SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

The fact that Dutton & Morisson will no longer be in governent is for the better. Australia needs something better than their outdated mindsets.

With a bit of luck and common sense that nuclear sub deal will be kicked to the kerb, that does not aid stability in the region.

Kiwirob wrote:

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

The fact that Dutton & Morisson will no longer be in governent is for the better. Australia needs something better than their outdated mindsets.

With a bit of luck and common sense that nuclear sub deal will be kicked to the kerb, that does not aid stability in the region.

Mmm:
And the CCP are doing there best to maintain that stability

Kiwirob wrote:

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

The fact that Dutton & Morisson will no longer be in governent is for the better. Australia needs something better than their outdated mindsets.

With a bit of luck and common sense that nuclear sub deal will be kicked to the kerb, that does not aid stability in the region.

Is that a prediction like the one you made ahead of the war in Ukraine?

We need nuclear submarines. Our existing ones are way too old.

cpd wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

The fact that Dutton & Morisson will no longer be in governent is for the better. Australia needs something better than their outdated mindsets.

With a bit of luck and common sense that nuclear sub deal will be kicked to the kerb, that does not aid stability in the region.

Is that a prediction like the one you made ahead of the war in Ukraine?

We need nuclear submarines. Our existing ones are way too old.

You don’t need nuclear subs, you never needed nuclear subs until just recently and even then you still don’t need them. You do need new subs which you ordered, then cancelled, and now have to wait at least a decade or longer before you get the first SSN.

Nuclear submarines are off topic for this discussion anyway.

Off topic discussions get locked remember.


Back to the topic, Malcolm Turnbull made a good point about the catastrophe the Libs face having lost these blue ribbon safe seats.

Many people there were contributors to the Liberal party financially so the Libs have lost a lot of funding. Those people were traditionally also very dependable voters.

The Sky After Dark crowd chanting about socialism and woke this or that aren’t as reliable or probably as strong financial backers of the Libs.

That’s why this is a bigger disaster than Rowan Dean and the others will admit.

The people here barracking for the LNP, do you really support them, as in giving the LNP donations, or not?

Good Government relies on a good opposition - and we really don't have one after Saturday.

i would hope Labor is able to move back to a spirit of negotiation and is able to advance a legislative agenda. Although Labor may scrape to majority in the house, the more broadly they can adance their agenda with the independents and the Greens the better for us all.

Dutton is the likely next Lib leader, but will never be PM. As the Victorian Deputy Libs person on the ABC panel was saying "this is going to get worse for the Libs before it gets worse". I'd expect that it will be two terms before the Libs can challenge Labor.

I'd suspect the Taylor family may be concerned about the proposed ICAC which could sideline leadership ambitions.

Kent350787 wrote:

Good Government relies on a good opposition - and we really don't have one after Saturday.

i would hope Labor is able to move back to a spirit of negotiation and is able to advance a legislative agenda. Although Labor may scrape to majority in the house, the more broadly they can adance their agenda with the independents and the Greens the better for us all.

Dutton is the likely next Lib leader, but will never be PM. As the Victorian Deputy Libs person on the ABC panel was saying "this is going to get worse for the Libs before it gets worse". I'd expect that it will be two terms before the Libs can challenge Labor.

I'd suspect the Taylor family may be concerned about the proposed ICAC which could sideline leadership ambitions.

One has to remember that although the ALP will form government they have done so at a primary vote lower than when Shorten lost the last election. The ALP is going to be in for a very rough ride over the next 3 years and just like the Coalition they also have to change the minds of the quiet Australians so they have tp perform. The senate will be a big test for them and its things on the peripheral like the pledge on the Uluru statement these things can come back and bite him on the ass.

As for the Teals well time will tell if they receive the amount of exposure and the funding from Holmes à Court or will climate 200 form their own party at the next election and can they hold on. Wentworth went independent for a short period of time the moved back to the liberals. there are two schools of thought. The ALP have only got in because of a perfect storm.

Kiwirob wrote:

cpd wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

With a bit of luck and common sense that nuclear sub deal will be kicked to the kerb, that does not aid stability in the region.

Is that a prediction like the one you made ahead of the war in Ukraine?

We need nuclear submarines. Our existing ones are way too old.

You don’t need nuclear subs, you never needed nuclear subs until just recently and even then you still don’t need them. You do need new subs which you ordered, then cancelled, and now have to wait at least a decade or longer before you get the first SSN.

While this is off topic but you are very wrong on the need for nuclear propulsion, ever wondered why the RAN cant get boats off the shelf that fits within its conops?

I have a hopefully noncontroversial question: Why did "Labour" become "Labor"?

DocLightning wrote:

I have a hopefully noncontroversial question: Why did "Labour" become "Labor"?

Search (Google) and you shall find:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-07/ ... /100789310

There is no one definitive answer. But Labor is shorter to write and probably fits better on advertising.

DocLightning wrote:

I have a hopefully noncontroversial question: Why did "Labour" become "Labor"?

I have wondered that too but never really found an answer and then had another quick look

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-07/ ... /100789310


But I just watched Albo's first press conference nothing really spectacular about it which was to be expected

But one thing I did notice was the flags behind The Australian Flag the Aboriginal flag and one i have not noticed before green and blue with a white diagram of some sort with a star in it.

Anyone know what it is?

A101 wrote:

But one thing I did notice was the flags behind The Australian Flag the Aboriginal flag and one i have not noticed before green and blue with a white diagram of some sort with a star in it.

Anyone know what it is?

Edit: that's the Torres Strait Islander Flag.

https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/torres-s ... ander-flag

DocLightning wrote:

I have a hopefully noncontroversial question: Why did "Labour" become "Labor"?

My understanding is that there was a lot of love for the USA when the Australian Labor Party was formed, and it was a conscious decision to adopt the US spelling in the last name.

As for the "perfect storm" being the only issue that got Labor over the line, that is transparently rubbish. They served up a positive but small target position against a failing third term Government with the weakest leader in 50 years. Yes, there should be questions for Labor over the relatively small 2pp margin, but now the party is in power they can demonstrate competence.

It will be interesting to see whether Labor serves two terms or three as Government. WIthout a miracle from the Libs, and with basic competence from Labor, a Labor win in 2025 seems likely.

Kent350787 wrote:

As for the "perfect storm" being the only issue that got Labor over the line, that is transparently rubbish. They served up a positive but small target position against a failing third term Government with the weakest leader in 50 years. Yes, there should be questions for Labor over the relatively small 2pp margin, but now the party is in power they can demonstrate competence.

It will be interesting to see whether Labor serves two terms or three as Government. WIthout a miracle from the Libs, and with basic competence from Labor, a Labor win in 2025 seems likely.

The reason why Labor had to go small target was even they know that any big policy ideas would be destroyed in the media. Now if they try to bring in big policy ideas in government they’ll be labelled as dishonest for not declaring them at the election (so the media could attack them prior).

Labor’s primary was down, a big reason for that is the ALP vote in teal seats dropped as Labor supporters there went teal, knowing the teal had a good chance of winning whereas the ALP candidate didn’t.

Greens also increased there vote, maybe this is a sign some traditional Labor supporters think the party has become a bit too far right themselves and needs to go back towards their natural position? Whatever it is the lower ALP primary this election in no way means the country is becoming more right wing, the opposite is true.

Dutton looks likely to get Liberal leader. This will excite the party members, Sky News and the now Conservative minority. Deputy to go to Michaelia Cash, female, fairly conservative and from WA where they desperately need to win back seats.

3 years is a long time in politics. Many things could happen, honestly I didn’t expect Morrison to lose re-election when he got up in 2019, I thought with a friendly media he’d roll it in. But incompetence shown through fires, floods, foreign policy, pandemics, vaccines, assault allegations and general smug dishonesty did him in.

Possible that News Corp recasts Dutton as a MAGA style candidate? Then tries to destroy Labor and the Teals in their papers.

News will be out for blood. They will run MAGA style attacks for sure. The teal independents will be cast as traitors. Expect hysterical attacks.

DocLightning wrote:

I have a hopefully noncontroversial question: Why did "Labour" become "Labor"?

In NZ and the UK the Labour Party is still spelt Labour.

cpd wrote:

News will be out for blood. They will run MAGA style attacks for sure. The teal independents will be cast as traitors. Expect hysterical attacks.

Sky News has already been hysterical with the Teals pre election, they’ve already been cast as traitors:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=df2Eef9gwr0

Some on Sky News not coping well with the Liberal loss:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrKRudd/stat ... 0700455936

Kent350787 wrote:

As for the "perfect storm" being the only issue that got Labor over the line, that is transparently rubbish. They served up a positive but small target position against a failing third term Government with the weakest leader in 50 years. Yes, there should be questions for Labor over the relatively small 2pp margin, but now the party is in power they can demonstrate competence.

You are missing the point of the “perfect storm” is not just about one point its many from policy to perception. Labour ran a very lacklustre campaign about identity politics of personalities between Albo and Scomo.

Many thousands of Australians have done it tough over the last three years one national problem after another, be it bushfires floods, covid pandemic cost of living pressures shortages of supplies to rebuild build so on and so on. People were tired and still are tired. You had the perception that Morrison was not doing enough regarding natural disasters, we had problems at both state and federal levels border closures covid lockdowns etc we have cost of living pressures that are out of the governments hands we can see that with the price of fuel over $2 a litre and that’s with the excise cut, Albo cut the softer image at the debates and the ALP capitalised on them which was smart.

By running such small target campaign, they actually have made a rod for their own back they have no mandate. A lot of the seats the ALP picked up were on preferences the coalition received more primary votes than the ALP, the greens stole a number of votes off the ALP as did the teals off the coalition but look where they were in the more affluent suburbs in Melbourne and Sydney as well in Brisbane (notice the were all along the Brisbane River) all the seats that changed hands are wafer thin if they push too far the electorate can push back by saying you never mentioned this or that.

What’s the ALP to do next?

If the ALP form a majority in the lower house, they do not need the crossbenchers, the Teals just become observers the Greens on the other hand have a few more cards to play if the coalition do not support them in the upper house, do the ALP throw money at the teal seats to try and keep them out of coalition hands depending on the out come I think the coalition have a very good chance of picking them back up for the Teals most likely will not replicate that swing again next election if they cant be seen to move the dial and be effective, in hindsight whilst more troublesome for the ALP it would be more effective if they formed a minority government then those that voted for the Teals their votes would not be in vain.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

cpd wrote:

News will be out for blood. They will run MAGA style attacks for sure. The teal independents will be cast as traitors. Expect hysterical attacks.

Sky News has already been hysterical with the Teals pre election, they’ve already been cast as traitors:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=df2Eef9gwr0

Some on Sky News not coping well with the Liberal loss:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrKRudd/stat ... 0700455936

Oh, Rowan Dean, why am I not surprised. Deves was in there with him too, they’ve got their blinkers on and totally missed the point of why they were so savagely belted this election and now want to try and go even further to the right. Dumb.

Then maybe they need two or three terms in opposition to bring themselves back to where they should be. Or they’ll end up irrelevant like Clive Palmer.

Oh yes, they said that teal candidate Zali Steggall wouldn’t win again either, yet she did. And by defeating the Libs strongest representation of its new image…

A101 wrote:

I think the coalition have a very good chance of picking them back up for the Teals most likely will not replicate that swing again next election.

There have already been multiple successful independent candidates - Wilkie, Haines, McGowan, Sharkie even Katter. Once an independent is established in a seat (and they’re doing a good job) it’s very likely they stay there. Like Zali Steggal, second election and she increased her vote, after the Liberals decided putting an anti-LGBT candidate in one of the most pro-LGBT seats in the country was a good idea......

I can guarantee you the Teal seats will remain Teal if the Liberals install Peter Dutton as leader. When the issues on Teal seats involved treatment of women, better treatment of LGBT, action against climate change, a more temperate style of politics and less corruption, why do the Liberals think Dutton, who’s either the same or more to the right than Morrison on those issues, could possibly attract voters back to the Liberals?

The teal seats want a Malcolm Turnbull style party. Not a Peter Dutton party. Unfortunately for the Liberals that’s all they have to install as leader.

Dutton will attract zero teals back to the Liberals.

Another point that’ll hurt the Liberals - Chinese Australian voters. It’s no secret Dutton is one of the most pro war politicians in the Liberals, you can see him begging for a conflict with China. But it was Chinese Australian voters who trounced the Liberals in a lot of their seats. There’s up to 1.5 million Australians of Chinese ancestry, a lot of them in marginal seats and used to be traditional Liberal voters. However with the Liberals adopting Trump style anti Asian rhetoric and warmongering with China, these voters abandoned the Liberals and delivered double digit swings to Labor, which swung several marginal seats.

Going further to the right doesn’t get the Teal seats back for the Coalition, it doesn’t get the marginal suburban seats back. They may get some of the One Nation vote back but that vote was coming back to the Liberals as preferences.

Going further right means more Teals start to run across the country (don’t forget Teals only ran in a handful of seats this election, and won most of them), and Liberals are basically decimated in every city.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

A101 wrote:

I think the coalition have a very good chance of picking them back up for the Teals most likely will not replicate that swing again next election.

There have already been multiple successful independent candidates - Wilkie, Haines, McGowan, Sharkie even Katter. Once an independent is established in a seat (and they’re doing a good job) it’s very likely they stay there. Like Zali Steggal, second election and she increased her vote, after the Liberals decided putting an anti-LGBT candidate in one of the most pro-LGBT seats in the country was a good idea......

I can guarantee you the Teal seats will remain Teal if the Liberals install Peter Dutton as leader. When the issues on Teal seats involved treatment of women, better treatment of LGBT, action against climate change, a more temperate style of politics and less corruption, why do the Liberals think Dutton, who’s either the same or more to the right than Morrison on those issues, could possibly attract voters back to the Liberals?

The teal seats want a Malcolm Turnbull style party. Not a Peter Dutton party. Unfortunately for the Liberals that’s all they have to install as leader.

Dutton will attract zero teals back to the Liberals.

Another point that’ll hurt the Liberals - Chinese Australian voters. It’s no secret Dutton is one of the most pro war politicians in the Liberals, you can see him begging for a conflict with China. But it was Chinese Australian voters who trounced the Liberals in a lot of their seats. There’s up to 1.5 million Australians of Chinese ancestry, a lot of them in marginal seats and used to be traditional Liberal voters. However with the Liberals adopting Trump style anti Asian rhetoric and warmongering with China, these voters abandoned the Liberals and delivered double digit swings to Labor, which swung several marginal seats.

Going further to the right doesn’t get the Teal seats back for the Coalition, it doesn’t get the marginal suburban seats back. They may get some of the One Nation vote back but that vote was coming back to the Liberals as preferences.

Going further right means more Teals start to run across the country (don’t forget Teals only ran in a handful of seats this election, and won most of them), and Liberals are basically decimated in every city.

While it’s true for some independents what we are talking about are affluent electorate, Wenworth showed its fickle nature. This current election they were very well funded and had massive exposure they may have money but they want to keep that money and it’s well known that the ALP what to milk them further so they have a bit of a condrum don’t they. I imagine the Teals will go the way of the greens in that there base will be relatively small I just can’t see them holding the all the seats

Those two boat "arrivals" timed to perfection for announcement on election day and then spammed out to mobile phones by unsolicited text message by the LNP, that is being investigated:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... 5ansx.html

Good! The sudden amazing willingness to talk about "on water operations" stunk of desperation and I wouldn't put it past them to have set up the whole thing.

A101 wrote:

What’s the ALP to do next?

If the ALP form a majority in the lower house, they do not need the crossbenchers, the Teals just become observers the Greens on the other hand have a few more cards to play if the coalition do not support them in the upper house, do the ALP throw money at the teal seats to try and keep them out of coalition hands depending on the out come I think the coalition have a very good chance of picking them back up for the Teals most likely will not replicate that swing again next election if they cant be seen to move the dial and be effective, in hindsight whilst more troublesome for the ALP it would be more effective if they formed a minority government then those that voted for the Teals their votes would not be in vain.

I think Labor's only real option after 2019 was to run a small target campaign to win the election and implement a policy platform. And it wasn't as small target as the media reported, with 28 or 29 detailed policy statements on the ALP website.

But you're right, Labor is best working with others, as Albanese has indicated he will, and as Labor has done in the past. I agree acting to get the support of the teals is the logical move, but I think implementing their announced platforms on integrity and climate change will be more effective than pork barrelling seats that are already largely wealthy.

cpd wrote:

Those two boat "arrivals" timed to perfection for announcement on election day and then spammed out to mobile phones by unsolicited text message by the LNP, that is being investigated:

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... 5ansx.html

And the Government after all these years told them to arrive on Election Day, instead of the previous few days were it actually might have swayed some of the undecided voters.


No laws have been breeched, ABF would have followed protocol.

It’s Government discretion to whether information is released. I also think it’s a legitimate disclosure the ALP were informed of the interception before release of the information, and comes back to the credentials of the ALP and the use of TPV’s and it’s pull factor


We will just add it to the reviews that the ALP are going to do

cpd wrote:

Good! The sudden amazing willingness to talk about "on water operations" stunk of desperation and I wouldn't put it past them to have set up the whole thing.

I’m glad they did now it puts the spotlight on ALP policy into illegal boat arrivals and forewarning of the impending arrivals

Kent350787 wrote:

I think Labor's only real option after 2019 was to run a small target campaign to win the election and implement a policy platform. And it wasn't as small target as the media reported, with 28 or 29 detailed policy statements on the ALP website.

They played the man not the ball, the ALP played to their best strength. Problem was they also did not say how they would implement the policy that were announced, they shouted out that Scotty was from marketing 101 they played to personality which is marketing 101.

Kent350787 wrote:

but I think implementing their announced platforms on integrity and climate change will be more effective than pork barrelling seats that are already largely wealthy.

For the Teals it’s not going to come down to pork, it’s going to come down to the ability to show that they can influence there main issues. We saw this in the Gillard Government when in minority with the Greens

But the biggest problem that Albanese will have to constantly watch is if the policy has more negative consequences for cost of living for the battlers, it’s the outer suburbs that hold the power at the next election and joe blow will say is it worth it

A101 wrote:

its just like wages the ALP are banging on about, minimum award rates are reviewed yearly by the the Fair Work Commission with both industry and government making submissions to the Annual Wage Review 99% would not even know that I reckon

Mind you, a Government can make a submission strongly supporting an increase, or supporting an increase at a certain rate. Recent Government submission to the FWC have been for below CPI or nothing.

A101 wrote:

the ALP were informed of the interception before release of the information

Do you have a source for this?

cpd wrote:

A101 wrote:

the ALP were informed of the interception before release of the information

Do you have a source for this?

It was reported on the evening news that night

Kent350787 wrote:

A101 wrote:

its just like wages the ALP are banging on about, minimum award rates are reviewed yearly by the the Fair Work Commission with both industry and government making submissions to the Annual Wage Review 99% would not even know that I reckon

Mind you, a Government can make a submission strongly supporting an increase, or supporting an increase at a certain rate. Recent Government submission to the FWC have been for below CPI or nothing.

I missed this from earlier


Yes, agree that's why I said both industry and government can make submissions. Really anyone with an interest can make a submission, even you and I could if we were so inclined.

But at the end of the day the business has to be profitable to continue and wages are only one portion of the business, no sense pricing yourself out of a job. I have actually seen that happen a few times

A101 wrote:

I’m glad they did now it puts the spotlight on ALP policy into illegal boat arrivals and forewarning of the impending arrivals

That’s an admission the change in “don’t talk about boats” policy on Election Day was solely to damage Labor. It was just a political attack line.

Luckily the Australian people saw right through it.

By the way I don’t think the dog whistling racist campaign against refugees will work in 2022 as it worked for the Liberals in years past. The Australian public has changed. We’ve become more tolerant and accepting of refugees of non European backgrounds, and racist scare campaigns don’t work in the more diverse Australia of 2022 and only drive the large numbers of multicultural voters against the party that pushes the racist scaremongering. Look at how Chinese-Australians swung marginals seats away from the Liberals. Look at how One Nation amounted to nothing this election.

Australians have moved on from falling for racist scare campaigns, and are now prioritising candidates from diverse backgrounds. In my state of Western Australia Labor will have new members of Indian, Malay-Chinese and Afghani heritage, in addition to existing MP’s with Egyptian and Indigenous Australian heritage.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

A101 wrote:

I’m glad they did now it puts the spotlight on ALP policy into illegal boat arrivals and forewarning of the impending arrivals

That’s an admission the change in “don’t talk about boats” policy on Election Day was solely to damage Labor. It was just a political attack line.

I'm just stating a fact in context to the original post that believes it was a set up .

And its no attack line just an illustration to highlight the pull factor that the ALP will have on illegal boat arrivals, because they are being duplicitous that they say they are maintaining the coalition policy 100% when clearly, they have signalled, they will be scrapping TPV’s. they have also said that they intend to move people from TPV’s to PPV’s increasing the pull factor.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Luckily the Australian people saw right through it.

Really, everyone person who I have spoken to and mentioned about the boat arrivals have said that this is what we have to look forward too and its only just the start and are not happy we will most likely lose control of illegal boat arrivals again, with a number of them being rusted on ALP supporters too.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

By the way I don’t think the dog whistling racist campaign against refugees will work in 2022 as it worked for the Liberals in years past. The Australian public has changed. We’ve become more tolerant and accepting of refugees of non European backgrounds, and racist scare campaigns don’t work in the more diverse Australia of 2022 and only drive the large numbers of multicultural voters against the party that pushes the racist scaremongering. Look at how Chinese-Australians swung marginals seats away from the Liberals. Look at how One Nation amounted to nothing this election.

I think its you who are miss reading the tea leaves here. Most Australian do welcome genuine refugees that come to Australia by the proper means but frown upon the many thousands who enter illegally by boat which pay thousands of $ to people smugglers. Most people can see the difference between an economic refugee who are asylum shopping and a genuine refugee.

Any whiff or hint of drownings at sea or arrivals by the thousands and I guarantee the silent voters will be expressing their displeasure of Her Majesties Australian Government

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Australians have moved on from falling for racist scare campaigns, and are now prioritising candidates from diverse backgrounds. In my state of Western Australia Labor will have new members of Indian, Malay-Chinese and Afghani heritage, in addition to existing MP’s with Egyptian and Indigenous Australian heritage.

Two very different issues and I would not say they are prioritising candidates people look at whom best meets their own ideology in politics

A101 wrote:

[
Really, everyone person who I have spoken to and mentioned about the boat arrivals have said that this is what we have to look forward too and its only just the start and are not happy we will most likely lose control of illegal boat arrivals again, with a number of them being rusted on ALP supporters too.

I think its you who are miss reading the tea leaves here. Most Australian do welcome genuine refugees that come to Australia by the proper means but frown upon the many thousands who enter illegally by boat which pay thousands of $ to people smugglers. Most people can see the difference between an economic refugee who are asylum shopping and a genuine refugee.

Any whiff or hint of drownings at sea or arrivals by the thousands and I guarantee the silent voters will be expressing their displeasure of Her Majesties Australian Government

Actually immigration and refugees are far down the list of worries for Australians this year:

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/101002116

Number one issue by far? Climate change. That’s why your side lost, as the public didn’t trust their fairly weak proposal for net zero, and they still have obvious climate deniers like Matt Canavan and Barnaby Joyce in the Coalition.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

A101 wrote:

Really, everyone person who I have spoken to and mentioned about the boat arrivals have said that this is what we have to look forward too and its only just the start and are not happy we will most likely lose control of illegal boat arrivals again, with a number of them being rusted on ALP supporters too.

I think its you who are miss reading the tea leaves here. Most Australian do welcome genuine refugees that come to Australia by the proper means but frown upon the many thousands who enter illegally by boat which pay thousands of $ to people smugglers. Most people can see the difference between an economic refugee who are asylum shopping and a genuine refugee.

Actually immigration and refugees are far down the list of worries for Australians this year:

It doesn’t take a genius to figure why that is the case, just look at the media reporting on the boats that were intercepted, now compare that when Rudd changed policy and the boats started arriving in there hundreds,imagine media and public interest when illegal immigration adds millions to the deficit.

Take away TPV and those who land here cannot be removed that’s the pull factor and the ALP have said they are scrapping TPV overwhelm ABF with boats and it’s inevitable they will land and when it’s shown that happens well good luck to the ALP with the mainstream voters

sierrakilo44 wrote:

ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/101002116

Number one issue by far? Climate change. That’s why your side lost, as the public didn’t trust their fairly weak proposal for net zero, and they still have obvious climate deniers like Matt Canavan and Barnaby Joyce in the Coalition

Really no surprises there as the ABC is very left leaning, if you look at the sample graph from this survey and the last election it’s remarkable similar 27% to 29% of respondents in its survey on climate

The reason it’s that for the coalition there were no effective communication on it, they can’t compete by moving far from its base and just virtually replicate ALP position on renewables. The best thing for the coalition would have been to separate there ideals on it. Australians first and foremost want cheap and reliable power the coalition lost its way on climate message

Have you also noticed that the coalition received the highest number of primary votes in this election, and it was the far more moderates liberals who advocated climate reduction numbers lost their seats than more traditional liberals seats held on the Nationals under Barnaby Joyce held all there seats and actually picked up one.

There is no doubt that the climate policy’s will hit the battlers in the wallets, as I said earlier the ALP have to tread very careful here the next election is going to be fought in the mainstream electorate and the cut and paste policy between the ALP/ Coalition will not work next time around.

A101 wrote:

Really no surprises there as the ABC is very left leaning.

It was stacked with right wingers and was literally turning itself inside out at times to make sure it didn't offend its political masters.

But yes, it's very left wing when the standard is Sky News After Dark.

A101 wrote:

There is no doubt that the climate policy’s will hit the battlers in the wallets

There is no doubt that coal policies and in general energy policies during the LNP have hit me in the wallet. We can't keep going that direction, it's too expensive now. Everyone I know is putting in huge solar power on their homes and batteries, they are fed up with the energy prices that kept on going up and up and up under coalition governments. These people are not well off, they are working class ordinary families, typical Howard's Battlers. That's their way of dealing with increasing energy prices.

cpd wrote:

A101 wrote:

Really no surprises there as the ABC is very left leaning.

It was stacked with right wingers and was literally turning itself inside out at times to make sure it didn't offend its political masters.

But yes, it's very left wing when the standard is Sky News After Dark.

Even its own fact checker agrees its left leaning, and that is supposedly an unbiased source

Overall, we rate ABC News Australia, Left-Center Biased based on story selection that moderately favors the left

There is a big difference between even centre-left and left wing. There is no doubt that Sky after Dark is far right, and I'd argue the commercials are centre-right to right. The addition of Speers and Probyn to the ABC has clearly made its political coverage dead centre, if not slightly right.

If we'd had a decent energy policy for the last 9 years, a phased changeover would have had limited day to day impact. As it is, we're now going to be playing catch-up and there may be pain in some areas. But the markets have spoken, even without incentives, and the Government's policy around renewables appears very sensible.

cpd wrote:

A101 wrote:

There is no doubt that the climate policy’s will hit the battlers in the wallets

There is no doubt that coal policies and in general energy policies during the LNP have hit me in the wallet. We can't keep going that direction, it's too expensive now.

Well, you can blame that on the Chinese which committed an own goal, supply and demand it’s a simple equation. China is building more coal fired power plants and are having supply issues because the have restricted imports of Australian thermal coal (funny how they did not put those same restriction on met coal and Iron ore which would have a greater effect on its own economy) which in turn increased the wholesale cost of coal in general

cpd wrote:

Everyone I know is putting in huge solar power on their homes and batteries, they are fed up with the energy prices that kept on going up and up and up under coalition governments. These people are not well off, they are working class ordinary families, typical Howard's Battlers. That's their way of dealing with increasing energy prices.

Which is a good thing, I’ve done it myself but not everyone can afford it and especially those that rent will never pay to put those sorts of things in.
Coalition policy has been in favour of a mix of renewable and base load power through the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme which puts downward pressure on base load, but there is always a need for reliable base load power and that is demanded by the electorate and its here where the coalition can make a point of difference to the battlers. Infrastructure costs are the biggest drivers on upward pressure of electricity costs whist coal is in demand prices will rise no different from fuel

Kent350787 wrote:

There is a big difference between even centre-left and left wing. There is no doubt that Sky after Dark is far right, and I'd argue the commercials are centre-right to right. The addition of Speers and Probyn to the ABC has clearly made its political coverage dead centre, if not slightly right.

According to there own ideals, they have a survey within media bias fact checker from the "Rate the Bias of ABC News Australia" while not a proper analysis those that contributed 56% ranked the ABC as far left

Kent350787 wrote:

If we'd had a decent energy policy for the last 9 years, a phased changeover would have had limited day to day impact. As it is, we're now going to be playing catch-up and there may be pain in some areas. But the markets have spoken, even without incentives, and the Government's policy around renewables appears very sensible.

until it drives up further hip pocket pain with government having to provide more incentives {subsidies}

A101 wrote:

but not everyone can afford it and especially those that rent will never pay to put those sorts of things in.l

I know not everyone can afford it, but they are having to find ways regardless otherwise existing energy becomes far too expensive. So you get people increasing their loans because they've calculated that even with the costs of that, it will put them financially ahead.

The LNP with all of its time in power had all the time in the world to make moves in this space to make the aforementioned things a bit easier for people. They can throw huge amounts of money about when they want to, so there is no reason they couldn't have done something in this space, other than the fact they are ideologically opposed to anything environmental.

cpd wrote:

A101 wrote:

but not everyone can afford it and especially those that rent will never pay to put those sorts of things in.l

I know not everyone can afford it, but they are having to find ways regardless otherwise existing energy becomes far too expensive. So you get people increasing their loans because they've calculated that even with the costs of that, it will put them financially ahead.

The LNP with all of its time in power had all the time in the world to make moves in this space to make the aforementioned things a bit easier for people. They can throw huge amounts of money about when they want to, so there is no reason they couldn't have done something in this space.

I absolutely agree that the lack of action by the Coalition over most of its three terms, and the strong sway over those two parties by fossil fuel industries, has delayed the transition and likely increased the hip pocket pain that will be felt.

The subsidies for fossil fuel power generation, when nearly all sectors of the market are supporting renewable instead (including storage for baseload) is an interesting denial of Liberal ideals.

Kent350787 wrote:

cpd wrote:

A101 wrote:

but not everyone can afford it and especially those that rent will never pay to put those sorts of things in.l

I know not everyone can afford it, but they are having to find ways regardless otherwise existing energy becomes far too expensive. So you get people increasing their loans because they've calculated that even with the costs of that, it will put them financially ahead.

The LNP with all of its time in power had all the time in the world to make moves in this space to make the aforementioned things a bit easier for people. They can throw huge amounts of money about when they want to, so there is no reason they couldn't have done something in this space.

I absolutely agree that the lack of action by the Coalition over most of its three terms, and the strong sway over those two parties by fossil fuel industries, has delayed the transition and likely increased the hip pocket pain that will be felt.

To what the technology is not there yet to provide reliable base load power, and I doubt it ever will be, as a lot of renewable will be competing for the same land used for farming. mmm sustainable foods supply or sustainable power supply.

If the sun don't shine solar becomes less reliable, wind farms are susceptible to not enough wind or too much wind, hydro fantastic.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for reducing our dependance where we can, but I firmly believe it needs to be a mix of renewables and reliable efficient base load power

Kent350787 wrote:

The subsidies for fossil fuel power generation, when nearly all sectors of the market are supporting renewable instead (including storage for baseload) is an interesting denial of Liberal ideals.

I think that's a disingenuous statement, the coalition government have been looking and supporting with subsidies and grants into building a reliable sustainable source for all Australian but also acknowledge that no single element can provide it

But we know that a mix of renewables, plus expanded storage can deliver that. Australia has higher PV generation rates on cloudy days than many northern hemisphere countries have on sunny days.

Coalition climate denialism and strong preference towards fossil fuel industries has held back investment across a range of renewables. Even where they have tried to support fossil fuels, the market has said no.

At least now we can remove the unecessary fossil fuel subsidies and get back on the path to the future.

Kent350787 wrote:

But we know that a mix of renewables, plus expanded storage can deliver that. Australia has higher PV generation rates on cloudy days than many northern hemisphere countries have on sunny days.

Yep, all good for the households that have that capacity for short periods of time.

But base load no mate you are barking up the wrong tree, you are talking base load on an intermittent generation capability and storage capacity, which needs to be able to meet demand for days and perhaps weeks on end not hours at a time, hence the need for mixed capacity.

Kent350787 wrote:

Coalition climate denialism and strong preference towards fossil fuel industries has held back investment across a range of renewables. Even where they have tried to support fossil fuels, the market has said no.

Sorry, that is just plain wrong, the market are the consumers if you gave them a choice of unreliable supply or reliable supply it’s a no brainer what the market will choose, but the debate is not marketed like that because the policy of the coalition was for mixed supply whilst waiting for new technology to advance to an acceptable level of reliability to provide efficient stable energy supply, and that’s good policy

Kent350787 wrote:

At least now we can remove the unecessary fossil fuel subsidies and get back on the path to the future.

I can tell you right now even Albanese or more precisely the ALP will not do that as he/they knows it will cost him the next election

The generation market is not investing in fossil fuels. We're paying $600 million of public money for the Kurri Kurri gas generation plant. If it was a good deal, why wasn't the market ready to fund it?

We're in a transition stage, but 10 years later than the rest of the developed world because of a Government that preferenced fossil fuels and (oddly) preferred picking winners rather than market mechanisms. That is where we need a Government to guide the transition.

Kent350787 wrote:

The generation market is not investing in fossil fuels. We're paying $600 million of public money for the Kurri Kurri gas generation plant. If it was a good deal, why wasn't the market ready to fund it?

Because Liddel power station is closing down and Vales Pt slated to in the next few years. No sensible private equity firm will put money into it be cause of political climate, and with private equity the requirements are to be profitable as possible at any moment political parties can and might impact on that profitability by legislating carbon tax of some description.

Kuri Kuri is designed to be provide peaking power at times of high demand and low supply from intermittent variable sources(renewables)
AGL built a solar farm for approx. $440 million out at Nygun at will only provide power for approx. 33,000 NSW homes on 250 hectares of land, whereas Liddel provided power for approx. 700,000 homes. Even AGL shows there is a need for it once Liddel is closed

Its not they do not want build because of the political environment is as just as too much of a concern if they are not going to get a return of investment.
Liddel is actually a good site small modular reactor (SMR) I think this is the debate needed within the coalition and one I would vote for
https://www.rolls-royce.com/innovation/ ... tions.aspx

A101 wrote:

[No sensible private equity firm will put money into it be cause of political climate, and with private equity the requirements are to be profitable as possible at any moment political parties can and might impact on that profitability by legislating carbon tax of some description.

The lack of an emissions trading scheme has been a major drag on energy investment. You're correct that it's largely politics, and the former Government played it only one way.

Kent350787 wrote:

A101 wrote:

[No sensible private equity firm will put money into it be cause of political climate, and with private equity the requirements are to be profitable as possible at any moment political parties can and might impact on that profitability by legislating carbon tax of some description.

The lack of an emissions trading scheme has been a major drag on energy investment. You're correct that it's largely politics, and the former Government played it only one way.

Ahh that's what i was trying to remember the name of "Emissions Trading Scheme"

An ETS that just an additional tax for the government royalties on minerals and petroleum something renewables do not have to pay

One more seat to go for the ALP

Well its is going to be an interesting time for the ALP in the senate, the Greens are really going to push them hard on climate policy

But really I have to wonder about Adam Bandt with this fantasy stuff

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-26/ ... 1211634414

Labor must abandon support for coal and gas, says Greens leader
Greens leader Adam Bandt says the Australian government will struggle to improve relationships across the pacific if it continues to support coal and gas projects.

Former pacific leaders have welcomed Labor's more ambitious emissions reduction targets but have also called for the new government to take more urgent action.

Mr Bandt says climate change poses an existential threat to pacific island nations and Labor must abandon its support for coal and gas.

“Labor will find it very difficult to re-establish good relationships with our pacific island neighbours if labor keeps opening new coal and gas projects.

Considering that the Chinese are planning on building over 40 more coal power plants

https://time.com/6090732/china-coal-pow ... emissions/

China is planning to build 43 new coal-fired power plants and 18 new blast furnaces — equivalent to adding about 1.5% to its current annual emissions — according to a new report. The new projects were announced in the first half of this year despite the world’s largest polluter pledging to bring its emissions to a peak before 2030, and to make the country carbon neutral by 2060.

Its going to be interesting to watch the ALP policy on this

https://www.theage.com.au/business/comp ... 5ao15.html

Australia’s coal and gas exporters could face higher hurdles to develop new projects and stricter emissions limits under the Albanese government, but analysts are not expecting drastic policy changes as Labor vows it will not buckle to pressure from the Greens.

While Labor has committed to supporting new projects across the country’s multibillion-dollar coal and gas industries, Greens leader Adam Bandt has begun ratcheting up pressure for the new government to veto all new fossil fuel developments. The Greens are on track to gain the balance of power in the Senate, meaning the Albanese government may need to rely on the party’s support to create new laws.