The Abbott Government

[Julia]

Whilst it all is a bit of a storm in a teacup I do agree with Banco's assessment that Pyne is a lying little rat. Of course at the end of the day it's his word against Pynes but he did appear to keep logs and some of his comments were rather random to have just made up

If that were the case, why would he not have included his latest revelations in his previous affidavit to the court?

You are in no more of a position than banco to know who in this instance is telling the truth.
It's all so paltry and sordid that I don't think too many people really care. Probably both of them are putting their own interpretations on what was actually said.

I'm not sure what Ashby gains by making it up.

Money?, viz

www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/jam...eter-slippers-legal-fees-after-aborting-trial

In the absence of any transcript of conversations, it's all just speculation and imo a waste of time.

I've never liked the nasal voice and smug private school boy look on the self-entitled brat with the condescending political style anyway but hopefully it may alter how some perceive him in the public eye.

So obviously you are already biased against Mr Pyne which will colour your view. Others will view Mr Ashby with similar scepticism for the reasons Knobby outlines below.

I am sure James Ashby was encouraged by those in the Liberal Party however he is a solicitous lying scumbag and I am personally glad that Peter Slipper succeeded in having costs awarded against him.

If he was stupid enough to believe the assurances of some of the party without getting it in writing (remember Tony Abbotts words) then more fool him.

Ashby should have realised that he would become an untouchable if he lost the case and would not get a job working for the Libs.

Also I noticed the following info which suggest the Libs may have paid up in any case.

In announcing his intention to drop the case, Mr Ashby said his lawyers, Harmers Workplace Lawyers, had absorbed the $1 million he has incurred in legal fees to date.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...rting-trial-20140620-zsgdp.html#ixzz3Chm629fr

 

[Julia]

Mr Ashby might just have further complicated his own situation by his attempts at manipulation.

Labor to send Ashby claims to prosecutors

AAP
September 08, 2014 6:30PM

A Labor MP wants prosecutors to assess whether James Ashby has committed perjury.

Michael Danby says Mr Ashby has told contradictory stories to the Federal Court and to TV about whether he was offered a Liberal Party job if he took action against then Speaker Peter Slipper over sexual harassment.

"Accordingly, I will be writing to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, inviting him to immediately investigate whether perjury has occurred," Mr Danby said in a statement on Monday.

Mr Danby will also raise the matter in parliament.

Mr Ashby told the Nine Network on Sunday that federal Liberal frontbencher Christopher Pyne had assured him of a job and a lawyer if he chose to return to the political scene after taking on his employer Mr Slipper.

Mr Ashby wrote in his diary that Mr Pyne: "Said a lawyer would be paid for as promised and I would have a job - state LNP politics or federal - if I chose to come back."

But the former adviser said in a Federal Court affidavit in his case against Mr Slipper: "I have not been paid or promised any financial or other benefit or consideration ... if I make any complaint or commence such action."

 

[Knobby22]

Mr Ashby might just have further complicated his own situation by his attempts at manipulation.

Well put Julia (and found).Mr Ashby duplicity has ensured his own downfall.

 

[overhang]

If that were the case, why would he not have included his latest revelations in his previous affidavit to the court?

I suspect he mislead the court as he didn't want to jeopardise the job offer Pyne had given him.

You are in no more of a position than banco to know who in this instance is telling the truth.
It's all so paltry and sordid that I don't think too many people really care. Probably both of them are putting their own interpretations on what was actually said.

Well either are you, I'm pointing out I agree with Banco's assessment which you disagreed with.

Money?, viz
In the absence of any transcript of conversations, it's all just speculation and imo a waste of time.

Pyne has more to lose than Ashby by telling the truth. The current government seems to call royal commissions for less.

So obviously you are already biased against Mr Pyne which will colour your view. Others will view Mr Ashby with similar scepticism for the reasons Knobby outlines below.

I was kind enough to reveal my predisposition but it doesn't mean my view is wrong, I suspect the regular space cadets that watch 60 minutes may tend to take Ashby's side. Who to trust? A lying politician or a lying politicians assistant.

 

[sydboy007]

If the below is the level of understanding how markets work and how Australian gas exports are now fully integrated into the global LNG trade, then how is it everyone thinks this Govt is somehow capable of rational economic management?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...to-gas-shortage/story-fn59noo3-1227051902353#

Energy Minister Ian Macfarlane is negotiating with the states to fast-track a fix to the shortage as domestic gas supplies are redirected to the booming export market while new production is vetoed on environmental grounds.

Mr Macfarlane dismissed calls from manufacturers to quarantine gas for the local market and blasted the NSW government for failing to develop its own coal-seam gas fields, sending prices skywards.

“The solution to high gas prices is to flood the market with gas,” Mr Macfarlane said ahead of the government’s looming policy plan for energy and manufacturing.

Some NSW energy customers pay $3 per gigajoule for gas under long-term contracts, but the minister warned the price would rise to more than $10 over the next few years because of limits on CSG production across the state.

To see local gas prices in that range you'd need LNG pricing of $18/GJ. Spot pricing has been trending down towards the $10GJ range. KOGAS has been deferring a large number of gas shipments. The Japanese are teaming up with India to form a major buyers club. The USA and Canada are bringing LNG terminals online over the next few years with the ability to export gas at the $10-12 GF range. All this should be known by the resource minister. If he doesn't then he should be sacked and someone who actually knows how the markets work for the majority of our resource exports put in his place.

It's quite likely now that local gas prices are going to settle at around the $6 GJ range as the gas glut continues to expand. Most of the LNG being brought online in Australia is at the top of the global cost curve and will barely break even as prices fall back to the $12 range. Major customers are already agitating for current contracts to be renegotiated, so don't expect any major deals to be announced for Australia any time soon.

I'm waiting for Macfarlane to explain what will happen to the gas if we go full throttle with CSG.

How much does he believe can be brought to the market over the next few years? What will the cost be for this new gas production?

Without a reservation policy won't any extra gas be exported to Asia if prices remain higher than the local market? Doesn't this mean CSG would have to bring enough extra gas to the market to actually cause, at a minimum, Asian LNG prices to fall? How much production does Macfarlane believe would be required to achieve this goal?

Is it sensible policy to cause excess production that negatively affects the pricing of a major export?

Australia is about the only major gas producer with no energy policy and no reservation policy. With manufacturing already in retreat, is it sensible to make things even harder by fully linking major domestic users into the global LNG market?

We have a Government who believes wind farms are ugly and is doing it's best to stop any more from being built, yet there's no evidence they have a negative impact on the environment, but they do provide farmers with a reliable income over many years as well as regional employment opportunities over the life of the wind farm.

Compare this with CSG, which most farmers are against, which has been repeatedly shown to leak toxic chemicals from poorly managed wells, and also requires billions of litres of brine to be somehow managed without damaging the local environment. After a few years he finite resource is depleted and the CSG companies move on. The benefit to the local community is relatively short lived, especially when compared to wind farms.

Maybe we'd be better off with the Government increasing funding to the CSIRO so they can commercialise their SOLGAS system. 25% higher energy content for a unit of gas using their catalyst and process. At least it helps to extend a finite resource rather than just using it up as fast as possible.

http://www.csiro.au/Organisation-Structure/Flagships/Energy-Flagship/SolarGas.aspx

-----------------

food for thought

http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/woodside_coleman_in_fresh_indian_bMf838xSnR7AFKE1Psqc1J

…It is set to receive its first LNG supplies from Australia in 2015-16 through a 20-year contract signed in 2009 between Petronet LNG and ExxonMobil for LNG from the $54 billion Gorgon venture.

However that contract is said to be among India’s most expensive LNG deals, and reports in India say Petronet has been under pressure from gas buyer GAIL (India) to renegotiate it to a lower price.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...l-LNG-at-lower-price/articleshow/41813752.cms

The company had recently offered to supply LNG to FACT at12 dollars per MMBTU (million metric British thermal unit). The price was $16 to $19.5 when the terminal was commissioned late last year.

“We are ready to pass on the benefits of the fall in prices of LNG in the global market to all customers. What is important for us now is to increase the throughput from the terminal,” said Petronet managing director and CEO Ashok K Balyan after the director board meeting here on Thursday.

Balyan, however, conceded that the company had not heard from FACT on resuming gas offtake from the Puthuvype terminal. FACT, which had initially bought LNG from Puthuvype, stopped later saying that the gas price was higher. “They are waiting for some clearances to revive supply,” he said.

http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com...offload-10-17-lng-cargoes-in-oct-nov-sources/

“Kogas are deferring for the second time so [their] options are now exhausted. I’m not sure how much more assistance the sellers can give,” the source said.

The supply overhang could total more than 1.5 million mt over 2014, with some reports pegging the surplus as high as 30-40 standard sized cargoes, as previously reported by Platt

 

[Knobby22]

I am very worried on how this will go, Syd.
If poorly handled it could become a major impost on business not to mention consumers that will make the carbon tax look like a cakewalk.

I know of one company personally that used to make specialty glass her for lighting that was exported world wide but he couldn't compete with the Germans due to high gas prices. If the government does not listen to industry then who are they listening to?

If it is true (as I have read in the Age) that the government is looking a contributing up to $1 billion dollars of taxpayers money to ensure this happens then I am flabbergasted.

So it ain't so Tony.

 

[sydboy007]

I am very worried on how this will go, Syd.
If poorly handled it could become a major impost on business not to mention consumers that will make the carbon tax look like a cakewalk.

I know of one company personally that used to make specialty glass her for lighting that was exported world wide but he couldn't compete with the Germans due to high gas prices. If the government does not listen to industry then who are they listening to?

If it is true (as I have read in the Age) that the government is looking a contributing up to $1 billion dollars of taxpayers money to ensure this happens then I am flabbergasted.

So it ain't so Tony.

What annoys me is the Government is using the rise of LNG exports to force through CSG. I'm just trying to understand if they really don't know what's going on in the gas market (after the metadata fiasco it's a possibility) or they're being very dishonest abut the benefits that expanded CSG production will have when there's no reservation policy.

i suppose it could be a combination of the two.

I'd urge Macfarlane and other Govt members to have a read of the AEMO report

NSW cost structure does not look competitive with the oncoming LNG glut.

Australia wide The weighted average cost is comparable to domestic gas prices at the time of this report, with short term spot prices ranging between AUD2.50 and AUD4.50 per GJ, which are lower relative to longer term contract prices.

An analysis of the above figure reveals that the majority of sources sitting under the weighted average are generally in production / development or earmarked for near term development,

The below cost drivers for NSW CSG will be difficult to overcome to make it profitable without unrealistically high LNG pricing forecasts.

 

[Julia]

Well either are you,

Exactly right. But I've not made any assessment about who is telling the truth. Rather, I' ve suggested that probably a conversation occurred from which both participants extracted the meaning most appealing and useful to them.

I'm pointing out I agree with Banco's assessment which you disagreed with.

I did not agree or disagree with banco's 'assessment'. I just made the point that, once again, although he wasn't there he had formed a categorical conclusion about who was (if anyone) lying and that he did so in his usual floridly pejorative language.

I suspect he mislead the court as he didn't want to jeopardise the job offer Pyne had given him.

Even if Mr Pyne had offered him a job (which is very much in dispute) to mislead the court is hardly an indication of good character. Someone who misleads a court is probably unlikely to balk at misleading, manipulating or misrepresenting in any other less important situation.

 

[sptrawler]

If the below is the level of understanding how markets work and how Australian gas exports are now fully integrated into the global LNG trade, then how is it everyone thinks this Govt is somehow capable of rational economic management?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...to-gas-shortage/story-fn59noo3-1227051902353#

Energy Minister Ian Macfarlane is negotiating with the states to fast-track a fix to the shortage as domestic gas supplies are redirected to the booming export market while new production is vetoed on environmental grounds.

Mr Macfarlane dismissed calls from manufacturers to quarantine gas for the local market and blasted the NSW government for failing to develop its own coal-seam gas fields, sending prices skywards.

“The solution to high gas prices is to flood the market with gas,” Mr Macfarlane said ahead of the government’s looming policy plan for energy and manufacturing.

Some NSW energy customers pay $3 per gigajoule for gas under long-term contracts, but the minister warned the price would rise to more than $10 over the next few years because of limits on CSG production across the state.

To see local gas prices in that range you'd need LNG pricing of $18/GJ. Spot pricing has been trending down towards the $10GJ range. KOGAS has been deferring a large number of gas shipments. The Japanese are teaming up with India to form a major buyers club. The USA and Canada are bringing LNG terminals online over the next few years with the ability to export gas at the $10-12 GF range. All this should be known by the resource minister. If he doesn't then he should be sacked and someone who actually knows how the markets work for the majority of our resource exports put in his place.

It's quite likely now that local gas prices are going to settle at around the $6 GJ range as the gas glut continues to expand. Most of the LNG being brought online in Australia is at the top of the global cost curve and will barely break even as prices fall back to the $12 range. Major customers are already agitating for current contracts to be renegotiated, so don't expect any major deals to be announced for Australia any time soon.

I'm waiting for Macfarlane to explain what will happen to the gas if we go full throttle with CSG.

How much does he believe can be brought to the market over the next few years? What will the cost be for this new gas production?

Without a reservation policy won't any extra gas be exported to Asia if prices remain higher than the local market? Doesn't this mean CSG would have to bring enough extra gas to the market to actually cause, at a minimum, Asian LNG prices to fall? How much production does Macfarlane believe would be required to achieve this goal?

Is it sensible policy to cause excess production that negatively affects the pricing of a major export?

Australia is about the only major gas producer with no energy policy and no reservation policy. With manufacturing already in retreat, is it sensible to make things even harder by fully linking major domestic users into the global LNG market?

We have a Government who believes wind farms are ugly and is doing it's best to stop any more from being built, yet there's no evidence they have a negative impact on the environment, but they do provide farmers with a reliable income over many years as well as regional employment opportunities over the life of the wind farm.

Compare this with CSG, which most farmers are against, which has been repeatedly shown to leak toxic chemicals from poorly managed wells, and also requires billions of litres of brine to be somehow managed without damaging the local environment. After a few years he finite resource is depleted and the CSG companies move on. The benefit to the local community is relatively short lived, especially when compared to wind farms.

Maybe we'd be better off with the Government increasing funding to the CSIRO so they can commercialise their SOLGAS system. 25% higher energy content for a unit of gas using their catalyst and process. At least it helps to extend a finite resource rather than just using it up as fast as possible.

http://www.csiro.au/Organisation-Structure/Flagships/Energy-Flagship/SolarGas.aspx

-----------------

food for thought

http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/woodside_coleman_in_fresh_indian_bMf838xSnR7AFKE1Psqc1J

…It is set to receive its first LNG supplies from Australia in 2015-16 through a 20-year contract signed in 2009 between Petronet LNG and ExxonMobil for LNG from the $54 billion Gorgon venture.

However that contract is said to be among India’s most expensive LNG deals, and reports in India say Petronet has been under pressure from gas buyer GAIL (India) to renegotiate it to a lower price.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...l-LNG-at-lower-price/articleshow/41813752.cms

The company had recently offered to supply LNG to FACT at12 dollars per MMBTU (million metric British thermal unit). The price was $16 to $19.5 when the terminal was commissioned late last year.

“We are ready to pass on the benefits of the fall in prices of LNG in the global market to all customers. What is important for us now is to increase the throughput from the terminal,” said Petronet managing director and CEO Ashok K Balyan after the director board meeting here on Thursday.

Balyan, however, conceded that the company had not heard from FACT on resuming gas offtake from the Puthuvype terminal. FACT, which had initially bought LNG from Puthuvype, stopped later saying that the gas price was higher. “They are waiting for some clearances to revive supply,” he said.

http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com...offload-10-17-lng-cargoes-in-oct-nov-sources/

“Kogas are deferring for the second time so [their] options are now exhausted. I’m not sure how much more assistance the sellers can give,” the source said.

The supply overhang could total more than 1.5 million mt over 2014, with some reports pegging the surplus as high as 30-40 standard sized cargoes, as previously reported by Platt

Barnett has been shouted down and undermined, by both Labor and the Liberals, over the issue of domestic LNG reserves and onshore processing.
So it isn't as though they can say, they didn't know.
Also the media get a lot more circulation bagging Barnett, rather than reporting what he has to say.
It's much better viewing to have McGowan on the news, giving his unbiased opinion.lol

 

[Tisme]

Also I noticed the following info which suggest the Libs may have paid up in any case.

In announcing his intention to drop the case, Mr Ashby said his lawyers, Harmers Workplace Lawyers, had absorbed the $1 million he has incurred in legal fees to date.

Apparently there are some law firms who don't need money to pursue social justice:

"22 August 2013


Clive Palmer has alleged this morning that Mal Brough had asked him to fund James Ashby’s legal case against Peter Slipper. We note that Mal Brough has categorically denied this allegation. To date there has been total confusion and contradictions concerning this meeting between Palmer and Brough, with numerous claims and counter claims as to what supposedly took place at that Coolum lunch. This is just yet another chapter in this saga which is being played out in the context of an electoral battle for the seat of Fisher.

For abundant clarity, at no stage did James Ashby ask Mal Brough, or indeed anyone, to fund his case. Further, as has been on the public record for some time, there is no third party funding his case. The case is being financially supported by Harmers Workplace Lawyers themselves. Harmers, on occasions, funds cases which they believe have social justice merit, where complainants otherwise would not have access to the courts.

Also, contrary to many reports, James Ashby has not had a substantive hearing on his claims of sexual harassment against Peter Slipper. That crucial matter is still to be decided.

It should also be noted that the Justice Rares decision of last December is still under appeal awaiting a decision.

 

[Tisme]

More corruption

http://www.afr.com/p/national/peta_credlin_emails_revealed_at_dKqNsVBmjWAFUjVy09SP1K

 

[overhang]

 

[Smurf1976]

So far as gas is concerned, we've basically made the decision to link east coast (Qld, NSW, ACT, Vic, Tas, SA) gas prices to export parity prices via the LNG plants being built.

That is not a Coalition decision as such, just as is it isn't really a Labor decision either. Rather, it is the inevitable confidence of placing blind faith in "free markets" to allocate resources.

In short, the "free" market has decided that the best use for gas is to export it rather than having factories etc using it here. That maximises profit for gas companies, at the expense of lost opportunities in the broader economy.

In terms of how high it goes and when, well suffice to say that at least one electricity generation company is extremely aware of what's going on and already has their future financial projections and physical operation plans factoring this in. Once gas goes up, that also helps drag electricity prices up.

As for how high and how much, well it's around another $20 per MWh from a CCGT plant and around another $30 per MWh from a steam plant using gas - that compares with the impact of the carbon tax which ranged between about $9 (CCGT) through to about $32 (least efficient coal plants). With the closure of a number of coal-fired plants in recent times (the most recent being Morwell (aka Energy Brix) which was effectively mothballed a few days ago), gas is to a large extent now the marginal source of generation especially during business hours and thus sets the spot price.

Allowing for the impact on the direct use of gas, noting that this is how most gas is used (ie most gas is not used to generate electricity), the overall impact of the gas price hike is of similar magnitude to the carbon tax but more difficult to workaround given the non-electricity impacts.

Those figures assume that gas ends up at around $6 per GJ.

In short, neither Labor nor the Coalition seem even slightly interested in manufacturing, energy security or anything of that nature. It's just the old dig it up as fast as we can and sell it mentality. Fast forward 50 years when the gas and iron ore are gone, or 100 years when the decent coal is gone too, and future generations aren't likely to be too impressed with this thinking. And 50 years isn't that long really - it's not as though we're talking about a problem that's 1000 years away or something like that, we're talking about something that's well within the lifetime of a child born today.

 

[SirRumpole]

In short, the "free" market has decided that the best use for gas is to export it rather than having factories etc using it here. That maximises profit for gas companies, at the expense of lost opportunities in the broader economy.

I never cease to be amazed at the ways this country continually finds to cut it's own throat.

Tariff reductions (Keating), world oil parity pricing (Fraser), and now export parity on gas.

Simply amazing.

 

[noco]

I never cease to be amazed at the ways this country continually finds to cut it's own throat.

Tariff reductions (Keating), world oil parity pricing (Fraser), and now export parity on gas.

Simply amazing.

Yes an now the Government wants to import subs from Japan.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-built-overseas/story-fnihslxi-1227052360818

 

[sydboy007]

Yes an now the Government wants to import subs from Japan.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-built-overseas/story-fnihslxi-1227052360818

I'd be happier if they'd stop building the wheel again and take an off the shelf proven design and build it in Australia.

It will still cost more, but at what point is there any point in having a military when you can't produce the fuel to run the equipment, you can build anything but guns and basic ammunition, when your supply lines are so easy to disrupt that the enemy doesn't have to bomb you into submission - just a month or maybe 2 at the most till the lack of transport fuels in the economy stops food being shipped thousands of kilometres.

If I understand correctly the total submarine build could cost up to $80B due to the massive amount of infrastructure that would need to be built to support the project. If that is true, then possible we just have to accept we can no longer do it in Australia unless we're looking to get into the submarine building business big time.

 

[SirRumpole]

I'd be happier if they'd stop building the wheel again and take an off the shelf proven design and build it in Australia.

It will still cost more, but at what point is there any point in having a military when you can't produce the fuel to run the equipment, you can build anything but guns and basic ammunition, when your supply lines are so easy to disrupt that the enemy doesn't have to bomb you into submission - just a month or maybe 2 at the most till the lack of transport fuels in the economy stops food being shipped thousands of kilometres.

If I understand correctly the total submarine build could cost up to $80B due to the massive amount of infrastructure that would need to be built to support the project. If that is true, then possible we just have to accept we can no longer do it in Australia unless we're looking to get into the submarine building business big time.

I guess the problem with building them elsewhere is that other people know your capabilities. Building them here would enable us to insert a "surprise" capability that may be decisive.

 

[sydboy007]

In short, neither Labor nor the Coalition seem even slightly interested in manufacturing, energy security or anything of that nature. It's just the old dig it up as fast as we can and sell it mentality. Fast forward 50 years when the gas and iron ore are gone, or 100 years when the decent coal is gone too, and future generations aren't likely to be too impressed with this thinking. And 50 years isn't that long really - it's not as though we're talking about a problem that's 1000 years away or something like that, we're talking about something that's well within the lifetime of a child born today.

It's already here. Back in 2001 we were 85% self sufficient in liquid fuels. By next year it's close to 30%.

We have no strategic oil / fuel reserves like japan / USA.

While I don't like the idea, we may have to start looking at coal to liquids very soon if we're going to stop the massive blowout in the trade deficit due to our increasing reliance on fuel imports.

 

[SirRumpole]

It's already here. Back in 2001 we were 85% self sufficient in liquid fuels. By next year it's close to 30%.

We have no strategic oil / fuel reserves like japan / USA.

While I don't like the idea, we may have to start looking at coal to liquids very soon if we're going to stop the massive blowout in the trade deficit due to our increasing reliance on fuel imports.

Oil from algae is a promising alternative

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innov...de-oil-in-less-than-an-hour-180948282/?no-ist

 

[noco]

I'd be happier if they'd stop building the wheel again and take an off the shelf proven design and build it in Australia.

It will still cost more, but at what point is there any point in having a military when you can't produce the fuel to run the equipment, you can build anything but guns and basic ammunition, when your supply lines are so easy to disrupt that the enemy doesn't have to bomb you into submission - just a month or maybe 2 at the most till the lack of transport fuels in the economy stops food being shipped thousands of kilometres.

If I understand correctly the total submarine build could cost up to $80B due to the massive amount of infrastructure that would need to be built to support the project. If that is true, then possible we just have to accept we can no longer do it in Australia unless we're looking to get into the submarine building business big time.

So if we build 12 Submarines here in Australia at $80 billion, where will the extra $60 billion come from considering we could buy 12 Subs from Japan for $20 billion?

Why are our costs so much higher than Japan?

And given we could save $60 billion, how many Kilometers of new roads and highways could we build for $60 billion?