BACK TO THE FUTURE: Labor's policies sound a little familiar when it comes to handling state assets.
BACK TO THE FUTURE: Labor's policies sound a little familiar when it comes to handling state assets. Contributed

MY SAY: Hypocrisy reigns in asset handling

SO LET me get this straight.

We were happy to jump up and down and scream blue murder at the prospect of selling off infrastructure assets, but we're fine with our public land being sold off?

I'm sorry but a land asset is still an asset and a sale is still a sale and it looks a lot like the State Government is now selling assets to me.

The fallout?

The council of unions was reported to be fine with the sales, provided the funding generated went back into public infrastructure.

Geez, that sounds awfully like some of the LNP's plans under Strong Choices, to use asset sales to fund major infra- structure projects.

The Mooloolah River Interchange is just one project that springs to mind.

So will we see the same level of outrage now that the Labor Government has gone down a similar path?

Doesn't look like it.

Handing land assets to either local governments or developers: well, Annastacia Palaszczuk's left-hand woman Jackie Trad felt categorising that process as wholesale asset sales was wrong.

Personally, I think it makes sense and so do many on both sides of politics, clearly.

So why can't both sides acknowledge sound policy from the other and lead, with our best interests the motivation, rather than one eye on the prize of being "the Government"?



Council supports strategy to combat waste issues

premium_icon Council supports strategy to combat waste issues

The council supports most government measures to combat waste issues

Four-time premiership-winning coach returns to lead IGS

premium_icon Four-time premiership-winning coach returns to lead IGS

The Great Public Schools Association rugby season begins on Saturday

Composter takes council to court over rejected application

premium_icon Composter takes council to court over rejected application

The council said it did not consider the proposed changes as "minor"

Local Partners