asx not sing_sx, page-14

More xenophobic claptrap from an ignorant Aussie.

Singapore is ranked as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, as determined by Transparency International. See for yourself at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/26/corrupt-nation-rankings-r_n_774215.html#s165594&title=Denmark__1.

So, if this is not about corruption, perhaps it is about denying the ASX some supposed right to play a key role in Asia?

Last I heard, the ASX was a government regulated but publicly owned corporation. Who exactly is the Australian government to think that they can set the strategic direction for any public company?

Then perhaps this is truly a matter of national interest? Perhaps the ASX is indeed the cornerstone of our financial systems?

If that is the case, why then is the Australian government opening our market to competitors like Chi-X?

Richard Balarkas, the head of Instinet in Europe, can't understand all the fuss about stock exchanges, or why they are perceived as being in the national interest.

"They are the equivalent of eBay for stocks and shares," he said.

"They don't raise capital, the investment banks do that. So any talk about how important they are because of their role in IPOs, issues and listings is rubbish. Exchanges are puny IT companies."

This ia a small-minded decision, made by a small-minded government.