Abbott and the Coalition refuse to release Parliamentary Budget Office advice on the limited number of policy commitments it submitted for costing

Australian Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and the Coalition released unsubstantiated policy commitment costing figures on the afternoon of 5 September 2013 which was less than two days before the federal election polling booths open.

Abbott refuses to release Parliamentary Budget Office advice on the limited number of policy commitments actually submitted for independent assessment.

The following document produced by Abbott, Hockey, Robb et al would be a rollicking eight-page farce or fractured fairy tale if the implications were not so serious for the country.

Coalition Costings Table by politicalalert

*Abbott photograph found at Google Images

Seems Rev Fred is moving

According to documents lodged with the AEC the registered office of the the Fred Nile Group (aka the CDP) is 1 Hamer Street Kogarah Bay and at that address one should expect to find Frederick John Nile.

A little bit of investigation revealed the property at 1 Hamer Street Kogarah Bay is set for auction at 4.00pm on Saturday 14th September. It's open for inspection on three occasions prior to auction time. Interestingly, one inspection time is this Saturday, election day, from 12 noon - 1.00pm.

Readers might recall the scorn heaped on Julia Gillard for the appearance of her kitchen. Well, take a gander at Fred's kitchen - there's not a tea towel in sight!

Agents describe the place as a "Light Filled Family Haven Of Space And Privacy" - seems an "e"was left out of the word beginning with "H"and ending with "n".

Could this be the room where the CDP power brokers assemble?
Fred's floor covering matches the colour of the NSW Upper House. Hmmmmm, perhaps his new bride isn't impressed with his choice of colours and seeks a new address.

Fred Nile's mob speak with forked tongues

Late yesterday (perhaps after dark) an assortment of junk mail was placed in letter boxes in the Lower Clarence area by persons working on behalf of Reverend Fred's lot. There was enough combustible material to start a bushfire.

However, two things about the junk (which was obviously left as a complete parcel of goodies) stirred things up.

1. The front of one piece of the junk advised voters to Vote 1 for Fred's candidate and then vote for your preferred prime minister. Turning the page over revealed what a pack of hypocrites the CDP are. There, the instructions for voters in the electorate of Page were to Vote 1 for one of Fred's flock and then vote 2 for the National Party candidate.

2. Accompanying Fred's junk was a flyer authorised by B Franklin of Level 8, 130 Elizabeth St, Sydney 2000 which North Coast Voices yesterday described as the work of political cowards. What was that flyer from the State Director of the NSW National Party doing with the other junk Fred left? No prizes for guessing that one!

The fine print on the CDP rubbish says it's authorised by Ian Smith of 9 Exeter Rd Homebush West 2140. Clarrie will be forwarding the entire package to Mr Smith (via Australia Post) without stamps. 

Stick that up your jumper, Mr Smith!

48 hours until the federal election polling booths open and Abbott still hasn't released Coalition policy costings

http://electioncostings.gov.au/coalition-costings/

NSW Nationals and Kevin Hogan act the political cowards yet again

Faced with more federal election campaign funding than they know what to do with and in the last week of the campaign, the NSW North Coast Nationals and their candidate in Page, Kevin Hogan, once more distribute attack advertising without either the word Nationals, the National Party logo or Kevin Hogan's name or photograph appearing on the flyer aimed at popular sitting MP Janelle Saffin.

This time campaign advisers have gone one step further and offered a little gratuitous young female flesh as a side order of nasty.

The previous attack flyer is here.

Dear 'Kevin Hogan For Page' - GO AWAAAAAY!

As the Nationals shift focus onto and election campaign money into the Page electorate, locals have not reacted favourably.

This selection of  voter comments concerning the advertising blitz appeared on their candidate, Kevin Hogan's, Facebook site.

Carly Woodstock With respect Kevin, may I ask how much was spent on your campaign and advertising? I'm sure that you are a great bloke - but in all honesty I really find it all a 'bit much'. I for one am finding it visually off putting seeing those signs and billboard banners plastered everywhere throughout our beautiful region...reminds me of Chairman Mao in the sense of it being quite suffocating. Best wishes, but as an upcoming voter - I would like to know the true cost $$$of your campaign.

August 29 at 1:08am

Heidi Jones I totally agree Carly - what a waste of money and resources. They are everywhere - on the corner, in the shopfronts, on the telegraph poles, in windows - it is a visual assault!!

August 31 at 1:28am

Tina Vitolins They are even leaking out down here in Grafton area too very much an eyesore and the amount of junk mail from you is horrendous lucky we can recycle !

21 hours ago

Elena Nieuwenhof can you please stop sending me like 200000000000 letters in the mail every week it getting really annoying and its not helping the environment nor is it persuading me to vote for you ~*bye*~

August 30 at 3:53am

David Hutton Yeah fuck off you moron

August 30 at 5:41am

Bonnie Martin Dear Kevin Bogan, today I received yet another letter in the mail from you, making all these ridiculous claims about saving households money and miraculously lowering interest rates. And yet under a Labor government we have the lowest interest rates I can remember. You say the Carbon Tax increases pressures on households... What about the GST. I'd rather a tax on destroying the environment over a tax on living.
If your wasteful spending on this election campaign is anything to go by I would not call you a good money manager. Everywhere I go in Lismore I see your angry face leering out, billboards, on the side of buses, on cars and shop fronts. You have 3 ads on TV. I hope the tax payer isn't footing this bill 

August 26 at 1:09am via mobile

Sonia Makings So today there were two girls that were in school uniform doing letter box drops in our street. Well I can assure you that not a lot if any were actually put IN letter boxes as there was a bundle of at least 45 dropped two houses away from ours. They were blowing down the street after they were dropped and myself and my two girls had to pick them all up. Not real happy at all!

August 27 at 1:50am via mobile

Josh McMahon ok i have liked you. now fix my problems. you can start with that leaky tap in the backyard. and the cat litter needs changing.

Mickey House I guess the opportunity has been missed but, where are the indigenous and ethic people in your campaign or commercials?

Do their families count?

Do their families' worries matter?

Abbott's proposed Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) will see carbon abatement costings shortfall of est. $35 billion up to 2020

In order to achieve a 5 per cent cut in emissions, RepuTex modelling indicates that the ERF would require additional funding of $35 billion between 2015 and 2020, or $41 billion in total. [RepuTex,August 2013,EMISSIONS TRADING VERSUS DIRECT ACTION,p 17]

Direct Action vs. ETS: Achieving Our Emissions Objectives

Posted on: 29.08.2013

RepuTex today released a research paper titled ‘Direct Action vs. Emissions Trading: Achieving Australia’s Emissions Reduction Objectives’.

In this report, commissioned by WWF-Australia, RepuTex analysed the ability of the Coalition’s Direct Action Plan and the government’s Emissions Trading policy to achieve Australia’s committed target to reduce emissions to 5-25% below 2000 levels by 2020. Research modelled the Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) of each policy at the industry level, examining abatement potential and the associated cost of each scenario through to 2020.

Key Findings:

• The retention of the ETS would deliver the full 146 Mt CO2-e of abatement necessary to meet Australia’s 5 per cent emissions reduction target, with approximately 55 per cent coming from domestic abatement and 45 per cent from international abatement. This would be achieved at an average carbon price of A$22 from FY15-20.
• Assuming the setting of ‘emissions intensity’ baselines and current funding, the Direct Action Plan is projected to lead to emissions growth of 16% on 2000 levels, driven by higher Power and Industrial sector emissions.
• Additional funding of A$6 bn is required per year for the Emissions Reduction Fund to achieve enough abatement for Australia to meet its 5% emissions reduction target.
• Alternatively, the setting of an ‘absolute emissions’ baseline could lead to significant domestic abatement and the meeting of Australia’s 5% emissions reduction target, however this would require a penalty price of $54 per tonne, and additional funding of A$3.3 bn per year.
• Regardless of the policy mechanism, the Power and Industrial sectors – notably the Mining, Energy and Chemicals industries – will pay for the achievement of Australia’s abatement objectives, either passing that cost to customers (under the ETS) or to government (under Direct Action).
• Under the latter, businesses will be required to outlay capital and other resources to deliver the abatement. It is then unclear if businesses will be guaranteed payment for abatement under the reverse auction mechanism.
• To limit emissions growth or drive emissions reductions, a penalty price under Direct Action must be set at A$54 to encourage companies to directly invest in abatement activities.

Download the full report via the link below (automatic download).  

Download this publication