Ethics

Castle tackles inclusivity with exclusivity

The board of Rugby Australia (RA) has capitulated at the altar of political correctness. CEO Raelene Castle unconvincingly announced the reasons why Israel Folau’s contract has been terminated. This is a board that acted on external activism. It buckled. Castle squirmed around the question of whether sponsors had applied pressure or not. What Folau said was unnecessary but how is it other players can get arrested and get away with a written warning?

Ultimately, RA will feel the wrath at the ticket office from already disgruntled paying fans. Attendance continues to slide. RA losses are expected for 2019 following the losses in 2017. The 2018 profit was merely due to an exceptional item. Perhaps Folau’s termination will help plug the hole in the P&L. No wonder losses are being made, given the pitiful performances led by a man with the worst record of any Wallabies coach. Why is he still there?

Australia will be lucky to make it beyond the quarterfinals at the Rugby World Cup in Japan this year. Yet the CEO and board tolerate his woeful record. CM has long argued Michael Cheika can’t unite that team. His record proves it. His team rally behind him publicly but their faces tell a different story.

Castle is out of her depth. She might have cried inclusiveness but there was no conviction in the press conference. Inclusiveness, to many of those on the left, is limited to whatever they prescribe. Stray from the party line and get excluded. Her eyes said it all in the press conference – she is definitely no crisis manager.

Folau, on the other hand, didn’t accept a $1m buy off to walk away so RA could wash their hands of the matter. He stuck and continues to stick to his faith. Hopefully, he takes it all the way to the High Court to leave RA with more egg on its face.

Let’s be clear. Folau hasn’t called for violence against homosexuals. Yet why is it just that group that is singled out as victims? CM ticked a few boxes on his tweet. Surely CM’s right to feeling oppressed is just as valid on the faux outrage scale. Where are the drunkards, adulterers and fornicators calling for his head? Nowhere. With good reason. Because 99.9% of people probably rolled their eyes at the tweet and moved on.

Look at RA’s Male Champions of Change (MCC) program. This is the focus of RA and it is not rugby. RA’s website openly states the following,

MCC works with influential leaders and encourages them to take action towards gender equality. 

Rugby Australia is a proud supporter of MCC and our Chief Executive Raelene Castle has recently been appointed as a Special Advisor on the MCC Sport program. 

This program aims to enhance the involvement of women in all aspects of sport and works with key stakeholders to achieve pay equity.

What on earth could have possessed RA to hire an activist as CEO? Castle also promotes on the RA website:

I have seen the challenges first hand and I have a personal passion to ensure that the gender equality discussion is at the forefront across all aspects of our society.

Quite frankly 99% of her customers couldn’t care less about RA’s stance on gender equality nor the group’s wish to drive it across society. They want to see good rugby. They d not see it as RA’s job to tell them how to behave. RA is answering questions nobody is asking.  If female coaches are better than the males, no male rugby supporter will care if the team is quite literally putting scores on the board. No one needs or wants RA’s activism which also extends to male domestic violence. How about female domestic violence against men? Take a look at the stats. Let’s just beat up on toxic masculinity because it is easier.

Where was the board when Wallabies flanker David Pocock encouraged school kids to join the climate strike or retweeted posts mocking climate skeptics? Is his climate activism ranked above Folau’s quoting of a religious text? Did RA do anything when Pocock was arrested for chaining himself to an excavator for 10 hours at the Maules Creek mine? He was charged with “trespass, remaining on enclosed land without lawful excuse and hindering the working of mining equipment.” Raelene Castle wasn’t CEO at the time but Cameron Clyne, Paul McLean and Ann Sherry were and still are board members. Where is the balance in sanctions handed out?

Let’s not forget the double standards of Pocock. He can find it in his heart to play for a team that is sponsored by Qantas which emits more carbon dioxide per passenger-kilometre than any other airline operating across the Pacific, according to an analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation. Oh, the irony that he also happily played for a team that was sponsored by gas-guzzling Land Rover SUVs. Nary a peep from the climate activist when it lines his pockets.

What will the other devout Christian Pacific Islanders do? Will they leave the Wallabies en masse? They’re good enough to find homes in other sides. The Japanese would welcome them.

If the RA board think they’ve reached a moral high ground in this decision they’re seriously mistaken. Trying to pay him off was the first big mistake because his faith trumped their expediency. They thought he was all bluster, just like the players who threatened to boycott the team if he remained. Folau wasn’t for sale.

CM has repeatedly said that Folau’s remarks in a public forum were unnecessary but defends his right to say them.

Castle’s decision is a perfect representation of the growing trend of allowing virtue signaling to infect a board which will spectacularly backfire. This is no different to Gillette, Colgate and other brands trying to do moral preening. People want the product. Start throwing lashings of political correctness and watch customers desert them. Footy Show anyone? Trying to be a ‘woke’ corporate is the closest thing to sleepwalking off a cliff.

Brexit Party’s want to change politics for good

Doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs, housewives, fishers etc. Ordinary people fed up with the duplicitous House of Commons which has failed to deliver on Brexit. Very sensible campaign and is there any wonder why in the space of a few months, the Brexit Party is polling at more than Labour and the Tories combined. Forget incumbency. If only Australia had a credible third option to shake the orthodoxy. It will eventually come because neither party has got the people at heart.

Actually, vote on the political emergency

No surprise to see The Guardian parrot on about a climate emergency. The editorial completely misses out on the political emergency we face. The economic climate is a massive issue facing Australia. When Bill Shorten tells us that he “will change the nation forever” we shouldn’t view that positively. It is probably the honest thing he has said. Labor’s policy suite is the worst possible collection one could assemble to tackle what economic headwinds lie ahead. Our complacency is deeply disconcerting.

First let’s debunk the climate noise in The Guardian.

The math on the climate emergency is simple. Australia contributes 0.0000156% of global carbon emissions. No matter what we do our impact is zip. If we sell it as 560 million tonnes it sounds huge but the percentage term is all that is relevant. Even Dr Finkel, our climate science guru, agrees. What that number means is that Australia could emit 65,000x what it does now in order to get to a 1% global impact. So even if our emissions rise at a diminishing rate with the population, they remain minuscule.

Bill Shorten often tells us the cost of doing nothing on climate change is immeasurable. He’s right, only in that “it is too insignificant” should be the words he’s searching for.

Perhaps the saddest part of the Guardian editorial was to say that the Green New Deal proposed by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez was gaining traction in the US. It has been such a catastrophic failure that she lost an unsolicited vote on the Senate floor 57-0 because Democrats were too embarrassed to show up and support it. Nancy Pelosi dismissed it as a “green dream.” At $97 trillion to implement, no wonder AOC says feelings are more important than facts.

With the 12-year time limit to act before we reach the moving feast known as the tipping point, it gets confusing for climate sceptics. Extinction Rebellion wants things done in only 6 years. The UK House of Commons still can’t get a Brexit deal done inside 3 years but can act instantaneously to call a “climate emergency” after meeting a brainwashed teenager from Sweden. It speaks volumes of the desperation and lack of execution to have to search for political distractions like this.

The ultimate irony in the recent celebration of no coal-fired power in the UK for one week was fossil fuel power substituted all of it – 93% to be exact. Despite the energy market operator telling Brits that zero carbon emissions were possible by 2025 (40% of the current generation capacity is fossil fuel), it forgot that 85% of British homes heat with gas. Presumably, they’d need to pop on down to Dixon’s or Curry’s to buy new electric heaters which would then rely on a grid which will junk 40% of its reliable power…good luck sorting that out without sending prices sky high. Why become beholden to other countries to provide the back-up? It is irrational.

Are people aware that the German electricity regulator noted that 330,000 households (not people) were living in energy poverty? At 2 people per household, that is 1% of the population having their electricity supply cut off because they can’t afford to pay it. That’s what expensive renewables do. If the 330,000 could elect cheap electricity to warm their homes or go without for the sake of the climate, which would they choose? 100% cheap, reliable power. Yet Shorten’s plan can only push more into climate poverty which currently stands at 42,000 homes. This is before the economy has started to tank!

If one looks across Europe, it is no surprise to see the countries with the highest level of fossil fuel power generation (Hungary, Lithuania & Bulgaria) have the lowest electricity prices. Those with more renewables (Denmark, Germany & Belgium), the highest. That is Australia’s experience too. South Australia and Victoria have already revealed their awful track record with going renewable. Why did Coca-Cola and other industries move out of SA after decades? They couldn’t make money with such an unreliable

Ahh, but we must protect our children and grandchildren’s futures. So low have the left’s tactics sunk that using kids as human shields in the fight for climate change wards off conservatives calling out the truth because it is not cool to bully brainwashed kids. We should close all our universities. As the father of two teenagers, CM knows they know everything already so there is little requirement for tertiary education!

The Guardian mentioned, “But in Australia, the Coalition appears deaf to the rising clamour from the electorate [on climate change].” Really?

CM has often held that human consumption patterns dictate true feelings about climate change. Climate alarmist Independent candidate Zali Steggall drives a large SUV and has no solar panels on her roof! Her battleground in the wealthy seat of Warringah is probably 70%+ SUV so slapping a Zali bumper sticker does nothing but add to the hypocrisy.

Why do we ignore IATA forecasts that project air travel will double by 2030? Qantas has the largest carbon offset program in the world yet only 2% elect to pay the self-imposed tax. Isn’t that telling? That is the problem. So many climate alarmists expect others to do the heavy lifting.

SUVs make up 43% of all new car sales in Australia. In 2007 it was 19%. Hardly the activity of a population fretting about rising sea levels. In Warringah, waterfront property sales remain buoyant and any bank that feared waves lapping the rooves of Burran Avenue would not take such portfolio risk, much less an insurance company.

Shorten’s EV plan is such a dud that there is a reason he can’t cost it. Following Norway is great in theory but the costs of installing EV infrastructure is prohibitively expensive. It will be NBN Mark II. Will we spend millions to trench 480V connectors along the Stuart Highway?

Norway state enterprise, Enova, said it would install fast chargers every 50km of 7,500km worth of main road/highway. Australia has 234,820km of highways/main roads. Fast chargers at every 50km like the Norwegians would require a minimum of 4,700 charging stations across Australia. Norway commits to a minimum of 2 fast chargers and 2 standard chargers per station.

The problem is our plan for 570,000 cars per annum is 10x the number of EVs sold in Norway, requiring 10x the infrastructure. That would cost closer to $14bn, or the equivalent of half the education budget.

The Guardian griped that “Scott Morrison’s dismissive response to a UN report finding that the world is sleepwalking towards an extinction crisis, and his parliamentary stunt of fondling a lump of coal”

Well, he might doubt the UN which has been embroiled in more scandals related to climate change than can be counted. Most won’t be aware that an internal UN survey revealed the dismay of unqualified people being asked for input for the sake of diversity and inclusion as opposed to choosing those with proper scientific qualifications. The UN has climbed down from most of its alarmist predictions, often citing no or little confidence of the original scare.

Yet this election is truly about the cost of living, not climate or immigration. The biggest emergency is to prepare for the numbers we can properly set policy against.

We have household debt at a record 180% of GDP. We have had 27 years of untrammelled economic growth. Unfortunately, we have traded ourselves into a position of too much complacency. Our major 4 banks are headed for a lot of trouble. Forget meaningless stress tests. APRA is too busy twiddling its thumbs over climate change compliance. While the Royal Commission may reign in loose lending, a slowing global economy with multiple asset bubbles including houses will come crumbling down. These banks rely 40% on wholesale markets to fund growth. A sharp slowdown will mean a weaker dollar which will only exacerbate the problem.

We have yet to see bond markets price risk correctly. Our banks are horribly exposed. They have too little equity and a mortgage debt problem that dwarfs Japan in the late 1980s. Part/whole nationalization is a reality. The leverage is worse than US banks at the time of the Lehman collapse.

We have yet to see 10% unemployment rates. We managed to escape GFC with a peak of 6% but this time we don’t have a buoyant China to rescue us. Consumers are tapped out and any upward pressure on rates (to account for risk) will pop the housing bubble. Not to worry, Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen assures people not to panic if their home falls into negative equity! This is the level of economic nous on the catastrophe that awaits. It is insanely out of touch.

Are our politicians aware that the US has to refinance US$8.4 trillion in US Treasuries in the next 3 years? That amount of money will crowd out a corporate bond market which has more than 50% of companies rated BBB or less. This will be compounded by the sharp rise in inventories we are witnessing on top of the sharp slowdown in trade (that isn’t just related to the trade war) which is at GFC lows. The 3.2% US economic growth last quarter was dominated by “intellectual property”, not consumption or durable goods.

China car sales have been on a steep double-digit decline trajectory for the last 9 months. China smartphone shipments dwindle at 6 year lows. In just the first four months of 2019, Chinese companies defaulted on $5.8 billion of domestic bonds, c.3.4x the total for the same period of 2018. The pace is over triple that of 2016.

Europe is in the dumps. Germany has had some of the worst industrial production numbers since 2008. German GDP is set to hit 0.5% for 2019. France 1.25% and Italy 0.25%. Note that in 2007, there were 78mn Europeans living in poverty. In the following decade, it hit 118mn or 23.5% of the population.

Global bellwether Parker Hannifin, which is one of the best lead indicators of global industrial growth, reported weaker orders and a soft outlook which suggests the outlook for global growth is not promising.

This election on Saturday is a choice between the lesser of two evils. The LNP has hardly made a strong case for reelection given the shambolic leadership changes. Take it to the bank that neither will be able to achieve surpluses with the backdrop we are headed into. Yet when it comes to economic stewardship, it is clear Labor are out of their depth in this election. Costings are wildly inaccurate but they are based on optimistic growth scenarios that simply don’t exist. We cannot tax our way to prosperity when global growth dives.

Hiking taxes, robbing self-managed super fund retirees and slamming the property market might play well with the classes of envy but they will be the biggest victims of any slowdown. Australia has run out of runway to keep economic growth on a positive footing.

We will do well to learn from our arrogance which has spurned foreign investment like Adani. We miscalculate the damage done to the national brand. Adani has been 8 years in the making. We have tied the deal up in so much onerous red tape, that we have done nothing more than treating our foreign investors with contempt. Those memories will not be forgotten.

There will come a point in years to come where we end up begging for foreigners to invest at home but we will only have ourselves to blame.

The editorial closes with,

However you choose to exercise your democratic decision-making on Saturday, please consider your candidate’s position on climate and the rapidly shrinking timeframe for action. We have endured mindless scare campaigns and half-baked policy for too many decades. We don’t have three more years to waste.

This is the only sensible quote in the entire article. The time for action is rapidly shrinking. However, that only applies to the political and economic climate. One can be absolutely sure that when the slowdown hits, saving the planet will be furthest removed from Aussie voters’ minds.

Winning over climate skeptics with profanity

Bill Nye, ‘the Science Guy,‘ went on John Oliver’s program to convince the few remaining climate skeptics with profanity instead of proof. CM is sold! Funny how the left believes that expletives will win the day, similar to the shutdowns at the Katowice COP summit. No reasoned debate. Just mocking and shaming of those who don’t conform to the group think. The climate emergency should be called on people like this who make claims the world will be up to 8 degrees hotter by 2100.

Will Bill Shorten declare a climate emergency?

Why is Greenpeace demanding PM Scott Morrison declare a ‘climate emergency’? Why not badger Bill Shorten? Labor has an uncosted climate change policy but gone one step short of declaring a full blown “climate emergency” despite the cost of doing nothing being so huge. Probably because climate change isn’t as big an election issue as made out and declaring catastrophe might wreck his chances to move into The Lodge.

Ironically Greenpeace just wrote about the success of Extinction Rebellion with respect to climate emergency. In the process revealing how useless it is at public advocacy to praise a rival playing in the same donation pool. Will these two leftist groups eat each other in months to come when they realize they’re fighting over the same funds?

Are the Greens expecting the Libs to hold onto power? Even if Morrison declared an emergency, not one Greens voter would put Liberal as their second preference.

What we do know is the Greens love law breakers. It is a $3,000 + GST per person fine to climb onto unauthorized parts of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. 15 of them. $45,000 for Premier Gladys Beijiklian. It doesn’t matter if they were experienced abseilers. They should be prosecuted.

Instead of condemning illegal activity the Greens, true to form, were applauding! NSW Greens politician, Cate Faehrmann, was quick to say,

BREAKING: Protesters have scaled the Sydney Harbour Bridge calling on Australia to declare a climate emergency! I applaud their actions 100%. Governments aren’t listening so more and more people are taking desperate action to be heard.”

Imagine if pro-Adani groups handed out leaflets on the benefits to jobs and the economy. The Greens would censure the activity as unconstitutional and demand they be arrested and jailed for heresy.

No, ScoMo!

For a Conservative party to push a subsidy of up to 20% of the value of a property for first time home buyers shows how bereft of policy it is. When Vic Premier Daniel Andrews raised a similar plan in March 2017 CM trashed it.

Think about it. Home prices have started to fall in major capitals because of a lack of demand thanks to astronomical prices and tapped out borrowers. This is before the Royal Commission puts the brakes on lending.

Why provide a subsidy to first home buyers toward the top of a bubble? It is not the role of the taxpayer to subsidize nor insure the downside risk in the event of the owner going into negative equity. What happened to free market economics?

What will this 20% subsidy do? If a couple go house hunting with a budget of $800,000, they will be able to shoot for a $1mn property. It might end up being the same property, pushed up by the desperate buyer thanks to the subsidy creating a false sense of security. So the reality is the taxpayer and the homeowner may end up in the red the day they move in. What a policy!!

Has ScoMo just called the top of the property market?

UN endorsement speaks volumes

If a politician ever wanted to hunt for the worst possible endorsement, look no further than a reference from the UN. Christina Figueres, former UNFCCC climate chief and world government proponent has been meddling in our Aussie election.

Dr Kerryn Phelps proudly said on Sky News that she attended a meeting with climate scientists and Figueres. Figueres gave Phelps, Zali Steggall, Julia Banks and Rebekha Sharkie her seal of approval because of their stance on climate change (and because of their gender).

Figueres is a piece of work. She warned that climate change is so critical that  gender inequality should be tackled at the same time and she openly defended discrimination against males when it came to hiring in her department. Misandry?

The U.N. is home to many unsavory characters.

Who could forget when the World Health Organization (WHO) proposed Robert Mugabe to be an ambassador? What smell test could he possibly pass?

What about the UN AIDS Executive Director, Michel Sidibé,  who was responsible for creating a toxic environment that promoted “favoritism, preferment and ethical blindness.

Of the 670 staff members at the UN agency interviewed by independent investigators, 18 admitted they had experienced some form of sexual harassment in the previous year and a further 201 said they were on the wrong end of workplace abuse.

One staff member went on the record saying, “U.N.AIDS is like a predators’ prey ground…You have access to all sorts of people, especially the vulnerable: You can use promises of jobs, contracts and all sorts of opportunities and abuse your power to get whatever you want, especially in terms of sexual favors. I have seen senior colleagues dating local young interns or using U.N.AIDS resources to access sex workers.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who made it clear he had a zero tolerance policy with regards to sexual harassment when he took office,  refused to fire him. Despite his term ending in January 2020, Sidibé has offered to quit in June 2019 in order to ensure a stable transition period! In what world does a person outed for turning a blind eye to such a poisonous culture get to leave on his own terms? Sacred cows.

So these incidents prove without doubt the U.N. holds the moral high ground on so many fronts. We shouldn’t be surprised that Phelps thinks Figueres is a credible source. Phelps showed her disdain for the white male patriarchy on International Women’s Day.

Identity politics is poison. The irony within the fight for ‘identity representation’ in climate science was debunked by an internal UNIPCC survey a decade ago. The outcome was simple – it noted diversity (gender and ethnicity) were prioritized over ability. Several delegates, without any scientific credentials, gave the feedback they were way out of their depth and could not contribute any value to the process yet were asked to do so anyway. So much for the benefits of equality over ability?

While these four independent women may say they are conservative at heart, they are of the left. The U.N. endorsement from a hard socialist proves it.