Government

One of the great political fantasies of the inner city chattering classes these past few years has been that federal member for Wentworth and one-time Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull might somehow switch teams and emerge as leader of the Australian Labor Party.

Given this weekend's events, it is now likely that the entire Australian economy will be exposed to the same indecision and paralysis that members of the renewable energy community have suffered for the last three years.

If anyone thinks that a hung parliament is necessarily going to be of benefit to Australia they should think again. The clean energy industry has been crippled by indecision. With a selection of independents controlling the lower house and the Greens controlling the upper house, one can only suspect that such indecision is going to last considerably longer.

There’s been a lot of talk – and no small amount of bluster – about political risk in Australia over the past month – or more specifically since the announcement of the government’s proposed Resources Super Profits Tax.

According to Rio Tinto Chief Executive Tom Albanese, Australia’s proposed RSPT is currently “my number one sovereign risk issue on a global basis”. That’s a big call from the leader of a company that invests in countries with far less predictable political regimes than Australia’s, including Zimbabwe and Papua New Guinea.

Let Australia Follow the Leaders

Jamison Group urges the government to take the lead of the US and China in the Energy Industrial Revolution

The Jamison Group, formed as a group of experts in sustainable transport and energy policies to make recommendations to the NRMA, delivered two new reports in February of this year. These reports informed the NRMA’s Alternative Fuels Summit, staged in Sydney in March, which attracted much media and public attention.

Will Clegg focusses on the risks of the Government’s ‘risk-free’ approach to military procurement.

Of all Canberra’s tribes, Defence has recently suffered the harshest of attacks. The 2009 Defence White Paper promised to provide Defence with a lot of new kit, and Prime Minister Rudd promised additional funds to pay for it. Yet the government reneged on this promise ten days after it was made, deferring around $8.8 billion of defence funding when it tabled the 2009 Budget. It is not clear which part of the Defence budget this money has come from, although capital investment has probably suffered the most. Defence is also bearing the brunt of a politicised campaign to restore the fiscal surplus. As Andrew Davies highlighted on the Lowy Institute’s blog, between 2012 and 2013 Defence will have around $1 billion less to spend on major capital equipment, which is the year the government hopes to restore a narrow fiscal surplus of a mere $1 billion.

Shopping list: 100 F 35 Joint Strike Fighters