Education

$14bn shock for Shorten. Not $100m

Image result for bill shorten ev

Let’s face it, pre-election budget boasting is a beauty contest we can do without. Fanciful promises guarantee we will not end up in surplus. Shorten’s speech was loaded with mistakes. Let’s cut through some numbers.

The Coalition put forward the following on Tuesday.

What escaped many in the Frydenberg budget of Tuesday is that to fund the 16.8% jump in tax receipts on 2018/19, individual taxpayers will still see their pockets hit +18.4% in aggregate even after including the ‘generous’ rebates. Superannuation tax collections will jump 43% in 4 years time.

NDIS spending is targeted to be 92% higher by 2022/23 than last year. Medicare +24%, public hospital assistance to the states +21%, aged care services +27%. For all the celebrations of lowering pharmaceutical rebates for one wonder drug from $120,000 to $6.50, the reality is spending in this segment will fall 18.4% in total. The family tax benefit will squeak 4% higher in the next 4 years.

As written on Tuesday, the revenue projections of the government are unrealistic as we stare at a slowing world economy. German industrial production in March cratered to 44.1 and China’s auto sales continued a 7-month double-digit slump in February.

Analyzing the Labor response

Shorten claimed NDIS was cut A$1.6bn to get a surplus. Under Frydenberg’s budget, NDIS for 2019/20 will rise A$4.5bn. Out to 2022/23, it rises to over A$24bn.

The Opposition Leader also made reference to A$14bn in cuts to public schools. Note the funding to public schools on 2013/14 was A$4.8bn. In 2018/19 it was $7.7bn and projected in 2022/23 to be A$10.4bn. 

$200mn to renovate nursing campuses in Australia won’t achieve much. The John Curtin Medical Research School at the ANU cost $130mn alone.

Shorten made reference to bushfires being caused by climate change. Fire & Rescue NSW notes that 90% of fires are either deliberately or accidentally set. A Royal Commission after the horrible Black Saturday bushfires showed that policies which restricted backburning reduction targets were to blame for the larger spread of fires, not climate change. In 2013, Tasmania learned none of the lessons with similar policy restrictions preventing the Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service to complete more than 4% of all the 2.6m hectares it manages. The reef is not being damaged by climate change and floods and drought are no more frequent or severe than a century ago.

While climate alarmists will relish the prospect of 50% electric vehicles (EV) and cut emissions 45% by 2030 to save the planet, a few truths need to be considered:

1) our own Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel, has admitted that no matter what Australia does to mitigate global warming our impact will be zero. Naught. Nada. Putting emotion to one side, is there any point in spending $10s of billions to drive electricity prices?

2) South Australia and Victoria have already beta tested what having a higher percentage of renewable energy does or rather doesn’t do for sustainable and reliable baseload power. Both states have not only the highest energy prices in Australia but the world. These stats are backed up in Europe. The EU member states with a higher percentage of renewables have steeper electricity prices than those with less. These are facts.

3) Consumption patterns matterLast year Aussies bought only 2,200 EVs. In 2008, SUVs made up 19% of the new car sales mix. Today they make up 43%.
In 2008, c.50m total passengers were carried on Australian domestic flights to over 61m today. The IATA expects passengers flown will double over the current level by 2030. These are hardly the actions of people panicked about cataclysmic climate change. Or if they are, they expect others to economize on their behalf.

Qantas boasts having the largest carbon offset program in place yet only 2% of miles are paid for, meaning 98% aren’t. 

4) Global EV production capacity is around 2.1m units. While rising, it is still a minor blip on 79 million cars sold worldwide. Add to that, auto parts suppliers and car makers are reluctant to expand capacity too fast in a global auto market that is slowing rapidly.

Car sales in China have fallen for 7 straight months. In Feb 2019, sales fell 13.8% on the back of January’s -15% print.  Dec 2018 (-13%), Nov 2018 (-13.9%) & Oct 2018 (-11.7%) according to the Chinese Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM). The US and Australian car markets are under pressure too. 

5) So haphazard is the drive for EV legislation that there are over 200 cities in Europe with different regulations. In the rush for cities to outdo one another this problem will only get worse. Getting two city councils to compromise is one thing but 200 or more across country lines?

Without consistent regulations, it is hard for makers to build EVs that can accommodate all the variance in laws without sharply boosting production costs. 

6) Fuel excise tax – at the moment, 5% of our tax revenue comes from the bowser. $25bn! Will Mr. Shorten happily give this up or do we expect when we’ve been forced to buy EVs that we will be stung with an electricity tax on our cars?

7) Norway is a poor example to benchmark against. It is 5% of our land mass, 1/5th our population and new car sales around 12% of Australia. According to BITRE, Australia has 877,561km of road network which is 9x larger than Norway.

Norway has around 8,000 chargers countrywide. Installation of fast chargers runs around A$60,000 per unit on top of the $100,000 preparation of each station for the high load 480V transformer setup to cope with the increased loads.

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.

While it is safe to assume that Norway’s stock of electric cars grows, our cumulative sales on Shorten’s plan would require far greater numbers. So let’s do the maths (note this doesn’t take into account the infrastructure issues of rural areas):

14,700 stations x $100,000 per station to = $1,470,000,000

4,700 stations x 20 fast chargers @ A$60,000 = $5,640,000,000 (rural)

4,700 stations x 20 slow chargers @ A$9,000 = $846,000,000 (rural)

10,000 stations x 5 fast chargers @ A$60,000 = $3,000,000,000 (urban)

570,000 home charging stations @ $5,500 per set = $3,135,000,000 (this is just for 2030)

Grand Total: A$14,091,000,000

Note that Shorten pledged $100m to EV charging stations around Australia to meet his goals. Even if he was to skimp on 2 fast and 2 slow chargers per stand, Aussies taxpayers will need to shell out $6.5bn. At least he could technically cover that with repealing $6bn in franking credits.

Norway’s privately run charging companies bill users at NOK2.50 (A$0.42c) per minute for fast charging. Norway’s electricity prices are around NOK 0.55 (A$0.05c) per kWh to households.  In South Australia, that price is 43c/kWh. So will Shorten subsidize an EV owner charging in Adelaide at the mark up a private retailer might charge? 

What about subsidies to EV buyers? If we go off Shorten’s assumptions of $3,400 per EV at 570,000 EVs per annum, the tax payer will fork out $1.94bn a year.

Will there be a cash-for-clunkers scheme?  If the plan is to drive internal combustion powertrains off the road, existing owners may not be emboldened with the decimation in the value of their existing cars. Let’s assume buyers are irrational and accept $3,000 per car (Gillard offered $2,000 back in 2010) trade-in under the scheme. That would amount to $1.73bn.

8) Making our own batteries! While it is true Australia is home to all of the relevant resources, sadly we do not have enough cobalt to make enough of them.

Australia is home to only 4% (5,100t) of the world’s cobalt. 60% of the world’s cobalt comes from DR Congo which has less than satisfactory labour laws surrounding children. If we want cheap EVs, we have to bear that cross of sacrificing children to save the planet. It can’t be done any other way.

Li-ion batteries consume around 42% of the globe’s cobalt supplies. Cars are 40% of that. The rest being computers, mobile phones, etc.

9) Automakers have set up their own battery capacity to supply internal production. Given our terrible history in automotives, we should not expect them to line up to buy our batteries.

Nissan spent around A$770m on a battery plant in Sunderland. Panasonic plowed $2.8bn into the battery plant that supplies Tesla.

10) Australia has no real homegrown industrial scale EV battery technology. If we bought in a technical license, that will only make our production costs prohibitive on a global scale. Our high wage costs would add to the improbability of it being a sensible venture.

All in, Shorten’s EV plans could cost Australians well over $20bn with c.$4bn in subsidies ongoing.

11) Green jobs – according to the ABS, jobs in the renewable sector have fallen from the peak of 19,000 in 2011/12 to 14,920 in 2016/17. The upshot is that green jobs in the renewable sector are not sustainable.

In short, Mr. Shorten’s budget reply was extremely thin on detail. Especially with respect to climate change. The LNP has plenty of ammunition to prosecute the case on his wild costing inaccuracies (as outlined above) yet will they have the gumption to fight on those lines. Saving the planet is one thing.

Loading a stretched grid with EVs and increasing the proportion of less reliable power sources looks like a recipe for disaster. We need only look at consumption patterns to get a true sense of how ‘woke’ people when it comes to global warming. South Australians and Victorians are already living the nightmare of renewables.

This election is about one thing – individual pocketbooks. The electorate needs working solutions, not electric dreams.

Attempts to abort “Unplanned” fail

Unplanned is a pro-life movie which has stormed the rankings in American cinemas in its first week despite a limited number of theatres showing it. The plot is set around the real life story of a woman, Abby Johnson, who ran a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic. She had a crisis of conscience after seeing a 13 week old termination for herself. She is now a pro-life activist.

Note that NY and other states will allow mothers to terminate babies up until immediately before delivery if they do decide. NYC even lit up monuments to celebrate the passing of the legislation.

Regardless of one’s views on a “woman’s right to choose“, seeing a movie that has no gratuitous nudity, course language, sex scenes or graphic violence shouldn’t cause consternation much less carry a R-rating. How can a 16yo girl can get an abortion without parental consent but needs an adult to see the Unplanned movie? Shouldn’t an open mind on the industry be a good thing for people to see and judge for themselves?

Twitter tried to explain away attempts to thwart the popularity of the film by claiming “glitches” in the system caused followers to be automatically unfollowed. It stands at over 310,000 followers now.

Let’s familiarize ourselves with abortion.

ABORTION STATS

c.700,000 fetuses are terminated in America each year. Down from 1.4 million in 1990. Hardly stats to cheer about. Of course the arguments for a woman’s right to choose will always be thrown at pro-lifers. Yet allowing termination until birth?

Eurostat statistics on abortion reveal that Germany, France, UK, Spain and Italy alone terminate a combined 760,000 fetuses per annum. Across the EU-28 there are 1.25mn terminations. Without getting into a debate on abortion rights, the pure statistical number points to 20.4% of fetuses never make it out of the womb alive.

According to the Guttmacher Institute some 56 million abortions occur annually. Every. Single. Year. Think that WWII saw 50 million deaths in 6 years of conflict with wide spread use of lethal weapons. So abortions kill at a far higher rate than global conflict. 

Take a look at the following photos if you’re game and ask yourself whether abortion is something to celebrate? Once again, this piece isn’t a cry to exert control over women’s rights rather question society and its approach to taking more individual responsibility. 

Or are we mistaken to think that the real reason NY lit up these monuments was to lament for all of the fetuses with heartbeats that never had a say in the very legislation that killed them the day of delivery? Maybe NYC should ban the film outright as it doesn’t fit the pro-choice narrative? Some states have passed laws allowing abortion to late stage pregnancy. Other states have introduced heartbeat bills preventing termination if a heartbeat is detected.

CM is not taking sides on democratic processes. Rather wondering why a film of this nature carries such fear and loathing? If abortion is nothing but a simple process why bother trying to derail a simple movie? Well that is an obvious answer. It’s way more popular than the apparatchiks want us to believe.

Gladys Berijiklian wipes the floor with Michael Daley

Listening to the NSW Election debate, incumbent Premier Gladys Berijiklian wiped the floor with Opposition Leader Michael Daley. Daley’s opening remarks were well prepared but it was all down hill from there when it was impromptu.

Daley was short on figures on pretty much every issue. Berijiklian knew them off by heart. Schools, climate change spending, public assets, electricity costs, mental health, hospitals, tolls, unemployment, education, water etc etc. Daley mentioned numerous times in his answers that he needed to double check his figures. On TAFE spending he guessed $3 billion. In reality it is $64 million.

When asked for a show of hands over the contentious Allianz Stadium rebuild, the Penrith audience backed the Premier by around 2:1.

The Premier made the rebuild costings clear and pointed out they’ve been in the public domain for over 12 months. Daley didn’t even have clear costings on how much it would cost to renovate. At one point Berijiklian was telling him how much bringing up to meet building codes would be. One would think he’d be all over the numbers on an issue he has expressed much passion over. She said that the new stadium would cost the same as renovating the current one.

Whether 100 undecided voters influence the election is a moot point but Berijiklian was the clear winner. The end result. Of 100 undecided, 50 would vote for the Premier and only 25 for Michael Daley.

Why stop at kids just protesting climate change?

It’s election time. NSW opposition leader Michael Daley said he supports the climate strike by school kids as a democratic right. Given the kids are being brainwashed with only one side of the debate, perhaps the teachers might show them these two front covers from Time and debate why the scientists were wrong and could they be making the very same mistakes again?

Yet why stop at letting kids take a day off school to protest climate change? Why not strike over the rebuild of the Allianz Stadium? Perhaps demonstrate over the West Connex motorway? How about screaming inside Woolworths over milk prices paid to farmers? Why not protest The price of electricity? Anemic wage growth? Housing prices? Negative gearing? Offshore detention? Immigration?

Using kids as political pawns is disgraceful on every level. Parents and teachers who back this type of activism need to be schooled themselves in common sense. So weak must the arguments be to have to let kids do the bidding for them.

Perhaps teachers should look in the mirror and come up with answers to the sustained slump in our global PISA rankings for English, maths and science first before organizing excursions to support ideologies that don’t have any relation to the curriculum.

The reality is when kids from other nations blitz them in the real world in later life, those participation trophies will do little to assuage their anxiety much less make their lives happier in a climate that won’t have turned out anyway like they were force fed.

Maybe the teachers need to sit outside the headmaster’s office

If kids want to strike and learn to protest, shouldn’t we the public be able to see whether the children are being constructively taught both sides of the argument in class before they paint placards? CM has a strong feeling that only “one” side of the climate story is being pushed – the alarmist one. Skeptical kids should live in fear of detention.

Perhaps that should be the litmus test – if teachers are proud of getting kids to form such demonstrations, they should not be afraid to allow open access to what they’re teaching. Something tells me they wouldn’t dare because it would prove their own bias beyond doubt.

Here are three things CM would do:

Make the kids debate both sides of the argument in detail. Make them think. Research. Investigate.

Conduct an ethics class to show the countless lies, scandals and whistleblowers outing even government agencies on fabricating data. Kids know what happens when they lie. Perhaps they would grow up to be questioning about what bias they’re fed.

Do an economic feasibility study on renewables vs fossil fuels. Let students decide on whether investing their futures in renewables for zero outcome by 2100 makes sense. Teach them that renewables aren’t cheaper than fossil fuels for two reasons – first, fossil fuel prices are plummeting and second renewable calculations are based on 100% operating capacity which is unrealistic in the extreme. Put them at 20% and renewables are 5x more expensive relatively speaking.

If after thorough and rigorous debate the kids still believed they’re doomed then they can protest their little hearts out.

What it proves is that school faculties are pushing political agendas rather than education. We teach kids that lying is bad and there are consequences for doing so. Shouldn’t teachers be put on the naughty step for doing the same?

CM worries about their future indeed. Oh and it won’t be global warming that kills them. Their dreams have a far higher risk of being killed off through the activism peddled by their teachers. Say, have the teachers told the kids about those alarmists warning childbirth as a cause for future warming?

Karl Marx would be proud.

Building the Education Revolution the right way

AWM at night.

Is the $500m upgrade to the Australian War Memorial (AWM) to honour recent conflicts too exorbitant? It is a lot of money. The current building is worth $140mn. The AWM cultural/heritage collection alone is worth over $1.2 billion. Only 4% of it is on display. While some will look at the expense as extreme it is worth considering some facts. Before that let’s not forget the $442mn to protect the Great Barrier Reef.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)  allocates $42.7mn of the entire $11bn budget annually to operate the AWM. Donations of $13.8m (+150% year-on-year) were made in 2017, $4.3mn in merchandise, $2mn in interest and $2mn in net GST receipts make up the balance. If one wants to be properly cynical the expansion project is only 1% of the current amount to upgrade our submarine fleet!!

As much as the complaints will flow around wasting money on glorifying war, the stats show that interest in the museum has been rising over time.

1.12 million visited the AWM in the 2017 fiscal year. A total of 844,899 people visited the Memorial in 2007. That is a 33% increase. Time spent on the AWM website totaled 5.61mn up from 4mn in 2007. Anzac Day related searches in the period just past were up 47.7% year over year. Facebook followers hit 100,000, a 27% year on year increase. So much for those who think nobody cares anymore and that there is a drop off in interest in honouring our military history. Clearly not.

Honouring the brave soldiers who have defended our freedom in recent conflicts are no less worthy of being shown respect. Should we scale the funding dependent on the number of deaths. Should we pro-rata the investment based on the 64 killed in action in armed conflicts since Vietnam to the 102,792 prior?

The AWM is already an exceptionally well designed and curated museum. The reality is there is no space to augment the collection without a rebuild.

Canberra got 4.95mn visitors annually in 2017 (+10.6% on 2016) adding $2.26bn to the ACT economy.

Expensive yes, but to ensure the aesthetics are kept tasteful and in the spirit of the 76yo AWM, it is hardly going to be worth erecting a corrugated iron shed with a few ceiling fans. Building underneath the current site will take some pretty serious engineering feats.

And to the Anzac haters whose cheap shots remain too frequent.  Even our own state broadcasters can’t resist the temptation to demean those who served. Anzac Day is treated more and more as one of resentment, not honour and sacrifice.

ABC presenter Jonathan Green protested by saying Anzac Day is “our collective quest for a military history that we can drape around us”.

Scott McIntyre, formerly of the taxpayer funded SBS, tweeted with respect to those commemorating Anzac Day,

Wonder if the poorly-read, largely white, nationalist drinkers and gamblers pause today to consider the horror all mankind suffered.

He had also tweeted,

Remembering the summary execution, widespread rape and theft committed by these ‘brave’ Anzacs in Egypt, Palestine and Japan.

As well as,

“The cultification of an imperialist invasion of a foreign nation that Australia had no quarrel with is against all ideals of modern society.”

Not to be outdone the left leaning mainstream media journalists stepped into the fray. Geoff Weinstock of Fairfax wrote on his twitter page with respect to the sacking of McIntyre,

“Ridiculous. Frightening. I also think Anzacs were racist yobs and Anzac Day is a death cult. Sack me Fairfax.”

Michael Leunig’s Anzac Day cartoon in The Age, depicted medals with a legend against each: Fear, Hate, Anger, Violence, Homicide.

Guardian columnist Catherine Deveny called Anzac Day a

“Trojan horse for racism, sexism, toxic masculinity, violence, homophobia and discrimination.”

Perhaps these people might reflect on the reality of Lt Norman Martin Peterson’s letter of 7 May 1943 which reflected on Anzac Day

“Perhaps you may think, at times, that I’m a moaner. — but it’s not that the life here (in spite of a few hardships) doesn’t agree with me, but the fact that wharfies, and coal miners, and munition workers go on strike, or want extra pay for working on Anzac Day , while the soldier (for whom Anzac Day is for), puts up everything with a wisecrack and forgets days and dates. I though finely, when we brought in a wounded bloke on Easter Monday, shot like a sieve, while in his homeland his fellow countryman strike for more pay, or holidays. Was his shocking wounds worthwhile in keeping his country safe for racecourse wages, “sportsmen (?)”, strikes, and absentees?—What do you think!!!!”

or just the general conditions these soldiers endured under constant attack by an enemy sworn to kill them. From his despatch of 5th February 1942,

“This bloody war is a terrific mental strain, you can get shot anywhere by snipers, (who never live more than two hours anyway, after they’ve climbed the trees, because our blokes comb the branches with Brens and they dangle like rabbits from their perch). I’ve lost about 2 stone {he was 154lb at the start] since I’ve been in action here, it’s tough, believe me…

“I decided to risk it and make a dash for it, a man every two minutes. Without mock heroics, my knees were knocking as I got to my feet and darted around the 200 yard long bend, expected to get one in the guts any moment. To my sorrow, around the corner we came across poor old George Jenkins, who had been guide, —shot, —our first casualty and we had only been in the place 5 minutes and a sniper had got him. The bullet had plowed through his scalp from ear to ear, and his face was a mess. Poor buggar, all he was worrying about was that he wasn’t able to tell us about the sniper and was we alright. I slapped a shell dressing on his skull, and we carried him back, —lucky buggar, he’ll go home now.”

We spent $16.2bn on Building the Education Revolution. $500m for the “educational” value in a society in desperate need of waking up to how good they have it is quite frankly cheap at twice the price.

Those bloody racist Aussies

53AF3EA1-EA38-4015-9383-FAE2C80A8D8B.jpeg

Aussies. We love backing underdogs and relish in self-deprecating humour. Being put down in Australian culture is generally regarded as a compliment. Yet when we see bad behaviour, Aussies generally have no issues calling it as they see it.

We care little if we offend those perpetrating crimes. Take our national cricket team where several members were caught cheating in Sth Africa. The backlash was immense. We’d rather lose than cheat as a nation although it maybe the only solution left to wrest back the Bledisloe Cup from the All Blacks after 16 years…..

Of course the satire of Mark Knight’s cartoon about Serena Williams’ temper tantrum got the activists riled up over supposed racist overtones. How quickly CBS made reference to a “white” cartoonist. If he’d been black and drawn the identical cartoon, would that have made it better? Why no complaints at all the other caricatures of Williams? That’s right – not a peep.

32E00CE2-4BF7-4E5F-8FBF-BA82AEDF4BA4.jpeg

That’s how the victim industry operates – find a narrative and then build concocted evidence to support it. Certain people might owe Knight a debt of gratitude.

Take this example. Author Leslie Honore   gladly used the viral nature of the cartoon to overtly plug her own book. This technically dilutes the nature of supposedly being 100% for the sisterhood in Serena’s corner, does it not? Makes for a great marketing tool though!! Surprised the author didn’t offer a free set of steak knives if bought within 20 minutes. True colours indeed.

1BEEA0C0-06BE-4549-B082-A71713799807

As for Aussies being racist, what will be evident when Naomi Osaka walks on court at the Australian Open in Round 1 is that everyone will cheer her. Not to apologise for the cartoon’s supposed misportrayal of her looks nor to make up for the appalling crowd display in New York but to honour a true bonafide sportswoman. We love everything about her. How could we not?

In all of the controversy surrounding the US Open final Naomi Osaka has oozed class with her sweet, bubbly but calm demeanor. Instead of apparatchiks demanding an open apology to Serena for sexism, equality and racism not once did any of them think to mention Osaka’s restraint or authenticity throughout the “me, me, me” nature of the saga. It was all about the champ! Williams’ prior tantrums were conveniently forgotten. Don’t forget Serena openly threatened Umpire Ramos that the thief would never be allowed again on ‘her court!’ So in that vein, Osaka was not an equal. She was privileged to stand across the net from the Queen.

Sure the racquet smasher with a coach who openly admitted he cheated is worthy of an apology. We should be proud to have the morals of such a role model drummed into kids. If little Johnny or Veronica don’t throw tantrums while representing their school we should put them straight in front of the counselor to work out why they haven’t been triggered. Don’t even start with the 9-yo brat refusing to stand for the Australian national anthem. Thanks Kaep!

If we judge the 23 grand slams and 10s of millions every year in endorsements and prize money for Serena , the global tennis apparatus has done a dismal job trying to beat her into submission if that is truly the claim. She’s got away with murder with her antics for years.

Throughout all Nike must have minted her name over the years as all these racists lined up to buy her clothes. Surprised the loonies haven’t called for cultural appropriation of white kids who wear Serena branded tennis clothing.

Maybe the lesson for Williams here is that playing against someone almost half her age that can blast 200km/h serves can teach her a thing or two about being a truly great champ in all aspects.

Poor old Naomi Osaka must be thinking the woman she once idolized is nothing like the person on the TV she thought she knew. Don’t worry Naomi, we wouldn’t want you to change anything about you!

Even if you don’t end up breaking all the records what better advocate for the game of tennis to have you as a global ambassador than a dummy spitting, venomous prima donna failing to cope with being dethroned. May there be many more kids who aspire to your level of maturity.

As an Aussie, CM speaks on behalf of many here who would openly say “we love you”. You can’t get here soon enough!