Thought-Factory.net Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion philosophy.com Junk for code
parliament house.gif
RECENT ENTRIES
SEARCH
ARCHIVES
Commentary
Media
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
Cartoons
South Australian Links
Other
www.thought-factory.net
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

The new Senate « Previous | |Next »
October 11, 2013

The result of the 2013 federal election is a conservative Senate. Though the Greens retained their Senate numbers, they have been politically marginalized, and are unable to thwart environmental policy rollbacks favoured by the business side of politics. The balance of power has shifted to PUP

RoweDPalmer.jpg David Rowe

A conservative federal government will do what conservative state governments have done--- dismantle environmental policy around the country,such as undo environmental regulations, cut “green tape”, reduce third party planning appeals, not “lock up” any mining regions or forests. An Abbott Government, with the support of the Senate will, in effect, support the old extractive and fossil fuel industries whilst remaining indifferent to the increasing frequency of heat waves across much of the Australian continent.

This is a backward looking conservatism not ordinary conservatism. The latter conservatism:

---in the classical sense — wishes to preserve a stable society. Of course, this includes stable institutions and observing the rule of law. For these reasons (and several more), a conservative prefers evolutionary, more incremental change to revolutionary change: revolutionary change threatens the stability conservatives seek to conserve. Hence, conservatives reluctantly accept change — so long as it isn’t revolutionary. They do so for the sake of stability and order. Moreover, for the sake of order and stability, real conservatives are amenable to political compromise with their opponents.

The backward -looking conservatism, in contrast,i s generally fearful of losing their way of life in a wave of social change. To preserve their group’s social status, they’re willing to undermine long-established norms and institutions — including the law. They see political differences as a war of good versus evil in which their opponents are their enemies. For them, compromise is commensurate with defeat — not political expediency.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 11:07 AM | | Comments (17)
Comments

Comments

There is some evidence of how any negotiations might play out... Something like: ‘I will do anything, Tony (Windsor), to get this job; the only thing I wouldn’t do is sell my arse.’

Ah. Such an idealist!

It will be nice to not listen to green issues. Perhaps they can help in the garden for their next senate term.

melody,
there will be lots of green issues talked about over the next few years because the conservatives are obsessed by them.

nar,
the greens are obsessed by them. conservatives are obsessed with making labor look like crap economic managers.

Nan... I am NOT looking forward to another round of Howard's culture wars. But, sadly, the tories won't be able to help themselves.

sorry melody,
the conservative movement is obsessed by climate change. Their energies are devoted to deny it; or if they accept climate change, then deny human causation.

peter,
it is easier to deny things when money is being made. Like denial of water issues around csg or whaling issues etc etc. there is a big list and global warming is just one thing.

Carbon pricing is the Abbott Government's Achilles heel melody.

The world institutions---IMF, World Bank, OECD---have moved in favour of a carbon price that steadily makes carbon emissions more expensive.

Abbott is going in the opposite direction driven by the ultra conservative groups backed by the fossil fuel industry.

"it is easier to deny things when money is being made."

Well, the fossil fuel industry is on the ropes, due to declining consumer demand, increasing wind energy from SA and solar PV flattening out the daytime peaks and pushed down wholesale electricity prices.

They are starting to mothball their coal fired power stations.They sit idle cos they are starting to operate at a loss.

And its going to get worse for them as households are installing solar as a hedge against rising electricity prices, even with subsidies largely removed.

"The world institutions---IMF, World Bank, OECD---have moved in favour of a carbon price that steadily makes carbon emissions more expensive. Abbott is going in the opposite direction"

Abbott can always continue his international apology tour and seek forgiveness for his past comments such as climate change is crap

The new conservative senators who want to roll back carbon pricing to protect the coal lobby don't seem to realize that the Australian electricity market faces declining demand and falling wholesale prices – largely caused by the rapid growth in renewable generation.

Market forces are going to close the coal generators owned by the NSW, Queensland and WA state governments.

I dont think climate change is big in the minds of people and certainly not the governments priority or weak spot.
If it was it would of been reflected in the last election results.
If its a big issue with you thats fine.
My point was that people define right and wrong by what it costs them.

Melody,
where have you been these last three years?

Rolling back carbon pricing was a big deal for Abbott---he staked his political life on it. He has to deliver. Then everything will be okay. That was the deal.

It's a weak spot because the roll back of carbon pricing wont change things that much. Households will continue to install solar as a hedge against rising electricity prices, even with subsidies largely removed.

The more solar there is on rooftops the less money made by the fossil fuel generators. The more this happens the more their assets will devalue and become stranded.

How many seats did the greens win?

Did their voter base increase or decrease?

That aside I think a lot of people who feel strongly about the issue don't really understand people.
The problem isn't that people,governments,business etc argue that the science is right or wrong.This is the black and white side. What the problem is that its a human nature issue. The grey area which is the main body of people,governments, business that prioritise monetary gain higher than the science of global warming and thus set about rather than being denialists really just look for ways to justify their actions.
I work in the csg area and a classic example is that we get the smartest environmental graduates and pay them $150K to find ways to justify how we stuff the land. We send the hairy legged hippies, do gooders and banner wavers to the dole queue.
Same goes for coal. Australia sells the coal and we all benefit from it.

I doubt that it is the hairy legged hippies, do gooders and banner wavers who are putting solar PV on their roof.

Melody says"I dont think climate change is big in the minds of people and certainly not the governments priority or weak spot."

Then why is Environment Minister Greg Hunt saying that the option of a double dissolution election remains on the table as the Coalition stares down Labor over the repeal of the carbon tax."We will not stop until the carbon tax is repealed."

Is that just posturing for those who just want to make money from King Coal and CSG ?