Retired infantry officer. Conservative by nature and politics; Happily married and father and grandfather of eight. Loves V8 powered Range Rovers, Golden Retrievers, good books and technology and think there should be open season on Greenies. Born in the mid forties and overdue for servicing but most parts still work.

No Welcome, no smoking ceremonies

By Joanna Hackett

I acknowledge those proud Quadrant contributors past and present, who ask despairingly what the lone individual can do when the enemy circles.

Josie hurled her knitting across the room and followed it with the remote. She hit the ABC reporter right smack in the face as intended.

The television spluttered and went dark.

“Smarmy bitch,” she muttered. Her cat, Cat, gave her a belligerent look and stalked into the kitchen. “I’ve had enough of this nonsense, Cat,” she said loudly. “I may be old but I’m not stupid. How dare they do this to my country.”

She sat quietly for a minute. The room was gloomy and cold and the hot water bottle on her lap was clammy. Josie had survived war and depression, worked hard and paid her dues. She loved Australia but now it seemed to be falling apart. Sometimes she felt as if she no longer belonged here, like a piece of detritus. That new little Prime Minister was prancing around parroting on about enshrining his precious voice in the Constitution so that 3 per cent of the population could tell the remaining 97 per cent where to go. That was obviously as ridiculous and damaging as his push for net zero, or men giving birth through their penises.

Read on

Albo’s going to change the media

As expected, change is imminent

But it’s not just politics that the new PM wants to change – he wants to change the media as well. Diary hears that Albanese has told confidantes that he was “appalled” by the behaviour of a press pack that became increasingly vocal during the campaign to try to catch him out.

He must be talking about the media’s frustration at him not answering questions and of course, his inability and/or failure to answer questions, simply invites gotcha tactics from the media.

We’re also told that, emboldened by his win, he’s now on a one-man crusade to improve the “civility” of discourse in press conferences under his leadership. And if that means journalists who yell or interrupt him are actively demoted down the pecking order of those allowed to ask him questions, so be it.

I’m not sure it’s a good tactic to attack the media so good luck with that. A better tactic from his point of view would be to only allow ABC journalists at media briefings.

There you go mate, great advice for free.

Rural workers targeted

New Agriculture Minister charged with attacking farmers, Senator Watt, speaks out on how the ALP are going to close down live export

“There are increasingly consumers and buyers overseas who are looking for different ways of sourcing their meat and we think there’s a massive opportunity for processed meat that we want to explore.”

Are there really? A lot of live export customers can’t afford The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union wages and few developing nations have a fridge in each home. The union would be happy but thousands of Australian rural workers will be out of a job.

Come to think of it, that would make the ALP happy and the Greens and PETA idiots very happy.

Senator Watt also argued the former government’s pledges to build major dams including Hells Gate would only go ahead if they passed environmental and business assessments.

ALP talk for not going to happen

Veterans Affairs demoted to outer Ministry

No surprise there. Richard Marles will be flat out on Defence and far too busy to worry about veterans but it’s nice to know early in this government’s time that us veterans will get little attention. We know where we stand and it’s down the back of the room. Out of sight, out of mind

One disappointing matter in the ministry is that veterans’ affairs sits outside cabinet. Incoming defence minister Richard Marles’ explanation on ABC radio this morning wasn’t exactly persuasive.

“Veterans’ affairs largely has been a ministry which has been in the outer ministry, but of course it sits within a broader defence space. So there is definitely through me a voice that exists in that space in relation to the cabinet,” he said. 

Whatever Labor says, Mr Marles will be busy on other pressing defence matters, and there’s no substitute for having a dedicated minister sitting in the cabinet and advocating for veterans. The new government may discover this over the next term. 

Veterans’ affairs will have yet another new minister, continuing years of churn, while the new government brings more turnover for the science portfolio. One of the major contributions Labor can make in those areas is to maintain stability in its line-up of ministers.

Matthew Keogh is the new minister for Veterans Affairs And Defence Personnel. Matt, who served as shadow minister for defence industry, has been named as the minister for veterans’ affairs and the minister for defence personnel.

He seems positive in this speech he gave in 2018 on Veterans Affairs Legislation so let’s wait and see.

 

More here

Climate change facts

A very interesting read with plenty of perspective
Letter to the Editor
Written By Terence Cardwell*
The Editor
The Morning Bulletin
I have sat by for a number of years frustrated at the rubbish being put forth about carbon
dioxide emissions, thermal coal-fired power stations and renewable energy and the
ridiculous Emissions Trading Scheme.
Frustration at the lies told (particularly during the election) about global pollution. Using
Power Station cooling towers for an example. The condensation coming from those
cooling towers is as pure as that that comes out of any kettle.
Frustration about the so-called incorrectly-named man-made ‘carbon emissions’ which
of course is Carbon Dioxide emissions, and what it is supposedly doing to our planet.
Frustration about the lies told about renewable energy and the deliberate distortion of
renewable energy and its ability to replace fossil fuel energy generation. And frustration
at the ridiculous carbon credit programme which is beyond comprehension.
And further frustration at some members of the public who have not got a clue about
thermal Power Stations or Renewable Energy. Quoting ridiculous figures about
something they clearly have little or no knowledge of.
First, coal-fired power stations do NOT send 60 to 70% of the energy up the chimney.
The boilers of modern power stations are 96% efficient, and the exhaust heat is
captured by the economisers and reheaters and heat the air and water before entering
the boilers.
The very slight amount exiting the stack is moist as in condensation and CO2. There is
virtually no fly ash because this is removed by the precipitators or bagging plant that are
99.98% efficient. The 4% lost is heat through boiler wall convection.
Coal-fired Power Stations are highly efficient with very little heat loss and can generate
massive amount of energy for our needs. They can generate power at an efficiency of
less than 10,000 b.t.u. per kilowatt and cost-wise that is very low.
The percentage cost of mining and freight is very low. The total cost of fuel is 8% of total
generation cost and does NOT constitute a major production cost.
As for being laughed out of the country, China is building multitudes of coal-fired power
stations because they are the most efficient for bulk power generation.
We have, like, the USA, coal-fired power stations because we HAVE the raw materials
and are VERY fortunate to have them. Believe me, no one is laughing at Australia –
exactly the reverse, they are very envious of our raw materials and independence.
A major percentage of power in Europe and U.K. is nuclear because they don’t have the
coal supply for the future.
Yes, it would be very nice to have clean, quiet, cheap energy in bulk supply. Everyone
agrees that it would be ideal. You don’t have to be a genius to work that out. But there
is only one problem—It doesn’t exist.
Yes – there are wind and solar generators being built all over the world but they only add
a small amount to the overall power demand.
The maximum size wind generator is 3 Megawatts, which can rarely be attained on a
continuous basis because it requires substantial forces of wind. And for the same
reason they only generate when there is sufficient wind to drive them. This of course
depends where they are located but usually they only run for 45% -65% of the time,
mostly well below maximum capacity. They cannot be relied upon for a ‘base load’
because they are too variable. And they certainly could not be used for load control.
The peak load demand for electricity in Australia is approximately 50,000 Megawatts,
and only small part of this comes from the Snowy Hydro Electric System (The ultimate
power Generation) because it is only available when water is there from snow melt
or rain. And yes, they can pump it back but it costs to do that. (Long Story).
Tasmania is very fortunate in that they have mostly hydro electric generation because of
their high amounts of snow and rainfall. They also have wind generators (located in the
roaring forties) but that is only a small amount of total power generated.
Based on a average generating output of 1.5 megawatts (of unreliable power) you would
require over 33,300 wind generators.
As for solar power generation, much research has been done over the decades and
there are two types. Solar thermal generation and Solar Electric generation, but in each
case they cannot generate large amounts of electricity.
Any clean, cheap energy is obviously welcomed but they would NEVER have the
capability of replacing Thermal power generation. So get your heads out of the clouds,
do some basic mathematics and look at the facts, not going off with the fairies (or some
would say the extreme greenies.)
We are all greenies in one form or another and care very much about our planet. The
difference is most of us are realistic. Not in some idyllic utopia where everything can be
made perfect by standing around holding a banner and being a general pain in the
backside.
Here are some facts that will show how ridiculous this financial madness the government
is following. Do the simple maths and see for yourselves.
According to the ‘believers’ the CO2 in the air has risen from .034% to .038% in air over
the last 50 years.
To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in a clearer perspective: If you had a
room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x 3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would
occupy in that room would be .25m x .25m x .17m or the size of a large packet of
cereal.
Australia emits 1 percent of the world’s total carbon Dioxide, and the government wants
to reduce this by twenty percent or reduce emissions by .2 percent of the world’s total
CO2 emissions.
What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?
By their own figures they state that the CO2 in air has risen from 0.034% to 0.038% in
50 years.
Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 (in the air) has increased in 50 years by 0.004
percent.
Per year that is 0.004 divided by 50 = 0.00008 percent. (Getting confusing – but stay with
me).
Of that, because we only contribute 1%, our emissions would cause CO2 to rise 0.00008
divided by 100 = 0.0000008 percent.
Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the government wants to reduce it by 20% which is
1/5th of 0.0000008 = 0.00000016 percent effect per year they would have on the world
CO2 emissions based on their own figures.
That would equate to an area in the same room, as the size of a small pin!!!
For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and roofing
installations, Clean coal technology, Renewable energy, etc, etc.
How ridiculous is that?!
The cost to the general public and industry will be enormous. Cripple and even closing
some smaller business.
T.L. Cardwell
To the Editor I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of
NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4
X 350 MW Munmorah Power Station near Newcastle. I would be pleased to supply you
any information you may require.
* Terry is now retired and is in excellent health at age 69. Nobody paid him to write the article which was, (to their credit), published by the local press. ? ?

Article copied from Catallaxy Files

Do not welcome me to my home

Being a fifth generation Aussie and responsible for two more generations; having served in the military for 25 years both in peace and war; having been a JP serving my community for over 20 years and having served on charity boards I consider Australia My Country and refuse to be “welcomed” to it by some nondescript Indigenous chap who presumes to lecture me on the sins of my forefathers.

Lincoln Brown at the The Spectator agrees with me.

The notion that Australians must be welcomed or invited to their own country by Indigenous leaders – as occurs at the opening of state and federal parliaments, conferences, and school assemblies – is a divisive and destructive one.

This practice, while it may appear reasonable or harmless, is a manifestation of the ongoing assault on Australia’s Western heritage and implies that non-Indigenous Australians, whose families have called Australia home for many generations, do not really belong here.

I recently attended an event where the audience (mostly comprised of Australians with European heritage) were ‘welcomed’ by an Indigenous speaker. It was a pitiful display of bitterness, resentment, and even hatred towards white Australians. Indeed, it was little more than a scolding for the colour of their skin.

The speaker bluntly stated that Australia still belongs to ‘First Nations’ people (a nonsensical and ahistorical term lifted from Canada’s debates about colonialism) and does not belong to so-called ‘white people’ (or presumably any other migrant families). He then asserted that the audience needed to learn Australia’s ‘true history’. This, even though ignorance of Australia’s British heritage has never been more apparent than it is now.

It was an overtly adversarial presentation – devoid of hope or a positive vision for Australians. Not a trace of recognition for the fact that Indigenous people enjoy the same fundamental rights that all Australians enjoy, or the tremendous efforts that governments, charities, and individuals have put into improving life for Indigenous Australians over many decades. Instead, the speaker aggressively asserted that Indigenous people are still colonised and that white people must continue to be reminded of this until colonialism ends.

The belief that all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, have a right to call the country in which we were born home is now openly attacked.

The desired outcome for such activists is unclear. How, exactly, will we know when enough has been done to overcome racism? What measurable goals must be achieved? When will we be able to congratulate ourselves for elevating Indigenous voices and dismantling colonialism enough? Will it be when all references to Christianity are removed from the national curriculum, as was attempted (and, thankfully, negated) last year? Or when we abolish the Australian flag? At what point will we have made enough progress?

Ironically, as I flew home on a Qantas jet, the pilot acknowledged the traditional custodians of the state I was returning home to. It is a strange form of colonialism in which major corporations, from airlines to the AFL, feel the need to constantly remind everyone that the land belongs to Indigenous people. One would think that if racism were the ubiquitous problem that we are told it is then major corporations would not bother with such sentiments.

White people, as nebulous as that concept is, are not guests in Australia. My ancestors were also born and raised here many generations ago. No one should be made to feel guilty for the colour of their skin or blamed for the actions of people who have long since died. This attribution of historical, collective guilt to an entire group of people due to their ethnicity is not only racist but is a symptom of a dying Australia. It is a direct, ideological assault on Western values based on selective distortions of history and the Marxist idea of class guilt, now applied to race, which divides humanity into ‘oppressed’ and ‘oppressor’ classes and ascribes sinfulness or virtue based on whatever group one happens to belong to.

If you are Indigenous, you are a victim, and therefore virtuous. If you are white, you are an oppressor, and therefore sinful. If you disagree, this demonstrates that you are entrenched in your oppressor privilege, which makes you more of a racist.

This is a dangerous fiction.

The reality that nobody is allowed to acknowledge, but everyone knows, is that Indigenous Australians not only enjoy the same basic rights as everyone else but are now viewed by mainstream institutions such as government, media, and education as having a kind of culturally protected status thanks to policies concerned with promoting ‘equity’. Such policies mean that Indigenous people have access to a range of opportunities, from scholarships to employment, that non-Indigenous people do not.
Welfare policies for Indigenous people abound, yet so do high rates of alcoholism, abuse, imprisonment, and early deaths in Indigenous communities. Is this because of racism? How many more apologies, more welcomes to country, more equity programs, are needed to remedy these issues and undo the supposed harms of our colonial heritage? Or could it be that these policies, which negate personal responsibility (that nasty colonial idea), do more harm than good?

People are afraid to suggest these things because they will be accused of racism. To call someone a racist is one of the most destructive slurs available. It destroys careers and reputations. This constant threat of ostracism for saying ‘the wrong thing’ is a cudgel the Left wields to shut down debate and discussion about how to view Australian history and how issues in Indigenous communities can be addressed. The tragic irony is that ‘welcome’ ceremonies, apologies, and other pointless gestures do nothing whatsoever to address the real and serious problems faced by Indigenous communities (especially those who live in remote areas). The virtue-signalling activists do not care about helping them, only about getting revenge on white people, and promoting themselves as victims.

None of this is likely to be new to most readers of The Spectator Australia. We know that Western values are under attack and that Australian history is more complex than being entirely good or entirely bad.

What is needed is the courage to say the unsayable: it is not right for white people to be chastised for their skin colour, nor is it right to blame every problem that Indigenous people face on so-called racism. This assault on Western values only ends when cancel culture is countered with courage culture, and name-calling stops being a weapon that can be used against people who see through the pernicious cultural-Marxist worldview.

Lincoln Brown can be found over on Twitter.

1 2 3 192