by PAUL COLLITS – PETER Dutton’s surge over Anthony Albanese as preferred PM in recent opinion polls is unprecedented for a first term opposition leader.
It has left many either speechless or reduced to mouthing gobbledygook.
- Dutton is increasingly looking as though he will become Australia’s fourth great opposition leader.
- He has plunged a dagger into the heart of the renewables money laundering scheme.
- He is showing both substance and courage.
The extent to which this surprising development is the result of the Coalition’s recent astonishing announcement that “going nuclear” is open to debate.
What Dutton’s nuclear play achieves is monumental:
- It provides Australia with much needed energy security;
- It plunges a dagger into the heart of the renewables money laundering scheme;
- It brings Australia into the 21st century energy economy;
- It neutralises, at a stroke, bleating greens and assorted Leftists and globalists who endlessly bang on about non-existent climate emergencies;
- It largely shuts down internal divisions in the opposition Parties over climate and energy by simply taking carbon emissions out of play;
- It places a ceiling over our massive, energy-driven cost of living crisis;
- It restores hope to farmers that their land won’t be pillaged in the name of renewables and “bird-chomping eco-crucifixes”;
- It will save untold numbers of whales;
- It will restore economic life and hope to seven regional centres which have suffered grievously at the hands of those determined to kill off traditional power generation and mining;
- It all but secures the next election for the Coalition.
Recent polling suggests strong support for nuclear energy – 60 per cent, as a matter of fact.
And why wouldn’t there be? Stories of fish with three eyes and other nuclear power-driven abnormalities are all very 1950s.
If and when it comes to pass, Australia will join such nations as Canada, the United Kingdom, India, China, South Korea, France, Spain, Russia, Japan and the USA, most prominently, in the sensible nuclear energy club.
Most of the G7, in other words. Thirty-two countries, all up. Going nuclear is not a revolutionary act. Merely a mainstream one.
Oh, and Australia has around a third of the world’s uranium resource. Up until now, we have merely shipped it to other places so they can have reliable energy when we, increasingly, do not.
Moreover, Dutton even named the proposed sites, showing both substance and further courage.
In contrast, the PM announced, a mere month ago, plans to subsidise the Australian manufacture of solar panels and wind farms – $22b of corporate welfare. Mr Albanese wants to deliver a “reliable and renewable future”, as if the words “reliable” and “renewable” should ever be used in the same sentence.
The usual suspects, like The Guardian and the CSIRO (the wildly misnamed and climate-obsessed Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation) now have a new game to play. Maligning nuclear, at all costs.
BLISSFULLY
Speaking of costs, the critics seem to be blissfully unaware of, or at least are conveniently parking, the likely final bill for renewables, estimated in 2010 at $370 b over (then projected) ten years.
The current budget projects a Commonwealth Government spend of $47b over four years to “support” a transition to renewables.
All this being spent on a system that won’t guarantee power and will only last twenty years before it all falls to bits.
The Nationals’ leader, David Littleproud, has joined the fray: “ ‘Dripping with self-righteous sanctimony’ – Littleproud lashes Teal MPs in nuclear debate.”
The Teals are largely rich, greenie women – we used to call them “doctors’ wives” – who won a few inner-city seats at the last election.
Littleproud’s Party represents regional and rural interests. Knowing that a nuclear energy sector will revive economies inhabited by his own constituents, and will preserve much needed farmland, he has gone on the attack.
On the question of the costs of nuclear, Littleproud slammed the Albanese government over its energy plan which will cost “$1.5 trillion”.
Battling the Coalition on the cost of nuclear looks to be a very dumb idea for the greenies.
The term game-changer is a cliché whose use we should all abhor. Yet here it approaches appropriateness.
Maybe it wasn’t needed, politically, as Airbus Albo is probably going to achieve electoral ignominy all on his own. Which makes Dutton’s move courageous as well as brilliant.
Above all, the word that most comes to mind to describe his nuclear energy policy is “elegant”. As the above dot points make clear.
With the imminent resignation of the LINO (Liberal in name only), greenie Matt Kean from NSW politics just announced, Dutton’s week was made.
There goes the principal internal opposition to nuclear energy within the Coalition ranks.
And just like that, Malcolm Turnbull’s mini-me is off to join the renewables industry scam. No doubt, he will be well rewarded.
WILDERNESS
The NSW Liberal Party, the Party of Kean, will likely be in the wilderness of Opposition for as long as the British Tories – who may or may not even exist after July 4 – and good riddance to both of them.
Their own-goal decades in office sealed both their fates.
Meanwhile, Peter Dutton is increasingly looking as though he will become Australia’s fourth great opposition leader (after Gough Whitlam, Malcolm Fraser and Tony Abbott).
Astonishingly, Albo hasn’t realised the full import of Dutton’s masterstroke. Or perhaps he has.
He has been spouting even more mindless gibberish than he usually does since Dutton went for the nuclear option.PC
The Ruinous Cost Of Free Energy
https://ipa.org.au/publications-ipa/research-papers/the-ruinous-cost-of-free-energy-why-an-electricity-system-built-on-renewable-is-the-most-expensive-of-all-options
The problem with the average conservative is that they are well below average – the (so-called) renewables versus nuclear is a *false dichotomy*. The aphorism that is apropos is this: “If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it”. Coal-fired power stations are adequate to meet our needs, and do not need to be replaced *BY ANYTHING AT ALL*.
As for Dutton being “courageous”, the truth is that he is a mediocre and uncompelling individual who is not particularly bright, and who is no doubt blissfully unaware of the other quote that is apt in this context: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
Remember that Dutton is the bloke who said that, if the voice referendum failed, his answer would be to have a *SECOND REFERENDUM*, which is an unambiguous display of a particularly spectacular brand of stupidity. That is, having considered Albanese’s plans to throw away a cool four hundred million of *our* dollars, the best riposte that Dutton had was an offer to flush another four hundred million dollars down a toilet adjacent to the one that Albanese wanted to use. Sadly, the fact that you think that someone who is so thick could become “a great opposition leader” says more about you than it does about him.
It appears that you have not bothered to read the Dutton Plan that does not fixate on nuclear reactors but considers those options several. And the main reason of many is that Renewable Energy Target 83% transition is reliant on what has not been achieved anywhere in the world, harnessing wind and solar to replace power stations, and all the add ons and land required to build a complicated system that would still most of the time need to rely on gas fired generator plants.
Yes, coal fired power stations have for over 100 years generated most of the grid electricity both 24 hour base load and peak demand periods, with some hydro electricity power station contribution since 1960s.
Privatisation of state owned power station assets was first proposed by the Labor Carr NSW Government early 1990s and during those 16 years at the end term Premier Keneally sold “the first tranche” committing to privatisation. 2007-2013 Labor created with incentive RET based on wind and solar with penalties against coal fired power stations making them unprofitable and not worth maintaining or replacing. 2022 Labor increased RET from 33% to 83% of electricity supply transition.
“It appears that you have not bothered to read the Dutton Plan […]”
LOL: it appears that you have not read my comment.
Quote
India is rushing to add fresh coal-fired plants as it is barely able to meet power demand with the existing fleet in non-solar hours.
Post pandemic, the country’s power demand scaled new records on the back of the fastest rate of economic growth among major economies and increased instances of heatwaves.
India saw its biggest power shortfall in 14 years in June, and had to race to avoid night time outages by deferring planned plant maintenance, and invoking an emergency clause to mandate companies to run plants based on imported coal and power.
— Asia Financial
And they are discussing numbers like $33 billion instead of $3.3 trillion. When President Modi wants electrical generation fast, he didn’t say “quick, build 50,000 wind mills, with batteries, gas plants, high voltage lines and pumped hydro.”
India now consumes more coal than Europe and North America combined, making Australia and the UK, and everyone except China, just so irrelevant.
Watch out, the GetUp activist mob are running false nuclear propaganda for Union Labor again.
GetUp was established via The Australian Workers Union when Bill Shorten was a senior executive at the AWU, and he was appointed to the GetUp Board of Directors at that time. The Union Movement donates to GetUp, Labor and Greens.
Look out for misleading comments on social media, misquoting of Peter Dutton and other Coalition MPs, and left leaning media assisting to muddy the waters, and create smokescreens and mirrors because the nuclear reactor option is a far superior choice to wind-solar hybrid and “firming”.
Coalition Plan;
https://www.australianeedsnuclear.org.au/our-plan