Sunday, 3 November 2013

Comparison doesn't show Tony Abbott in a good light


Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard: montage from Google Images

Expenses paid by the Dept. Of Finance during a period when Julia Gillard was Prime Minister of Australia and Tony Abbott was Leader of the Opposition:
Courtesy of @FrancieJones

Note: Overseas travel costs have been omitted from this list. 
These figures can be found at  (Abbott) 
and  (Gillard).

Saturday, 2 November 2013

NBN: What Tony Abbott's digital illiteracy means for rural and regional Australia


Australian Minister for Communications Malcolm Bligh Turnbull, the man Prime Minister Abbott insisted (in a breathtaking display of digital ignorance) virtually invented the Internet, has ground the National Broadband Network rollout to a halt.

Leaving rural and regional Australia, its communities and businesses, on the other side of an ever-widening digital divide.

Financial Review 31 October 2013:

Construction firms building the national broadband network have told sub-contractors they will have to wait up to five months before receiving more work, as the rollout of fibre optic cabling grinds to a halt.
NBN Co revealed that in October a 10th of its standard workload was carried out. Small work crews physically rolling out fibre cabling along streets and into homes say they will need to cut dozens of staff if there is no further work.
The company managing the rollout revealed on Tuesday that just a third of the more than 900,000 homes it planned to pass with fibre over the next 12 months would finish construction. It would not issue contracts to construct the remaining 600,000 existing premises where network build had not yet begun, prompting criticisms from Labor and community groups....

Rather predictably Nationals MP for Cowper and Assistant Minister for Employment, Luke Hartsuyker, is attempting to deny reality - blaming the former Labor government for what the Abbott Government is doing.

According to him; "The Coalition is committed to being honest with Australians about the NBN rollout. We will implement the policy that we took to the election." [The Daily Examiner,1 November 2013,p3]

In March 2013 Hartsuyker stated on his own website that; Up to two million Australian households cannot get decent fixed-line high speed broadband...Regional Australia stands to benefit more than most from the rollout of high speed broadband...The Coalition’s broadband policy will put a priority on rolling out high speed broadband to those communities where it is needed most... 

Eliminating over half a million homes/businesses across the country from the fibre-to-the-premises high speed broadband connection rollout, with no indication if they will be included in any rollout of fibre-to-the-node, does not appear to be meeting the election promises made by the Nationals to NSW North Coast voters.

In the Clarence Valley alone, an estimated 51,346 men, women and children in 23,873 homes now have no idea if or when the National Broadband Network will reach them.

Nationals MP for Page, Kevin Hogan, is yet to make comment.

Hockey accused of punting with taxpayer dollars


Is Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey taking a leaf out of Peter Costello’s game plan and 'cooking' the nation’s books....

The Sydney Morning Herald 29 October 2013:

Reserve Bank governor Glenn Stevens has effectively confirmed that Joe Hockey is blowing several hundred million dollars in an attempt to make his performance as Treasurer look good. Never underestimate the vanity of politicians.
Forget a few thousand here and there on the cost of weddings and Cairns “meetings”, Hockey’s petty budget politics will cost tax payers about $300 million over the next 12 months and another couple of hundred million the next year....
The RBA certainly didn’t ask for Hockey’s $8.8 billion capital injection and didn’t think it was necessary.
That’s the extra $8.8 billion the government is having to borrow and pay interest on while blowing out “Labor’s” 2013-14 budget deficit by the same amount....
But don’t take my word for it. Here’s how Stevens explains Hockey’s borrowing binge:
“The high exchange rate has also had a significant impact on the Reserve Bank's own balance sheet. It led to a decline in the value of the Bank's foreign assets and hence a diminution in the Bank's capital, to a level well below that judged by the Reserve Bank Board to be prudent. This has been a topic of some interest of late. Our annual reports have made quite clear over several years now that, while this rundown in capital in the face of a very large valuation loss was exactly what such reserves were designed for, we considered it prudent to rebuild the capital at the earliest opportunity. It has been clear that the Bank saw a strong case not to pay a dividend to the Commonwealth during this period, preferring instead to retain earnings, so far as possible, to increase the Bank's capital. That rebuilding could in fact have taken quite a few years, given the low level of earnings......
So “Labor’s” deficit blows out to about $40 billion this year, but Hockey’s heroic efforts to reduce the debt in the years ahead will be enhanced by a rich stream of dividends from the RBA. The last time the Aussie had a sharp fall, the RBA paid the government a dividend of more than $5 billion. Trader Joe is playing the forex market with borrowed money.


Friday, 1 November 2013

A reminder of cost of living figures BEFORE Abbott & Co have a chance to dismantle the national carbon pricing system


The Sydney Morning Herald 30 October 2013:

Australia's official inflation rate may be 2.2 per cent, but for most Australians the cost of living is scarcely rising.
New estimates released Wednesday show that for households headed by working Australians the cost of living climbed just 0.9 per cent in the year to September.
The Bureau of Statistics says among households headed by Australians on benefits, old age pensioners and retirees the cost of living climbed 2 per cent.
The estimates are lower than the official inflation figure because they include the cost of mortgage repayments, which has been sliding.
During the year in which the costs faced by working Australians climbed 0.9 per cent the wage price index climbed 3 per cent.
Electricity prices are climbing at their lowest annual pace in six years - just 6.1 per cent....

Economists reject Abbott's Direct Action Plan: "any economist who did not opt for emissions trading "should hand his degree back"


The Sydney Morning Herald 28 October 2013:

A Fairfax Media survey of 35 prominent university and business economists found only two believed direct action was the better way to limit Australia's greenhouse gas emissions. Thirty - or 86 per cent - favoured the existing carbon price scheme. Three rejected both schemes.
Internationally renowned Australian economist Justin Wolfers, of the Washington based Brookings Institution and the University of Michigan, said he was surprised that any economists would opt for direct action, under which the government will pay for emissions cuts by businesses and farmers from a budget worth $2.88 billion over four years.
Professor Wolfers said direct action would involve more economic disruption but have a lesser environmental pay-off than an emissions trading scheme, under which big emitters must pay for their pollution.
BT Financial's Dr Chris Caton said any economist who did not opt for emissions trading "should hand his degree back".

Thursday, 31 October 2013

Prime Minister Tony Abbott's 50 day boast is risible


Herald Sun 26 October 2013:

Fifty days into the job, Prime Minister Tony Abbott says he's already delivered on many of his election promises, and that includes stopping the boats.

The Prime Minister made this boast fifty days after the 7 September 2013 federal election.

Since Tony Abbott was sworn in a Prime Minister of Australia on 18 September there has been an estimated 13 SIEV boats that either arrived in Australian waters or were found in distress in international waters in the 33 days up to the last Sovereign Borders reporting period.

This roughly averages out to two boat arrivals each day.

Perhaps the Prime Minister might like to explain how this is a “delivered” election promise?

It was an impossible promise when he made it - a fact of which he was well aware.

Surprise, surprise - most Australian newspapers ignore peer-reviewed climate change science


The Guardian 31 October 2013:

One third of articles in Australia’s major newspapers rejected or cast doubt on the overwhelming findings of climate science, with climate sceptic Andrew Bolt monopolising coverage of the topic in several high-circulation News Corporation titles, according to a new analysis.
A study of 602 articles in 10 newspapers by the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism found that 32% dismissed or questioned whether human activity was causing the climate to change. The articles were analysed between February and April in 2011 and again in the same period in 2012.
Significantly, newspapers based a small fraction of their coverage on peer-reviewed science, instead relying heavily on comment pieces penned by writers without a scientific background.
According to the research, the number of articles on climate science decreased in 2012 compared to the previous year, although the tone became more sharply sceptical of the established scientific position in this period.
When measured according to words allocated to an article, 31% did not accept established climate science in 2011, with this number rising to 44% in 2012.
The high levels of scepticism were driven by the editorial leanings of market-leading News Corporation titles and, in particular, its syndicated columnist Andrew Bolt, the study found.....

The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism 2012 study:


The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism 2011 study:


2.1 COVERAGE OF CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY

·    Overall, negative coverage of the Gillard government’s carbon policy across ten newspapers outweighed positive coverage across ten Australian newspapers by 73% to 27%. (Note: After neutral items were discounted).See Section 4.5, Content of articles: Stance towards the 2011 Carbon Reduction Policy
·     All papers contained some positive and a substantial amount of neutral material. The highest level of neutral articles was found in The Age and The Mercury, the lowest level was found in the NT News and The Daily TelegraphSee Section 4.5, Content of articles: Stance towards the 2011 Carbon Reduction Policy
·     After neutral items were discounted, negative coverage (82%) across News Ltd newspapers far outweighed positive (18%) articles. This indicates a very strong stance against the carbon policy adopted by the company that controls most Australian metropolitan newspapers, and the only general national daily. See Section 4.5, Content of articles: Stance towards the 2011 Carbon Reduction Policy
·     By comparison, Fairfax was far more balanced in its coverage of the policy than News Ltd publications with 57% positive articles outweighing 43% negative articles.See Section 4.5, Content of articles: Stance towards the 2011 Carbon Reduction Policy
·         The Age was more positive (67%) rather than negative towards the policy than any other newspaper. The Daily Telegraph was the most negative (89%) rather than positive of newspapers. See Section 4.5, Content of articles: Stance towards the 2011 Carbon Reduction Policy
·     Headlines were less balanced than the actual content of articles. See.
·     Neutral articles were more likely to be headlined negative (41%) than positive (19%).See Section 4.6, Carbon Tax or Carbon Policy? Defining the debate
·     Readers relying on metropolitan newspapers living in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane received more coverage of carbon policy issues than readers in Perth, Adelaide and Darwin. See Section 4.2 Number of articles
·     The Australian gave far more space to the coverage of climate change than any other newspaper. Its articles were coded 47% negative, 44% neutral and 9% positive. When neutrals were discounted, there were 84% negative articles compared to 17% positive. See Section 4.5, Content of articles: Stance towards the 2011 Carbon Reduction Policy

2.4 SOURCES IN THE AUSTRALIAN MEDIA

These findings are based on an analysis of the first three sources quoted in all news and features.
·     11% of news and features quoted no source and 30% of the rest quoted only one source. The claims by many single sources about the likely impact of the carbon policy were not tested against the views of other sources. Only 42% of the rest of the articles included more than two sources. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Political sources were used more frequently than any other sources (54% of all sources), reflecting the intensity of the political debate. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Federal Labor sources were 28% of all first sources. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Business sources (23%) received greater representation overall than Coalition political sources (18%).See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Fossil fuel lobby and other big business sources opposed to the policy were very strongly represented, often without any critique or second source. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Clean energy and other businesses sources in favour of the tax received low coverage, particularly in News Ltd papers. They complained during the campaign that they were excluded and adopted specific strategies to address this with some success. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Although they played a key role in negotiations, The Australian Greens received low coverage (5% of all sources).See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Business sources (23%) receive more coverage than all Australian civil society sources together including unions, NGOS, think tanks, activists, members of the public, religious spokespeople, scientists and academics (17%).See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Business sources quoted 4 or more times over the 6-month period were quoted being negative towards the policy in almost 80% of occasions. Many Australian readers would have been left with the impression that the nearly the entire business community was opposed to the carbon price policy. In fact this was far from the truth. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Bluescope Steel was quoted 71 times, substantially more than any other business source. This was more than the number of times all NGOs and scientists combined were quoted. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Figure 17 also shows that peak councils such as the Business Council of Australia, Minerals Councils of Australia and Australian Coal Association achieved very strong representation. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted
·     Academics and scientists were also poorly represented. See Section 4.8, Sources quoted

2.6 OPINION

·     Journalists or regular columnists wrote 75% of opinion pieces. See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     59% of that commentary was negative, 23% neutral and 18% positive. 
·     All newspapers carried some positive commentary. See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     The Herald Sun opinion writers were overwhelmingly negative (96%). The Courier Mail (89%), The Australian (85%), The Daily Telegraph (85%), The NT News (85%) and The West Australian (85%) were also very negative in their commentary. (When neutral figures were removed).See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     The Mercury was more balanced in its commentary than other News Ltd papers. See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     Andrew Bolt and Terry McCrann, who are sceptical towards the scientific consensus on anthropomorphic climate change, published more opinion pieces on the carbon pricing policy than any other commentators. See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     Together, opinion writers who are sceptical of the scientific consensus on climate change including McCrann, Bolt, Tim Blair, Miranda Devine, Piers Akerman and Christopher Pearson accounted for at least 21% of all words of commentary published by journalists and regular commentators in the ten newspapers over this period. Their columns are prominently featured online, often accompanied by highly negative cartoons and illustrations. See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     Opinion pieces in The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age were more evenly distributed between negative and positive than News Ltd opinion pieces. See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     The Age was the only paper to publish more positive commentary (59%) compared to negative (41%). See Section 4.10, Opinion
·     Fairfax newspapers did not publish any opinion articles by climate sceptics about climate policy, during this period. See Section 4.10, Opinion