[Spinner77]

because some clever bugger decided because it is gonna cost a bit more we should outsource the lot, it's worked out well for our trains

Yes, it's called the user-pays principle. Some say it is the loser-pays principle.

Three points.

First, there would never have been a single mile of rail built in this country if today's rules of economic efficiency had been applied then. Rail was expected to be a subsidy to industry.

Second, rail and electricity used to provide a great proportion of the apprenticeships available for the community as a whole. These were well managed apprenticeships. Young people came out of them very well trained, and with a breadth of experience you can get today only at one of our very largest companies.

How many apprenticeships are provided by rail and electricity today? Two-fifths of three-eighth of sweet Fanny Adams.

Third, the old utilities provided a form of social security. Almost anyone could get a job on the railways. It didn't pay much, but it was a job. It also provided some self-respect, and a lot more self-respect than lining up for the dole and being humiliated at Centrelink.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no Lefty. But I think the Right has fooled itself, in going along, quite uncritically, with ideas that fail the tests of common sense, and now experience over - how long? Maybe a quarter of a century.

Let's be realistic and pragmatic.