Next week being budget week, we’re likely to see little in the way of polling beyond the usual Roy Morgan, followed by a deluge the week after as the main players to take the field to gauge the public’s response. For now, there’s the following:
• YouGov has published a further result from its April 19-23 survey showing 35% support for Australia recognising Palestine as an independent state with 27% opposed and 44% unsure, with Greens supporters the most enthusiastic and One Nation supporters the least.
• The Australian Electoral Commission, which hitherto offered only the second quarter as the time when the proposed redistributions for New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia would be published, is now saying “late May/early June”. I’ve also noticed for the first time that a redistribution process for the Northern Territory began in late February. With 81,170 voters presently enrolled in Lingiari and 72,748 in Solomon, this is likely to involve a transfer of voters in Palmerston from the latter to the former. This will be welcome for Labor, as the loss of this conservative-voting area will boost their 0.9% margin in Lingiari while reducing their 9.4% margin in Solomon.
• The Liberals have announced Brendan Small, managing director of a local cleaning products firm, as candidate for the New South Wales Central Coast seat of Dobell, held for Labor by Emma McBride on a margin of 6.5%.
• Weeks after I’d forgotten about it, an advisory from the AEC that they are about to archive their Cook by-election media feed prompted me to update my own results page with what are the definitive final results. Liberal candidate Simon Kennedy scored 62.7% of the primary vote, winning at the final count ahead of the Greens with 71.3%.
• The Nationals have preselected Brendan Moylan, a Moree solicitor, as their candidate for the New South Wales state by-election for Northern Tablelands, the date for which the government appears in no hurry to announce. The by-election will choose a successor to Nationals member Adam Marshall, who was re-elected last year with 71.6% of the primary vote and is abandoning state politics at the age of 39, with media reports suggesting he hopes to succeed Barnaby Joyce in New England.
Lordbain @ #31 Friday, May 10th, 2024 – 9:26 am
God! Didn’t we laugh when Costello said it!
Agree BW. I think most protesters are protesting against the way Israel are prosecuting this war. But there is usually a minority that spoil things.
Hey ho. Do stop putting me in with a group to which I did not yesterday belong.
In my case there wasn’t the usual ‘vitriol’ at all.
There was the Eco Resort powered by a giant human hamster wheel by way of firming power but other than that…
What I do admire are the anti Labor slaggers who creatively slag what Labor is doing before they even know what Labor intends. At least they show a level of enterprise above and beyond those who actually wait to see what Labor is doing before slagging it.
First they slag Labor for not doing something. Then they slag Labor for doing it too late. Then they slag Labor for not doing enough. Then they slag Labor for doing it wrong. Some Bludgers are indefatiguables on this.
Their creativity knows no bounds.
I also admire posters like Irene who are honest about it all. ‘Facts barely matter’ according to Irene as she ploughs into yet another anti-Labor slagathon.
Then I admire the posters who simply turn every single thing into a troll post, hoping for a bite. They are tireless.
Finally, I admire the Bludgers who want to double the spending on everyone while refusing to identify what would need to be cut or what taxes would be needed to be raised. Easy as.
I did enjoy the stunned silence yesterday on one topic. We all know about the massive subisidies to the fossil fuel industry. We have, after all, seen thousands of cranky anti-Labor posts on the topic. There was a bit of a shock among those people when the Queensland budget alone collects $19 billion a year in royalties and the like from the fossil fuel industry. The critics were not at all forthcoming about how they intended to replace that $19 billion or, alternatively, what cuts to state government services they envisaged by way of a reduction of $19 billion in royalties. One in five dollars is a lot of schools and hospitals and the like, after all.
Indeed oak; one for mum, one for dad, and one for the country… I said it back then and I’ll say it now; if you need to pay people to have children because otherwise your ponzi scheme of a society/economy collapses… maybe it’s time to rethink a few “orthodox truths”
Chalmers made a political and policy mistake calling for more babies.
Tin eared and tone deaf, IMO.
I’m sorry but it’s not enough to say both sides are bad. Where we stand, Israel is the reason why a unified Palestinian State will not happen. It begins and ends with Israel because they have complete oversight and final say on anything in regard to Palestine. This war has shown Israel has no intention of achieving that, and has exposed their previous support of Hamas as a destabilising force amongst Palestinians.
It also stands that Hamas doesn’t have the capabilities to enact it’s ‘genocidal’ plan like Israel does. It’s been eye-opening to see the scale of warfare between Russia and Ukraine where they have largely been unable to annihilate cities on the scale Israel has, because they face no meaningful opposition to their air superiority.
Yes Hamas is bad, obviously, but the reality is they will probably be in charge if Palestine is to ever be a country, and that’s something we just have to deal with. As in Afghanistan, nobody in the west wanted the Taliban in charge, but we left ourselves no choice in the matter, so now we must live with the consequences.
Chalmers was just following in Costello’s footsteps
I wish, when polling on a particular issue, companies would ask something like ‘how likely is it this issue will determine how you vote?’
I’m glad 44% of respondents are unsure about Australia’s position on the two state solution. That’s honest.
Of those who have a firm view, though, how many will vote according to which party adopts that position?
I doubt it will be a key issue Rewi.
Happy Friday All!
Reposting this as I didn’t get any bites yesterday.
Been lurking and noticing the debates re global warming. After seeing the climate experts opinions on what is coming at us, it’s hard not to feel despair.
So again I am back at my theme of the quality of the people who run the country – the politicians.
When I see abject policy failures, like global warming and even fire ants, I have to question their competence at actually doing stuff! You know, managing the country.
Is it that Politicians are only expert in being politicians? These are my principals, if you don’t like them, well ….. I have others. 🙂 Maybe Rufus T Firefly would be just as good as our current mob?
To be a successful politician you have to be agreeable, make people like you. How else will people vote for you? This inherently makes you a follower, not a leader.
So as an expert in being agreeable, why would you take the time or risk to convince people of the need to do something that may inconvenience them, be it money, lifestyle, whatever. A populist doesn’t have these issues – they are absolutely giving people what they want. Usually it’s the wrong thing tho.
And being this agreeable popular person, who has to spend most of their career schmoozing their way to the top, spending all their time on personal capital, where does that give you time to learn about risk, the lessons of history, how to distil information to make good decisions, how to manage? Nope, doesn’t happen.
Of course there are exceptions, Gough Whitlam springs to mind as a politician who was sure of his ideas and sold them to the electorate. Until events conspired to screw him. But these conviction politicians are few and far between, or their convictions are wrong and bad (looking at you John Howard and ScoMo – who both lost out at being popular!)
Maybe we have been hurt with the loss of an independent, competent and courageous public service. Any old schmo could be a politician if they were advised by a good public service. Just like average people can serve on a jury, or a Motoring Enthusiast like Ricky Muir can become a good senator.
So where am I going with this rant? Oh how I wish for evidence backed policy, backed up by expert advice, implemented by competent managers and sold to the populace by effective communicators. We ain’t getting any of that anytime soon with any of the current political crop, here or overseas.
If we were serious about global warming, Albo would be using the resources of Government to inform the public of just how bad global warming is going to affect us and why we need to take radical action now! I mean big time advertising campaigns – political talking heads banging on about it all the time. But this would be disagreeable and hence anathema to a politician. So we are doomed.
Damn, that did not end well.
Good thing there is some new Dr Who tomorrow to cheer me up.
Boerwar
Are you saying that without subsidies for fossil fuels the royalties would stop?
Rewi
As an issue that over rides all other issues?
Some on both sides, but in each case tending to be concentrated enough geographically to decide the outcome in individual electorates.
There was some strong evidence from the recent UK elections that there was such a thing as an islamic vote and that this lost Labor votes which then went to minors.
Deliberately getting a zero outcome from your vote is a form of protest.
This is a bit like voting informal when you are serious about a pox on both their houses.
davidwh
Me too, but I’m really using that as an example.
When asked to rate performance on economy, environment, health etc respondents should be asked how important that issue is to them in determining their vote.
As one of the vitriolic posters regarding Australia’s position on Palestine, I agree it will likely not play too much of a role next election; maybe in certain small margin seats based on demographics. However, I think the gas announcement might have (and for good reason) made a few inner city Labor members nervous… Macnamara should be really interesting, as might Richmond
https://x.com/grogsgamut/status/1788706895320228065?s=58&t=uOUOuQOvbsFUiiFQcfJvhQ
“For a[n Aus fed gov from 2022 that likes to warn about a minority gov], yesterday’s announcement was a very good advert for having one… (and it is an advert that will be used by all Greens and Teal] candidates from now till the election) …”
Greens/ Teals no shit
Gov shit lite
Opp full of shit
UAP/ PUP all shit
PHON shite
”
Boerwarsays:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 10:36 am
Both sides have expressed genocidal vision statements.
Hamas, given a limited opportunity, demonstrated who it would implement its vision statement if only it had the power so to do. I believe there would be no difference between Heshbollah, Iran, the Houthis, Assad or various Iranian supported terror groups operating in Syria and Iraq. All have expressed genocidal intentions. For them it is not a matter of if. It is a matter of when.
On Israel’s implementation of its genocidal vision statement we get daily feeds in the MSM.
The only real ethical difference between any of the players seems to me to be ability to deliver.
Demonstrating in support of either Hamas or Israel is, IMO, demonstrating in support of genocide. State terror or non-state player terror, choose your poison.
Demonstrating in support of a unified Palestinian state is, IMO, a legitimate focus.
However, I doubt whether the various student demonstrators are at all interested in the genocidal vision statements and activities of Hamas, Heshbollah, Iran, the Houthis or Assad. Those that express open support for Hamas are, beyond a shadow of a doubt, supporting terrorism.
”
After the holocaust,which happened before and during WW2, Jews said that they don’t feel safe living in Europe and wanted a homeland for themselves. When asked by US and UK for the location, Jews choose a place in Asia, which was called as Palestine by colonial powers of that time.
US and UK agreed to that and promised help in creating Israel and provide protection for them against the wishes of Arab countries.
I read somewhere that US bought off Saudi Arabia Shiek’s support for the initial stages in exchange for Saudi Arabia to do whatever they want to do in Muslim world.
As per reports a lot of Palestinians were displaced during the creation of Israel. Like IRA, PLO was found to take what they thought was theirs.
Long story short, PLO chairman Arafat and Israel PM Rabin were brought together by Clinton administration to sign off on peace deal. Arafat baulked at last moment asked for some time to discuss with colleagues. Palestinians never got a better deal afterwards.
Meanwhile, Rabin was killed by an Israeli far right extremist, which allowed Netanyahu, who was considered far right idealogue at that time, to come to power and that deal was ignored by Israeli government. Then Palestinians were ill-treated badly over last 25 years.
But the the Muslim rulers never cared much about Palestinians except Jordan King
My point is that it is festering issue which became worse over a period of time because Netanyahu remained PM over a long time.
Some Palestinians thought PLO became too soft after Arafat was no longer called a terrorist by West and started a terrorist organisation called Hamas and got help from Iran. Things got even worse after Hamas came on to scene. The rest as they say is history.
It is like ball of thread, where knots are tied to keep it intact and the then the ball is thrown away. The thread gets rolled up into a mishmash and you no longer can untie the knot.
‘Rewi says:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 10:55 am
Boerwar
Are you saying that without subsidies for fossil fuels the royalties would stop?’
——————
No. What I am saying is that the peeps who have been stating that the fossil fuel industry contributes nothing, including several repeat offenders on Bludger, have been fibbing all along.
But before I proceed. WE MUST SWITCH TO RENEWABLES ASAP.
What I am saying is that if we stop Queensland’s fossil industry tomorrow then someone has to find $19 billion to plug the state budget gap. Add NSW and WA and Federal royalties and the total is well over $25 billion a year.
As noted in numerous previous posts I have little time for the level of candour in the public policy debate around climate action in Australia.
The grim reality is that Australia getting to zero net fifty is politically unachievable.
Yesterday was yet another disgraceful day of posturing and moral panic. Not a single proponent of getting rid of fossil fuels was prepared to state how they would replace Queensland’s $19 billion a year. Someone else’s problem?
Try being the first party to announce that you are going to launch a program to kill off our domestic lifestock industries. No meat. No dairy. 16 years of livestock industry left. That is the implication of the Greens Zero Net Forty. After than no dairy and no meat and a series of smashed rural and regional towns and cities.
From the Greens on this topic: silence. That is just one example.
I give Labor credit for starting on the systemic changes we need to make. I don’t give it credit for getting us to where we need to be to get to zero net fifty. Because they won’t. Neither will anyone else.
The political burden of doing anything at all is incessant.
BW once again misrepresents the response he got regarding “What will make up for lost revenue” that he received from multiple people…. so let’s reiterate the cliffnotes version.
Yes, people will likely be worse of if the action undertaken to address anthro climate change is undertaken
Yes, even if australia expanded the tax base heavily, we would still likely (over the long term) have to make tough choices on funding priorities
Yes, the people from the neoliberal establishment know this, have always known this, and their lies that the transition will see everyone as a winner are reprehensible (and in a just world they would pay a price, which they likely wont) – again the fact albo wont release a sanitised version of the ONI report into the risks of climate change from almost 2 years ago speaks volumes.
So BW… we know that the revenue loss is going to hurt. We keep saying this.
But hey, if you think the revenue loss from fossil fuel royalties etc is bad, wait to you see what anthro climate change is going to do to the bottom line…
Lordbain
Sure.
That $19 billion is more than Queensland’s entire education budget.
Over to you.
Lordbain @ #54 Friday, May 10th, 2024 – 10:47 am
Indeed. The wheels are falling off the Great Migration Ponzi scheme so beloved of the duopoly – time to try something new to prop up our flickering economy.
Boerwar @ #68 Friday, May 10th, 2024 – 11:18 am
Well, we could start by removing subsidies for fossil fuels.
Then, we could tax the fossil fuel companies themselves.
Then, we could put a price on carbon to compensate for the damage they cause.
I think that will be more than enough to fill the gap, don’t you?
Agreed BW, we will need to make tough choices for a reduced revenue… so that means increasing the tax base (which Labor has ruled out) and reducing spending where possible (such as removing negative gearing etc which Labor has also ruled out). There’s a reason why Labor is relying on immigration and hyping up the need for birthr ates to increase… because if your not prepared to raise taxes, there’s basically only one other way to raise your revenue base…
One of the fossil fuel subsidies offered to miners is that they don’t pay excise. One of the justifications for excise is that it is used to pay for the road network. Although it might be galling that rich companies don’t pay, is it fair to charge a road tax on vehicles that don’t drive on roads.
Vehicles used for agriculture don’t pay the excise either.
Agreed BW, we will need to make tough choices for a reduced revenue… so that means increasing the tax base (which Labor has ruled out) and reducing spending where possible (such as removing negative gearing etc which Labor has also ruled out). There’s a reason why Labor is relying on immigration and hyping up the need for birthr ates to increase… because if your not prepared to raise taxes, there’s basically only one other way to raise your revenue base…
Boerwarsays:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 10:36 am
Both sides have expressed genocidal vision statements.
Hamas, given a limited opportunity, demonstrated who it would implement its vision statement if only it had the power so to do. I believe there would be no difference between Heshbollah, Iran, the Houthis, Assad or various Iranian supported terror groups operating in Syria and Iraq. All have expressed genocidal intentions. For them it is not a matter of if. It is a matter of when.
On Israel’s implementation of its genocidal vision statement we get daily feeds in the MSM.
The only real ethical difference between any of the players seems to me to be ability to deliver.
Demonstrating in support of either Hamas or Israel is, IMO, demonstrating in support of genocide. State terror or non-state player terror, choose your poison.
Demonstrating in support of a unified Palestinian state is, IMO, a legitimate focus.
======================================================
A far more balanced post. I would say the primary objective of the University protesters is to achieve a lasting cease fire. By putting pressure on Israel to agree to one. There objectives are very similar to those of many Israelis carrying out similar protests in Israel currently.
Don’t we file a lot of that under the ‘cost of battling climate change’? It’s a number literally no one can put a figure to. Bill Shorten was unfairly, but in hind side quite obviously, wedged on this in the 2019 election. It’d be a brave politician who said, “well Australia this is going to cost you umpty billion dollaroos.”
Socrates says:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 9:20 am
I still agree Australia should avoid taking sides in the Hamas – Israel war since Hamas is a terrorist group. However IMO the Israeli assault on Gaza is also plainly illegal (disproportionate response is not self defence) and Australia needs to walk away from any military links with Israel. How does Israel help defend Australia?
————————————
Curious thing to say. Shows how ignorant the West is of Israeli politics.
Hamas is a terrorist group ?? Western media ignorant of the fact Netanyahu has supported Hamas for around 20 years.
Netanyahu will do anything to avoid a 2 -State Solution with the Palestinians.
Politicians may have been aware too. But suits them to give false information to the voters. On many topics they like to keep voters in the dark, unaware of the truth.
Global warming is another.
December 11, 2023. Netanyahu’s longstanding policy of bolstering Hamas rule in Gaza, including encouraging Israel’s de facto ally Qatar to finance the terrorist organization. While the much-respected Israeli newspaper Haaretz has covered this issue, it has been largely ignored by the international press.
On Sunday, The New York Times gave new prominence to the long-standing Netanyahu-Hamas connection in a detailed and lengthy report. According to the newspaper:
Just weeks before Hamas launched the deadly Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, the head of Mossad arrived in Doha, Qatar, for a meeting with Qatari officials.
For years, the Qatari government had been sending millions of dollars a month into the Gaza Strip—money that helped prop up the Hamas government there.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel not only tolerated those payments, he had encouraged them.
More duds running Western governments, especially in the USA and Australia .
Conflating two issues:
Chalmers telling us to have more children (WTAF!)
Middle East Quagmire.
Imagine an alternative history where Israel implemented a type of Marshall Plan for Gaza & the West Bank 20 or 30 years ago that focused on Education. Right now the Palestinian Authority would be extolling their people to have babies! The surest way to reduce population is to educate women.
Climate change spending also has to justify itself, unlike certain other aspects of the budget which remain unquestionable… and then there’s the discussion of military spending.
Because there’s a big difference in tech you would be purchasing if, as an island continent you either expect China to be the biggest threat of the 21st century, or if your an island continent trying to handle a massive uptick in refugees because multiple traditional population centres (like the sub continent) can no longer handle anywhere near the population it once could.
Because I imagine even Morrison would view nuclear subs verse refugee rafts to be overkill… or maybe I give the man too much credit
For those still culture-war’ing energy, suggest actually reading what the government has published rather than second hand partisan reporting:
https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-05/future-gas-strategy.pdf
And the actual evidence:
https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-05/future-gas-strategy-analytical-report.pdf
And what the government is actually saying around CCS:
https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/king/transcripts/interview-kieran-gilbert-sky-news-0
“And so carbon capture and storage is one of those tools to help us reach net zero and the International Energy Agency has acknowledged this on a number of occasions, as have other international groups as part of the drive to net zero because it is an accessible and a possible way of storing CO2 safely but, you know, it’s contested, when there’s contested land use and I accept that as well, but it’s important that the research and the investment and the effort into CCS continues. As you would know, the Government is not sponsoring CCS. We do have a fund that’s looking into new technologies around CCS, but that is a matter for the proponents themselves, whether it be gas or anything else, to invest in how they lower their emissions and if one of those means is CCS, then they have to spend that money and that investment and go through all the appropriate approvals to do that.”
“So, I don’t think carbon capture is the only answer. It’s far from it. Absolutely. There are so many things we need to do to reach net zero. We need to drive down demand, we need to capture gas, we need to move away from gas as much as we can, where we can. But the thing is, in many uses we cannot. And until other alternatives are viable, like hydrogen, that gas and low emissions gas will be needed.”
Rewi each election is different. Sometimes it’s about a stale government and a new shiny alternative (2007), sometimes enough people don’t like the current leader group (2013), sometimes key issue are the most important factor (2019) and in 2022 probably a mix of all of those.
I expect in the wash up 2025 will be steady state and Labor will retain government barring anything major happening in the meantime.
https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/05/10/qantas-pilots-greenwashing/
Mostly Interestedsays:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 11:27 am
Don’t we file a lot of that under the ‘cost of battling climate change’? It’s a number literally no one can put a figure to. Bill Shorten was unfairly, but in hind side quite obviously, wedged on this in the 2019 election. It’d be a brave politician who said, “well Australia this is going to cost you umpty billion dollaroos.”
Hey Mostly Interested –
This is the problem! We need a politician who can lead and educate the electorate. Otherwise rational choices will not be made until the populace realises it is the frog in the pot and the waters getting hotter!
Mostly Interested @ #75 Friday, May 10th, 2024 – 11:27 am
It’s far easier to calculate the cost of not battling climate change.
We can (and have) estimated this cost – but the estimates are in lives, not dollars.
Of course, some people think the dollars are the more important thing.
What a piece of utter filth, what a s**tstain on humanity…
“Trump promised to scrap climate laws if US oil bosses donated $1bn – report”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/09/trump-oil-ceo-donation
If they took up his offer the fossil fuel industry would be as popular as brain cancer
In a just world Israel would have run short of USA weapons months ago and Ukraine wouldn’t have. Unfortunately it was the other way around.
Bizzcan, relying on CCS as even a small component to address emissions is the same as “clean coal” – its a misnomer designed by a marketing team to allow the continued production (and hell with ccs to.encourage an increase in emission reduction) instead of actually doing what’s needed… emission reduction.
But that’s not just my opinion,
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-false-promise-of-carbon-capture-as-a-climate-solution/
A decent read outlining the issues of CCS by someone who admits to be a proponent of the process – a key takeaway is that using the Icelandic model for CCS to address US emissions alone would cost 6 trillion a year… and while tech Improvement may go down to address this cost, why don’t we use already viable.techs and shift away from emissions?
SolarPunk says:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 10:54 am
Happy Friday All!
Reposting this as I didn’t get any bites yesterday.
Been lurking and noticing the debates re global warming. After seeing the climate experts opinions on what is coming at us, it’s hard not to feel despair.
So again I am back at my theme of the quality of the people who run the country – the politicians.
——————————-
The people who run the country certainly aren’t the politicians.
They are just puppets for their big donors, mostly the fossil fuel industry, as well as businesses running aged care, child care, private schools, private health funds, job providers, NDIS providers,,,,,
As we can see with Labor’s stupid gas announcement, this decision is what the gas donors to the Labor Party want. This support for more gas production is for the companies to keep selling more overseas.
Not for Australians use. So many lies in the announcement.
Josh Burns, Nacnamara, VIC, talking on ABC radio National this morning, has been outspoken on the day of the announcement against it. Others have joined him too.
Of course, if the fossil fuel industry was taxed properly, any loss of Royalties would be covered.
Bizzcan @ #79 Friday, May 10th, 2024 – 11:35 am
How amusing that the only CCS project that King can point to is Chevron’s infamous Barrow Island/Gorgon project …
But this project is hardly a “success”. As King herself goes on to say …
That’s putting it somewhat mildly. In fact this project might better be described as a catastrophic failure …
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/21/emissions-wa-gas-project-chevron-carbon-capture-system-pilbara-coast
CCS is “greenwashing” on an industrial scale.
Irenesays:
Friday, May 10, 2024 at 11:48 am
The people who run the country certainly aren’t the politicians.
Hi Irene,
I’m not going to say you are entirely wrong, but I think its a bit more deep than that (or its turtles all the way down!)
Why do the politicians agree to the various moneyed interest groups? Do the politicians feel they don’t have the skills to get re-elected without the support of these groups? Why is that? These are the deeper questions I am pondering and it goes straight to the types of people who become successful politicians.
Ultimately they make the law, so they do run the country. But how good are they at doing that? (Not very I think you will agree :))
Do you pay more tax than the big fossil fuel companies?
For all the environmental and climate destruction wrought by the fossil fuel industry here in Australia and globally, you’d think there must be a significant payback through taxes, right?
Unfortunately not.
We have analysed the Australian Tax Office’s most recent corporate tax filings, as well as data from the last ten years, and found that Australia’s biggest fossil fuel companies often pay less tax than the typical Australian worker. In many cases, they barely pay any tax at all.
https://www.marketforces.org.au/info/do-you-pay-more-tax-than-the-big-fossil-fuel-companies/
In 2022–23, Australian Federal and state governments
provided a total of $11.1 billion worth of spending and
tax breaks to assist fossil fuel industries.
This year’s figure represents a 5% decline on last year’s, but
subsidies in the forward estimates have increased from
$55.3 billion to a record $57.1 billion. This is 14 times
greater than the balance of Australia’s Disaster Ready
Fund, which is used to respond to climate disasters.
Fossil fuel subsidies in 2023
https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/P1378-Fossil-fuel-subsidies-2023-Web.pdf
Plus other tax schemes enabling the fossil fuel companies to pay little tax.
We need politicians who do not belong to the Labor or Liberal Party and who are not puppets of the fossil fuel industry and big business.
There’s a fundamental principle in political science and governance theory: the concept of the separation of powers and the recognition of multiple pillars within a democratic society.
Some folk seem to think the federal Australian government can address all issues no how big all small. Government is but one pillar within a democratic society, an important one yes, but not the only one.
The federal Australian government is just one part of a larger democratic framework. Private industry plays a significant role in the economy, providing goods and services, creating jobs, and driving innovation. The nation’s population, through civil society organisations, activism, and participation in democratic processes, also exerts influence and shapes public policy. And the legal system ensures that laws are upheld and justice is administered fairly.
Government cannot and do not singularly address all issues, regardless of their size or complexity. Government sets policy frameworks, establishes regulations, and redistributes taxation to fund public services and infrastructure. The delivery of services and outcomes often involves collaboration with other stakeholders, including private businesses, non-profit organisations, and community groups.
Apparently we poor Cave Dwellers are to be denied the pearls of wisdom in the AFR because that dastardly billionaire Kerry Stokes decided to double the printing price.
An article in the West Australian tells us that “The Sydney-centric team at The Australian Financial Review want to blame everyone but themselves for officially turning their back on Perth”, and that in WA the AFR circulation was less than the Kalgoorlie Miner and the South Western Times.
Who to believe???
The back of the envelope figures are pretty big.
This is before we even begin any transition costs.
It looks at money in and money out including the cost of paying jobkeeper to those who lose their jobs.
Say $120 billion loss in fossil fuel export earnings.
Say loss of royalties of around $27 billion.
Say plus $12 billion subsidies.
Say a loss of 50,000 direct jobs @ say $150,000 per annum = loss of $7.5 billion.
Say a multiplier loss of an additional 100,000 jobs @ say $90,000 per annum = loss of $9 billion.
Foreign capital investment foregone. Lumpy. Say loss of $5 billion per annum.
150,000 additional job keeper @ say $45,000 per annum ($39,000 + various oncosts) = cost to budget of $6.75 billion per annum.
Cattle-related exports per annum in exports. loss of $12 billion per annum.
Jobs lost: around 430,000 workers. Jobkeeper @ say $45,000 per annum = cost to budget of $19.3 billion per annum.
Sheep related exports, say a loss of around $5 billion per annum.
That’s some good maths there BW – how much does it cost if we do nothing?
Boerwar @ #93 Friday, May 10th, 2024 – 12:07 pm
The costs of not transitioning are even bigger.
And you don’t do them on the back of an envelope.
You do them on gravestones, plaques and monuments.
Try being the first party to announce that you are going to launch a program to kill off our tourism industry. After that you have everyone staying home and a series of smashed rural and regional towns and cities.
Of course the people who are advocating for this will probably respond with the tourism industry is diffrent then the meat industry or the fossil fuel industry and shouldn’t be allowed to continue.
Oh. I see that I have triggered the usual round of stupid comments.
I will just have to use caps so that they can get it.
WE MUST TRANSITION TO RENEWABLES ASAP.
THE COSTS OF GETTING TO ZERO NET FIFTY EVEN BEFORE WE SPEND A SINGLE DOLLAR ON THE TRANSITIONS ARE GOING TO BE MASSIVE.
IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE THE TOURISM INDUSTRY FROM ITSELF.
And I do wish the Greens all the best when they win government at the next election and deliver all of the above with 15 years to get to their zero net forty.
It is going to be a hoot.
》Foreign capital investment foregone. Lumpy. Say loss of $5 billion per annum.
Is this really a loss if it would only go to building assets of no benefit to Australia outside of the royalties?
And I recall an article saying the problem with starting manufacturing in Australia is a lack of workers.
Of course we going to go through 2.5 degrees.
In a canter.
The only open questions as far as I am concerned is how far past 2.5 degree we get and how soon we get there.
It is going to be a hoot.