In which Mein Gott steals the show, but there's a Groaning for the faithful and a short offering from the Angelic one's lesser half ...

 

The big news is, of course, the parrot having his wings clipped, after having graced Sky News and many lizard Oz mastheads over the years ... and so the pond was most anxious that the lizards of Oz had preserved his legacy, his many scribbles for the rag, vital links that should never be lost, but instead preserved in aspic for all time ...

Oh dear, cleansed, wiped, disappeared into the ether or off to the corn field.

Never mind, the pond doesn't like commenting on matters before the court, but does occasionally wonder what it must be like for people who build a career on being closeted. Such a strange, arcane way to live a life, and yet a testament to the way that bigotry still flourishes, not least in News Corp ...

On then to the reptiles du jour and beyond the plucked bird sightings, it was a fairly tepid assembly ...

The pond had anticipated that Dame Groan would be in a complete rage, face contorted, drool dripping from lips at the mutton Dutton refusing to join in the foreign student cap, but she was strangely silent, and obsessed with super ... what a wise, discrete, wily old bird she is ...

The pond decided that this was the moment to visit Mein Gott, out and about yesterday, and in a splendid rage ...

It's unfortunate that Mein Gott always arrives after the pond has completed its herpetology studies for the day, but better late than never ... made especially joyous with this being Mein Gott's first appearance since the pond's recent medical episode ...

Better still, the reptiles assured the pond it was only a four minute read ...Bowen, others should be ashamed of our $650bn renewables disaster, Australia’s renewables disaster has been created because Chris Bowen and the state ministers did not start with a budget. Instead, they set out their aims with no idea of the cost. And they actually started constructing without a proper cost plan.

Even better than that, Mein Gott's piece opened with a splendid audio visual offering,  featuring the usual Sky News (Au) cross promotion and captioned ...

 Global mining giant Glencore has intervened in Australia’s energy debate, arguing the country will need to use coal for longer in order to keep prices down and remain competitive. “This is partly in response to the election of Donald Trump, but also to what it calls a global shift in the attitude towards coal and its role in the global energy transition,” Sky News Political Reporter Cameron Reddin said. “Its Chief Executive has gone on a blitz in the media here in Australia where he mounts the case for keeping coal in the system for longer, believing there is now a global shift underway that is more open to using coal as a transition fuel towards renewables, rather than something that needs to be phased out in the immediate term.”

What a tempting sight it was, essence of black gold clutched in paw ...

Clean, dinkum, virginal Oz coal. It took the pond right back to the golden era of Oz coal ...

Grand days, and now forget the disaster confronting the planet, on with the renewables disaster ...

Since Federation, Australian ministers on both sides of the parliament have made major mistakes and misleading statements. But nothing in our history matches the looming renewable energy conversion financial disaster.

We now have financial details of the project from one of Australia’s leading cost assessors, Frontier Economics.

When last July Chris Bowen announced that $122bn would be needed for his renewables program to 2050 he did not include around $100bn in essential costs including an artificial economic return boosting mechanism. But that’s turned out to be just the start.

Every reptile tale needs villains, and here they are, Energy Minister Chris Bowen and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in Wodonga, Victoria. Picture: Adrian Black/AAP Image

Thanks to the mighty Ted, Mein Gott is on top of the disaster, and produces a flurry of figures ...

The Bowen calculations are based on “net present value”, or NPV, which involves calculating the final cost and adjusting it back to the current dollars. But commercial infrastructure projections work on what will actually be outlaid. Frontier have now done those outlay calculations to 2050 for the governments and now the public.

Frontier calculate that the nation faces a $650bn outlay to 2050.

On my calculations, by 2050 much of that $650bn investment must be scrapped. We then start again because the renewable facilities have a limited life. It is a potential national disaster and the consequent huge power price rises created by the $650bn cost will destroy the economies of Victoria and NSW, including their social welfare programs. There are better ways to reach zero emissions, and we must find them or follow the US under Trump.

This disaster has been created because Bowen and the state ministers did not start with a budget. Instead, they set out their aims with no idea of the cost. And they actually started constructing without a proper cost plan.

It is possible that the protests by farmers and landholders attempting to stop the hated networks being constructed will delay the projects sufficiently to avoid the worst of the disaster, so enabling a better plan to be worked out.

I was alerted to the Bowen error and the $650bn looming outlay by Shadow Minister for Energy Ted O’Brien when in a public speech on Friday claimed there was a hole in the Bowen figures that was much greater than $100bn.

Because of the national importance, the nation must look at just how a $122bn project becomes $650bn and then must be substantially replaced between 2050 and 2075.

To understand how Bowen and the states got it wrong, and we ended up with a $650bn “temporary” project, I have to take you back to a series of decisions made by federal and state governments. First a decision was made that Australia should be 82 per cent renewables – wind, solar, hydro and batteries – by 2030.

Second, when the costs and returns were added up the cost of some of the renewable investments, including some transmission lines, could not be justified.

So, the state and federal governments devised a system which I would call “rigging the books”. But they would justify it by saying carbon savings had a value which must be counted in the project.

So to the problem of illustrating the rant, and this time the reptiles came up with Some solar panels installed on homes in Mt Barker, near Adelaide.

Pretty tragic, and sure to set Mein Gott off again ...

And so, a transmission network hypothetically costing $100m would be given a carbon credit, which would reduce its “cost” substantially and justify investment. Frontier calculates that some $80bn of the $650bn came from these carbon credits.

The carbon credits made uneconomic projects economic.

But of course, the bunnies – Australian consumers and industry – don’t get the credits, so must pay the full amount via electricity costs and/or taxpayer subsidies.

Then Bowen and the state ministers put forward futuristic demand projections which included substantial amounts of power required for green hydrogen and a huge up take of electric cars of around 97 per cent. Because electric electricity prices set to skyrocket to fund the $650bn outlay, Australians will not be able to afford electric cars.

And the price of electricity will drive industries wanting to use the network out of the country. Green hydrogen looks like a mirage. That means that the $650bn estimated cost will give us too much power capacity, further boosting future power prices.

It's true huge amounts of power will be required for artificial intelligence and data storage, but the big companies involved in this industry are usually not using the national networks overseas and certainly will not do it in Australia. They set up their own power generation, usually via nuclear, and if they’re not allowed to use nuclear in Australia they will simply invest in offshore storage and computer management. The large corporations do their sums (not Bowen’s) and nuclear is far cheaper.

At the next election, voters will need it to decide whether Bowen or the large corporations like Amazon have done the correct nuclear sums. O’Brien and the Coalition say nuclear is part of the solution.

Frontier do not tackle the nuclear issue but use the assumptions and requirements set out by the Australian Energy Market Operator. They do not make recommendations but have been commissioned to work out the best way to achieve the rules set by Bowen and the state ministers.

Accordingly, the AEMO set up a production grid that would be required to achieve the aims of Bowen and the state governments. Coal was phased out by 2050. Again under the rules endorsed by Bowen and the state governments gas becomes vital in providing the power that is not generated by renewables. Huge amounts of gas will be required under the plan and are costed in the Frontier sums.

That means either we either use Victoria’s immense low cost gas reserves, overcome the NSW gas mess, turn to South Australia and/or pipe the gas down from Beetaloo in Northern Territory. The Victorian government has endorsed the use of massive gas generators but find it politically impossible to drill the wells required to make sure its immense gas reserves are permeable.

Who is Mein Gott's hero and chief spicy sauce? Ask no more, it's Super Green Solutions founder Sean Cochrane. Picture: Shae Beplate

Figures, figures, figures, it's Mein Gott on figures steroids ...

Frontier’s $650bn calculation included both construction and operating costs. I do not estimate how much of the $650bn must be replaced after 2050. They do their sums on the basis of real outlays. They also provide NPV equivalents in some areas.

Frontier calculations does not factor in WA and Northern Territory.

Frontier give very detailed estimates of all the various contributors to the costs and among the big figures are onshore wind $202bn; Offshore wind $54bn; solar $39bn – pumped hydro $14bn; utilities storage $31bn. In all – the capital costs are $350bn. The remainder of the $650bn are led by operating costs and carbon credit rigging.

Now the real figures are out, they can’t be concealed by using NPV figures.

As for the costs facing the planet because of climate change, the pond regrets that punters must look elsewhere. There's plenty out there ...

Perhaps The Conversation, perhaps UN News, perhaps the World Economic Forum ... whatever, just don't trouble Mein Gott and rest of the reptile hive mind with trivia of that kind...

There's another plus to Mein Gott. 

It means that for one day at least the pond can avoid the doings in the United States in the newly formed court of King Donald I, though there are many temptations (paywall)... what with Uncle Leon always on hand to stir up trouble with the attendant lords, there to swell a progress or start a scene or two...

Sheesh, forget the back biting, note how that Beastly photo montage is worthy of the lizard Oz ...

And the pond doesn't have to pay attention to the epic failures of the Biden administration when it comes to Ukraine and Gaza. The immortal Rowe can do all that hard work instead ...

And now before turning to Dame Groan, the pond thought it might toss in an offering from the bouffant one. 

Shanners, the lesser partner of the Angelic one, rarely features in the pond, but this is, so the reptiles say, just a two minute read, and it addresses the nuking of the country to save the planet: Nuclear debate may wedge ALP between rock and hard place, Labor has confirmed two clear lines it will pursue through to next year’s election: Peter Dutton personally and the cost of the Coalition’s proposed nuclear energy policy.

There was one of those half-baked snaps to start ... Labor are ready to go to war with Peter Dutton over his nuclear costings.

It's so bad, such an appalling monstrosity, it can only be AI at work. 

Is it? Is this AI at work in the lizard Oz? If so, there's an abundance of the artificial, and bugger all signs of intelligence. 

There's no credit, perhaps because who would want a credit?

On the other hand, it perfectly encapsulates what the bouffant one has to offer by way of argument and insight, a slackly cobbled together effort, feebly attempting a little FUD and alarmism...

At the beginning of the final parliamentary sittings for 2024, Labor has confirmed two clear lines it will pursue through to next year’s election: Peter Dutton personally and the cost of the Coalition’s proposed nuclear energy policy.

Where possible and at every opportunity, Labor’s leaders are seeking to combine a common theme of “risk” for both attacks, and there is no sense that Richard Marles, Jim Chalmers or Tanya Plibersek – in Anthony Albanese’s absence – feel that the “risk” can be overstated.

Having thought for too long the Liberal leader was unelectable, the ALP has woken up to evidence in polling that he is closing in on the Prime Minister and the Coalition is overtaking the government.

The Treasurer started the first sitting day of the last session squeezing in claims at every chance that Dutton was “risky, reckless and arrogant” – in one interview mentioning “reckless arrogance” four times in just two sentences.

Housing Minister Clare O’Neil went one further in parliament, declaring Dutton’s “nasty negativity and reckless arrogance” would be a threat if he “becomes leader of our country”.

Marles, as Acting PM, attacked both Dutton and the Coalition’s nuclear policy as risky, repeatedly declaring nuclear energy was “the single most expensive form of electricity which exists in the world today”.

“Which is why the biggest risk to the household budgets of every Australian is the prospect of a future Dutton government,” he said.

The Environment Minister blamed the previous Coalition for the need to prolong coal-fired power stations for 20 years and attacked the opposition for “the fantasy of nuclear energy”.

Expect to hear much more of the same from Labor over the next two weeks and into next year – yet these arguments are not without risk.

For a start, the obsession with Dutton personally and the use of the term “Dutton government” and “if he becomes prime minister” elevates the Opposition Leader to the same level as Albanese and concedes a danger they now see of a possible election loss. They may be denigrating Dutton but they are telling the public they fear his leadership and think he can win.

The grounds for attack on the nuclear energy policy also concede ground and limit the arguments against nuclear to cost. Marles, Chalmers and Plibersek all focus on a claim of a $600bn cost for nuclear that is clearly open to dispute, as is Labor’s renewable energy cost.

The limits on the attack on nuclear – which was deemed to be a great Coalition weakness – are created by Labor’s support for a nuclear-powered submarine fleet housed in Western Australia that can’t be described as “dangerous” and clear evidence that Dutton’s “carbon emissions-free nuclear” has strong support among younger voters because it doesn’t add to greenhouse gas emissions.

Labor can’t say nuclear is dangerous because it wants nuclear submarines in Australian waters, nor can it say nuclear contributes to climate change. Cost is the only argument – and that’s at least debatable.

Impeccable logic. Nuclear subs are exactly the same as an SMR or an old fashioned nuke plant. Just think of a nuclear sub afloat in an earthquake site in the Hunter Valley and you can see how it works. Who could argue with that?

Before turning to Dame Groan, the pond would like to celebrate this blog's dedication to poetry, thanks in particular to one contributor. 

While turfing out old correspondence the other day, the pond came across this singular offering from distant days of yore, and hopes it will provide ongoing inspiration ...

Perhaps not as good as the pond's poetry corner, but still, scribble on valiant poet, all is not lost in the era of the Mango Mussolini ...

And so eventually to Dame Groan, and where's the harm? 

The reptiles assure the pond it's only a four minute read, and it's a chance to let off a mighty groan, even if the pond has absolutely no interest in the topic. 

The pond hopes that some of the pond's correspondents will take a view, but if they respond with sullen silence, that's not the pond's problem.

How will we solve the industry super funds problem?

There is no chance that a Labor government will ever deal with the fundamental problems confronting the super industry.

Rich despair in the usual way, but the thing that consternated the pond was the dismal illustration, with repetitive caption There is no chance that a Labor government will ever deal with the fundamental problems confronting the superannuation industry, writes Judith Sloan.

A nest egg? Really? 

Who comes up with this iStock kind of crap? Is this yet another example of AI at work in the reptile hive (see above)? 

Suggest money and an egg to the machine, and you come up with this kind of runny scramble? Oh tragic remnants of a long lost lizard Oz graphics department ...

On the upside there were no more visual interruptions to the epic Groaning ...

It’s a topic the Albanese government has assiduously avoided: the role and regulation of industry super funds. Apart from singing the praises of these funds while concocting various means of further protecting them, the silence has been deafening notwithstanding a range of obvious problems, both for the members and in public policy terms.

The most recent manifestation has been the failure of Cbus, the very large industry fund covering the construction industry, to efficiently and sympathetically deal with members entitled to death or disability benefits. Its chair is Wayne Swan, former Labor treasurer and now party president.

The numbers affected by the recent cases of mistreatment are substantial. It is estimated some 10,000 members were forced to wait, often for inordinate periods, for claims to be settled. The fund, in turn, blames the third party contracted to administer claims.

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission wasn’t buying this buck-passing, and Cbus may be fined up to $50m for its failure to appropriately serve its members. Initially, the CEO of Cbus, Kristian Fok, was too busy to appear before a Senate committee dealing with retirement incomes. But he eventually found the time and offered up an apology of sorts.

There are still several unanswered questions arising from this incident. Who pays the fine? Is it the members of the fund who will have to stump up? Should it be the owners of the fund – the construction unions and the employer associations? What about the trustees themselves?

This episode raises a range of more fundamental issues that have not been adequately dealt with for many years, by both Coalition and Labor governments. The one exception is Senator Andrew Bragg, who has been highlighting the concerns for some time. The problems with the system are legion.

Superannuation funds are not regulated as corporations but by a separate Act. There are two regulators that deal with superannuation: the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and ASIC. This divided regulation is not ideal.

The equal representation model of governance that applies to industry super funds is highly celebrated by union and employer association officials who benefit from the arrangement. But the reality is that having underqualified trustees – and that is being kind – of a fund with many billions of dollars under management is a problem. The fact that trustees are simply appointed rather than elected by the members is another.

Some funds compensate for this deficiency by co-opting external experts on to their investment committees. This begs the question of what the trustees do.

The recent addition of so-called “independent” trustees – something that has been advocated for years – makes a mockery of the adjective. The appointed independent trustees almost invariably have close links to the Labor Party. Increasingly, industry super funds look like retirement homes for retired Labor politicians.

The industry funds are effectively owned by the sponsoring unions and employer associations, but they have never contributed any capital. This is in contrast with the retail funds that bring capital with them. It is one reason the payment of fines is such a vexed issue.

Take the case of the trustees of an industry super fund overseeing misconduct who then do nothing. A court imposes a fine, but it is the members themselves who must pay the fine even though they have had no say in electing the trustees and have no scope to boot out trustees who are not up to the job. It is complete vacuum of accountability.

The funds have tried to get around this knotty issue by arbitrarily imposing an administration fee on members taken out before the member contributions are added to their accounts. This administration account is then seen by the trustees as essentially free money, to be used for sponsorships, marketing, donations to worthy causes – anything, really.

One example was the “investment” by AustralianSuper – the largest industry fund – and several others to establish a new online newspaper, The New Daily. Given that trustees are governed by the sole purpose test contained in the legislation – to maximise the retirement incomes of members – it was close to inconceivable how this expenditure could be justified.

However, we were told there was nothing to see, that the money was taken from the administration accounts of the funds. As it turned out, the “investment” was a complete dud, and the funds sold out as soon as possible to another entity within the superannuation landscape.

The pond thinks that Dame Groan has been given the chance of a long, uninterrupted Groaning, but must interrupt to report a strange affair. 

The pond's partner insisted that the pond watch the highlights of several European soccer matches, not for the the sport, about which the pond is clueless, but as a way of observing the composition of the teams. 

Even to the pond's untrained eye, there seemed to be a considerable number of players who varied from ancient Nordic or European stereotypes. Apparently many have remarked on the phenomenon.

The pond's partner followed up by reminding the pond that over 45% of NRL and 48%of NRLW players were of Pacific Islander background.

And then came news of this hammer blow this very day in the lizard Oz ...

Say what? He fellow travelled with the greenies and the country will stay swamped with furriners ruining tertiary education?

Where's Dame Groan when she's badly needed? 

Off Groaning about super, which probably deserves a Groan, but not when the Groaner's remarkable campaign about foreign students is under direct, dire threat. 

Did the old biddy take her eye off the ball? Will the Groaner ever get around to ravaging the mutton Dutton? 

The pond isn't holding its breath, as it finishes off this day's Groaning ...

As far as this type of spending is concerned, however, APRA has been asleep at the wheel for many years. In fact, it is close to impossible to find out about sponsorship deals and their justification, for instance. The payments made to sponsoring unions and employer associations are also well concealed.

The Labor government has attempted to maintain this lack of transparency as well as give the industry funds a free pass when it comes to remuneration disclosures. It is ironic that industry super funds try to hold listed companies in which they invest to higher standards of governance than they themselves uphold. There are very uneven gender balances in many industry funds as well as some trustees with inordinately lengthy tenure.

It is impossible to escape the impression that the trustees behave as if the money belongs to the funds rather than the members. It’s one reason the funds make it difficult to withdraw money, as well as their relative lack of interest in dealing with retired members.

The sheer size of the superannuation industry – now almost $4 trillion under management – raises complex issues. There is a widespread craven dependence of listed companies on superannuation funds as their major investors. Relatively inexperienced staff members of superannuation funds, ESG checklist on hand, are regularly calling the shots for companies.

In fact, the size of the superannuation industry raises issues about financial stability as one bloc controls such a large swathe of capital. The fact the funds are not regulated like corporations is another concern.

There is no chance that a Labor government will ever deal with the fundamental problems confronting the superannuation industry. The industry super funds were always a solution to the existential problems confronting the trade union movement. As the number of union members dwindles, both absolutely and relative to the size of the workforce, the influence of the industry super funds expands. Labor is never going to upset this apple cart.

Sadly, the Coalition has shown very little spine either. When confronted by the dilemma of raising the superannuation guarantee rate from 9 to 12 per cent, the Coalition government folded, afraid the funds would launch a hostile political campaign.

The reality is that 9 per cent is high enough, particularly if early withdrawals for home purchases are precluded. And much more attention needs to be given as to how superannuation is taxed – we have a terrible arrangement, particularly the taxing of contributions – as well as the development of sustainable retirement incomes products. I just wouldn’t hold your breath.

And so to finish up with the infallible Pope of the day, still in the grip of the rapture.

The pond understands many men are infatuated with the great snatch, especially when, Matt Gaetz style, teenage girls are featured...