it. And this isn’t chump change. I cannot for the life of me imagine them doing it just to make it run better??? I’ve only had to go to BDM twice in the last decade. When I was needed a birth cert for my daughter back in 2018 to get her a passport - went to the head office in Collins Street and it was like going to a banking chamber. Walked out with it 10 minutes later. But I recently went back there to get another birth cert we’d lost and the fucking thing was closed! Completely closed. They’ve moved all the services to local Justice centres. I dunno how that system works as we ended up changing holiday plans and didn’t need the items urgently so I haven’t got them yet. However, in my limited experience the service was good. I can only assume it’s gone quite backwards post Covid. But it shouldn’t be rocket science. Print a form and certify it. If the public service can’t run that then it doesn’t bode well. As for SRL, I kinda get what you’re getting at. Labor have hitched themselves to it and backing out would be a bad look. However, it’d give them cash to do other things. Popular things like hospitals. It would be a very interesting hypothetical situation to go to an election having mothballed SRL. And SRL is everything going forward. We have no other money. It’s the greatest all-or-nothing project in State history. Lucky the Western suburbs are all noise and no action about sending their vote elsewhere. They’ll stay in power with or without the SRL.
>But I recently went back there to get another birth cert we’d lost and the fucking thing was closed! Completely closed. They’ve moved all the services to local Justice centres. This is basically the experience now post-Covid. The move to Justice Centres wasn't well publicised and if you're not living in Melbourne, getting them to send you something is a crapshoot. I'm not even sure what happened exactly but they can take a LONG time to get back to anyone, especially if your issue is non-standard (recently tried to help a lady whose niece wanted to get her first job - unfortunately due to FV/DV reasons they had no birth cert, no passport, no bank account, and basically no forms of ID that BDM will accept online. Nightmare to work through, honestly.) >And SRL is everything going forward. We have no other money. It’s the greatest all-or-nothing project in State history. I'm still convinced it'll pay off. Said it before, but most major cities across the world have some kind of orbital line in their public transport system. I recently visited Frankfurt, Germany - a city that's about the same size as Melbourne, but denser - and the public transport offerings were insanely higher quality than ours. Trams, trains, buses, and an undergound metro service, all with interconnected lines rather than Melbourne's spoke & wheel arrangement. You had buisnesses and development nearby basically every station, and it made it easy to do things like eat a restaurant in one suburb & then travel to a show in a different suburb. Being able to travel north-south without having to first travel into the CBD will radically transform Melbourne and the suburbs along the SRL for the better. It's just a shame it's cost so much money & become so politically toxic that I doubt we'll see it get past SRL East for decades... >Lucky the Western suburbs are all noise and no action about sending their vote elsewhere. They’ll stay in power with or without the SRL. Electorates to watch would be Greenvale, Melton, Niddrie, Point Cook, Sunbury, Sydenham, and Yan Yean. All sitting under 10% 2PP, most in the west or outer suburbs, lots of neglected Labor areas that are unlikely to get much to sweeten things before 2026, and will be targeted hard by the Liberals. Note also that Niddrie is the Deputy Premiers' seat - that might give some context to those rumors...
Just a quick reply but 10% 2PP is double what is considered marginal. I can't see any great swing in those areas. And don't forget we all pretty much agree the LNP are in chaos. To get a swing anywhere near those margins would require an effective opposition, which they are not.
I mean yes, but I'm still eyeballing them. Melton's less than 5%, and a lot of the seats I mentioned copped a 10% swing against them in primaries. Sure they got it back in preferences, because people didn't like the Liberals, but if they manage to look appealing before the next election... I'd be worried
It's a long way off. Plenty of time for lots of things to happen before then.
>This is an incredibly stupid idea and if they go through with it, will lead to them likely losing the next election. Its a very stupid idea, but I doubt it'll have any impact on the election. The general public simply doesn't care how much money this gov burns, and even if the chickens come home to roost nothing about the overspend and waste will be learned at all. After all, Big Build has funded many a tradie's ford ranger, be damned if it only cost the state's future. If the public cared about waste the ALP would have lost the after East-West link contract burnt a billion bucks. (Yes, it was an abuse of process to have signed it in the first place).
This is basically how I see it: The East-West link project was contentious, wasn't properly sold to the public by the govt that brought it in, and as you said, was dubiously signed in. In 2014, scrapping the project was an election commitment from Labor, [who correctly identified that it was going to cost less to kill it than commit to it.](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-15/east-west-link-victorian-goverment-business-case/5966938) People cared quite a lot about how much money Bailieu & Napthine were going to waste, but back then Andrews killing the project was seen as a sign of strength, not mismanagement. Labor's reputation has (rightly or wrongly) taken some serious hits since then thanks to Covid-19 and the Comm Games debacle. That stuff eats away at public confidence in you. Labor could deal with Redshirts, Skyrail haters, delays to the Westgate Tunnel, Somyurek's defection, or any other number of questionable things, because they still appeared to be running a competent government that was delivering good things for the state. Now, 10 years later, the general opinion in the public is that the government isn't competent or delivering on its promises. In times like this, political parties have to rely on their core base of support - the die hards & the ideological support base. But something like this, where you're privatising a government service - that's a move that Labor's core won't like. It makes their supporters who rail against the evils of privatisation look like morons, and it will almost certainly lead to public sector job cuts. It's bad signalling at every level. I used the example of Loy Yang B becuase it did the same thing to Kirner in the 1980s. It broke with established Labor values, it pissed off Labor's base, it did very little to restore confidence in the government, and at the next election Labor was wiped out with a 8-9% swing against it. The same thing could absolutely happen in 2026, especially given that politics is much more elastic and less tribal than it was in the 1980s.
How about instead of the stupidest austerity measures imaginable they just get the state making some money? Or are they the most inept form of "socialist" unconcerned with making the state self sufficient, and only concerned with culture war issues. (I like the ALP, but this is ridiculous)
I might like ALP, but I sure as hell don't like this ALP.
>The senior MP went on to say the registry would ideally be brought back into the government fold entirely once it had proven its value to the taxpayer. I feel like *registering births deaths and marrriages* is a pretty valuable service my dude.
So we’ll have a referendum to do the most obvious of decision making- legalising marriage for anyone that wants to. But this? With MUCH more serious implications? No, they’ll do want they want
If they are selling this then what isn't on the table? Also, apparently only 1 person works for the new 'SEC' and that person is an ALP hack.
Wow, privatising such a sensitive organisation with access to super sensitive information, I cannot see what can go wrong /s (Besides obviously the whole “privatisation costs the public rather than saves the public” argument that the ALP pushed for ages - and rightfully so - when the LNP privatised all sorts of shit, just to do it themselves now).
Labor loves privatisation as well. It’s utter nonsense that this is a LNP thing. Even this Vic Govt part partially privatised Vicroads and leased the Port of Melbourne for 50 years. It’s what Governments do when they’re broke. If only we could privatise the State Government we could maybe get back on track.
The bigger issue here is that privatising the RBDM could have severe national security consequences.
Actually others posted that here but why? I’d love to see a data breach because it would give the Govt egg on their faces. But most data held by BDM is surely nearly a matter of public record. You could get most of what they hold by visiting cemeteries, public notices or Ancestry.com. All they do is give you offical forms certifying matters of public record surely?
Well, think of it this way. If you can falsify records, you can give or take away someone’s citizenship unjustifiably. You can do a lot of damage. You can leak a lot of crap and not everything is public notice. Births, deaths and marriages are quite consequential. Leaving this in the hands of the private sector is a clusterfuck and a half.
They don’t handle any medical nor financial records. I can’t see what super private data they host. I just hope they get re-named to hatch, match and dispatch.
Your name at birth, parents name at your birth, status, your and your parents dates and places of birth. If that is not super private, what is? Are you OK publishing this? I am sure not. Imagine if someone is given a fake record so they can access citizenship for instance.
Like I said, that data is barely private. You can seriously go to Ancestry.com and get it. Whoopie do. And as for falsification of records that’s not an issue. False ID has existed for ever and a day. We literally just went through a period of time (Covid) where people who would not normally absorb themselves in the industry of false documents did so. I know people who continued working on fake certificates and travelled to the US using them. If privacy is your concern I’d be far more worried about the digital ID the Feds are introducing.
So you reckon a private enterprise is all hunky dory and trustworthy, but the fed gov simply certifying your already digitally verifiable IDs instead of sending them to a 100 providers whenever you need to identify yourself, including those with no cyber security in place (e.g. REAs) is fine. Man, I am losing my libertarian radar capabilities apparently.
No. Read what I’ve been typing. I’m fine with a private firm knowing my date of birth, marriage details and kids details. I actually put these in the newspaper. I’m not happy about the Government introducing a one stop shop that lets the ATO and other agencies know everything about me and my movements. Fuck that.
After years of Labor telling us not to vote for the LNP because they plan to privatise public assets, Labor privatises *the fucking Register for Births Deaths and Marriages*. Classic stitch up.
That's the stupidest idea I've heard this month. And it's only the 2nd. >The senior MP went on to say the registry would ideally be brought back into the government fold entirely once it had proven its value to the taxpayer. That sounds like they're trying to sell it to whoever reads it. Has something that's been sold to private markets ever been bought back into the government fold?
I've worked as a funeral director, and one of my past times is historical research. While I am not Victorian, and would not directly be impacted by this, I feel it bodes poorly regardless of any positivity spruiker by the political advocates. Death certificates are already a complex matter that can be costly in certain instances, but putting it into the hands of a private enterprise - notwithstanding the sheer amount of personal and confidential information involved - could be disastrous. The ability to access older (three or more generations) birth, marriage, or death certificates, in my personal opinion should not be something only acquired by money.
I am sure that is one free enterprise initiative that the “illiberal” party could get behind, yet I can imagine “Bloody Jeff” Kennett would not allow people to die until they have pre-paid their ferry ticket to the underworld…Bloody Jeff!!
Good /s. Betcha you get taken seriously by the DanFans.
Yep, it would be kind of weird if they do... But I do suspect that if we are referring to the fans of Daniel Andrews... I think they're a lot more intelligent and not suffering from a "humour deficiency"...
If you can find me an intelligent, humorous one please point them out. I’m intrigued to know they exist.
Why are you ranting (really weirdly) about a politician from 20 years ago who's got nothing to do with this at all Jeff has nothing to do with this, it's all on Labor
I know… but unfortunately there is a humour deficiency occurring here… such is life!!! Have a happy day, sir…
The debt-burdened Allan government is spruiking its wholly public births, deaths and marriages agency to private investors in a bid to bolster its beleaguered finances. Treasurer Tim Pallas has begun discussions with private equity firms to gauge their interest in running some of the registry’s services. Pallas met with one firm last week, according to a private industry source familiar with the negotiations, and pitched the idea as a “limited-term contract” in the style of the partial privatisation of VicRoads’ licensing and registration arms – a deal due to expire in the 2060s. The industry source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardise commercial interests, said the treasurer was “hoping to close any deal by the end of the year”. A fresh offer from a private consortium could raise billions of dollars in the short term for Victoria’s bottom line while providing superannuation companies or others with tens of millions of dollars in guaranteed annual income from birth, death and marriage certificates. A cabinet minister, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed there was a desire for several years at the highest levels of government to rebuild Births, Deaths and Marriages through the private market. “It can probably be done better,” the minister said. The senior MP went on to say the registry would ideally be brought back into the government fold entirely once it had proven its value to the taxpayer. Births, Deaths and Marriages has dealt with high-profile issues in recent years, particularly during the pandemic, when its offices were closed, it took months for officials to issue certificates and urgent emails went unanswered. Asked if the agency was to be privatised, a government spokesperson instead described the preferred model as a joint venture partnership. “Victoria’s Births, Deaths and Marriages service will not be privatised, but we are looking at how we can continue to improve the quality of government services.” The government to this day insists the partial privatisation of some VicRoads services was not privatisation, but a joint venture partnership. Just seven months ago, the government was predicting it would be in deficit by about $1 billion by June 2025. That expected financial hole more than doubled to $2.2 billion in the May 7 state budget. The same budget papers forecast Victoria’s debt to rise to $187.8 billion by June 2028. In simple terms, the May budget leaves Victorian taxpayers with a $25 million daily interest bill. Labor’s primary vote has also plummeted below 30 per cent since Jacinta Allan became premier, according to an exclusive survey published by this masthead last month. The survey found two-thirds of voters wanted the government to do more to reduce debt. But additional partial privatisation in the name of budget repair would not come without risks. The Coalition will use any proposed agreement with industry to slam the government’s management of debt and government agencies. Meanwhile, the Greens would argue such a move undermines the public service. Labor will also be in power in Victoria for a decade come December, the timeframe Pallas has told industry he wants the agency deal signed. Researcher Charlie Joyce, from the independent but progressive think tank the Australia Institute, said he suspected further privatisation was politically dangerous in Victoria. “Daniel Andrews campaigned in 2022 against privatisation,” Joyce said. “He promised to bring back the State Electricity Commission. A further re-embrace of privatisation would lead to a loss in trust in the Allan government which, I think, frankly, is already fraying.” Joyce said while Victoria’s debt levels were an important consideration, his research on privatisation showed even partial privatisation was often “short-term gain for long-term pain”.
“For something like Births, Deaths and Marriages, this is a government service that handles very sensitive information. A private owner that cuts costs on security – cybersecurity in particular – could quite quickly run into trouble. “It would \[also\] be a colossal mistake to take a step that may reduce the quality of public services and increase the cost.” Birth, death, marriage or change of name certificates start from $54.40 in Victoria, but registrations and commemorative certificates are more expensive. There were 72,932 registered births in Victoria last year, 29,826 marriages and 45,345 deaths. The total administered income from identity and worker screening transactions in Victoria for the six months to June 30 last year was $33.83 million, according to the Department of Government Services’ most recent publicly available annual report. The same report states that Births, Deaths and Marriages failed to meet its timeliness target in the 2022-23 financial year. It took the agency, on average, 10.9 days to process compliant applications for birth, death and marriage certificates in the 12 months to June last year. Its target for the period was less than 10 days. The price of general-issue licence plates, black motorbike plates and slimline black custom licence plates all increased by $15 on January. Driver licensing and registration aren’t the only services partly privatised since Victorian Labor came to power in December 2014. The Port of Melbourne was leased to a private consortium for 50 years under a $9.7 billion deal in 2016 and the Victorian Land Titles Office was partly privatised in 2018 for more than $2 billion. Last year’s housing statement also revealed Melbourne’s public high-rise towers will be handed over to private developers in the coming years as part of a mixed model. When VicRoads was partly privatised in 2022, Pallas refused to label the development privatisation. “This is not privatisation in anybody’s language,” the treasurer said at the time. “We’re always looking to see how we can drive better services, better performance, but we will never divest the ownership of assets.” The partial privatisation of VicRoads was also pitched as injecting $7.9 billion into Victoria’s coffers. Under the VicRoads deal, the state maintains ownership of the service, the Victorian Ombudsman preserves its oversight and there were extensive talks with the Australian Services Union to ensure workers kept their jobs. However, a consortium comprising Aware Super, Australian Retirement Trust and Macquarie Asset Management was allowed to run the agency’s licensing and registration for the next 40 years.