Greg Hunt and the Liberal Coalition’s plans to sabotage renewable energy
Politics of solar: Milne, Hunt and the CEFC, REneweconomy, By Giles Parkinson 24 May 2013 “……The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) this week released its investment policies, which include as a rough guideline a minimum $20 million investment by the agency, and targeting projects of around $200 million.
But the CEFC is now the subject of a fierce political battle, with the Coalition repeating its vow to not just disband the CEFC, but also to dishonour contracts entered into by the CEFC, and to repatriate money not spent by the time the “caretaker” period ahead of the September poll begins on August 12.
Coalition climate spokesman Greg Hunt spoke to the audience about the need for investment certainty and removing sovereign risk, but the Coalition’s two biggest policy proposals – removal of the CEFC and having yet another review of the renewable energy target in 2014 – are creating just that…..
Hunt was asked three times to clarify his position on the RET, and whether that included support for the 41,000GWh target. To which he replied each time, “we are committed to the 20 per cent target, and have proposed no changes.”
But despite his desire to have “investment certainty”, he reiterated the Coalition’s preference to have a 2-yearly review rather than a four yearly review recommended by the Climate Change Authority – and endorsed although not yet legislated by the government. It is this very prospect of yet another review in a year’s time – and the fear of a more favourable response to the utilities’ demands to lower the fixed target in response to falling demand – which is currently stalling investment.
He also repeated his intention to disband the CCA, as well as the various clean technology programs which had been facilitating investment in rooftop solar and energy efficiency programs on commercial rooftops – a program that has been warmly embraced by the manufacturing sector…. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/politics-of-solar-milne-hunt-and-the-cefc-22212
Wikileaks Party- official registration open for comment until June 24
WikiLeaks Party closer to registering SMH, May 22, 2013 Paul Osborne, AAP Senior Political Writer The WikiLeaks political party is a step closer to being registered in Australia.
The Australian Electoral Commission on Wednesday published the constitution of the WikiLeaks Party and opened up the party’s official registration for public comment until June 24. WikiLeaks website founder Julian Assange plans to run for the Senate in Victoria at the September 14 election…. The WikiLeaks Party aims to run Senate candidates in Victoria, NSW and Western Australia.
Among the party’s objectives in its constitution are to “do all that is necessary to secure, develop and protect human rights and freedoms” and to hold governments, unions and corporations accountable for their actions.
The 10 names on the party application do not include Mr Assange. …. http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/wikileaks-party-closer-to-registering-20130522-2k03g.html
Tony Abbott’s determination to destroy action on climate chnage
Liberals’ plan to dismantle carbon laws BY:GRAHAM LLOYD, ENVIRONMENT EDITOR The Australian May 18, 2013 TONY Abbott would prepare for a double-dissolution election within five months of taking office if parliament blocked the repeal of the carbon tax, under a 12-month action blueprint to transform the nation’s environmental laws….( subscribers only) http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/liberals-plan-to-dismantle-carbon-laws/story-fn59niix-1226645695162
Northern Territory uranium miners no longer to claim tax costs for offices in foreign countries
Mining miners for a little extra cash NT News, ALISON BEVEGE | May 15th, 2013 THE NT Government has moved to close two tax loopholes to gain an additional $10.6 million out of mining companies.
It’s the only revenue-raising move in this year’s savings-based Budget. Mineral production was forecast to be worth $2.7 billion in 2013-14 but mining royalties are expected to raise $113.3 million, for a recovery rate of 4.2 per cent.
The first new Budget measure is a cap on the amount mining companies can claim as a transfer price for a mineral set at 5.5 per cent of its value……
The second measure would put a cap on the amount corporations can claim on tax for administrative costs for a foreign head office. Mr Tollner said they had been claiming expenses as NT costs……. http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2013/05/15/320899_nt-business.html
Coalition parties anti-wind energy, hypocritical about renewabl eenergy
Coalition dances around renewables commitment – again REneweconomy, Giles Parkinson 18 May 13, Joe Hockey refuses to endorse support for renewable energy, saying he had only just received the Budget Papers. Meanwhile, Coalition politicians are said to have signed up to speak at an anti-wind rally outside Parliament House. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/coalition-dances-around-renewables-commitment-again-84662
Tony Abbott’s claims about scrapping carbon tax – need scrutiny
Fact check: will scrapping the carbon price lower electricity prices? Fact check: will scrapping the carbon price lower electricity prices? The Conversation, Dylan McConnell, 18 May 13, Tony Abbott has said he will scrap the carbon “tax”, leading to a fall in electricity prices.
In his budget reply speech he stated: We will abolish the carbon tax – because that’s the quickest way to reduce power prices and take the pressure off cost of living and job security.
But will removing the carbon price really lower electricity prices, and if so, by how much?…….
wholesale costs only account for around 37% of retail electricity prices. Other major components of retail prices are transmission costs,
distribution costs (“poles and wires”), and retail costs (which include costs like the Renewable Energy Target).
Over the same period transmission costs went up 27%, distribution by 11% and retail costs by 17%. These components are independent of the carbon price, and account for the majority of hikes in retail electricity prices.
It’s worth remembering too that even without the carbon price, electricity prices are predicted to rise. Climate Change Authority
research suggests that without the carbon price, the rise would with be slightly smaller, with retail electricity prices just 6% lower. .http://theconversation.com/fact-check-will-scrapping-the-carbon-price-lower-electricity-prices-14408
Tony Abbott’s doubtful claim about axing Australia’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation
Clean energy head disputes Abbott’s ‘green savings’ BY:LAUREN WILSON, The Australian May 18, 2013 A ROW has erupted over whether the Coalition could save money by axing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, with the head of the green bank disputing Tony Abbott’s claims that about $400 million a year could be banked by abolishing the fund.
The opposition committed the Coalition, if elected in September, to scrapping the $10 billion CEFC, which provides commercial and concessional loans for companies investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency programs…..subscribers only http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/bank-head-disputes-abbotts-green-savings/story-e6frg9df-1226645636342
Australian Government’s mock “consultation” about opening Woomera to miners
Government’s “consultation” on mining in Woomera more like a ram raid Australian Greens nuclear policy spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam. 17 May 2013. The Federal Government made a mockery of public consultation by allowing three working days for initial submissions on opening up the Woomera Prohibited Area to miners, Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said today.
“On Wednesday 8 May Defence Minister Stephen Smith and resources Minister Gary Gray released the draft exposure of legislation to increase access to Woomera Prohibited Area to miners, and three working days later on 13 May the submission period closed. It’s not good enough,” said Senator Ludlam.
“Lawyers representing the Maralinga people, who in addition to being the Traditional Owners own approximately 40,000sqkm of freehold land in the area, advise that they have not been consulted on this legislation despite approaching the Defence Minister on the issue in July 2011.
“It is a relatively short amendment at nine pages but it is high-impact legislation. This area has an estimated 78 per cent of Australia’s known uranium reserves. The implications are massive.
“After years of review and the production of an 82 page report, we do not want to see a long process brought to an abrupt and shallow end.”
Antinuclear’s take on Australia’s Federal Budget
Today’s special – a swathe of items about the Budget.
People are analysing the Budget all over the place. Christina Milne of The Greens is scathing 
about how the Labor government has backed down on its clean energy commitments.
Still – the Australian Renewable Energy Agency survives, and solar and wind power are going to keep growing. Heaven help us if Tony Abbot gets in in September and tries to wreck renewable energy and climate change action. We may well look back on this Budget as something quite good.
The uranium lobby will be squealing, as new rules tighten, to stop the rorts on tax exempt exploration. But they keep all their other $billion perks.
Nuclear agencies continue to gobble up their $millions. The old dead, but still dirty High Flux has costly cleanups indefinitely, the live OPAL nuclear reactor continues to cost. Then there’s the radioactive waste dump planning.
And there are the Counsellors in India and China being funded – their job sounds very like marketing for Australia’s uranium industry.
Uranium mining: Budget slightly dents the government handouts to this industry
The mining industry has had a royal run from the Australian government. Up until this latest Federal Budget uranium mining companies could deduct the full cost of exploration immediately, or even 150 per cent of the cost of exploration in some cases. Tax breaks on exploration and equipment cost taxpayers more than $1 billion per year.
Now – mining companies will cry poor, as the new budget contains measures to tighten the rules on exploration deductions for miners. Companies will now only be able to deduct genuine exploration spending, rather than writing off the acquisition of a company that acquired mining rights and spent money on exploration. But hey, the Government is sacking more than 100 staff from the federal environment department, staff who help assess mining proposals
But don’t let’s feel too sorry for the uranium, or indeed, any mining corporations. For example BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto pay tax on their fuel, but the government gives nearly all of it back through the Fuel Tax Credits program. Fears the diesel fuel rebates could be targeted again proved unfounded, with no direct changes to the 32 cent rebate.
As Charles Berge wrote (in Sydney Morning Herald May 11, 2010) “And then there are direct government services. Geoscience Australia’s annual budget is $130 million, much of which goes to providing free data and services to the mining industry. The CSIRO and various government research centres chip in another $130 million per year in benefits to the industry. And for the research the miners have to do themselves, they get $160 million back per year in the form of research and development tax concessions.
A billion or two for fuel, … a billion for free pollution and a couple of hundred million for subsidised science . . . pretty soon we’re talking real money.
And that’s before we’ve even begun to talk about government-provided roads, rail, ports, electricity networks and other infrastructure.
Mining is different from most other industries because it directly accesses publicly owned, non-renewable resources. It is appropriate that it pay for this privileged access, over and above its fair share of company tax. In light of the $4 billion to $5 billion in benefits the mining industry receives each year from the Australian taxpayer, the government’s proposed resource rent tax starts to look modest (and anyway, uranium mining was exempt from that tax)…..
So don’t be snowed by the big miners’ shrieks about sovereign risk driving them out of Australia. The biggest risk is that we continue to subsidise mining operations that aren’t paying a fair return for their use of public resources and taxpayer dollars.”
Nuclear and Uranium Related Expenses in Australia’s Federal Budget 2013
Nuke Dump – $35.7m over 4 years National Radioactive Waste Management — securing a site and First Stage business case to “secure suitable volunteer site” and undertake initial scoping and design work, establish a Regional Consultative Committee and First State business case. (p253 bp2)-
Counsellor in New Delhi – $3.1m over 4 years to continue posting a Resources, Energy and Tourism Counsellor in New Delhi – is this to do with Uranium??
ANSTO = $38.7m for decommissioning High Flux Nuclear Reactor and $8.1 m for increasing costs of running OPAL Nuclear Reactor (nuclear fuel and electricity) Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation — additional funding for decommissioning and nuclear waste management activities
ARPANSA = $ 7.8 m over four years Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency — improving Australia’s capacity to deliver effective radiation protection and nuclear safety to enhance capacity to issue new licences and undertake compliance, upgrade Yallambie and to address workplace health and safety issues. 5.1 m to be recovered through revising licencing fees and testing fees.
Rum Jungle radioactive decontamination funds = 1.5 this year.
More detail on these nuclear-related expenses in the Budget: Continue reading
Australia’s Budget – a mixed result for clean energy – but Abbott’s agenda would be worse
Budget 2013-14 And Renewable Energy http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3739, 15 May 13, Australia’s Clean Energy Council has expressed disappointment in last night’s Budget, stating more than $600 million of funding for clean energy projects has been put in jeopardy.
While acknowledging a tough set of financial circumstances for the country and ambitious new projects such as the NDIS requiring funding, the CEC says chopping and changing clean energy program funding unsettles investors.
A deferral of $370 million in funding to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) over three years from 2014-15 is causing some concern as the CEC says the process for returning that funding to ARENA’s budget beyond 2020 is unclear.
$260 million of funding for energy efficiency programs and large-scale solar was also cut; the latter being $160 million of unallocated solar flagships funding which was to go to the ill-fated Solar Dawn project.
However, it wasn’t all bad news. The Clean Technology Programs did not receive rumoured cuts and $58 million of unspent funds in 2012-13 has been reallocated to 2017-18. $160 million of funding has been brought forward to 2014-15 to provide earlier access to funds for industry.
Greens leader Christine Milne was particularly scathing of the Budget. In an email with the subject line of “weaker, dumber, meaner”; Ms. Milne said the Government’s cuts to renewable energy funding constituted “back-flipping on their commitments to the Clean Energy package made with the Greens”. Ms. Milne also said “This budget is bad but Tony Abbott’s extreme agenda would go even further.”
For potential buyers of small scale rooftop solar arrays, their was neither bad or good news in the Budget – it’s business as usual.
On a somewhat related topic, carbon capture copped it in the cuts; with $662 million of uncommitted funds for the controversial Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships program being returned.
A full round-up of Budget 2013-14 winners and losers (renewable energy related and otherwise) can be viewed on ABC News.
Mixed fortunes for Australia’s Renewable Energy Agency in Budget
ARENA plans new mechanisms as funding cut, deferred REneweconomy By Giles Parkinson on 15 May 2013 Australia’s Renewable Energy Agency – the independent institution charged with giving a kick-start to emerging renewable energy technologies and supporting infrastructure – has had its overall funding cut by around 5 per cent and a further $370 million deferred to beyond 2020 as part of changes announced in the 2013 Federal Budget on Tuesday.
The cut, which effectively reduces ARENA’s total budget from $3.2 billion to just over $3 billion – comes from a decision to return $159 million of unspent money from the Education Investment Fund – a $200 million facility that was to run alongside the now defunct Solar Flagships program – to the budget.
CEO Ivor Frischknecht said he was disappointed by the budget cut – which effectively removes 10 per cent of unallocated monies, even though these particular funds were not under its direct control – but he said the “reprofiling” of the funding for other programs could actually suit ARENA’s investment objectives.
Under the changes announced by Treasurer Wayne Swan, funding for ARENA would be trimmed by $70 million in 2014/15 and by $150 million in the two subsequent years, with the money backloaded from 2020 into a program that would be extended out to 2021/22.
The move to effectively delay around 7 per cent of its unallocated funds has been criticised by clean energy supporters. The Clean Energy Council said it was disappointed the funds had been sent into the “budget ether”, just one year after ARENA had been established as an independent body to provide long-term stability to investors, and to avoid this very problem of annual budget cuts. ARENA enjoys bipartisan support, unlike the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
However, Frischknecht told RenewEconomy in an interview that the “reprofiling” of funding was a “sensible” move because it would help align the funding with the agency’s own investment plans……..
Frischknecht said ARENA was particularly pleased to get a $6.1 million increase in operational funding, which would allow the agency to expand, adding in project managers and specialist financing and transactional teams to look at new projects. “This is a big vote of confidence in our work,” he said. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/arena-plans-new-mechanisms-as-funding-cut-deferred-81277
www.politifact.com.au will rate politicians on truth or falseness in their facts
New website to rate politicians’ facts http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/new-website-to-rate-politicians-facts-20130512-2jfyx.html#ixzz2TDuKyJyi May 12, 2013 A new political fact-checking website has launched with lofty plans to keep politicians honest and voters better informed. PolitiFact Australia says it will fact-check claims by MPs, parties, candidates and other influential figures. The website is the first international affiliate of Pulitzer prize-winning US site, PolitiFact.
It will rate political statements as true, mostly true, half true, mostly false and false. The US website calls this scale “Truth-O-Meter”. Ridiculous claims will be rated “pants on fire”. The US website says facts are checked by writers and editors “who spend considerable time researching and deliberating” the rulings. “We always try to get the original statement in its full context rather than an edited form that appeared in news stories. We then divide the statement into individual claims that we check separately.
“When possible, we go to original sources to verify the claims. We look for original government reports rather than news stories. We interview impartial experts.” The first fact-checks have delivered “mostly false” to Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s statement the coalition’s broadband plan will “cost households $5000 to get connected”. Opposition Leader Tony Abbott gets the same rating for his statement that “the carbon tax is adding $400 to the cost of every car manufactured in Australia”.
The site is headed by Peter Fray, the former editor-in-chief of The Sydney Morning Herald, published by Fairfax Media, owner of this publication.Mr Fray said PolitiFact Australia is a necessary addition to Australia’s journalistic scene because politics has become ”faster and noisier” and voters are overloaded with information.
The first step in any fact-check is to ask the source for details to support the claim, before seeking independent verification. ”We are here to help sort out the facts from the fictions … we are not really out to get politicians, we don’t think they are all liars. But we do think they should be accountable for what they say,” he said.
www.politifact.com.au went live overnight on Monday.
Climate Change is THE ISSUE in Australia’s September federal election
Why Labor should fight the 2013 election on climate change, The Conversation, Matt McDonald 10 May 2013,If climate change features prominently in the federal election campaign, it will almost certainly be driven by the Coalition. Under Tony Abbott, the Coalition has long smelled blood in the water on climate change and in particular the carbon tax. Abbott has stated repeatedly that the repeal of the carbon taxwill be his first order of government business if elected, while Coalition climate spokesperson Greg Hunt has claimed that the 2013 election will be a referendum on the tax.
But this is a risky strategy, and this is precisely why the ALP can and should consider taking on the Coalition on this issue, and taking up the challenge of making the election a referendum on the carbon tax.
First, public attitudes to the carbon tax are softening. Polling has indicated a steady decline in opposition to the carbon tax since it was first mooted. By the end of 2012 opposition to the carbon tax was still at around 56% but was continuing to decline.Complaints to the ACCC about the carbon tax dropped off substantially after three months in operation. Six months in the majority of Australians polled believed that the carbon tax had made no economic difference to their lives.
There is every reason to believe these trends will continue as the tax becomes more institutionalised. Some began to draw parallels to the GST: an unpopular tax but one that was gradually absorbed into the economy and everyday practises, and which stopped short of the economic Armageddon predicted by opponents.
Second, it seems to be working.
Greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation hit a 10 year low in early 2013, driven by increases in cost for wholesale electricity and an increase in the share of electricity provided through renewable sources. Both of these dynamics are attributable to the carbon tax.
If part of the reason for opposing or repealing the tax was that it didn’t work this is clearly undermined by the figures to hand so far. The carbon tax is also clearly helping Australia track towards its 20% renewable energy target, at present a bipartisan commitment. One recent industry analysis suggested that without the carbon tax and associated investment incentives in renewables, the Coalition couldn’t hope to achieve this target.
Third, industry wants it. Tony Abbott has long claimed that Australia’s economic competitiveness is being fatally undermined by the carbon tax. The trouble is, the leadership of many of Australia’s largest corporations support it….. http://theconversation.com/why-labor-should-fight-the-2013-election-on-climate-change-13865
1 This month
17 October, Free Public Talk on Nuclear Issues in South Australia
David Noonan will speak on public interest concerns over the new Roxby Downs Indenture Act 2026 on BHP copper-uranium mining and ore processing in SA, and on how AUKUS may face SA with a High-Level nuclear waste agenda.
Dr Jim Green will discuss international developments in the field of nuclear power including ‘small modular reactors’ and Generation 4 ‘advanced’ nuclear reactor concepts.
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
