Aussie PM Scott Morrison Brandishes a Lump of Coal in Parliament

Bloomberg Celebrates an International Banker Effort to Dictate Climate Policy

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Climate policy is rapidly becoming a test bed, for how much control international bankers can exert over the policy decisions of elected governments, through boycotting the purchase of government bonds.

A $213 Billion Investor Targets Whole Nation Over Climate Change

By Matthew Burgess17 June 2021, 02:05 GMT+10

  •  Robeco wants Australia to phase out coal, pivot to low carbon
  •  Fund manager push adds to campaigns against Brazil, Indonesia

Robeco Institutional Asset Management BV will soon start pressuring Australia to phase out its reliance on coal and other natural resources, as money managers slowly begin targeting governments over climate change.

Australia has a “particularly high-risk profile” when it comes to climate performance, said Peter van der Werf, the Dutch firm’s senior manager of engagement and active ownership. As global investors implement plans to decarbonize portfolios by mid-century, Australia’s lawmakers must follow suit, he said in an interview.

Cutting back on natural resources “are very hard decisions because these are obviously very important sources of revenue for the Australian economy,” Rotterdam-based Van der Werf said. “That’s where in those conversations, institutional investors can also provide a perspective how they would foresee such a transition to take place.”

Australia is unlikely to be receptive to Robeco. Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who famously brandished a lump of coal in parliament, has steadfastly refused to commit to a deadline for net-zero emissions in support of politically sensitive industries like coal and gas. The nation instead is hoping technology such as carbon capture and storage will help meet its Paris Agreement obligations.

Read more:

Australia may be a much harder nut to crack than Brazil. At around 70% debt to GDP, And a rising trade surplus from mineral and coal exports, Australia can afford to laugh at banker efforts to boycott Australian bonds – even when the banker in question controls $213 billion. In these uncertain times there are trillions of dollars worth of private cash chasing safe havens. It doesn’t get much safer than Australia.

So why attempt such an apparently futile exercise?

There is always a possibility that someone in the Australian government will crack. It is possible bankers have spotted a financial weakness which I am not aware of. There is no real downside for the banks who participate in this exercise, even if they lose. And attacking Australia will provide valuable insights, for when bankers come after the country they really want to control.

4.7 12 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Curious George
June 19, 2021 10:08 am

Whom God gave money, He also gave intellect.

Reply to  Curious George
June 19, 2021 10:58 am

Divine right of bankers.

Reply to  Curious George
June 19, 2021 11:11 am

Divine sarcasm for the secular world.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Curious George
June 19, 2021 11:17 am

“A fool and his money are soon parted.” — attributed to Thomas Tusser, ca. 1573

Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
June 19, 2021 1:26 pm

But the complaint here is that banks and their money are not readily parted.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 19, 2021 2:10 pm

Nick, as you can see for yourself, I was replying (specifically, giving a counter-example adage) to Curious George’s comment, not to the article itself.

You got anything else?

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 19, 2021 10:13 pm

Just for the record, Mr Stokes, banks don’t have any money they are always saying so, it’s their investors’ & customers’ & money! It’s the same with guvments, they have no money, it’s their peoples money raised through taxation! Just like banks, guvments have no money when its people need it, yet come election time it’s amazing how they seem to find some to spend!!!

Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 19, 2021 10:37 pm

No it’s just your tax dollars that will protect them Nick because of the way our Four Bank system works. I believe a few in the US would have the same view over the subprime bailout.

The reality is the investment market is regulated by the Government and we know who will get squeezed if push comes to shove …. change the laws and make them squeal.

Reply to  LdB
June 19, 2021 11:18 pm

Robeco is not one of the Four Banks.

Reply to  Curious George
June 19, 2021 1:10 pm

You don’t mean THIS kind of “intellect,” do you?

Romans 1:28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful….worshiping the CREATION rather than the CREATOR….pagans and GAIA worshipers rather than stewards of the earth.

Reply to  Curious George
June 19, 2021 5:30 pm

What central bakers deal in is not money, it is debt. Using debt they rob blind the people of the world.

June 19, 2021 10:13 am

That stock photo of Scott Morrison is being overused as feature image

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Hatter Eggburn
June 19, 2021 1:23 pm

Far from the public eye and these ignorant Elitist investors is the world’s largest floating storage (for liquid condensate) and production facility for natural gas, Ichthys Explorer.

(see picture below.) This would be the picture that best describes Australia’s energy future.

Icthys Explorer, location: -13.93958° / 123.2978°, Timor Sea, 220 km north of Broome Australia.
This would be a good
Financed by Japan and South Korea, the LNG it delivers to those nations is vital to their economic output and future. At least 30-40 more years of production are expected. The gas moves via an undersea pipeline to Darwin, where LNG tankers take it to Asian ports.

These Global Socialists are intent on destroying Western Democracies. That is the goal here. This drive to destroy Australia’s domestic energy makrket is nothing but a goal to eliminate Western style market capitalism and the affluent middle class that affordable energy provides.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
June 19, 2021 1:23 pm

Ichthys Explorer

Reply to  Hatter Eggburn
June 19, 2021 6:52 pm

The stock photo is of a lump of coal that went to parliament. The coal just happened to sit next to Scott Morrison, and the photo is of them shaking hands.

John Garrett
June 19, 2021 10:15 am

Robeco is a Dutch investment management firm.

They are incompetent fools.

Jan de Jong
Reply to  John Garrett
June 19, 2021 10:37 am


Gregory Woods
Reply to  John Garrett
June 19, 2021 12:06 pm

But be very careful of those competent fools….

Dave Fair
Reply to  John Garrett
June 19, 2021 12:57 pm

No, they and like minded investors/bankers are playing a very dangerous game. The various countries write the laws and regulations under which they operate. If enough countries feel threatened, there goes their profits and, conceivably, their very existence. Do not bite the hand that feeds you.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 1:04 pm

Additionally, voters in the countries susceptible to this sort of blackmail will not let the politicians increase taxes enough to cover the “green” bill. Every poll shows voters like green, until they are asked to pay for it.

As long as politicians can hide the cost of “green” compliance, everybody is happy. But, politicians being politicians, they will not anger average voters with visible cost and tax increases. ChiCom virus spending won’t hide GND spending for very long.

Peter D
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 3:50 pm

Every recent State and Federal election in Australia was won by the party with the least green policies.
In recent State elections, the big conservative party tried to out green the leftists, and got trounced. Federally, it’s the Left out greening everyone else.

The trend is consistent, but few political commentators seem to notice. The Australian public is not stupid, nor are they green

Reply to  Peter D
June 19, 2021 8:59 pm

Facts are the NSW Govt a coalition of the “Liberal Party and the National Party” (ostensibly Right of Centre) – has been revealed as surprisingly Green in what they DO over the last 12 months. Starting with the loony-toon Koala maps that had been years gestating and their release lead to the Dep Premier threatening to resign – he quickly folded under the Premiers heel and had to take mental health time-out.
Then Premier Gladys unleashed her Minister for Energy and Environment Matt Kean to unveil his deep Green plan to “renewabilize” NSW electricity generation.  Then to add icing to the Green cake and to poke a sharp burnt stick into the eye of the Fed Gov – Gladys appointed the renewables enthusiast ex Fed PM Malcolm Turnbull to be a sort of energy Czar in Kean’s Dept running a new body termed the “Net Zero Emissions and Clean Economy Board” – this news broke about late March.
Then by early April in a “there must be a God moment” – a Nats MP was forced to resign his seat of Upper Hunter precipitating a byelection in the coal mining region. So Glad had to sack Turnbull who had hardly sat down in his new job. I am sure Mr Google can fill in the rest for anybody interested. The Gov also finances Green lawyers to run lawfare against fossil fuels incl a vital proposed gas pipeline. They are anti-dam – the NSW Gov also supports the “lock-the-gate” landowners anti-resources group. Have I sketched out enough ways the NSW Gov ACTIONS are GREEN.

Reply to  John Garrett
June 19, 2021 1:30 pm

They are incompetent fools.”
Well, they have the money.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 19, 2021 7:50 pm

No, they don’t have the money; it’s other’s people money. Money market is awash with funds in search of safe investments and better returns. And how many countries fit that profile?

Reply to  Lrp
June 19, 2021 10:54 pm

Other people chose to give their money to these funds to manage. Pretty unlikely if they are incompetent fools.

The money market is awash, but doesn’t see backing coal as a safe investment.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 19, 2021 11:06 pm

That is simply Western woke democracy political pressure … China, India, Russia etc have no problem building them.

Make no mistake if this all goes pear-shaped a lot of Western politicians are going to pay a price.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 21, 2021 6:34 am

Backing coal in China and India seems pretty safe to me.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 19, 2021 10:44 pm

Kim Jong-Un is worth a few bucks as well and your point is?????

Ron Long
June 19, 2021 10:16 am

“Aussie PM Scott Morrison brandishes a lump of coal in parliament”! I hope no sensitive viewers got the vapors from that. OK, I actually hope they did. I should be sorry.

Reply to  Ron Long
June 19, 2021 11:24 am

Mmmeh… Sorry, not sorry.

Reply to  Ron Long
June 19, 2021 1:19 pm

This one should be like smelling salts to their fragile psyches…

comment image

June 19, 2021 10:57 am

If any bonds should be boycotted it’s those of countries who think climate change is any kind of threat, even if it was occurring as the result of CO2 emissions and even if it was as much as claimed. Those countries who bought into the alarmist rhetoric, committed heavily to renewables and drove their energy prices through the roof will quickly become irrelevant in a global economy that will continue to be driven by oil until we run out when the only viable solution will be atomic energy which is equally feared by the same lunatics who are afraid of CO2. It’s sad that the US has become one of those countries run by these lunatics.

Gary Pearse
June 19, 2021 10:59 am

Canada seems to be the only country that can control its banks (they wern’t allowed to participate in all that derivatives crap that blew up in bankers faces). I would look into national security aspects to eject Bloomberg and others from doing business in Australia for interference in fiscal matters. I would change regs through parliament to perhaps block them from the insurance business, say, or other punitive measures. I would have Bloom and others charged with collusion and unfair trade practices arising from their meetings.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Gary Pearse
June 19, 2021 11:03 am

Re Brazil. They have a Trumpian in charge. It won’t go well with the banks trying to coerce him.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
June 19, 2021 11:42 am

It would be nice to eject the Bloomberg Business channel off the airways. Some anchors and their programs are flat out now preaching Marxism through the guise of climate and ‘carbon’ and divesting from coal (and the oil sands), even promoting guests that say they will be bankrupt in 10-20 years and to get out of investing in the oil patch or coal period. And every other sentence refers to to CO2 as carbon pollution and renewables are the only salvation for the planet. It is sickening listening to Bloomberg Business news these days and the channel usually gets changed now at the first mention of the term ‘carbon pollution’. The only carbon pollution I am aware of is the new version of the Marxist liberal/socialist.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Gary Pearse
June 19, 2021 1:09 pm

Sadly for the money men, politicians can only be rented, not bought. The money men now “own” the majority of politicians but when political survival is at stake, they will go with the desires of most voters. Most voters will not countenance visible tax increases nor runaway inflation.

Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 7:36 pm

Dave F:
Yes. Staying in office is the only principle most politicians truly beleive in.
Reminds me of a saying:
“An honest politician is one that stays bought.”
Hopefully, the voters will see that our “climate overlords” are wearing next
to nothing [once the brownouts & blackouts begin] and vote accordingly.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
June 20, 2021 9:59 am

Canada never had a derivative problem because they never let “homeowners” buy houses for 3% down. They were not driven by racism. Canadian homeowners had skin in the game, so didn’t walk away from their houses.

American racism, starting when Bill Clinton REQUIRED banks to loan money to those unable to repay the loans by demanding racial “equity” of outcomes. Better lend equally on the basis of % of population, or the US DOJ (under Holder) will sue you. So the banks lent as directed. They were bailed out by the US government through Fanny Mae and Freddy Mack backing the derivatives for mortgage securities. Those agencies were being run by Clinton cronies when that all happened.

The seeds were sown under Clinton/Holder but the results happened under Bush. Who got the blame?

BTW: Jerry Doyle, on his radio show at the time of the bailout had a very easy solution. Buy EVERY mortgage loan in the country down to, if I remember correctly, 2% interest. This would have reduced almost everyone’s mortgage payment, especially those with 6% or higher (sub prime) interest rates by over 50%. It would have also provided HUGH liquidity to mortgage bankers by the cash infusion from buying the “points”. It would have cost less than 50% of the final bailout package and NOBODY would have lost their house. Instead the politicians gave the money to the investors who had bought the crap “mortgage secured” “derivatives without any benefit for the average taxpayer. Crony “capitalism” at its finest.

H. D. Hoese
June 19, 2021 11:10 am

There sure are a lot of would-be, want to be, have been dictators around.
“Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Society does not actively monitor the site for inappropriate postings and does not on its own undertake editorial control of postings. However, in the event that any inappropriate posting is brought to the attention of Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Society we will take all appropriate action.

Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Society reserves the right to terminate access to any user who does not abide by these guidelines” One of these is “All messages must add to the body of knowledge. We reserve the right to reject any message for any reason.”

Joseph Zorzin
June 19, 2021 11:10 am

““are very hard decisions because these are obviously very important sources of revenue for the Australian economy,”

Aren’t natural resources the bedrock of that economy? (just guessing)
(and I’m including in natural resources- fossil fuels- minerals, farming, forestry, etc.)

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
June 19, 2021 11:58 am

Historically, it was the natural resources of farming, fishing, mining and logging that was the bedrock of not only the economy, but civilization itself. It is the primary resources, especially energy, that now allow for a secondary service orientated economy that without the primary resource based economy, there would be nothing.

Take away the very efficient fossil fuel economy, (that can’t be replicated with renewables) and the rest of the economy will fold like a cheap suit. Oz, Canada and several other modern economies are built upon the resource based economy and destroy that, and destroy your country. The multiplier effect from cheap energy is what will control who becomes the next major world leading economy. And the destruction of our energy sector is happening right in front of our own eyes, by our own corrupted bought off politicians and bankers.

Gordon A. Dressler
June 19, 2021 11:13 am

From the above article’s first sentence:
” . . . for how much control international bankers can exert over the policy decisions of elected governments, through boycotting the purchase of government bonds.”

What the heck? Why do “international bankers” even consider purchasing government bonds for any reason, when there are now all those many beautiful, marvelous, crypto digital currencies to play with?

Then, again maybe government bonds are much more lucrative to “international bankers” when one accounts for the monies being exchanged under the table, as it were.

June 19, 2021 11:44 am

Here we go again. Government officials and a few Popes already tried to dictate climate policy years ago — and they did change the climate — but at a high cost …

June 19, 2021 11:53 am

Inconveniently Europe natural gas on hand is currently significantly low; due, in part, to April’s uncooperative with the global warming narrative actual cold temperatures. Gas price there is up 50% already in 2021, which is almost matching the 2008 natural gas price level.

So in different parts of Europe they are using between 10 – 15% more coal now. Germany’s demand for electricity, for example, is above their 5 year average.

See Bloomberg’s 14 June 2021 article: “Gas is so scarce in Europe ….”

June 19, 2021 12:24 pm

Surely there must be some influential person who can ask the question “What climate emergency?” It will take just one to collapse the whole house of cards.
But so long as the bankers, business tycoons and politicos won’t do it I guess we are stuck with the whole scam.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Oldseadog
June 19, 2021 1:26 pm

It is a marketing truism that a particular slogan will only work for an (undetermined) amount of time. Notice that the climate scam slogans have been changing towards the more extreme at each iteration. I’m not sure where they go from “climate collapse.” Sophisticated consumers are now catching on to the unprovable alarmists’ rhetoric of an “existential threat.” Pretty soon people may begin to snigger when someone mouths that term.

Without the President Trump distraction, perhaps some budding Woodward and Bernstein will begin investigating the climate scam. Once part of the media gets interested in obvious government lies, the rest will follow.

June 19, 2021 1:23 pm

These shareholders are showing how to fight back against the “Woke” CEOs and boards using methods that hit them in the pocket book.

Woke Policies Put This Company At Material Risk Of Liability For Unlawful Racial Discrimination…same holds for irresponsible fiduciary policies that destroy brand name or stock valueBy Mike Huckabee

This is something I hope to see happening a lot more often, and I hope it’s so successful that it inspires many more such actions: a group of Coca-Cola shareholders has sent a letter to the board, warning that their woke, racist “anti-racist” policies are putting the company and the shareholders at material risk of liability for unlawful racial discrimination.

The letter warns that if their concerns are not addressed within 30 business days, “the Stockholders will be forced to seek judicial relief to protect Coke and the Stockholders’ interests in the company from your continued breaches of your fiduciary duties.” Maybe that will remind the board of what their job really is.

And speaking of companies that risk bankruptcy for leftist virtue signaling, Victoria’s Secret has dived headfirst into the empty swimming pool of wokeness. Signaling guilt and shame for ever selling lingerie that was appealing to the “male gaze,” Victoria’s Secret has hired a new spokesperson – outspoken leftist, anti-Trump, lesbian soccer player Megan Rapinoe – who has a history of denouncing the company, everything it stands for and traditionally sexy feminine clothing in general. It’s also replacing its “Victoria’s Secret Angels” models with a group of woke icons, including a trans woman. That gives a new meaning to “Victoria’s Secret.”

The company’s execs claim this will help them “regain relevance” and rebrand for the future. If I had to predict what that new lingerie brand will be called, I’d guess “Chapter 11.”

Dave Fair
Reply to  TEWS_Pilot
June 19, 2021 1:39 pm

Who wudda thunk? Victoria’s Secret has been selling sexy lingerie that appeals to people who want to have sexual relations with transgender females. They just needed to focus on that market segment to increase profits

Additionally, not being a lesbian, I don’t know how large a market segment that has been for slinky undies that appeal to the “male gaze.” My male gaze always tended toward the purely naked women forms. Clothing of any type just gets in the way.

Reply to  Dave Fair
June 19, 2021 2:00 pm

You will now be removed from all future VS mailings, clearly you are out of the mainstream for their new business model target market.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  TEWS_Pilot
June 19, 2021 2:59 pm

I just noticed that the other day … yet one more company testing the axiom; “get woke go broke”. They can join the ranks of Gillette, Coke, Pepsi, various basketball franchises. It’s a long sad list.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rory Forbes
June 19, 2021 5:01 pm

“yet one more company testing the axiom; “get woke go broke”

Yes. I’m going to miss the Angels. They sure did wear some extravagent outfits. Some of them were good looking, too. The females, I mean.

I think they signed up Megan Rapinoe, as a substitute for the Angels. She is the American soccer player who likes to take a knee during the U.S. national anthem.

I’m not sure who they think Megan Rapinoe appeals to. Certainly not me. Repulsed is closer to the feeling I have when I see her.

And the latest is that Megan Rapinoe has an old tweet that some are making out to be anti-asian, so Megan Rapinoe may not be spokesperson for Victoria’s Secrets much longer. Good riddance.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 19, 2021 6:35 pm

Yeah, Rapinoe was the one who was so vocal about pay equity with men’s soccer. She couldn’t work out why men were so much more highly paid. Apart from anything else, the fact that her women were beaten by a team of 15 year old boys could be the reason.

I’m with you. Considering that the Victoria Secret Angels are intended to appeal to male’s ‘prurient’ interests (as are most of VS’s products), I’m at a loss as to what market she’s supposed to appeal to … certainly not normal guys. As you say, she’s gonna get cancelled before she even gets to don a single bra or panties.

June 19, 2021 2:32 pm

The banking system we know started as a scam. Unethical bankers discovered they could lend out many times more money than they had received from depositors as long as most local people and businesses kept their accounts and did their banking at the local bank.

But elected politicians realized that many people had jobs and businesses and a good living as a result of this multi-lending fraud for which sufficient funds did not actually exist. As long as everyone believed they could get their money back, everyone was happy. So instead of banning the practice as “fraud”, the government made a deal with the banks to allow banks to advertise that deposits at the bank were “government guaranteed” in exchange for allowing banks to lend out first 5x and later 10x what they had on deposit to allow more people to benefit from the “monetary system”.

You don’t even want to know what that multiple is today because banks can use “assets” instead of deposits for their lending guidelines, they can issue mortgages on government approval, they can bundle mortgages, then sell them to the central bank for cash, both the cash and the mortgages becoming “assets” to the town bank and the central bank respectively. It works good until somebody notices there might not be enough money to pay back sketchy loans, then government steps in and lends the bank money to buy government securities until the bank has enough money or securities to be viable again.

So anything that appears that banks are trying to influence the government or vice versa, is complete nonsense. Banks and government “deep state” bureaucracy are one. They do work at keeping crazy flavour-of-the-day elected politicians from screwing up their system, but even those catch on after a couple of terms.

Christopher Hanley
June 19, 2021 3:23 pm

Why the focus on Australia, Indonesia Russia US South Africa Colombia Canada also export coal.
About 40% the quantity of coal Australia exported in 2018 was metallurgical coal essential for steel production in Japan China India and South Korea.
Of course goody-goody-two-shoes Norway seems to avoid the opprobrium levelled at Australia even though it’s wealth is based on oil and gas exports.

Peter D
June 19, 2021 3:43 pm

The impact, at a company finance bouycot by big fund (particularly Australian banks and Superannuation) appears to be twofold. The companies first go elsewhere for funding. Despite China starting a trade war, this is currently Chinese banks. Then when fossil fuel assets are divested by woke Australian companies, Chinese corporations move in, particularly coal power generators and coal mines.

So Australia’s fossil fuel assets do not lack finance, it’s just that control is transferred to other sources.

Is Robeco controlled by Chinese interests? Anyone know? I am really interested.

June 19, 2021 3:56 pm

Perhaps something can be written into the anti-discrimination laws to protect fossil fuel companies and advocates.

Gary Pearse
June 19, 2021 4:08 pm

“There is no real downside for the banks who participate in this exercise, even if they lose.”

Here’s the angle of attack then! Are there still politicians with a pair of long pants available. Dig into the statutes, the national security aspects. The bank act, financial malfeasance… Come out running and hurt these guys really bad! Conspiracy to undermine the Australian economy. I get peed off with the good guys, too. Do you need a mining engineer to tell you this?

Tom Abbott
June 19, 2021 4:48 pm

From the article: “Australia may be a much harder nut to crack than Brazil. At around 70% debt to GDP,”

That *is* good!

The U.S. debt to GDP is north of 100 percent, and going higher. That is definitely *not* good.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
June 20, 2021 5:27 am

That’s a good comment, Eric.

June 19, 2021 9:20 pm

Like most liberals, Bloomberg has no use for democracy.
He wants a world in which people who agree with him run everything.

Reply to  MarkW
June 19, 2021 10:55 pm

Don’t you?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Nick Stokes
June 20, 2021 5:29 am

I think MarkW wants non-authoritarian leaders showing us the way. Like Trump.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights