- Date published:
10:48 am, August 18th, 2019 - 54 comments
Categories: australian politics, climate change, making shit up, spin, the praiseworthy and the pitiful, uncategorized, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags: scomo, scott morrison
The Pacific Leaders’ Forum has occurred this week.
The area is the first to feel the effects of climate change. Increased intensity of storms and storm surges and rising sea levels are already making Pacific life hard. The writing is on the wall for many low lying islands such as Tuvalu.
Their Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga has done an outstanding job at recent UN Conferences and has persuaded most of the world to sign up to working to stop global temperatures increasing by no more than 1.5 degrees. Although the Americans showed up at the latest conference arguing the benefits of coal.
You may have a sense of puzzlement about why Pacific leaders are still having to debate how climate change is an existential threat to their nations. Because it is. They can see their fisheries wilt, their coral reefs die and their islands disappear before their eyes.
But Australia still wants to argue the toss. And caused the normally peaceful Pacific Leader’s forum to descend into chaos.
From the Guardian:
Critical talks at the Pacific Islands Forum almost collapsed twice amid “fierce” clashes between the Australian prime minister, Scott Morrison, and Tuvalu’s prime minister, Enele Sopoaga, over Australia’s “red lines” on climate change.
Ralph Regenvanu, Vanuatu’s foreign minister, who was part of the drafting committee of the forum communique and observed the leaders’ retreat, said there was heated discussion over the Australian delegation’s insistence on the removal of references to coal, setting a target of limiting global warming to below 1.5C and announcing a strategy for zero emissions by 2050.
He described the discussions as “frank, fierce at times, [with] very strong positions being held”.
“Negotiations almost broke down twice, [with leaders] saying ‘this is not going to happen, we’re not going to have a collective decision’,” he said. Leaders had to take a break from proceedings, which started about 9.30am local time and lasted for almost 12 hours.
“That’s why it took so long,” Regenvanu said. “When things break down, you know there’s a huge amount of frustration, luckily it didn’t break all the way down and the leaders were able to bring it back.”
Things became that bad that the Tongan leader shed tears.
Jacinda Ardern was praised for her role in trying to resolve tensions:
“[Jacinda Ardern] was much more compromising. She was really good yesterday. She said the right things about climate change and Morrison did not,” said Bainimarama.
Then former rugby coach and stale male and pale shock jock Alan Jones took things to a new height by calling Ardern a clown and suggesting Morrison “shove a sock down her throat”. Banimarana responded firmly.
This tweet has support from unusual sources.
But wait there was more.
Jones doubled down on his comments and said that Ardern “has no idea what she’s talking about”. Then a number of people responded in the best way to oppose this click bait manufactured controversy. They attacked his funding by contacting his show’s sponsors. After ME Bank pulled out the writing is on the wall. Jones has been issued with a final warning and any further comments will see his contract cancelled.
Please note. The best way to deal with misogynist shock jocks is to attack their funding. Let their sponsors know that what they are saying is deeply offensive as well as being wrong.
But you do have to wonder how many chances Jones will get. He previously said that Julia Gillard’s father would have been ashamed of her shortly after his death. Jones seems to have a thing about younger intelligent and articulate progressive women.
Then deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack went all hold my beer on it and said the Pacific Islands will survive because they pick Australia’s fruit. Yep. You read this right.
His reported comments are:
“I also get a little bit annoyed when we have people in those sorts of countries pointing the finger at Australia and say we should be shutting down all our resources sector so that, you know, they will continue to survive,” he said.
“They will continue to survive, there’s no question they’ll continue to survive and they’ll continue to survive on large aid assistance from Australia.
“They’ll continue to survive because many of their workers come here and pick our fruit, pick our fruit grown with hard Australian enterprise and endeavour and we welcome them and we always will.
“But the fact is we’re not going to be hijacked into doing something that will shut down an industry that provides tens of thousands of jobs, that provides two-thirds of our energy needs … and I’m only talking coal, let alone all of our other resources.”
I still do not get the right’s infatuation with coal. The only reason that I can see its support is that it is a vital weapon in the culture wars, and is able to turn some workers away from the left through fear of losing their jobs masked with an anti intellectualism veneer. Because it’s use makes no environmental sense and increasingly no financial sense.
Whether you agree or not. The Morrison government promised to end the left's supposed war on coal and were then overwhelmingly elected against all pre election night polls and opinions. The Australian majority want coal jobs and coal fired power plants, and that is what they democratically voted for.
A small minority of traditional Labour voters went for the conservatives because of perceived self interest. Most people realise that coal is poison to the environment and we need to get away from it as soon as possible.
It is government's job to collect and collate the evidence and know the true situation and explain that and the effects of various possible policies.
This is what should be done and yet often not. Brexit is one example. The citizens can be lied to if it suits the individuals in power to do so, and they are like insiders on the stock market. They can take advantage of their special knowledge and reap some rewards from the outcome of their policies, and then when matters go bump, they can be away from it and have a handy get out of jail card which somehow puts responsibility on the previous opposition.
There would be very few Australian one issue voters out there. But considering coal and energy security was arguably the coalition's number one policy, or at the least in their top three priorities. Voters were obviously either apathetic to coal, were not concerned with the government's approach towards it, or where happy with Morrisons plans moving forward.
What energy policy? They don't have one FFS. They've chewed through three prime ministers in six years arguing about. Australia's energy security has gotten worse, not better, as they've dilly-dallied, dancing to the tune of a fossil fuel sector who sees Australia as its last bastion in thwarting a post-coal transition.
If coal is so poisonous then why are we importing Indonesia coal and stop looking for natural gas?
Have you decided yet if you want to keep your commenting privilege here? It doesn’t bother me either way.
Genesis Energy is importing coal because previous governments set in place rules and structures that mean Genesis acts to maximise profit to their shareholders (and compensation to their executives, but that's another topic), and New Zealand's national interest gets no consideration.
Natural gas is extremely damaging too. That's a fkn good reason to stop looking for it. Less damaging than coal, yes, but still extremely damaging.
The Australian's were lied to. The Adani job numbers shrank dramatically upon election success. The campaign was low, dirty, based on falsities and pushing fear of others, others being people who want to help save the world in this instance. Divide and destroy, what a pack of winners.
I hope to see this type of politics made illegal, as it's disrespectful to voters and at best still fraudulent.
How would you make all the contested statements during elections illegal, without destroying the concept of free speech?
There are always going to be different views on issues. For instance the Australian Institute can't be right. No coal mine in the world that is the size of Adani employs as few as 100 people.
In any event this my point, these things are contested, with a range of views, especially as it relates to a future situation.
The idea is that wrong statements are picked up by the other side of the debate. That is whole point of fact checking. And if one person is consistently lying, then their opponents will call them out, along with the media.
Not the Murdoch media empire. A compliant media is a big part of the problem
We've all seen how the Gnats exploit a false 'freedom of opinion' to defend their utter nonsense from objective critique Wayne. That's not healthy democratic functioning.
In a healthy democracy a party like the Gnats would purge its habitual liars and fight its corner truthfully. They'd never win that way of course, they don't know squat about economics or anything else come to that, and the purge has gone the other way – Mailyn Waring may have been the last conscientious Gnat – contemporary ones will tell any lie they think will get them a moment of media attention – they are contemptible.
You have been saying for years that all National does is lie. And that they are contemptible. Well that’s just your opinion. I happen to disagree.
Just because National believes in different things to you does not make them liars.
And it is not how the two major parties conduct their political relationship. They essentially contest issues on the basis of ideological conviction. And on some major things they’ve basically agree (National Super, the basic structure of the economy, most aspects of foreign policy, and many others).
It is why New Zealand has such high international rankings on political stability, freedom, corruption, etc.
You would have both sides at each other’s throats on the basis they had no trust or respect for each. That they thought the other side was not just wrong, but also bad. With relatively few exceptions that is not how politics are conducted in this country.
You can see that in the way the Leaders of the major parties interact with each, not just now but for the last 35 years. There is a basic respect for each other. Not perfect, or subject to tension, but generally there. You can easily discern it after they leave politics. National supported Helen Clark for the UN Sec Gen, the fact that Sir Michael Cullen was appointed to various Boards, the fact that Jim Bolger has been appointed to various things by Labour.
Your approach would destroy the basic political and social compact of this country. Which would benefit us how?
"Your approach would destroy the basic political and social compact of this country. Which would benefit us how?"
Wayne, on the continuum of improving-to-preserving-to-destroying the basic political compact of NZ, where would you place the ‘approach’ of those behind the activities detailed in "Dirty Politics"?
Were those activities, sponsored at the highest levels of government, intended to improve or to destroy the basic political compact, or were the those activities largely neutral as far as the basic political compact is concerned?
The idea of service as a public good is largely lost. The first question now is not whether an initiative is worthwhile, but rather how will it benefit me, and how much it will cost – “for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.“
"Just because National believes in different things to you does not make them liars."
Just so – it's the lying that makes you a pack of liars Wayne.
Straighten up and fly right and I won't be obliged to point out your innumerable shortcomings.
If you don't straighten up, any ordinary person is obliged to conclude that you are as much strangers to the truth as you are to competence and common decency.
No, I wouldn’t have you at each others throats, I would have you clean up your act, until you do it you are unfit to be in parliament.
Stuart. What a dopey unsubstantiated biased unintelligible pathetic insulting and boring comment. In my opinion of course.
Am new view
[Can you please stick to one user name on this site – Incognito]
See my Moderation note @ 7:44 AM.
There is a long but not exhaustive list of National lies available on this very site; no need to linger in shameful ignorance, find it and uplift yourself through education.
The pie in the sky job numbers touted ,,, when Sir Kiddy Killing Key did one of his 'deals' ,,,,, for the benefit of the money laundering Auckland casino …. stunk like a rigged bidding process .,,, WeTheBleeple is correct,,,,, or we will end up like right wing lawless Brazil.
CoIncidentally ,,,, Sir Kiddy Killing Key ,,, KKK, reflects wayne Double Dipper mapps attitude to the People of Afghanistan.
I've been waiting quite a while for Wayne to show any tangible proof of remorse to the people he had a hand in harming and defaming ,,,, Like an apology or compensation to his victims.
White subpremacist have a love affair with Israel …. Mutual hate of Muslims you see …
[Straight back to your old habits? Please stay on topic and don’t attack other commenters with potentially defamatory comments – Incognito]
[lprent: Next time I see you mention anything that I think is clearly defamatory like this comment, then you are off the site permanently and in any aliases as well. You’l also be in my list of people who never get unbanned.
I don’t like pig-ignorant arseholes, and at present I can’t see any difference between you and Slater or Nottingham.
Banned for two months. ]
See my Moderation note @ 2:57 PM.
Reason (a misnomer if there was ever one!)
Apart from your usual abuse, what double dipping?
For instance I did not apply for the travel subsidy while I worked at the Law Commission, precisely because I thought I should not receive remuneration from the government and also get a government paid travel subsidy.
While I should expect a retraction from you, I know I won’t get it, more likely just additional abuse.
Adani is not a viable mine. It is a stranded asset. Don't ask the Greens. Ask the banks. No-one will lend to them which is why all the supposed libertarian, scorched earth capitalists in the government have suddenly transformed into statist socialists in the aid of the coal industry. This is a con, conceived and paid for by a corrupt coal industry in a last-ditch bid to save itself from the march of cheaper, more efficient renewables. The Morrison government is full of equally corrupt politicians, owned by the coal lobby and directed by the dominant Murdoch media, which sponsors the denialist line. The facts on coal and climate change are not contested. Ask the financial markets. Coal companies are going bust globally. This pitch in Australia is the last stand by a minority who have bought and sold our politicians and are intent on wrecking the planet in the process. On blogs like this, you see the same talking points from web-bots cropping up again and again. The disinformation is just another tool in the arsenal of a deeply cynical industry whose sponsors need to be exposed and dealt with, hopefully in our lifetimes.
Well put. Even from this side of the Tasman Amani is clearly a trash the planet sort of project with nothing going for it, even fiscally. Otherwise why would Government need to fund it?
The facts on coal and climate change are not contested
They are problematic if not only for the unstated reasons eg Hansen 2013.(The Faustian bargain.
We suggest that the huge post-2000 increase of uptake by the carbon sinks implied by figure 3 is related to the simultaneous sharp increase in coal use (figure 1). Increased coal use occurred primarily in China and India (Boden et al 2012; BP 2012; see graphs at http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/Emissions/Emis_moreFigs/). Satellite radiance measurements for July–December, months when desert dust does not dominate aerosol amount, yield an increase of aerosol optical depth in East Asia of about 4% yr-1 during 2000–2006 (van Donkelaar et al 2008). Associated gaseous and particulate emissions increased rapidly after 2000 in China and India (Lu et al 2011, Tian et al 2010). Some decrease of the sulfur component of emissions occurred in China after 2006 as wide application of flue-gas desulfurization began to be initiated (Lu et al 2010), but this was largely offset by continuing emission increases from India (Lu et al 2011).
We suggest that the surge of fossil fuel use, mainly coal, since 2000 is a basic cause of the large increase of carbon uptake by the combined terrestrial and ocean carbon sinks. One mechanism by which fossil fuel emissions increase carbon uptake is by fertilizing the biosphere via provision of nutrients essential for tissue building, especially nitrogen, which plays a critical role in controlling net primary productivity and is limited in many ecosystems (Gruber and Galloway 2008). Modeling (e.g., Thornton et al 2009) and field studies (Magnani et al 2007) confirm a major role of nitrogen deposition, working in concert with CO2 fertilization, in causing a large increase in net primary productivity of temperate and boreal forests. Sulfate aerosols from coal burning also might increase carbon uptake by increasing the proportion of diffuse insolation, as noted above for Pinatubo aerosols, even though the total solar radiation reaching the surface is reduced.
Half of the Australian emission increase come's from a single,the Gorgon Lng plant in WA.from which the CO2 reinjection is supposed to capture 80%.
I don't think that's quite true. I'm sure they want jobs, but they'd be just as happy with other reasonably rewarding work. And, they probably don't want some of the problems associated with global warming – higher summer temperatures, increased drought, river die-offs, increased fire risks.
Ideally, governments give their constituents, not what they want, but what they'd want if they were fully informed in regard to costs and benefits. Of course this is often abused, both through ignorance at the government or civil service level, or through the corruption of democratic institutions through commercial sponsorship. I expect that the enthusiasm for coal is commercially inspired, albeit with some support from voters cynical of Liberal/National ability or intention to create decent jobs outside least effort enterprises like mining.
Once AGW is accepting as a genuine problem, there is quite a lot Australia might wish to do to mitigate its impacts, which could generate quite a lot of long term reasonably skilled jobs.
"The Australian majority want coal jobs". Your source?
A few hundred jobs, if that will be created by the Adani mine, assuming it ever goes ahead and I would wager it won't. In the meantime, 70,000 jobs, many related to the tourism and service sectors, are at risk in Queensland from the demise of the Great Barrier Reef.
The LNP won the election, based on outright lies about Labor 'death taxes', promulgated on Facebook by the same forces that led to Trump and Brexit. In Queensland, Clive Palmer's astro-turfed 'party' split the conservative vote and led second preference votes back to the LNP. The rest came from Pauline Hanson's neo-fascist movement. Palmer spent more than $60 million on advertising, as a downpayment on getting fast-track approval for his coal deposit, right next to the Carmichael mine.
Outside Queensland and Western Australia, Labor won the election. In fact, the biggest swings to Labor were in nominally safe Liberal Party seats in the urban centres of Sydney and Melbourne. In short, the vast bulk of Australians voted FOR action on climate change and FOR the transition from fossil fuels.
I see this disinformation from web-bots like you, mate, all over the internet.
Why should Alan Jones lose his job. He is just saying what many Oz people are thinking, or will be after he has said it.
Jones is going nowhere, he's one of the most highly rated commentators in Australia, who is across all media platforms.
… he's one of the most highly rated commentators in Australia, who is across all media platforms.
You mean he's a misogynistic, mean minded, ignorant Aussie dinosaur who appeals to other misogynistic, mean minded, ignorant Aussie dinosaurs of which they have more than their fair share.
Jones is Aussies Hosking. the most liked and also the most disliked just depends which side of the fence your on
Like Leighton Smith?
Jones has 19% of the breakfast radio audience. But who listens to breakfast radio. People with one foot in the grave mainly. Of the 677,000 people who listen to 2GB at some point every week, almost 300,000 are older than 64. His audience is dying. They spend more money on funeral insurance and not much else. His supposed influence is in the heads of politicians.
Cos he's a twohanded wanker grazy.
I don't think Alan 'Dribbling Imbecile' Jones should lose his job. I do think he should be ridiculed into obscurity though.
"I still do not get the right’s infatuation with coal."
Think you will find support for coal is not the preserve of the right….and surely you understand the desire for power, influence and money?
…”Alan Jones took things to a new
I have heard Jones on the radio when I have been in Australia. He comes over as someone who needs a mental health assessment. When Julia Gillard was PM he would say the most disgusting personal things about her appearance. It never ceases to amaze that people like him, who are no George Clooney lookalikes themselves, think they can make personal and vile comments about women. They just don’t like smart, articulate women. Women in their world should only be making the scones and cups of tea.
Yeah, he does seem to have a particular bee in his bonnet about women in positions of authority who also happen to oppose his ideology. They're all simpering hyper-emotional ninnies who should get back to the embroidery and leave the real business of continuing to ruin the planet to embittered old vultures like him. First class arsehole basically.
Incredible that twice coup leader and strongman Frank Bainimarama is managing to make Australian political leadership look unfit and backward.
What is it about climate change issues which send RWNJs so crazy?
What is it about climate change issues which send RWNJs so crazy?
Because they've been cc deniers for decades and they can't handle being shown to be wrong. So they hate all those people -scientists,climatologists, meteorologists and people in power who are far more intelligent then them – and the only way they know how to get back at them is to make vicious, personal attacks against them.
What they don't realise is they show themselves up for being the ignorant, entitled, brain deficient idiots most of them are. And of course the most famous of them is the f*****t who currently graces the Oval Office.
🙂 "What they don't realise is they show themselves up for being the ignorant, entitled, brain deficient idiots most of them are. And of course the most famous of them is the f*****t who currently graces the Oval Office" 🙂
Now tell us what you really think.
I'm not sure why it is that NZers maintain this romantic notion of Australia (and I say so as once having held an Australian passport). That spirit of brotherhood based on an 'ANZAC spirit' that gets wheeled out once a year. (And btw, if you ever watch OZ media coverage of ANZAC day, it's usually as though NZ wasn't a participant)
Over the past 50 years, things have evolved from NZ being seen as another state of OZ – with somewhat less rivalry between say VIC and NZ or NSW and NZ than there was between VIC and NSW – to our now being seen as somewhat lesser beings than the exceptional okker.
It really is time to leave it alone and forge our own way, and if NZ's economic refugees still want to try their luck across the ditch in pursuit of higher wages, or a spot on "the GC', more fucking fool them. I can think of better places.
Fuk 'em. They even spent years bowling underarm over bloody apples ffs!
Follow the money. It's always and forever about the money.
Why are we still importing coal from Indonesia via Tauranga ?
Shhhsss…Jacinda made a captains call to ruin our own oil and gas industry, just so we can import more coal, adding even more carbon to the world just to ship it here.
Only on Planet Woke does that make sense.
[Making up stupid shit like that is a sure sign of a troll. Please provide evidence for your claim that shows it is not a planet orbiting a tiny wee black hole at the centre of your otherwise empty skull or you can embark on a long space travel to Planet Woke. You have until tomorrow morning because it might take you a while to find it or retract your comment – Incognito]
[It seems you were indeed just trolling given that you have not responded to the moderation note. I wish you a pleasant journey to Planet Woke and we might see you again in a fortnight – Incognito]
See my Moderation note @ 6:49 PM.
See my final Moderation note @ 6:49 PM.
Talking about 1.5 degrees is a hopelessly optimistic distraction. Highly likely that more than that is already locked in …
likely correct….but then politicians are optimistic to the point of self delusion
The upside of climate change.
Cheap slave wage workers.
And we always will…. take advantage!
The only time Jonesy makes any sense is his Friday rant in the Australian Newspaper about the current state of Australia Rugby Union and the sad thing is he is right. Heck even my dad who can't stand him at the best of times apart from his time as the Wallabies coach, agrees with him on the state of the ARU.
Jones seems to have a thing about younger intelligent and articulate progressive women.
Julia Gillard progressive? She was bitterly opposed to gay marriage and it took her departure from politics before she came to the realisation that gay marriage wasn’t such a bad idea.
"bitterly opposed" – how so? That word isn't used in the linked SMH article.
Jones declares they should pick fruit in China! Does he get money from China? China is expanding into the Pacific and Jones is putting oz to sleep on the issue.
It's obvious we need a free trade agreement across the Pacific, like the nz-oz, free movement of people, services, trade. That way oz have a choice migration or coal; freedom or China.
Big coal is dependant, a proxy for China in oz, Liberals are selling oz out.