The Climate of Deplorables

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” Never, have Groucho Marx’s words been more evident or reflective than opinions shared inside Ingsoc’s groupthink, back-slapping social media silos. Trump, Brexit, ScoMo–all results of racist, redneck, bigoted, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, small-minded, greedy, selfish, stupid, sexist pigs.

When Carl Jung uttered the words, “Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves” he challenged us to pick up the gauntlet of introspection, to better ourselves through self-reflection, and to cross-examine our values and beliefs in the context of the world in which we live. The world is not perfect nor is it fair, it’s complex, unforgiving, and dynamic. It’s a battleground for competing ideas, a fight for critical resources, and importantly, the environment in which you and your family live.

I’m a firm believer in the choice of an individual or people to resolve their own destiny, choose political leaders, progress economic agendas, build culture, and determine items of social importance: in other words, the right to self-determination. Politics is an avenue of expression, a timestamp of a country’s agenda, and ranked priorities. Some items are static, others transient but every three years, in free, fair, and democratic elections, Australians have the option to choose. No threat of military intimidation and no exclusion on the basis of race, sexuality, gender or religious beliefs. If you’re eligible, you can vote.

Elections are an opportunity for competing sides to debate. It’s the elucidation of ideas that gives voice to prosecute your case but also, raise doubt and table concerns over your opponent’s positions. It’s important that you define and defend your positions but when an opportunity to press your opponent’s argument presents, attack. The keys in knowing when to attack are discipline, timing, and severity: there’s nothing to be gained by taking a scorched earth approach when moderate action will suffice. Debates are as much about listening and comprehending as they are about talking. They are two-way dialogues, not one.

I’m not surprised Scott Morrison lead the Coalition to victory in the 2019 Federal Election. To those who would listen, I explained the moment he took the job, it became a status quo election, the Liberals finally had a leader who would fight, a confluence of domestic and international events conspired to create the conditions for victory, and the alternative, with its increasingly militant satellites and divisive messaging, was not palatable. In the object of transparency, I favour lean government, less intervention in the market, less burdensome taxes, the spirit of free enterprise, and freedom of thought, worship, speech, and association; I believe in the individual and your right to decide what’s best for you. I consider myself an engaged voter, solicit all matter of opinion, and routinely parse policy positions to better understand their potential economic, social, and cultural ramifications. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, “I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.” Jefferson’s message is precisely why my curious and open mind remains receptive to reasonable opinions, excellent policies, and some of my closest friends share divergent political beliefs. I see them for who they are and the value we add to our lives. Even as a LNP voter, I embrace Bob Hawke as one of Australia’s greatest ever Prime Ministers as his accomplishments helped lay the foundations for modern Australia. According to factions of Twitter, I’m a bigoted moron, dumb and mean-spirited, a truculent turd and Australians who voted incorrectly (i.e. the majority) support bigotry, rich people welfare, and are imagined to engage in soft xenophobia. Yeah…

British philosopher and Nobel laureate Bertrand Russell said, “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts” and “In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.” This election was billed as the climate change election so let’s investigate. In the 1970s, Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich predicted Earth would not be able to provide for its growing population and thanks to agricultural disaster, in the 1980s, some four billion people would perish in the Great Die Off. In 2006, Al Gore stated he “believes humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan.” More recently, US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated, “We’re, like, the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” There are countless other apocalyptic prognostications but I’ve chosen these few as they’re the most widely known and suspiciously, served to significantly increase Al Gore’s net worth (Dan Pena has a strong opinion on that)(and I suspect the same of Ehrlich given the book has sold 2 million copies) and garnered AOC significant publicity. There’s just one small problem: Ehrlich and Gore have been proven not only to be wrong, but tremendously wrong and Ocasio-Cortez walked back her position tweeting, “You’d have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge to think it’s literal”. Like cult leaders predicting armageddon, when the apocalypse doesn’t eventuate, the goalposts are moved. In truth, I can’t fault those demonstrating doubt, how could they not?

Would it surprise you to learn that in the 2018/2019 financial year, coal has replaced iron ore as our nation’s most valuable export? $67 billion in value (with a further $70 billion of new projects awaiting approval) and to further stress our reliance on resource exports, Australia has overtaken Qatar as the world’s top volume seller of liquified natural gas. We’re a mining, minerals, and resources dominant exporter and to think otherwise is frivolous. In the context of this election, Queensland endures the unenviable title of jobless capital of Australia and in outback Queensland, youth unemployment figures are tragic. In an electorate screaming for jobs, 1,500 new and the potential for a further 10,000 (yes, I have my suspicions about the number) in direct or indirect value created jobs with a mine life of 60 years is an attractive proposition. The Carmichael coal mine provides economic and social certainty for Queenslanders: it provides hope. Despite the fact global demand for coal is projected to slightly decrease, given its affordability, in Asia and the subcontinent, demand appears to be increasing. Do we transition away from coal-fired power stations in Australia and only export the resource or simply abandon the product all together? Without an immediate and commensurable export replacement, it’s economic vandalism and creates a real funding problem for hospitals and schools. In Queensland, Labor ran into several problems. The Palaszczuk government kept finding ways to retard the mine’s approval, Federal Labor proposed an alternative solution whilst sending mixed messages to regional and metropolitan electorates, and Bob Brown’s ill-conceived Stop Adani moral convoy polluted its way across the state. Consider these in context of a worker in the region. The Morrison government provided Commonwealth approval for the project (providing a level of certainty) where, despite calls from the CFMEU for Labor to support the coal mining industry, uncertainty and ambiguity plagued their campaign, and out of town zealots drove in on their high horses and told Queenslanders how they should live their lives. I’m a firm believer people seek out the dignity of work and when it’s your livelihood on the line, food on your table, the bills paid, and your children living in safety and comfort, whilst there may be better long-term solutions, when a human face is put on a decision, the tangible now choice becomes obvious. Labor’s primary vote in Queensland collapsed to 27.3 percent resulting in the party winning only 6 of the available 30 seats–the coalition won 23.

If the science is to be believed, large swathes of the Great Barrier Reef aren’t dying, it’s dead. Mass coral bleaching and “other threats” have supposedly rendered this beautiful ecosystem a wasteland. That’s a shame because when I visited this $56 billion asset and cultural icon in 2004, I was flummoxed by it’s sheer size, diversity, and obvious beauty. Confusion as to its current health abounds because one minute, the reef is showing signs of recovery and the next, heatwaves are compromising its ability to recover. The head of the Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators maintains studies are misleading and exaggerate damage with funding typically supplied by the public teat. The inference seems obvious: researchers are overstating damage to the reef in order to maintain their grant funding. I don’t know which position is correct but when I read a study that states, “little is known about bleaching frequency prior to 1979 when regular modern systematic scientific observations on the Great Barrier Reef began” and “Reconstructed bleaching was evident through the entire available record from 1575 to 2001” my interest is piqued. Furthermore, studies have been conducted that lead to the conclusion increased solar activity may contribute to a significant portion of global warming or more obviously, “small changes in solar activity can impact Earth’s climate.” One minute, rising sea levels are bad for coral reefs the next, they may be beneficial. It’s all so confusing. Again, an open mind suggests climate change is a complex subject with multiple moving parts. Interestingly, the Ningaloo Reef seems to be remarkably healthy now with perceived issues modelled. Make of that what you will.

A big ticket policy item Labor took to the election was mandating “50 per cent of all new cars sold in Australia to be electric by 2030.” I love the ambition and believe over time, the market will accept more hybrid and electric vehicles however, just 0.3% of total sales in Australia in 2018 were electric. The implications seem obvious. As the world’s largest lithium producing country and with lithium being a key ingredient in batteries powering electric vehicles, Australia is poised to strengthen its export position but also, if managed correctly, attract investment, create jobs through the establishment of lithium mining projects, battery production, and spin-off industries. Overseas, developments in battery performance elicit excitement as it now appears the range bridge may be closing. All good news, right? The 2030 target date, despite it (apparently) only being aspirational immediately triggers concerns. Basic economics teaches students about the law of supply and demand and its relationship to price. If electric vehicles haven’t reached price parity by 2030, for people who can’t afford to upgrade their vehicles, with an increased number of EVs on the road, what happens to the price of traditional cars and petrol? Furthermore, the Federal government collects nearly $11 billion per annum in fuel excise revenue. Improved fuel efficiency and an increase in alternatively powered vehicles has seen this amount trend downward requiring the government to (already) seek alternative sources of revenue. Australia’s road network is over 900,000 kilometres of sealed and unsealed roads and the nation is home to some 6,400 petrol stations. The charging station problem becomes three-fold: either you’re asking existing petrol stations to make capital expenditures to install charging stations, market entrants are tasked with building the required infrastructure or private citizens will be required to charge their cars in private dwellings which, as current charging rates suggest, consigns off-peak electricity prices to the annals of history. What happens if you run out of charge in regional Australia? Are our power grids appropriately placed to expand and meet significantly higher energy demand? Service centre issues continue to dog Tesla and for mechanics, given an entire generation is not qualified to work on EVs, what happens there? Education and training opportunities should present but until mechanic supply is there to force competition, what do you think that means for the service price of your EV? I haven’t touched on queries relating to commercial vehicles, heavy haulage, and new product development lead times. If you’d like to watch a thought-provoking documentary, Who Killed the Electric Car is compelling viewing. To me, the aspirational idea of more electric vehicles is great, however, a more prudent target date to effect generational change would be 2050.

It’s impossible to discuss climate change without bringing up emissions and a country’s energy mix. Labor proposed by 2030, 50 per cent of the nation’s electricity would be sourced from renewables and it would reduce the nation’s pollution by 45 per cent on 2005 levels. I have no aversion to improving Australia’s energy mix, in fact, I favour a mix of coal, renewable energy, and nuclear and I have no problem with reducing pollution (despite acknowledging our relatively low percentage contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions as demonstrated by Alan Jones). Given large scale investments and developments in fourth generation nuclear reactors (even though we’ve known about the relative safety of molten-salt reactors since the 1950’s), when someone like Bill Gates says, “Nuclear is ideal for dealing with climate change, because it is the only carbon-free, scalable energy source that’s available 24 hours a day” you tend to listen–and investigate. That’s the crux of the matter: balancing our want to do good with economic reality. People can argue over government subsidies all they want, my request is simple: responsibly manage Australia’s energy supply to ensure cheap and reliable base load power. Australia is brimming with energy options and as a nation, we’d be silly not to investigate all. The Government’s Climate Solutions Package makes a number of measurable statements which appear to support meeting our agreed international obligations whilst the Federal Budget articulates funding for its energy policy (as well as outlining the LNP’s election platform). Bill Shorten put forward a $15 billion energy plan to help tackle climate change however, he refused to put a cost on his full climate change policy which BAEconomics modelled at potentially costing Australia’s economy anywhere between $264 billion and $542 billion over the next decade. That’s the problem with Labor’s position: too ambitious in too short a timeframe and with no detail as to the overall cost. Once again, had the timeframe been say 2050 (given climate warrior Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez walked back her the world is going to end in 12 years inflammatory remarks), it would seem more responsible and more realistic. Like the coalminers in North Queensland, the market loves certainty and by refusing to price the total cost of Labor’s climate change policy, why would a nation commit to something as such? When in doubt, vote no.

The above essay only scratches the surface of climate change discussion: it’s barely one level deep. In broader election commentary, I haven’t touched on the glaring issues with Labor’s franking credits fiasco, its attack on family trusts, the obvious outcomes of its negative gearing policy, queries over the ACTU’s death tax position, concern over perceived social engineering efforts, the Greens’ assault on free speech, the top end of town class warfare messaging, and the controversy surrounding GetUp!’s conduct. What the outraged don’t appear to understand is these discussions occur every day, they’re in offices, on the sidewalk, on trains, and over dinner except they’re outside the social media bubble. People need to realise governments govern for everybody not just the few. If you take the time to engage rather than judge, you might hear people champion ideas like green finance initiatives and the thoughtful commentary of Australia’s truculent turds, if you’re willing to hang a question mark on the things you’ve long taken for granted, may pleasantly surprise.

Comments

  1. The last time I looked, Australia was a democracy. Rational debate is what I’m interested in, not being fed BS or being bullied into others’ opinions. Forget or ignore this, as some of our politicians did, and you will pay the price. A myriad of points well made, Erik.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.