As a single correspondent noted, As you'd expect, Gerard didn't stir the Bot, who had likely drifted off after the first paragraph, and the same likely applies to nattering "Ned" when he makes his return 4.30 pm appearance.
He won't trigger the bot so much as trigger a deep ennui and profound sense of futility.
Meanwhile, the reptiles went full climate change hysterics in this morning's digital edition ...
Mercifully the reptiles managed to ignore Barners, Tamworth's shame, though he was given a ribbing by John Handscombe in The Echnida (no link, newsletter):
He's Labor's not-so-secret weapon, almost guaranteed to inflict damage on the Coalition whenever he opens his mouth. He's a gift to the government, even though he sits opposite.
He is, of course, Barnaby Joyce, member for New England, one time deputy PM and former leader of the Nationals.
As if the Coalition wasn't at a low enough ebb already, its numbers so depleted it barely registers as a political force. Along comes Barnaby with his latest doomed bid for attention - his private member's bill to scrap net zero.
He is, of course, Barnaby Joyce, member for New England, one time deputy PM and former leader of the Nationals.
As if the Coalition wasn't at a low enough ebb already, its numbers so depleted it barely registers as a political force. Along comes Barnaby with his latest doomed bid for attention - his private member's bill to scrap net zero.
In the lizard Oz, Perry did his best to discount renewables...
ELECTRICITY
Coal, renewables jostling for crown as cheapest energy
Black coal remains competitive on price as an energy source but firmed renewables will reign supreme by the end of this decade, a joint CSIRO and AEMO report finds.
By Perry Williams
Coal, renewables jostling for crown as cheapest energy
Black coal remains competitive on price as an energy source but firmed renewables will reign supreme by the end of this decade, a joint CSIRO and AEMO report finds.
By Perry Williams
In a singular, heroic, reptile feat, Perry construed his report without a single link to the actual report, though it's easy enough to find as CSIRO releases final 2024-25 GenCost report following consultation, The latest report updates cost estimates for new electricity generation technologies, recognising that cost is just one of several key factors driving decisions and a mix of technologies is required to meet Australia's electricity needs.
The release handily identified 3 key points:
- The report found renewables remain the lowest-cost new-build electricity generation technology, while nuclear small modular reactors (SMRs) are the most costly.
- Electricity systems rely on a mix of technologies, because no single option can deliver all the capabilities required for a reliable, secure and flexible supply.
- Rising construction costs in Australia and supply chain constraints for some technologies remain a challenge for reducing costs.
Inter alia, Perry managed to mangle his way through the findings, and the pond decided to abandon the accompanying terrifying snaps of windmills against a setting sun and the splendours of a coal-fired power station in the setting sun to make room for the sight of all the spinning wheels:
Black coal has staged a comeback to rival firmed renewables as the cheapest form of electricity in 2024-25, amid a spike in costs to build onshore wind, while small modular nuclear plants remain the most expensive technology if built into Australia’s energy grid.
The CSIRO said black coal was $111 per megawatt hour at the lowest end of its annual forecasts, compared with backed-up wind and solar which was $116 MWh under the cheapest level of modelling. Those figures represent a turnaround from a year ago when black coal at $107 MWh was outpaced by firmed renewables, which was forecast at $97MWh.
Black coal is not expected to retain its position, however, with the costs of firmed solar and wind falling substantially to $76MWh by 2030, compared with black coal at $103MWh by the end of the decade.
The joint report by Australia’s national science agency and the Australian Energy Market Operator measures electricity technologies by comparing a levelised cost of energy that includes operating and capital costs over the power generator’s economic life.
While black coal just pipped green energy at the lowest end of the price projections, the median figure of $144MWh for the fossil fuel was above the $140MWh median for firmed renewables under an assumption of 70 per cent clean energy in the grid.
Variable standalone solar generation – with no back-up – was by far the cheapest electricity generation source with solar costs from as low as $48MWh, with onshore wind at $80MWh.
Firming or “integration costs” to support renewables are estimated at $48MWh to $64MWh in 2024-25 and $23MWh to $40MWh in 2030 depending on the renewable share.
Still, calculations point to the cost of firmed renewables increasing by up to 20 per cent from a year ago, according to the GenCost report, whereas black coal has fallen by 9 per cent at the mid point of the forecast range.
CSIRO points out the reduction in fossil fuel generation costs between 2024 and 2030 is not a result of technological improvement but rather cheaper fuel prices and capital costs, which were impacted by global inflationary pressures that peaked in 2022. “Also, using fossil fuels without carbon capture and storage makes them high emission technologies which makes them incompatible with national and state emission targets,” CSIRO added.
It comes as AEMO chief executive Daniel Westerman will tell a clean energy conference on Tuesday that 90 per cent of Australia’s remaining coal fleet is set to close in the next decade, posing a challenge for system security.
CSIRO said the capital costs of onshore wind technology rose by a further 6 per cent in 2024-25, following an 8 per cent increase the year before.
The CSIRO said black coal was $111 per megawatt hour at the lowest end of its annual forecasts, compared with backed-up wind and solar which was $116 MWh under the cheapest level of modelling. Those figures represent a turnaround from a year ago when black coal at $107 MWh was outpaced by firmed renewables, which was forecast at $97MWh.
Black coal is not expected to retain its position, however, with the costs of firmed solar and wind falling substantially to $76MWh by 2030, compared with black coal at $103MWh by the end of the decade.
The joint report by Australia’s national science agency and the Australian Energy Market Operator measures electricity technologies by comparing a levelised cost of energy that includes operating and capital costs over the power generator’s economic life.
While black coal just pipped green energy at the lowest end of the price projections, the median figure of $144MWh for the fossil fuel was above the $140MWh median for firmed renewables under an assumption of 70 per cent clean energy in the grid.
Variable standalone solar generation – with no back-up – was by far the cheapest electricity generation source with solar costs from as low as $48MWh, with onshore wind at $80MWh.
Firming or “integration costs” to support renewables are estimated at $48MWh to $64MWh in 2024-25 and $23MWh to $40MWh in 2030 depending on the renewable share.
Still, calculations point to the cost of firmed renewables increasing by up to 20 per cent from a year ago, according to the GenCost report, whereas black coal has fallen by 9 per cent at the mid point of the forecast range.
CSIRO points out the reduction in fossil fuel generation costs between 2024 and 2030 is not a result of technological improvement but rather cheaper fuel prices and capital costs, which were impacted by global inflationary pressures that peaked in 2022. “Also, using fossil fuels without carbon capture and storage makes them high emission technologies which makes them incompatible with national and state emission targets,” CSIRO added.
It comes as AEMO chief executive Daniel Westerman will tell a clean energy conference on Tuesday that 90 per cent of Australia’s remaining coal fleet is set to close in the next decade, posing a challenge for system security.
CSIRO said the capital costs of onshore wind technology rose by a further 6 per cent in 2024-25, following an 8 per cent increase the year before.
This year’s spike included a one-off 4 per cent increase to take account of work camp costs not previously included in wind capital cost estimates. CSIRO also pointed more broadly to sustained long-term increases in Australian construction costs.
Combined cycle gas turbines costs jumped by 11 per cent, reflecting tight global supplies, while large scale batteries and solar fell 20 per cent and 8 per cent respectively.
“Stakeholders remain concerned about the cost of wind projects,” CSIRO said. “In discussions with stakeholders it was identified that the increasing remoteness of wind projects and their workforce needed means that they typically need to construct a work camp as part of the project costs.”
While global inflationary pressures earlier this decade hit a raft of energy technologies, CSIRO singled out the “difficult circumstances” for Australia’s onshore wind projects for its assumption that capital costs will not return to a normal cost path until 2035, some five years later than other technologies. After 2035, wind costs are projected to decline only a modest amount.
Australia’s nascent offshore wind sector has struggled to overcome investment hurdles despite being central to Victoria’s plan to phase out coal and replace it with renewable energy.
CSIRO pointed to a lower rate of cost reduction for offshore wind over time compared to last year given less resource availability for floating offshore wind and the impact of continued reductions in solar technology costs.
The draft report issued in December claimed the cost of large-scale nuclear power plants far exceeded firmed renewables over the long term, even if solar and wind farms are completely rebuilt every 25 or 30 years. The opposition, which took its pro-nuclear policy to the federal election, and other nuclear advocates had previously slammed historical GenCost figures, which were modelled over a 30-year time frame, claiming that was a flawed assumption, and that nuclear facilities were designed to operate for a period of more than 60 years.
Large-scale nuclear has been costed at between $180MWh and $293MWh with small modular reactors between $456MWh and $757MWh.
The science agency also pushed back on any possibility of Australia delivering nuclear on a fast-track basis such as the UAE at 12 years.
“Australia is not likely to be able to repeat the UAE experience because our level of consultation will be consistent with our higher level of democracy and the experience of other Western democracies. As such, at least 15 years remains the most plausible lead time,” CSIRO said.
Combined cycle gas turbines costs jumped by 11 per cent, reflecting tight global supplies, while large scale batteries and solar fell 20 per cent and 8 per cent respectively.
“Stakeholders remain concerned about the cost of wind projects,” CSIRO said. “In discussions with stakeholders it was identified that the increasing remoteness of wind projects and their workforce needed means that they typically need to construct a work camp as part of the project costs.”
While global inflationary pressures earlier this decade hit a raft of energy technologies, CSIRO singled out the “difficult circumstances” for Australia’s onshore wind projects for its assumption that capital costs will not return to a normal cost path until 2035, some five years later than other technologies. After 2035, wind costs are projected to decline only a modest amount.
Australia’s nascent offshore wind sector has struggled to overcome investment hurdles despite being central to Victoria’s plan to phase out coal and replace it with renewable energy.
CSIRO pointed to a lower rate of cost reduction for offshore wind over time compared to last year given less resource availability for floating offshore wind and the impact of continued reductions in solar technology costs.
The draft report issued in December claimed the cost of large-scale nuclear power plants far exceeded firmed renewables over the long term, even if solar and wind farms are completely rebuilt every 25 or 30 years. The opposition, which took its pro-nuclear policy to the federal election, and other nuclear advocates had previously slammed historical GenCost figures, which were modelled over a 30-year time frame, claiming that was a flawed assumption, and that nuclear facilities were designed to operate for a period of more than 60 years.
Large-scale nuclear has been costed at between $180MWh and $293MWh with small modular reactors between $456MWh and $757MWh.
The science agency also pushed back on any possibility of Australia delivering nuclear on a fast-track basis such as the UAE at 12 years.
“Australia is not likely to be able to repeat the UAE experience because our level of consultation will be consistent with our higher level of democracy and the experience of other Western democracies. As such, at least 15 years remains the most plausible lead time,” CSIRO said.
The pond suggests correspondents go to the actual report, though that shouldn't stop them admiring the way Perry made his Case for Coal and treated the nuking of the country to save the planet.
Meanwhile, the lead was full of shock and horror ...
EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
UN climate chief turns Labor target dial to the max
Simon Stiell will meet with Chris Bowen in Canberra, after declaring fruit and veg will be a ‘once-a-year treat’ if Labor does not lift its clean-energy ambitions.
By Sarah Ison, Geoff Chambers and Matthew Cranston
UN climate chief turns Labor target dial to the max
Simon Stiell will meet with Chris Bowen in Canberra, after declaring fruit and veg will be a ‘once-a-year treat’ if Labor does not lift its clean-energy ambitions.
By Sarah Ison, Geoff Chambers and Matthew Cranston
That lead Geoff to chamber yet another round ...
COMMENTARY by Geoff Chambers
Take your lecture to big emitters, The UN climate change official issuing doomsday appraisals of Australia’s future should spend more time lecturing the world’s biggest emitters in China, India and the US.
Take your lecture to big emitters, The UN climate change official issuing doomsday appraisals of Australia’s future should spend more time lecturing the world’s biggest emitters in China, India and the US.
While in a state of high indignation, the Chambered one was on a remarkably short groove:
The UN climate change official issuing doomsday appraisals of Australia’s future economy, security and prosperity should spend more time lecturing the world’s biggest emitters in China, India and the US.
Workers, business owners and families who have enough on their plate don’t need hectoring from Simon Stiell, a former Grenada government minister who scored a plum job as executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
While many Australians believe climate change is real, investment in the issue ranges from low-level concern to extreme or radical zealotry. Polling on climate change often shows high levels of concern but little support when asked to pay more. As the Coalition warns Australia’s commitment of net-zero emissions by 2050 will be a “wrecking ball” to the economy, Stiell, Chris Bowen and other climate advocates say inaction will wreak havoc. The loudest voices have dominated debate for too long. All punters observe is two sides who can’t agree on the path ahead.
While the US, Britain, Canada and dozens of western countries pursue zero-emissions nuclear power to hit net-zero targets and power homes and heavy industry, Australia has a renewables-only approach. China, India and the US are the world’s biggest polluters but Australia, population 27.4 million, wears the blame for climate change catastrophe.
Bowen, who has described Stiell as a friend, is on a global charm offensive as Labor seeks to co-host the COP31 summit with Pacific nations next year. He will meet Stiell on Tuesday as the Climate Change Authority finalises advice on a 2035 emissions target.
After a landslide victory, Anthony Albanese and Bowen might go harder than some Labor MPs thought before the election. They must submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions, including a new 2035 target, by September ahead of the November COP30 summit in Brazil. If Australia wins its bid, Albanese – who gave Scott Morrison plenty of grief before the Glasgow COP26 summit – will finally make his first appearance at the UN’s marquee climate change conference.
Workers, business owners and families who have enough on their plate don’t need hectoring from Simon Stiell, a former Grenada government minister who scored a plum job as executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
While many Australians believe climate change is real, investment in the issue ranges from low-level concern to extreme or radical zealotry. Polling on climate change often shows high levels of concern but little support when asked to pay more. As the Coalition warns Australia’s commitment of net-zero emissions by 2050 will be a “wrecking ball” to the economy, Stiell, Chris Bowen and other climate advocates say inaction will wreak havoc. The loudest voices have dominated debate for too long. All punters observe is two sides who can’t agree on the path ahead.
While the US, Britain, Canada and dozens of western countries pursue zero-emissions nuclear power to hit net-zero targets and power homes and heavy industry, Australia has a renewables-only approach. China, India and the US are the world’s biggest polluters but Australia, population 27.4 million, wears the blame for climate change catastrophe.
Bowen, who has described Stiell as a friend, is on a global charm offensive as Labor seeks to co-host the COP31 summit with Pacific nations next year. He will meet Stiell on Tuesday as the Climate Change Authority finalises advice on a 2035 emissions target.
After a landslide victory, Anthony Albanese and Bowen might go harder than some Labor MPs thought before the election. They must submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions, including a new 2035 target, by September ahead of the November COP30 summit in Brazil. If Australia wins its bid, Albanese – who gave Scott Morrison plenty of grief before the Glasgow COP26 summit – will finally make his first appearance at the UN’s marquee climate change conference.
And what of all the coal and gas Australia exports, Geoff, what of that?
Never mind, at the very bottom of its screen cap of the page, the pond saw the reptiles falling into line with this story ...
‘HAMAS PROPAGANDA’
Images of starving children ‘false’, Israeli envoy claims
By Ben Packham and Geoff Chambers
Images of starving children ‘false’, Israeli envoy claims
By Ben Packham and Geoff Chambers
The pond had already noted the yarn when it turned up yesterday in the Nine rags ...
The irony is profound, because it's a variant on an age-old ruse, the große Lüge.
The wiki explanation of the big lie notes The German expression was first used by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf (1925) to describe how people could be induced to believe so colossal a lie because they would not believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously". Hitler claimed that the technique had been used by Jews to blame Germany's loss in World War I on German general Erich Ludendorff, who was a prominent nationalist political leader in the Weimar Republic.
There's a variant on this in another study, here:
As a general rule, the most effective big lies are outrageous enough to be unbelievable yet appeal strongly to the prejudices of the listeners and are stated in as bland and matter-of-fact terms as possible. It is sometimes even more effective to string several big lies together in a series of talking points.
Various sources, both popular and scholarly, attribute the following passage to Joseph Goebbels on the big lie: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Various sources, both popular and scholarly, attribute the following passage to Joseph Goebbels on the big lie: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Back to the reptile report on this große Lüge:
Israel’s No. 2 diplomat in Australia says there is no starvation in Gaza and that images of emaciated children in the Palestinian enclave are part of a “false campaign” by Hamas.
Rejecting mounting reports that famine is sweeping the territory, Israel’s deputy ambassador, Amir Meron, said Hamas was “deceiving the media, deceiving international organisations, the international community, and it is deceiving its own people”.
“The picture that you see, we think these are false pictures,” he said.
“There is no starvation in the Gaza Strip. This is a false campaign as we see it. A false campaign from the Hamas side to have those photos being published … to bring a false negative story to the world.”
Images from Gaza in recent days have sparked international condemnation, including from Anthony Albanese, who accused Israel of killing civilians by illegally withholding humanitarian aid.
Mr Meron denied Israel was failing to meet its international obligations, accusing international aid organisations of refusing to deliver aid and of stealing supplies.
“The aid is ready. It’s ready to be given to the population. They just need to come and get it,” he said.
Rejecting mounting reports that famine is sweeping the territory, Israel’s deputy ambassador, Amir Meron, said Hamas was “deceiving the media, deceiving international organisations, the international community, and it is deceiving its own people”.
“The picture that you see, we think these are false pictures,” he said.
“There is no starvation in the Gaza Strip. This is a false campaign as we see it. A false campaign from the Hamas side to have those photos being published … to bring a false negative story to the world.”
Images from Gaza in recent days have sparked international condemnation, including from Anthony Albanese, who accused Israel of killing civilians by illegally withholding humanitarian aid.
Mr Meron denied Israel was failing to meet its international obligations, accusing international aid organisations of refusing to deliver aid and of stealing supplies.
“The aid is ready. It’s ready to be given to the population. They just need to come and get it,” he said.
His comments followed those of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who declared earlier: “There is no starvation in Gaza, no policy of starvation Gaza.”
The Prime Minister was unmoved by the claims, savaging the Jewish state in parliament for the “humanitarian catastrophe” unfolding in Gaza. “Israel’s denial of aid and the killing of civilians, including children seeking access to water and food, cannot be defended nor can it be ignored,” Mr Albanese said.
He said he shared the distress of those across the world at the image of a starving one-year-old Palestinian boy, Mohammed Zakaria al-Mutawaq, published globally in recent days. “He is not a threat to the state of Israel, nor is he someone who can be seen to be a fighter for Hamas,” he said.
“He’s a young child who deserves to be treated appropriately. And the position of the Australian government is very clear, that every innocent life matters. Every Israeli and every Palestinian.
“This conflict has stolen far too many innocent lives, tens of thousands of civilians are dead, children are starving.”
Amid the claims from Israel that photos from Gaza have been doctored, CNN has reported that the boy’s mother has said he had a pre-existing muscular disorder. There has since been claims from pro-Israeli journalist David Collier that he has cerebral palsy and other diseases that affect his appearance.
Mr Albanese demanded Israel comply with its obligations under international law but reiterated he would not rush to recognise a Palestinian state, as France had declared it would do in September.
“It must be more than a gesture,” he said. “It must be something that’s a part of moving forward. Australia will make that decision as a sovereign state.
“We obviously are in discussions with other countries as well, going forward.”
His comments came as Victorian ALP members prepared motions demanding the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state and sanctions on Israel, to be moved at the party’s state conference this weekend.
Labor is considering recognition of Palestine, after Foreign Minister Penny Wong flagged last year that Australia could do so ahead of a formal peace process.
Former NSW premier and Labor foreign minister Bob Carr on Monday said the government should show a “flash of independence, strength and maturity” by joining with Paris to recognise a Palestinian state. He issued the call as he compared Israel’s actions in Gaza to those of the Nazis.
“The use of famine as a weapon of state policies is precisely and absolutely what Israel has been doing,” Mr Carr said. “There can be no argument about that. They control the food that goes in, its nature and its quantity.
“It would be hard to distinguish between the pinched despairing faces of childhood victims in the Warsaw ghetto and those we are seeing out of Gaza.”
Labor Friends of Israel co-convener Nick Dyrenfurth said he was “gravely concerned with the Netanyahu government’s actions in Gaza” but condemned Mr Carr’s provocative comments. “Mr Carr is wilfully lying and deliberately stoking community tensions with extremist language and deliberately provoking his former friends in Australia’s Jewish community with Nazi slurs,” he said.
“War is an awful thing, but there is no genocide taking place.”
Sorry Nick, the große Lüge is the große Lüge, and unfortunately all the snaps that accompanied the story reminded the pond of the BBC reporter who flew over Gaza and saw only rampant devastation in areas he once knew when on the ground.
If even King Donald believes that what he saw is what he's seen, there's a sense of returning to earth reality 1.0.
Of course to sustain the große Lüge no foreign journalists are allowed on the ground, though the snaps accompanying the lizard Oz story couldn't help but note some terrible sights ...
No doubt Nick, you'd be pleased by NZ cartoonist Gavin Schist ...
After all that the pond looked over to the extreme far right, and there was the bromancer top of the world, ma ...
Naturally the bromancer wanted the boot kept to the neck.
If you've got an iron fist, keep using it ...
The header: Recognising Palestine state would be a mistake, While the savagery of Hamas required a strong Israeli reaction, that doesn’t absolve Israel morally or politically for the responsibility it now has for the two million people in Gaza, and their basic human needs.
The caption: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese during Question Time at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman
The reptiles seem to be dropping the nonsense of asking the hive mind to take them there, and regrettably the pond was already there:
The Albanese government is likely to extend formal diplomatic recognition of a Palestinian state some time in this term of parliament, though not as soon as at the United Nations General Assembly in September.
In my view, the considerations driving the government are almost entirely about managing domestic politics and avoiding a fresh bit of trouble with the Trump administration in Washington.
My guess would be that if the British Labour government of Sir Keir Starmer extends formal diplomatic recognition to Palestine, the Albanese government will follow. Whether done with Britain, or alone, such a move would be a mistake.
The PM was nonetheless at something approaching his best in his discussion of this issue with David Speers on the ABC’s Insiders program on Sunday. Albanese said, inter alia: “How do you exclude Hamas from an involvement there? How do you ensure that a Palestinian state operates in an appropriate way which does not threaten the existence of Israel? So we (won’t) make any decision as a gesture. We will do it as a way forward if the circumstances are met.”
In my view, the considerations driving the government are almost entirely about managing domestic politics and avoiding a fresh bit of trouble with the Trump administration in Washington.
My guess would be that if the British Labour government of Sir Keir Starmer extends formal diplomatic recognition to Palestine, the Albanese government will follow. Whether done with Britain, or alone, such a move would be a mistake.
The PM was nonetheless at something approaching his best in his discussion of this issue with David Speers on the ABC’s Insiders program on Sunday. Albanese said, inter alia: “How do you exclude Hamas from an involvement there? How do you ensure that a Palestinian state operates in an appropriate way which does not threaten the existence of Israel? So we (won’t) make any decision as a gesture. We will do it as a way forward if the circumstances are met.”
The reptiles dropped in a snap of Keir Starmer
The bromancer was full of doubts, but no doubt comrade Albo took comfort from his advice ...
That’s perfectly sensible. If the government sticks to these requirements it will logically go back to the position of seeing the full, formal, diplomatic recognition of Palestine as something that can only satisfy the PM’s own criteria if it comes at the end of a negotiated agreement with Israel.
The big conceptual change the Albanese government made from the position of previous Australian governments has been outlined numerous times by Foreign Minister Penny Wong. It is that early recognition of a Palestinian state, though no such state exists, could be part of the peace process, could accelerate the peace process.
This defies all logic and sense. The only idea behind it is that there’s a perfect two-state solution all ready to go, and only the intransigence of Israel stops it coming about.
In fact, if you include the initial UN partition into an Arab and a Jewish state in 1947 – rejected by the Arab world, which immediately launched a war of attempted annihilation on Israel – Palestinians have been offered a full state on four occasions. They’ve rejected it each time.
For, as Albanese himself says, it’s necessary that such a state not pose a threat to Israel. That means no anti-Israel terrorism from that state, a complete acceptance of Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state, complete respect for its negotiated borders and an end of all other claims against Israel. One practical problem is that any Palestinian leader who agreed to a state on anything like those terms would certainly be assassinated by Islamist extremists.
The big conceptual change the Albanese government made from the position of previous Australian governments has been outlined numerous times by Foreign Minister Penny Wong. It is that early recognition of a Palestinian state, though no such state exists, could be part of the peace process, could accelerate the peace process.
This defies all logic and sense. The only idea behind it is that there’s a perfect two-state solution all ready to go, and only the intransigence of Israel stops it coming about.
In fact, if you include the initial UN partition into an Arab and a Jewish state in 1947 – rejected by the Arab world, which immediately launched a war of attempted annihilation on Israel – Palestinians have been offered a full state on four occasions. They’ve rejected it each time.
For, as Albanese himself says, it’s necessary that such a state not pose a threat to Israel. That means no anti-Israel terrorism from that state, a complete acceptance of Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state, complete respect for its negotiated borders and an end of all other claims against Israel. One practical problem is that any Palestinian leader who agreed to a state on anything like those terms would certainly be assassinated by Islamist extremists.
Therefore, for the moment, no two-state solution is available, although it’s the only solution in the long run. But you probably need 20 years of normalisation before you get to peace treaty territory.
The only solution? Apparently the bromancer hasn't been listening to the final solutions proposed by assorted members of the current government of Israel.
Cue a snap of Penny Wong
Back to the bromancer, and eventually a kinda, sorta billy goat butt...
Albanese is entitled to put public pressure on the Israeli government over the appalling humanitarian circumstances now prevailing in Gaza. Albanese’s government has, counterproductively, walked away from Australia’s historic friendship with Israel and undoubtedly Canberra now has less influence in Jerusalem than at any time since the disastrous Whitlam government.
Nonetheless, Israel is committing a grave moral and political error in its policies in Gaza today. The overwhelming moral responsibility for the truly appalling suffering and tragedy of the people of Gaza rests with Hamas.
Remember, Hamas is a proscribed, deeply anti-Semitic, terrorist organisation, of grotesque blood-lust, funded since its inception by Iran. It shares with Tehran the desire to wipe Israel off the map.
The Hamas terrorist atrocities of October 7, 2023, were among the most depraved and savage the world has seen. Every civilised human being stood with Israel at that point. But Hamas conducted that barbarous savagery as an act of considered policy. It foretold that Israel would make a massive response and it also foretold that Israel would suffer gravely in its international standing as a result.
Even now, Hamas could end the terrible suffering of the people it claims to represent simply by releasing the 19 or 20 Israeli hostages believed to be alive that it’s still holding.
However, while the savagery of Hamas required a strong Israeli reaction, that doesn’t absolve Israel morally or politically for the responsibility it now has for the two million people in Gaza, and their basic human needs for food, etc.
Israel has no good options in Gaza but it must choose a policy and implement it. The Netanyahu government, to the chagrin of the Israel Defence Forces, has never outlined what it plans for Gaza after the fighting is over.
Nonetheless, Israel is committing a grave moral and political error in its policies in Gaza today. The overwhelming moral responsibility for the truly appalling suffering and tragedy of the people of Gaza rests with Hamas.
Remember, Hamas is a proscribed, deeply anti-Semitic, terrorist organisation, of grotesque blood-lust, funded since its inception by Iran. It shares with Tehran the desire to wipe Israel off the map.
The Hamas terrorist atrocities of October 7, 2023, were among the most depraved and savage the world has seen. Every civilised human being stood with Israel at that point. But Hamas conducted that barbarous savagery as an act of considered policy. It foretold that Israel would make a massive response and it also foretold that Israel would suffer gravely in its international standing as a result.
Even now, Hamas could end the terrible suffering of the people it claims to represent simply by releasing the 19 or 20 Israeli hostages believed to be alive that it’s still holding.
However, while the savagery of Hamas required a strong Israeli reaction, that doesn’t absolve Israel morally or politically for the responsibility it now has for the two million people in Gaza, and their basic human needs for food, etc.
Israel has no good options in Gaza but it must choose a policy and implement it. The Netanyahu government, to the chagrin of the Israel Defence Forces, has never outlined what it plans for Gaza after the fighting is over.
Actually the government does have a plan, outlined in Haaretz, Netanyahu Proposes to Annex Parts of Gaza in Attempt to Appease Far-right Minister if Hamas Does Not Agree to a Deal, Under the proposed plan, Israel will gradually begin annexing parts of Gaza if Hamas does not agree to a cease-fire. Netanyahu told ministers the plan is supported by the Trump administration (*archive link)
They're already annexing parts of the West Bank, so why not go the full hog?
The reptiles slipped in a snap of the annexer-in-chief, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the audience at a conference in Jerusalem.
If Israel withdraws right now, Hamas reasserts control, which is plainly unacceptable. On the other hand, the international community would go berserk if Israel reoccupied Gaza altogether, but at least then Israel would be responsible for Gaza’s administration, providing food, education, vaccinations, etc.
There’s talk of an international Arab peacekeeping force but surely it’s acutely unlikely any Arab government would ever shoot a Gaza terrorist to prevent them attacking Israel. Some Israelis talk of empowering local clans to fight Hamas, but that would be chaotic. Benjamin Netanyahu hates the option, but eventually it will probably be necessary for the Palestinian Authority, hopefully reformed, to resume administration of Gaza.
Israel cannot allow the present situation to continue.
There’s talk of an international Arab peacekeeping force but surely it’s acutely unlikely any Arab government would ever shoot a Gaza terrorist to prevent them attacking Israel. Some Israelis talk of empowering local clans to fight Hamas, but that would be chaotic. Benjamin Netanyahu hates the option, but eventually it will probably be necessary for the Palestinian Authority, hopefully reformed, to resume administration of Gaza.
Israel cannot allow the present situation to continue.
Indeed, indeed, it's time for complete annexation and annihilation ...
The bromancer then added this apologia:
He attributes to me views that are the opposite of those I hold. Time without number I’ve criticised Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton for wildly overdoing war rhetoric regarding China. As recently as May 17 in The Weekend Australian, I wrote: “Scott Morrison and then defence minister Dutton frequently talked of war with China … it’s extremely irresponsible to talk about going to war unless such talk is necessary to justify great national expenditure or mobilisation.”
In the same piece I criticised the Morrison government’s “cynical rhetoric”. I’ve made these points many times. It’s true I’m more of a realist on Beijing than Curran is, but I’ve never supported drums of war talk. Curran has every right to disagree with me. But at least disagree with views I actually hold. He has an obligation to his readers to get the most elementary facts right.
- In Monday’s Australian Financial Review, columnist James Curran wrote, rather confusingly, that, regarding China, I had demanded of the Albanese government “a return to the ‘drums of war’ rhetoric characteristic of the Morrison years” and similar vulgar abuse.
He attributes to me views that are the opposite of those I hold. Time without number I’ve criticised Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton for wildly overdoing war rhetoric regarding China. As recently as May 17 in The Weekend Australian, I wrote: “Scott Morrison and then defence minister Dutton frequently talked of war with China … it’s extremely irresponsible to talk about going to war unless such talk is necessary to justify great national expenditure or mobilisation.”
In the same piece I criticised the Morrison government’s “cynical rhetoric”. I’ve made these points many times. It’s true I’m more of a realist on Beijing than Curran is, but I’ve never supported drums of war talk. Curran has every right to disagree with me. But at least disagree with views I actually hold. He has an obligation to his readers to get the most elementary facts right.
In truth, the pond has always enjoyed the bromancer’s columns, if in a deeply perverted way reflecting an addiction to melodrama and hysteria.
His extravagant reshaping of facts to fit his fanciful notions of the way the world works are always entertaining, as is his routine loss of memory. But this is such a blatant, basic error of fact as to require correction, and what better way to correct than by celebrating with one of many bromancer columns beating the drums of war ...
And so on and on, because the bromancer that time spent a good nine minutes preparing for war with China.
There are any number of examples, which is why the pond is always joking about the bromancer wanting a war with China by Xmas, but the pond must press on because this is already way over length and yet there are devotees of Dame Groan, who hang on every word in her groanings ...
The header: Chalmers is already gaming ‘reform’ roundtable, Chalmers is perfectly entitled to make political comments. But it’s another thing to claim to have delivered ‘a better living standard’ when per capita GDP has declined in seven of the past nine quarters.
The caption: Treasurer Jim Chalmers during Question Time at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: Martin Ollman
The pond will speed through this groaning, it's merely here - not there - for correspondents to have their say if they so desire ...
The planning for the Treasurer’s productivity roundtable is in full swing. After the Prime Minister announced the proposed high-level meeting to discuss productivity, Jim Chalmers has enthusiastically grabbed the reins. Treasury officials are busily drafting communiques.
Chalmers thought about dropping productivity from the title, preferring the term “reform”. The beauty of this switch was that his idea of reform is my idea of counter-productive and costly action. There is much more accountability in productivity because it is measured. Sensibly, he opted to switch back.
Even so, Chalmers has made some extraordinary preliminary comments. According to him, “we’ve made a lot of progress together in our first term making our economy more productive, dynamic and resilient”.
Chalmers is perfectly entitled to make political comments. But it’s another thing to claim to have delivered “a better living standard” when per capita GDP has declined in seven of the past nine quarters, and labour productivity is where it was in 2016. Business investment is the same share of the economy as it was in the recession of the early 1990s.
The idea that the economy is “more productive, dynamic and resilient” is not supported by the facts. Twenty per cent of our exports are dominated by one commodity – iron ore – with most of it heading to China, underscoring the fragility of the economy.
Chalmers thought about dropping productivity from the title, preferring the term “reform”. The beauty of this switch was that his idea of reform is my idea of counter-productive and costly action. There is much more accountability in productivity because it is measured. Sensibly, he opted to switch back.
Even so, Chalmers has made some extraordinary preliminary comments. According to him, “we’ve made a lot of progress together in our first term making our economy more productive, dynamic and resilient”.
Chalmers is perfectly entitled to make political comments. But it’s another thing to claim to have delivered “a better living standard” when per capita GDP has declined in seven of the past nine quarters, and labour productivity is where it was in 2016. Business investment is the same share of the economy as it was in the recession of the early 1990s.
The idea that the economy is “more productive, dynamic and resilient” is not supported by the facts. Twenty per cent of our exports are dominated by one commodity – iron ore – with most of it heading to China, underscoring the fragility of the economy.
At this point the reptiles introduced another Jimbo, who managed to ignore Tamworth's shame and his bonkerdom, LNP Senator James McGrath discusses how Australians should be worried about Labor’s economic reform roundtable, saying it is “bonkers” and will only produce “hair-brained ideas”. “Australians should be worried,” Mr McGrath told Sky News host Steve Price. “Those who own their own homes, are of pensionable age, should be worried about organisations, so-called think-tanks, like the Grattan Institute coming up with quite frankly hair-brained ideas like this. “This is bonkers.”
Dame Groan knows all about bonkers ...
The dramatic expansion of the government-funded, low-productivity care economy at triple the rate of economic growth is another factor contributing to our delicate economic situation. The predicted years of budget deficits is a further consideration.
But back to the roundtable. Chalmers has cunningly opted for a relatively small number of participants, which has the effect of heightening the competition for places as well as enhancing the presumed prestige of attending.
Whether Liberal Party deputy leader and shadow treasurer Ted O’Brien was wise to accept is debatable. The mere attendance at these types of events implies a degree of co-ownership of any outcomes. At the same time as this event is being planned, the Productivity Commission is receiving submissions on the five inquiries Chalmers commissioned late last year. Anticipating the possible criticism that the Labor government lacks a reform agenda, Chalmers nominated the following areas for the PC to consider: delivering quality care; data and digital technology; economic dynamism and resilience; a skilled and adaptable workforce, and; the net-zero transformation.
The fact the PC has covered most of these topics quite recently didn’t concern Chalmers too much. The timing would suit him and some of the ideas contained in the submissions could be highlighted, rejected or lampooned. Chalmers may be a second-rate economic manager, but he is a skilled political operator.
Into this environment, several prominent players have added their penny’s worth, often in the context of seeking to win favour with the government. I’m not sure we are really expected to take seriously the Commonwealth Bank’s suggestion that Australia should introduce a wealth tax. After all, wherever a wealth tax has been attempted, the perverse outcomes have been sufficient for governments to reverse course.
But back to the roundtable. Chalmers has cunningly opted for a relatively small number of participants, which has the effect of heightening the competition for places as well as enhancing the presumed prestige of attending.
Whether Liberal Party deputy leader and shadow treasurer Ted O’Brien was wise to accept is debatable. The mere attendance at these types of events implies a degree of co-ownership of any outcomes. At the same time as this event is being planned, the Productivity Commission is receiving submissions on the five inquiries Chalmers commissioned late last year. Anticipating the possible criticism that the Labor government lacks a reform agenda, Chalmers nominated the following areas for the PC to consider: delivering quality care; data and digital technology; economic dynamism and resilience; a skilled and adaptable workforce, and; the net-zero transformation.
The fact the PC has covered most of these topics quite recently didn’t concern Chalmers too much. The timing would suit him and some of the ideas contained in the submissions could be highlighted, rejected or lampooned. Chalmers may be a second-rate economic manager, but he is a skilled political operator.
Into this environment, several prominent players have added their penny’s worth, often in the context of seeking to win favour with the government. I’m not sure we are really expected to take seriously the Commonwealth Bank’s suggestion that Australia should introduce a wealth tax. After all, wherever a wealth tax has been attempted, the perverse outcomes have been sufficient for governments to reverse course.
The reptiles then threw in a snap, Bernie Sanders delivers remarks on stage at NHTI Concord Community College.
That set Dame Groan off, perhaps on the basis that she just loves her billionaires ...
A wealth tax must involve a tax on unrealised capital gains, something that appeals to far-left American politicians Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Not only are the compliance costs huge – wealth must be estimated every year – but there is also the real possibility affected individuals simply flee the jurisdiction to avoid the tax.
The return of a carbon tax is another perennial favourite. It’s certainly true that a national carbon tax, calibrated for what is happening in other countries, has certain positive features. But the case for a carbon tax exists only if all the other climate-related government measures are abolished.
This includes all the subsidies to renewable energy; the Safeguard Mechanism; the New Vehicle Emissions Standard; all household subsidies related to energy use and green devices, and the list goes on. Both federal and state government interventions would need to be scrapped. The point is this isn’t going to happen and so there’s no reason to talk about a carbon tax.
Spotting an opportunity, the superannuation industry has decided to get in on the game of making “helpful” suggestions. According to lobby group the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia, “institutional super funds have funded approximately 14 per cent of Australia’s capital stock, which generates domestic economic activity”.
This is illogical in economic terms because it assumes the funding would not have occurred had it not been for superannuation. The evidence is clear, however: the impact of compulsory superannuation on domestic saving is very small.
Based on dubious modelling, the further claim is made that the 30 years of compulsory superannuation has lifted GDP by 2 per cent – a trivial number given that there is now $4 trillion of superannuation funds under management. Leaving these mistruths aside, the concrete suggestions made by the ASFA are truly frightening. They claim a lower target rate of return for investing in nation-building activities should be accommodated within modified rules. A similar point is made in respect of housing – “loosening reporting requirements on super funds” is called for.
The return of a carbon tax is another perennial favourite. It’s certainly true that a national carbon tax, calibrated for what is happening in other countries, has certain positive features. But the case for a carbon tax exists only if all the other climate-related government measures are abolished.
This includes all the subsidies to renewable energy; the Safeguard Mechanism; the New Vehicle Emissions Standard; all household subsidies related to energy use and green devices, and the list goes on. Both federal and state government interventions would need to be scrapped. The point is this isn’t going to happen and so there’s no reason to talk about a carbon tax.
Spotting an opportunity, the superannuation industry has decided to get in on the game of making “helpful” suggestions. According to lobby group the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia, “institutional super funds have funded approximately 14 per cent of Australia’s capital stock, which generates domestic economic activity”.
This is illogical in economic terms because it assumes the funding would not have occurred had it not been for superannuation. The evidence is clear, however: the impact of compulsory superannuation on domestic saving is very small.
Based on dubious modelling, the further claim is made that the 30 years of compulsory superannuation has lifted GDP by 2 per cent – a trivial number given that there is now $4 trillion of superannuation funds under management. Leaving these mistruths aside, the concrete suggestions made by the ASFA are truly frightening. They claim a lower target rate of return for investing in nation-building activities should be accommodated within modified rules. A similar point is made in respect of housing – “loosening reporting requirements on super funds” is called for.
To compound the thought crime thinkers on parade, the reptiles flung in the snap of another, Elizabeth Warren
There came a final gobbet, and inevitably the Groaning joined in this day's reptile chorus on energy ...
The fact remains that superannuation funds are governed by the sole purpose test to maximise the retirement incomes of the members. Chalmers would be ill-advised even to consider these suggestions lest workers lose out in the name of some people’s ideas of lifting productivity.
An electricity grid based mainly on renewable energy, for instance, is far less productive than a centralised one based on a small number of large plants. Not only is there a need for a massive overbuild of renewable kit, but there is also an inherent redundancy in the system because of the need to back up intermittent power. The case for transforming the electricity grid has nothing to do with productivity, quite the reverse.
As we go through this “hundred flowers blooming” stage, it’s best to be realistic about what will come from the productivity get-together. The outcomes will be modest. It will give off the appearance that the government is active in this space while failing to achieve any meaningful boost to productivity. But it’s a shiny ball for the media to follow in the meantime.
An electricity grid based mainly on renewable energy, for instance, is far less productive than a centralised one based on a small number of large plants. Not only is there a need for a massive overbuild of renewable kit, but there is also an inherent redundancy in the system because of the need to back up intermittent power. The case for transforming the electricity grid has nothing to do with productivity, quite the reverse.
As we go through this “hundred flowers blooming” stage, it’s best to be realistic about what will come from the productivity get-together. The outcomes will be modest. It will give off the appearance that the government is active in this space while failing to achieve any meaningful boost to productivity. But it’s a shiny ball for the media to follow in the meantime.
Those snaps of US politicians reminded the pond of what it had been missing this day, but fortunately
TT was on hand to provide a reminder:
What a pity that Dame Groan hasn’t herself scored a seat at the productivity round table. It’s easy to imagine the sort of positive contributions she might make - “What a stupid idea,”, “That’s never going to work”, “You’ve no idea what you’re talking about”, etc etc etc.
ReplyDeleteI note that the good Dame also rates Treasurer Jimbo as only a “second-rate economic manager”. Might it not bolster her assessment if she deigned to describe what she considers necessary in a first-class economic manager? BTW, what’s the Groaner’s own management experience?
Dorothy, thank you for the invitation to have a say on Dame Groan for this day. She - the Dame - does not make it easy, with her reference to ‘the Commonwealth Bank’s suggestion that Australia should introduce a wealth tax. After all, wherever a wealth tax has been attempted, the perverse outcomes have been sufficient for governments to reverse course.’
Delete- followed by what is a non-sequitur
‘A wealth tax must involve a tax on unrealised capital gains,’
Somewhere I have a clipping from the days when newspapers carried strips like ‘The Wizard of Id’. This one had a peasant waving down Robbing Hood, to ask ‘Hey, Robbing Hood, why do you only steal from the rich?’ The next image had RH, palms outwards, asking ‘And the alternative is?’
Until our ‘Claytons’ GST, most taxes in this country were either progressive, or proportional to the value of property. So - wealth taxes. The one applied to unrealised capital gains supports one entire stratum of government; the one most of us are (literally) in contact with, day to day.
Yes, there was a mix of sales taxes, and there was discussion amongst academic economists particularly about the efficiency (as economists use that term) of consumption taxes on all goods and services compared with what was often called ‘lump sum’ consumption taxes. None of that discussion was really taken up by newspaper columnists of the time, so it was not taken up in the general community.
The GST that we have now is very definitely not a ‘wealth tax’, and Commonwealth Bank boffins will have been well aware that much of the legislation that set it up makes detailed exemptions for all kinds of financial services. The crowning achievement is for high assay gold to be free of GST.
Of course, in this age of King Donald, reptile riters are expected to claim that progressive taxes have perverse outcomes. Miraculously, in Rupert’s columns, the dens of the Foxes, or up in the Sky, with diamonds, tariffs now have all sorts of virtues, not previously understood since the time of Adam Smith. Perhaps Ted O’Brien will make a case for more tariffs at the ‘round table’.
Ah, the ‘The Wizard of Id’.
DeleteI may have an (in) correct memory Chadwick, of the ‘The Wizard of Id’ publishing the old chestnut... (now caligula's policy direction)
"Fight the war in poverty!
Kill a beggar today".
Or maybe Mad Magazine???
DP etc, apologies if the secret police flag this!
Oh, Anonymous - one version of the Dame's c.v. is here -
Deletehttps://www.eoas.info/biogs/P004358b.htm
Putting it bluntly, it is difficult to find evidence of real experience of 'management' in most of that. One of our continuing problems in productivity is the small size, and general mediocrity, of the class of 'company directors' in our land of Girtby. Too many who show signs of taking their statutory responsibilities (and fees) seriously, are eased off the boards, for being insufficiently 'collegial'.
The PC burgers said...
DeleteNo Dame! Not that broken record. We've heard it all before...
“What a stupid idea,”, “That’s never going to work”, “You’ve no idea what you’re talking about”, etc etc etc"
The pond stands in awe looking at the humble admiration and detailed consideration of Dame Groan in all her finery. The old biddy surely has the greatest cult following of any of the reptiles.
DeleteBTW Chadders, your reference to Robin Hood struck a chord, because for some perverse reason the pond's logarithms threw up the very first episode ...
The Adventures of Robin Hood (1955) S1E1 'The Coming of Robin Hood'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alrsF0VWt3k
It was the US edition and so began with a period strange ad.
It was way too early for the pond (and back in the day people in Tamworth were lucky to get a snowstorm trying to tune into NBN, and anyway, we didn't have a TV) ...
Anyway, the pond gave it a brief go, and was amused to discover a very young Leo McKern playing one of the villains.
The show could have done with a few more Wizard of Id lines ...
CSIRO report re costs of electricity generation: "...nuclear small modular reactors (SMRs) are the most costly." Well I think so too, but I still wonder just how anybody can assess the "cost" of SMRs when no such things exist or are likely to for some considerable time, if ever.
ReplyDeleteAnd what are all those existing nuclear non-SMRs doing to survive rising seas ?
https://ensia.com/features/coastal-nuclear/#:~
Steady GB, the pond has an SMR on back order for the back yard, and expects it to be delivered some time very soon ...
DeleteOT today yet very relevant for last 2 days shenanigans...
ReplyDeleteDP' wise advice yesterday...
"As alway in such situations, the pond recommends using a VPN - for example, Mullvad. It won't necessarily help in matters bot, but it helps with freedumb."
As downunder we get Downer in the gutter strong man surveillance too...; "PimEyes sees use by Australian police, enacts ban on searches for children"
Because pictures out them, so your face and fingerprints are used against you...
"Israel’s No. 2 diplomat in Australia says there is no starvation in Gaza and that images of emaciated children" will be hidden in these orwlian tools...
And of course the hooded cold ones get...
"New ICE mobile app pushes biometric policing onto American streets
Jun 26, 2025
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202506/new-ice-mobile-app-pushes-biometric-policing-onto-american-streets
Sparking a run on vee pee enz...
"As OSA kicks in, Yoti sees 25% spike in traffic, lands at number two on Apple charts
"Among surging VPNS, established provider gets vote of confidence from UK users
Jul 28, 2025
...
"UK age assurance provider Yoti has hit the charts in a big way following the activation of the Online Safety Act. The Yoti digital ID app has surged to number two on the Top 20 UK iPhone App Store Table, jumping ahead of OpenAI’s widely-used large language model, ChatGPT.
"The only app topping Yoti on the table? That would be Proton VPN – one of four virtual private network (VPN) apps in the top ten. VPNs allow users to hide their IP addresses, meaning they can behave as though located outside the UK. Tombs says it’s no surprise seeing the spike in VPN downloads, as users try and work around age verification requirements to access adult content.
"According to Mashable, Proton VPN reported a 1,400 percent hourly increase in signups over its baseline on July 25, when the new age verification requirements came into effect.
"But, Tombs says, “seeing Yoti at number 2 shows a lot of UK individuals want a private way to digitally prove their age (or ID)” to accommodate the laws.
"The GOV.UK One Login app sits at number 10 on the list.
...
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202507/as-osa-kicks-in-yoti-sees-25-spike-in-traffic-lands-at-number-two-on-apple-charts
"Face image search engine Pimeyes has stirred controversy over its ability to pinpoint exactly where exactly on the vast internet your face has popped up. Now it’s coming out with a new, even more powerful tool – video search.
"The function, which is expected to go online in the next three months, will allow users to search for faces in billions of online videos. The update is a result of an “enormous work” by the company’s 12-member team, Pimeyes Director Giorgi Gobronidze told Biometric Update in an interview.
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202507/pimeyes-new-tool-will-be-able-to-search-billions-of-faces-through-videos
"PimEyes sees use by Australian police, enacts ban on searches for children
Oct 24, 2023
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202310/pimeyes-sees-use-by-australian-police-enacts-ban-on-searches-for-children
“Pimeyes ” sounds uncomfortably close to “Pimpeyes”.
Delete"Israel’s No. 2 diplomat in Australia says there is no starvation in Gaza..."
DeleteOh look how well the Israelis have learnt from Trump - if you don't like it, deny that it exists.
Chambers: "...Australia has a renewables-only approach. China, India and the US are the world’s biggest polluters...".
ReplyDeleteTrue now, but ...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-27/chinas-co2-emissions-may-have-peaked-thanks-to-renewable-energy/105549598
Hi cooda thunk it.
Besides, think about this: if only about 1% of the population are really very smart and clever, then Australia, population about 27 million, has about 270,000 of them. But China, population about 1.4 billion, has about 14 million of them. No wonder China is surging ahead.
Oooh, Bro: "...there is only one peer competitor for the US - China."
DeleteNumber of very smart people: China, 14 million; US 3.5 million. I think the peer competition is over. Though of course before Trump started closing everything down, the US had a long standing capacity to import very smart people, even including Australians. But now ?
Basting!
ReplyDelete"50° “edge of survival” heat hits Turkey for first time in recorded history"
https://www.intellinews.com/50-edge-of-survival-heat-hits-turkey-for-first-time-in-recorded-history-392955/?source=turkey
Oh my, the whole of planet Terra is going kaput. Consider:
Delete"The world is on fire. There’s a coup. Inflation is through the roof, and AI is taking our jobs. What does it all mean? Each week, Matt Bevan explains the biggest story in world news while hiding in his basement from assassins and authoritarian regimes.
Airs on ABC Radio National at 1.30pm Friday."
https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/if-youre-listening
Yes. If Your Listening has grown on me. Like Media Watch, both need to be on the yr 8-12 curriculum.
DeleteMedia manipulation studies.
And Civics.
And the curtin pulled back.
The Bro: "...if Israel reoccupied Gaza altogether, but at least then Israel would be responsible for Gaza’s administration, providing food, education, vaccinations, etc".
ReplyDeleteAnd doubtless Israel would fully honour those obligations in the same humanitarian way that it acts now.
The Groany: "...per capita GDP has declined in seven of the past nine quarters, and labour productivity is where it was in 2016."
ReplyDeleteNow we've been through this before, but: both GDP per capita and 'productivity' are ratios of economic numbers to population. Now Australia's 'population' has been increasing significantly over the last decade due to very high immigrant numbers. Now the incoming immigrants are counted with the total for Australia because those ratios do not wait upon a census to get the up-to-date population number.
But it generally takes a while for new immigrants to settle in to the economy and start to make a contribution. Thus population increases faster than additions to the GDP and productive output. And thus GDP per capita and productivity decrease with increasing population. Yes ?
So, unless the likes of The Groany are prepared to give us the actual numbers of population and productivity, her pronouncements are pointless - which is hardly a new state for her.