As we wait for the 2019 polling machine to get cranking, a review of recent happenings:
• Indigenous leader Warren Mundine is to be installed as the new Liberal candidate for the marginal seat of Gilmore in southern New South Wales, supplanting the existing candidate, Grant Schultz, by decree of the party’s state executive acting at the behest of the Prime Minister. Schultz promptly quit the Liberal Party when the news broke yesterday and announced he would run as an independent. Schultz’s dumping was also blasted by Shelley Hancock, member for the corresponding state seat of South Coast, who spoke of “one of the darkest days of the Liberal Party”. A local real estate agent and son of the late Alby Schultz, former member for Hume, Schultz was preparing a challenge to the preselection of incumbent Ann Sudmalis last year, and was the only remaining nominee after she announced her retirement in September. Mundine was national president of the ALP in 2006 and 2007, but quit the party in 2012 and moved ever further into the conservative orbit thereafter. It is expected the seat will be contested for the Nationals by Katrina Hodgkinson, former state member for Burrinjuck and Cootamundra.
• Following Kelly O’Dwyer’s retirement announcement on the weekend, it appears accepted within the Liberal Party that it needs to pick a woman to succeed her. Katie Allen, a paediatrician and medical researcher who ran unsuccessfully in Prahran at the November state election, has confirmed she will nominate. Michael Koziol of The Age reports other names being discussed include Caroline Elliott, state party vice-president and daughter of businessman John Elliott, and Margaret Fitzherbert, who lost her upper house seat for Southern Metropolitan region at the state election. Senator Jane Hume has reportedly encouraged to put her name forward, but announced yesterday she would not do so.
• Anne Webster, founder of young mother support organisation Zoe Support, was chosen as the Nationals candidate for Mallee at a local preselection vote on Saturday. Webster will succeed one-term member Andrew Broad, who announced his impending retirement last month after he became embroiled in the “sugar baby” affair. Rachel Baxendale of The Australian reports Webster won in the second round of voting over Birchip accountant and farmer Bernadette Hogan and Mildura police domestic violence taskforce head Paul Matheson, with three other candidates excluded in the first round.
• Nationals Senator Bridget McKenzie has announced she will not contest the lower house seat of Indi, contrary to expectations she would do so if independent incumbent Cathy McGowan announced her retirement, which she did last weekend.
• Two notable independents have emerged to challenge Tony Abbott in Warringah: Alice Thompson, a KPMG manager who worked in the Prime Minister’s Office under Malcolm Turnbull, and Susan Moylan-Coombs, founder and director of indigenous advocacy organisation the Gaimaragal Group.
Alby Schultz was the member for Hume, not Gilmore, and there has been almost no redistribution of territory between Hume and Gilmore since 2010, when Alby Schultz was last elected as member for Hume. So your assertion is factually incorrect.
Chris Bowens reply to the begging letter from Robert Gottliebsen of the Oz:
Robert Gottliebsen has again used his column on these pages to opine about Labor’s dividend imputation reforms.
Now, lest I be misunderstood, let me be clear at the outset.
I respect Mr Gottliebsen as a longstanding journalist and my disagreement with his arguments shouldn’t be seen by him or anyone else as personal attack on him. He is entitled to his views, but I am entitled to rebut them.
And I say, respectfully, his arguments are confused and somewhat s
This time he has focused less on the economics of the issue and more on the politics.
He argues that, if the election was delayed until November, the Liberals would be able to successfully campaign on this issue. Well, I appreciate his concern but let’s be clear: if Labor had only just announced this policy he may have a point.
The policy was announced almost a year ago: last March. Just before the Batman by-election. Labor won the by-election with a swing to us. We then won the Longman, Perth and Braddon by-elections with swings to us.
The Liberals ran hard on the imputation issue on the retiree-heavy Bribie Island. They were rewarded with a 10 per cent swing against them. They campaigned on the issue in the Wentworth and Mayo by-elections. They lost.
Now let me be clear, the Labor Party has not one inch of complacency about the upcoming election.
But nor do we fear a Liberal scare campaign.
Because across Australia people, including many who will not be able to access refundable credits under Labor’s policy, both respect a political party that has the courage to put its policies out long before an election and also know that some of the tax concessions that favour higher wealth individuals simply can’t go on.
In 2014-15, $5.9 billion was spent on refunding dividend imputation credits. The commonwealth government in the same year spent less than this on public schools ($5.2 billion).
This can’t go on.
Every time Mr Gottliebsen, Josh Frydenberg or anyone else draws attention to Labor’s plans, they increase the moral authority of our mandate, if we receive one, to pass this reform through the parliament.
Now, Mr Gottliebsen then praises the original Paul Keating dividend imputation reforms which operated between 1987 and 2000. He calls it “brilliant policy”. I agree.
That’s why I want to return dividend imputation to the original Keating model.
Every criticism that is made of our policy would have to apply to the operation of the original Keating model.
Mr Gottliebsen reckons our plan discriminates in favour of industry funds and has previously used emotive language about “union mates”.
Well, put aside the fact industry funds are jointly managed by unions and employers. The fact is industry funds are treated the same way as retail and bank funds. And all these funds pay tax.
Allowing them to use franking to offset that tax is a fundamental principle of avoiding double taxation.
In fact, it is tax refunds to non-tax-paying SMSFs and individuals which is the anomaly in our tax system: no other element of our personal income tax system involves refundable credits. None.
Finally Mr Gottliebsen has accused me of “telling Australians to invest overseas”.
Mr Gottliebsen is entitled to his argument but he is not allowed to assert I have said things that I have not. I have not encouraged or recommended investors to do anything.
What I have done is point out that if people are making investment decisions solely on the basis of franking credits, the tax system is then distorting investment when we are meant to ideally have a non-distortionary tax system.
And, just yesterday, The Australian published comments from the University of Melbourne’s Professor Kevin Davis, formerly the chief economist of the government’s Financial Systems Inquiry, who commented on dividend imputation: “It wasn’t meant to lead to zero taxation of corporate income which occurs when dividends are paid to investors on zero marginal tax rates and rebates paid.
“That has created a significant economic distortion and, while removing the rebate may be painful for those who have structured their investments to maximise gains from this tax arbitrage, such a change is warranted.”
And just remember, 92 per cent of individual taxpayers are unaffected by Labor’s reforms to refundability and dividend imputation.
Let me finish by inviting your readers to imagine a world, for the sake of the argument, in which every shareholder is a retired non-taxpayer.
In this world, the tax office would collect tax at the prevailing corporate rate from business and then we would refund every single dollar to the company owners: the shareholders. The corporate tax rate would effectively be zero.
Some people might think that’s a good thing. I don’t.
And we’ll be asking the Australian people at the election to agree with us.
Chris Bowen is the Australian Labor Party’s treasury spokesman.
Goll says:
Friday, January 25, 2019 at 12:27 am
Barney
Michael would be googling with prayer.
Apparently there was a problem with the NSW/VIC interconnector at some point as the flow was changed from Victoria being a exporter to become an importer.
Otherwise he’d be looking for 8000 blackedout houses!
Well Goll clearly doesn’t have a clue.
Won’t somebody think of the grandparents ? Wee Robert has been cranking up the violins lately. Just doing his bit in the great Coalition Scare War of 2019 I suppose. Mind you he does not sound confident of victory 🙂 “The ALP is set to win a May election by one of the biggest margins in our history. ?
.
.
Robert Gottliebsen can’t recall any group of politicians being so ruthless in their treatment of battling retirees and grandparents as Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen’
https://outline.com/Cs8RXt
Anybody who wants to post Coal, gas or Nuclear has a future should read and understand this post first. The sanest contribution I have seen for a long long time.
Bryon says:
Friday, January 25, 2019 at 12:49 am
Here be ramble.
I see that 3 coal fired power stations had outages or reduced capacity on 25 Jan. And AEMO had to call on big manufactures to reduce consumption.
Yay centralised power.
Amongst them was the Whyalla steel mills. Yep the city is still there. Guess Abbotts repeal of the carbon ‘tax’ saved it.
Actually Whyalla is being saved and the mills will soon be powered by solar and pumped hydro. So they will able to absorb loss of power from the grid and carry on.
Near Port Augusta there are large solar power farms being built, including at least one with heat sinks they can produce night time power.
There is a massive greenhouse factory producing tomatoes, with much of it’s energy needs powered by solar and using the solar to desalinate water for the crop.
Further south is the Tesla battery. Only 100mW, but apparently quite effective, and profitable, as it can kick in much quicker than generated power to smooth out spikes in demand.
Coal or nuclear rely on a few large power plants. It is an old way of thinking.
The future of power is renewables coming from many smaller commercial plants and domestic installations. It will use a mix of power solutions connected to a robust grid. A much bigger proportion of power will be sourced from local production. Residential and small commercial sharing power in their suburb or town.
The grid will resemble the internet. With many interconnections and a little bit of the total flow going through each connection.
Besides the environmental benefits this is especially important to smaller countries like Australia., which currently depend on a few generation assets. Right now, some country that is unhappy with us and has long range missiles or just one missile submarine could devastate the whole eastern grid to the extent it would be out of action for months.
With a highly interconnected and dispersed source of power we have a much more robust energy system.
I find it strange that many folk who barrack for coal, would also be the same folk that claim to be defenders of the nation. Yet they work against our economic and security interests.
Frednk
Thanks for clearing that up.
Have a nice day.
BiGD,
You could have built a surf boat shape around one of these:
🙂
Chris Bowen nails it. Thanks Steve.
The telling stat for me is that 92 per cent of taxpayers are not affected.
Tell that to the Tories and their cheer squad in the media who are winding the fear knob up to 11.
There will always be winners and losers in any changes to tax. We have had too many winners for too long. It’s all about fairness.
Rex: ‘They really need to simplify down the messaging’
Rex critercising Labor again.
If you want to o be taken seriously as a ‘Labor over Liberal’ preference giver, please provide a (some/any) critercism of the LNP.
Until you do, you are just another LNP promotor.
[‘…more than half of Americans blamed Trump for the shutdown.’]
https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/us-senate-blocks-measures-to-end-month-long-shutdown-20190125-p50tkh.html
PeeBee says:
Friday, January 25, 2019 at 10:13 am
Just heard on Jon Faine that a mushroom farmer in Nagambie couldn’t use its own solar power during the blackout yesterday.
Apparently, the solar power has to go into the grid first and then drawn back out to run the farm.
Does anyone who knows about these things can confirm that is the case?
You can design it to operate so it must be grid connected,not grid connected or both. It’s a design issue.
Frednk
What exactly did you clear up again?
Currently 3 coal-fired power stations are down in the Latrobe Valley in Victoria.
How embarrassing for the coal worshippers.
Goll says:
Friday, January 25, 2019 at 11:13 am
Frednk
Thanks for clearing that up.
Have a nice day.
I’d explain, but there is a lot of nonsense posted on technical subjects and the nonsense just keeps coming even if you explain. If you interested I will explain what an inter-connector does and why power flow reverses, and why it is expected. It is however pretty basic stuff.
PeeBee @ #1553 Friday, January 25th, 2019 – 11:21 am
grow up
C@tmomma @ #1553 Friday, January 25th, 2019 – 7:19 am
That was the general idea! 🙂
“BiGD,
You could have built a surf boat shape around one of these:
…”
Pretty likely that the project would have entailed using a pulley system with sliding seats – like the indoor rowing machines you see in gyms & positioned inside the ‘boat’ on top of the trolley wheels connecting to the track.
Take a look at this rowing bike:
https://youtu.be/KMZSwYf7jxQ
AS an alternative, take a look at this:
https://youtu.be/vpc81M-2SlA
A timely image reminder…
https://twitter.com/georgebludger/status/830211810590482432?lang=ar
Frednk
Ths farmer had a farm.
The farm is connected to the grid.
The farmer’s panels connect into the grid.
The farmer pays for the electricity used less the electricity he/she feeds into the grid.
To check the outage, the farmer’s electricity supply must be connected to the grid.
If the farmer has installed a cut out switch and isolates his/her installation from the grid than the farmer can run a generator into his system and have power.
Is that clear?
It seems you were not quite understanding what I said about the interconnector having some ‘change over’ problems last night.
The problems were temporary, nothing you wouldn’t expect when an interconnector reverses direction.
The temporary problem did not cause any blackouts of significance.
Because of the points so eloquently outlined by Byron last night.
Do you have a clue now?
Soros unloads on Xi Jinping, Putin:
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/mortal-danger-facing-society-billionaire-george-soros-unloads-on-china-20190125-p50tkl.html
Meanwhile, Trump remains mum on comrade Putin – can’t think why.
Steve Davis @11:07 “That’s why I want to return dividend imputation to the original Keating model.”
Should do the same with Super.
Re Robert Gottliebsen, that was a very interesting analysis. I haven’t read his latest article, so can’t comment further than that.
Mr Gottliebsen is a long-standing and respected economics commentator, but some of the recent stuff I have read of his when it’s politically sensitive just looks like standard Murdoch hackery.
This from Chris Bowen is the real ALP weakness, and if it is exploited will send votes to Clive and Pauline. To put it bluntly either in his understanding of tax policy and economics or in his politics he is no AOC.
Avoiding double taxation is not a fundamental principle. The fundamental principle is that two separate legal entities pay tax on their separate taxable incomes. Franking credits is an almost inexplicable exception to the rule. (I’m not a huge fan of consolidation but I would grant it is an almost explicable exception to the rule). Your plumber doesn’t get a tax credit for the tax you paid out of the money you paid him. In fact a good plumber is going to take your fully taxed payment and then it is going to be hit by GST and what is left still be taxable to him.
What dividend imputation is, is a logic and an idea from the trickle down text book. It is, predominantly rich people avoiding having their wealth taxed. It has a role to play when you are on your knees, naked and starving and begging for capital in your economy, when you don’t care how you get screwed by that capital. We are not in that world.
Sorry Rex if I have offended you, but pointing out the fact that you endlessly promote the LNP by continuing to critercise Labor is hardly a matter of my age. It has more to do with the fact that you endlessly critercise Labor and NEVER critercise the LNP.
If the facts offend you, change the facts.
Mavis Smith says:
Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 10:48 pm
Itza, Late Riser:
Bizet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2MwnHpLV48
-0-
I’ve heard countless versions of the Pearlfishers duet since the early 1950’s. And I know arguments about “bests” can be a bit tedious. But none has come close to the first time I listened to Robert Merrill and Jussi Bjoerling in 1950. It still makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdb94HbyRko
Rossmcg
Re the 7%.The SMH had an article on that a few weeks back. I wish I could find it again ! Anyway, they included a breakdown of the 7% and how much moola they were worth. Suffice to say not much in the way of “battlers” to be found among them. Although if they lived in Point Piper they might be looked upon as such by the locals.
Gottliebsens reply in reply to Bowens response to his begging letter.
Let me explain simply the nub of where Chris Bowen and I differ over the so-called retirement and pensioners’ tax. I think once most Australians, including many ALP supporters, understand the fundamental pillars that underpin my view, they will be on my side rather than that of the Treasurer in waiting.
But first I want to express my appreciation to Chris Bowen for his willingness to debate the issue and I urge my readers to read every word he has written.
I might be old fashioned, but I believe passionately in two pillars of Australian taxation policy: The first pillar is that people in the same financial position (i.e. have the same assets and income) should be treated the same. Since federation all political parties have endorsed this anti-discrimination policy. Until now.
Secondly, where there are longstanding retirement rules under which people arrange their future when they cease working, there should be extensive grandfathering when fundamental changes are proposed. I am afraid both sides of politics have strayed from this pillar, but I can’t recall any group of politicians being so ruthless in their treatment of battling retirees and grandparents as Bill Shorten’s ALP.
Let me set out in the clearest possible terms how Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen are dismantling the first and second pillars. I believe they have been extremely poorly advised so I will put forward some ideas help them adjust their policy to conform with the above two pillars which I believe help unite our society.
Until now, both parties had an agreed policy whereby shareholders in a company would not be double taxed on company profits. Accordingly, when you receive a dividend from a company that dividend forms part of your taxable income. But you receive a credit for the tax already paid by the company (it’s called a franking credit) so there is no double taxation. If you are a retiree and have no other taxable income, of course you receive the corporate tax refund in cash.
If Chris Bowen had declared that all non-earning retirees can no longer receive the cashback refund or, where there were exemptions, then those exemptions applied to all people in that classification, I would have declared that his retirement and pensioners’ tax complied with the first pillar.
Instead, Shorten and Bowen discriminated between people with the same assets and income thus trashing the first pillar for the first time in our history.
Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen declared that if you had no taxable income but saved your money through an industry or certain retail funds then you would receive your cash refund entitlement “in full”. I repeat “in full”.
By contrast, if you are in exactly the same financial situation, again with no taxable income, but saved outside of superannuation or saved via some retail funds or most self-managed funds then you would not receive a cent of your cash refund entitlement. I repeat not a cent. There are more than a million Australians being discriminated against this way — probably more women than men.
There was an exemption for pensioners but again there was blatant discrimination — if you did not register by a set date you got hit by the tax. Never in our history has any set of politicians ever engaged in such blatant and unfair discrimination.
The ALP shadow ministers have minders who insulate them from the pleading letters/emails from salt-of-the-earth older Australians who have been hit hard while their retired friends in the same financial position are totally unaffected.
By contrast I have no minders to shield me. I am human and I let the letters/emails from wonderful people create anger and I described the industry funds as ALP mates. That was not fair. They have won the superannuation wars fair and square and not on a mates basis.
Shorten and Bowen defend their blatant discrimination by saying that because the industry and big retail funds happened to have members who were salary earners and paid tax, those salary earners’ tax payments can be credited to the retirees so they can receive their corporate tax cash refunds. That’s an insult to the intelligence of ordinary Australians. To mix up the taxes paid by one member of a fund with the tax status of an entirely separate person breaks all the rules. It’s a complete nonsense.
So, if the retirement and pensioner tax is to be fair it must apply to everyone in the same tax income/asset bracket and cannot exclude those in retail and industry funds. All must have their cash franking credit refunds blocked
Of course, we all know that if everyone was subject to the retirement and pensioner tax it would spark a riot among grandparents and retirees and would enrage their children.
So, if we are making the tax comply with the first pillar outlined above and apply it to all people equally, then we must grandfather it to comply with pillar two.
I would suggest that everyone be given a $15,000 limit on their cash franking credits. Make it a fixed sum so it will be reduced by inflation over the years. If Chris Bowen is right that there is a pool of rich people out there who will pay most of the tax, then this will not greatly affect his revenue. But while I can’t prove it, I think he is wrong. I believe the vast bulk of the $55 billion in projected revenue will be raised from battlers. If I am right then fair grandfathering would decimate the income projections.
The ALP is set to win a May election by one of the biggest margins in our history. So, Chris Bowen will claim that he has a mandate. But the Australian population is justifiably so angry with the Coalition that they want to teach it a lesson. In my view, a May election will be about venting voter anger against the Liberals and not the policies of either party. But under the accepted practice, Chris Bowen is entitled to claim a mandate.
So, after the election the retirement and pensioners tax will become law. We are going to be stuck with a precedent that promotes taxation discrimination. Who knows what politicians will do next time. With some justification, I don’t believe Bill Shorten fully understood this when he originally endorsed the policy.
Unfortunately, the ALP has made promises that spend the money. But there is a way out. The real issue is the level of franking credit benefit. Cut the total franking credits benefit (not just those credits received in cash) from 100 per cent of tax paid to say 95 or 90 per cent and end the illegal use of franking credits by international investors. While many will oppose this, the measure conforms with my two pillars and does not create an incredibly dangerous and divisive precedent that shatters salt of the earth Australians.
Robert Gottliebsen
steve davis @ #1573 Friday, January 25th, 2019 – 10:44 am
Nope, he lost me there. Taxing dividends paid to shareholders as personal income to the shareholder is not and has never been “double taxation”.
WeWantPaul
Damned right re the imputation. Always saw it as a nice little tax ‘evasion’ for the wealthy.
Robert Gottliebsen has long had a murder boner for an Australian Aquisition of the F-22 Raptor. Notwithstanding that it isn’t available for export. Or that its production run ended a decade ago. Or that it is based on a 1980s Air Superiority Doctrine that barely applies. Or has 1980s Avionics. Or that the F35 already has a proven advantage or the Raptor in all multipurpose combat roles expect for the one that doesn’t likely apply – either very much or at all (within visual range close air combat). Not to mention that this now relic would cost 4 times the fly away cost of an F35 and costs 3 times as much to operate.
Gottliebsen should just retire and enjoy his franking credits while he still can.
Its 8 % of the population who would probably never have voted Labor in their lives. Its always the rich that squeal the loudest.
I’m sure Chris Bowen is looking forward to the new senate straightening out his hotch potch of franking credit policy.
ar
Tell that to the ATO
.
This prevents double taxation – that is, the taxation of profits when earned by a corporate tax entity, and again when a recipient receives a distribution.
https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Imputation/
beguiledagain:
Yes, that version is a pearler (pun intended). Shame that Bjoerling died so young. He was arguably the best tenor of the 20th century.
Mavis Smith @ #1560 Friday, January 25th, 2019 – 11:21 am
Greg Sargent hits the nail on the head:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/01/24/there-is-only-one-way-break-trumps-pathology-pelosi-has-found-it/?utm_term=.ce7f478a8421
[‘Alex Salmond, the former first minister of Scotland, has been charged with multiple counts of sexual assault and two of attempted rape.’]
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/24/alex-salmond-scotlands-former-first-minister-arrested
steve davis
Thanks. Chris nails it.
And great to compare it to schools funding.
Labor is winning this argument, as they are with negative gearing and capital gains tax changes
I can’t wait for Chris Bowen’s reply to Robert Gottliebsen’s reply to his reply! 😀
Dire Straits summed up the franking credits.
https://youtu.be/wTP2RUD_cL0
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2019/jan/24/donald-trump-latest-news-today-live-government-shutdown-senate-vote
According to a new poll, released today, American’s are more polarized and pessimistic than ever — but also more inclined to vote. Trump’s approval rating during the shutdown came in at 42% with 40% responding that they would support the President “no matter what”, but an undeclared Democratic opponent still leads by 10 points nationally.
“Based on the results of this first survey of 2019, the battle of 2018 will carry forward with an even more engaged, more re-aligned and politicized country, to produce an election like nothing we have seen before” the pollsters from Stanley Greenberg, Democracy Corps & Greenberg Research wrote in a memo released with the findings. Here are the rest of the results:
The Democratic margin is growing. Democrats prevailed by 8.6 points nationally in 2018, and in this first poll of 2019, the Democratic candidate for President is ahead by 10 points, 51 to 41 percent, with 5 percent volunteering third party candidates. (Just 3 percent are undecided in a generic presidential ballot against Trump.) That leaves the Trump vote 5 points short of 2016, which would push him back dramatically back behind the Electoral College blue wall. He is losing independents by 11 points and is losing a quarter of moderate Republicans.
Voters are nationalized politically. Fully 92 percent of those who voted for Democrats in 2018 are voting for a Democratic presidential candidate, and 90 percent of those who voted Republican in 2018 are voting for Donald Trump in 2020. All voters of both camps have fully polarized and translating their preferences nationally.
The re-alignment continues. The Democratic candidate is winning Hispanics 62 to 32 percent, millennials 64 to 26 percent, millennial women by a daunting 79 to 16 percent, unmarried women 71 to 22 percent, and even white unmarried women by a two-to-one margin (62 to 30 percent). Every one of those numbers in the Rising American Electorate pushes the 2018 blue wave a step further.
White working class women are sending a message. They currently give the Democrat a 3-point lead over Donald Trump, 49 to 46 percent.
CNN reporting that Trump’s staff have drafted the national emergeny order which will take $7 billion in funds allocated by Congress for other programs to fund the border wall.
Trump threatened this action when he first shut down the government. Now that all his other bullying efforts have failed epically, this emergency order will be his only way to save face and, most importantly, to obviate another bollocking from Murdoch’s minions and Rush Limbaugh etc.
In 2014-15, $5.9 billion was spent on refunding dividend imputation credits. The commonwealth government in the same year spent less than this on public schools ($5.2 billion).
This can’t go on.
This is the point for me.As soon as Labor display sensible economic management the MSM start crying, only because it targets the rich.
If it was a policy against union members or a reduction of penalty rates, it would be the greatest economic policy ever seen.
I will explain once and that is it.
The interconnectors connect two portions of a grid with there own generation capacity. The aim of the market operator is to match system generation capacity with use. That match can be met with power flowing to or from other states.
The direction of power flow changing from Victorian export to import on the NSW interconnector simple means that power is being imported from NSW. As several large Victorian coal generators tripped it is to be expected. There is nothing wrong with the interconnector.
As to the farmer; he actually has several options depending on what he wants to spend.
He can have a system that shuts down when the grid is lost. This is the common solution and the cheapest.
He can add batteries and have a system that disconnects the grid on loss of grid supply and have the system keep on trucking; we will see more of these.
Or he can be stand lone; I believe we will see more of these as rural lines are decommissioned.
This is the way it is technically; now feel free to respond with any ill informed nonsense you like.
Goll says:
Friday, January 25, 2019 at 11:37 am
Frednk
Ths farmer had a farm.
The farm is connected to the grid.
The farmer’s panels connect into the grid.
The farmer pays for the electricity used less the electricity he/she feeds into the grid.
To check the outage, the farmer’s electricity supply must be connected to the grid.
If the farmer has installed a cut out switch and isolates his/her installation from the grid than the farmer can run a generator into his system and have power.
Is that clear?
It seems you were not quite understanding what I said about the interconnector having some ‘change over’ problems last night.
The problems were temporary, nothing you wouldn’t expect when an interconnector reverses direction.
The temporary problem did not cause any blackouts of significance.
Because of the points so eloquently outlined by Byron last night.
Do you have a clue now?
Rex
“”I’m sure Chris Bowen is looking forward to the new senate straightening out his hotch potch of franking credit policy.””
Admit it Rex, your a LNP plant!.
Any Waterlooites in the Bludger Lounge ?
.
The battle for Waterloo: up to 20 towers more than 30 storeys high
https://outline.com/csek3V
C@tmomma:
[‘Greg Sargent hits the nail on the head:’]
Yes, he certainly does, Pelosi having Trump’s measure.
F-35 Demo Team pilot practices new maneuvers
https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1739104/f-35-demo-team-pilot-practices-new-maneuvers/
steve davis @ #1580 Friday, January 25th, 2019 – 11:55 am
They can buy the biggest soapboxes.
Also, note how Gottliebsen’s reply to Chris Bowen couched his defense in terms of Chris Bowen and Bill Shorten threatening 2 fundamental pillars of tax policy, yada yada. Not whether what they were doing was right or wrong but whether it ‘attacked’ convention, a shibboleth of Conservatism. Well, old-fashioned Conservatism.
However, if you follow Gottleibsen’s thought processes to their ‘logical’ conclusion, what he is saying is that it’s okay for a government to make changes to retirement income policy that positively benefits the retirees but you must not make changes that may redress an imbalance, because that is classed as negatively affecting retirees and that’s not allowed in his book.
Which, if you draw that thread out a little bit longer, what Gottliebsen is proposing is that a positive but inequitable change to retiree’s incomes can be done, even up to that the point where it egregiously tips the scales in their favour and totally bends the original intent of the policy out of shape.
Well, that’s just not right!
Doesn’t Bowen’s argument there apply to dividend imputation refunds per se, and not just those with zero taxable income?
I am also bemused how this initiative will save the government so many billions but only affect so few people. Just the types who will alter their investments accordingly.
That’s…not much of a message. Seriously, WTF?