Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to a group of diplomats, the EU and USA will punish Australia with carbon sanctions if we don’t play their climate game. But the weak response to Russia suggests this is an empty bluff.
Australian action climate change and why our national security and future prosperity rely on it
By Janaline Oh
April 18 2022 – 5:30amAustralia’s future prosperity and national security will depend on lifting its game on climate action. Over 100 former Australian ambassadors, high commissioners, trade commissioners, diplomats and development specialists issued a climate-focused foreign policy in December 2021, calling on the government to take immediate, ambitious steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to restore Australia’s international standing on this issue.
Diplomats for Climate Action Now recently signed a joint letter, with four other professional groups, asking the incoming prime minister to make climate action the government’s top priority through a national mobilisation.
Why would we do this? The job of a diplomat is to represent the government of the day abroad, to understand our international partners and to advise the Australian government on how best to prosecute its policies. We do not usually weigh into domestic policy debates.
But climate change is not a domestic issue. It is a global issue which poses a significant threat to Australia’s national security and future economic prosperity. We have seen the effects of climate change in abundance over recent years, with drought, the devastating Black Summer and recent Western Australian bushfires, and catastrophic flooding in Queensland and NSW.
…
In fact, Australia can benefit from our potential to generate cheap and abundant renewable energy to create a sustainable, high productivity, export economy. Australia’s reliance on raw commodity exports has led to heavy dependence on a single market: Australia sends more product by value to China than to the six next largest export destinations.
…
The European Union and United States are now preparing to apply carbon border adjustment taxes – effectively a carbon price on imports from countries that are not taking effective measures against climate change. We will have a carbon price imposed on Australian goods, but it will not accrue to the benefit of the Australian people.
…
Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7701834/national-security-and-future-prosperity-rely-on-climate-action/
The open letter from the diplomats (link);
Given how weak and pathetic the EU leaderships’ response to Russia has been, the EU’s utter dependence on resource imports, my challenge to EU leaders about carbon border taxes is – bring it on.
Right now shipments of abundant Australian natural gas are steaming towards EU ports. There are plenty of other customers who would love to receive that gas, the entire world is currently suffering a capacity shortfall. If EU leaders don’t want our fossil fuel, let us know, so we can divert our ships elsewhere.
As for the USA, even if Biden does manage to impose carbon border taxes on Australia which drive up prices for US consumers, I don’t think we will have long to wait until they are repealed.
Simple. Tit for tat on their imports.
Australia represents about 2 per cent of the global economy and we have 26 million people.
The wealthy country is based on huge reserves of minerals and energy first and foremost, and even those realisable assets have been restricted by governments, mostly States with powers and areas of responsibility covering prospecting permits, development applications and all the other red and green tape hurdles that must be negotiated before mining or extraction can commence.
And another example of UN influence via treaties and agreements spanning back many decades through to recent years.
Australia with trade sanctions applied against our exports would be financially challenged.
We export mainly to east pacific and India. Export 3.5% to USA. We import 10% from USA and stuff- all from Europe. We import mainly from the same people we export to.
So the US and Europe can go … themselves.
Australia should make preferred nation status status for countries that dont have such duties. Certainly, for fossil fuel, agricultural, …exports, the global market without the EU and US would be your best bet forever. Egypt and the rest of the ME is worried about foodstuffs. Bangladesh has brand new coal-fired electrical plants. N.Am is not needy for your main export products anyway.
This whole Reset is within months of collapse. Please don’t knuckle under and that will speed up the process of saving Europe from the only real thing that is unsustainable.
But where are trillions of tons of minerals going to come from for their renewables energy future?
From countries which already have the type of government these people want, such as China.
They are all Australian former diplomats to other countries, their ex-excellencies are probably lamenting a loss of relevance and the perquisites that went with the job.
Australia’s future prosperity and national security will depend on (not) lifting its game on climate action.
So carbon taxes on China and India? Also US per capita emissions are high so US will tax its own exports?
China & India will do whatever’s in their best interests. As for us Yanks, rumor has it that
LGB hid his own Easter eggs this year & had a hard time finding them! 😉
We’ll bring in enough illegals to compensate for the per capita part. We’ll be looking like central China in no time.
How exactly will Australia export renewable energy? Coal, oil, gas make sense. But how do you package up renewable energy for export?
Our treasurer Josh “Never run a business in my life” Frydenberg plans to plough $20 billion of taxpayer’s money into building a hydrogen export economy, to service a market which doesn’t exist.
You are right about no business experience but he has an impressive CV;
Frydenberg completed honours degrees in economics and law at Monash University, where he became president of the Law Students Society,[6]before working at Mallesons Stephen Jaques, a large Australian commercial law firm. Frydenberg won both a Fulbright Scholarship to attend Yale University and a Commonwealth Scholarship to attend the University of Oxford. He opted to accept the latter, completing a Master of International Relations at University College, Oxford, with a thesis on Indonesian politics. While deciding between Oxford and Yale, he was introduced to and developed friendships with Greg Hunt, a Fulbright Scholar and future cabinet colleague, and Sir Zelman Cowen, a former Australian governor-general and Oxford provost. He was introduced to the latter through their mutual friend Steven Skala. Cowen “became a mentor to Frydenberg and they spent many Sundays together discussing literature, music, philosophy and law”.[5] While at Oxford, Frydenberg was a member of the Oxford University L’Chaim Society.
Frydenberg has also earned a Master of Public Administration from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.[7]
Frydenberg is one of seven Liberal MPs in the 46th Parliament of Australia who have obtained degrees at an Oxbridge or Ivy League university, the others being Alan Tudge, Angus Taylor, Andrew Laming, Dave Sharma, Greg Hunt and Paul Fletcher.[8]
Wikipedia
Looks like Frynderbeg spent too much time discussing music, literature etc but too little time learning basic economy. During his term Australia reached nearly a trillion dollars budget defficit.
Actually, not so. In September 2013 Labor handed the Abbott Coalition Government over $400 billion of admitted debt exceeding Labor’s own debt ceiling which was not raised during the last financial year. Their last Budget 2013/14 under estimated the deficit deliberately with an election due that year. Labor committed to two very expensive budget expenditure items, Gonski State Education Grants and National Disability Insurance Scheme, and made no provision to pay for them and some other expenses. An independent audit discovered these problems. As a result the Abbott Government was forced to raise the debt ceiling to $500 billion to pay for the Labor unfunded commitments and leave some reserve for any other unforeseen expenditure.
The present debt as reported in the 2022/23 Budget is between $700 and $800 billion. The trillion dollar reports are based on Forward Estimates of future debt. But that is subject to the performance of the economy which is now growing at the rate of 3.5% GDP, a long, long term average. And Budget forecasts (Forward Estimates) valuing mining exports below present period prices being achieved. In other words taking a conservative view rather than getting carried away with recovery from the pandemic to date. An astute decision by the Treasurer and other Ministers involved in budgeting.
It must be considered that much of the new debt was spent on economic stimulus like funding employers and employees during the State Government legislated lockdowns, and funding various other Federal contributions to State Health and related public health.
By opening 1000s of new rare earth mines, digging it up and sending it to China. Trillions of solar panels, wind turbines, lithium batteries and EVs come from where?
Haven’t you heard of the NT solar power export scheme via undersea cable to Singapore, sounds crazy but might work, hope they have better batteries than we do !
Pork pie in the sky. Singapore will go nuclear (already in their plans) before being dependent on Twiggy’s crazy scheme.
If you wanted to find a way to expose your nation to foreign/terrorist risk, you could hardly do better than offshoring your power supplies.
well theres that insane plan to send pv power via cable to singapore as just one assinine example
and the even crazier hydrogen export stunt supposedly using renewable power to process it
Why are demands to “DO SOMETHING NOW” to stop the climate(s) from changing always come from soft-handed, shiny-bum know-alls who have never worked up one bead of sweat in earning their livings?
In their deep carpeted, air-conditioned offices, they are never going to notice even an RCP8.0 global warming scenario.
So whose comfort levels are they pretending to be concerned about?
A friend who was once a representative of a major company on a Pacific Island is adamant that nothing happens in the Pacific without a bribe. I’m sure he’s wrong, and all our diplomats are totally honest, but if ever a corrupt diplomat was to somehow slip into the ranks, who hooked up with a corrupt Pacific Island leader (perish the thought), keeping the climate cash flowing to foreign governments could be worth millions of dollars per year to the corrupt diplomat responsible for maintaining said flow of cash.
Bribery and corruption is a way of life in many countries, with some notable exceptions like Singapore where the slightest hint of something misconstrued as an bribe potential will result in panic if talking to a government employee or other.
To register a business in Jakarta, Indonesia, I saved many thousands of Australian Dollars by using a local firm to handle the registration. When I asked how it is done the explanation was money at each level to finally reach the right desk. It’s a way of life and widely accepted as the normal.
On my first trip as Master, delivering light oils around the Indonesian Islands, stupidly I tried to stop the free booze and fags to the port officials, and couldn’t understand why things were so difficult. Finally the owners explained to me that the cost of the backhanders was factored into the Charter Rate, so I started the freebies again and suddenly all was sweetness and light and nothing was too much trouble.
In the 1960s in a West African country, when paying my light bill for the first time (you got in line), the fellow behind me advised to add a few pennies or the clerk puts your bill in a pile to process later (you have to then go back for your receipt). Talking to the fellow afterwards he told me the clerk’s small pay check assumed he did get ‘dashee’ from bill payers. Also, the clerk had to ‘buy’ his job from the hiring clerk in the first place!
On a business trip flying into Jakarta the passenger sitting alongside me, Chinese from Singapore, placed some US dollar notes into his Passport where his Visa for Indonesia was fixed. He saw me looking and said no need for you to do this, you’re Australian and a white.
He explained that without the “donation” he could be given a hard time and be delayed at Immigration.
“In fact, Australia can benefit from our potential to generate cheap and abundant renewable energy to create a sustainable, high productivity, export economy.”
=============
So a trillion volt DC connector from Australia to the world? Pay for itself in a billion years.
The sentence does not say that the export is energy. It says ‘ …renewable energy to create a …, high productivity export economy’
Maybe that will be something like tourist trinkets made of sand and spit fused together with such energy.
A “high productivity export economy” will require that we re-establish our manufacturing sector.
That will require at least a few new coal fired power stations.
Remember, you cannot manufacture anything with unreliable expensive, erratic power supply.
Actually, come to think of it, it will never pay for itself. Might be lucky to pay for the serial replacement of the windmills and solar panels, but not for the connector.
I’d like to think you are right, but Australia is a soft target (they think); unless they try to stop the submarine deal?
If you don’t realize that would really cause the US issues then you don’t understand the realities at play. The US is well aware China is Australia’s largest trading partner and pushing Australia back towards them is not in US interests. US administration may cajole but they know the realities.
Australia can always lower its per capita emissions by joining China.
I suggest that HO, goes back to her homeland and dictate to them first, using the Pareto Theory. Then work on the smaller emitters.
The UN IPCC conveniently ignores that Australia signed and ratified the Kyoto Japan Agreement for emissions (greenhouse gases at that time) reduction and became on the few signatory nations to achieve the target, but Australia well exceeded that target. And at present having signed and ratified the Paris Agreement for emissions (now concentrated on CO2) Australia is well on track to achieve the target set for 2030.
But during COP26 pressure was applied for Australia to increase the target and bring the completion date back to 2025. The Prime Minister & Cabinet refused to cooperate. Earlier the UN IPCC refused to allow Australia to apply credits for exceeding the Kyoto Agreement target to the Paris Agreement target.
At COP26 Australia also received demands to ban coal mining and exports, and that was refused. And to sign and Agreement to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 and that was also refused, the Prime Minister & Cabinet position is: “an aspirational goal” with no commitment and based on new technology development without damaging the economy.
Looking behind the news and the commentators views isn’t it clear that the UN attempts to force member nations to do what the UN wants them to do and if not possibly facing consequences like Great Barrier Reef tourism, which is of importance to economic prosperity in Queensland, and therefore for national prosperity, being adversely impacted by UN declarations that the GBR is dying. Regardless of the excellent health of the GBR.
It should also be considered that the Prime Minister was under pressure from our major allies UK and US to commit to the UN demands.
The politics of climate hoax are often hidden behind the mind games being played to scare people with and to try and convince us to accept the illogical potential economic vandalism.
Extract from the Canberra Times link provided …
“Global finance and investment are moving away from fossil fuel economies and Australia’s ability to attract job-creating foreign investment (and even insurance for those investments) is already compromised by a decade of denial and inaction. Our trading partners and strategic competitors are investing heavily in decarbonising their economies.
Climate risk increasingly features in global investment decisions, and even more so in global insurance markets. Adani had to self-finance and self-insure its Carmichael coal mine because it could not persuade any bank or insurer to take on the risk.
This was not because of woke capitalism, but rather a hard-headed assessment of the financial risk associated with new coal projects. Australia will export coal as long as there is a market for it, but as our major trading partners – including China, Japan and India – implement their climate action commitments, that market will collapse.”
Stepping through the minefield would be a daunting task and resulting in a damned if we don’t and damned if we do situation for our elected representatives. Perceptions are very important in politics.
Australia was in a stronger position when Donald Trump was the POTUS and opposed climate hoax and UN interference in the affairs of member (sovereign) nations. But right now consider our major allies UK and US leadership.
“But right now consider our major allies UK and US leadership.”
With friends like them, who needs enemies!!!
I consider India as the de facto head of the British Commonwealth. The rest are sub managers of EU and UN masters. Australia has been back and forth on this. I don’t see Australia as under any credible threat from the fading toothless ones as far as trade (or anything else) is concerned. You do have three or four more climateer professors per capita than any other nation, though.
Dennis, you forget that our major trading partners China, India etc did not agree to the COP26 ambit claims for CO2 reductions any time soon, these developing countries can do what they want to re Paris, so they will charge ahead with coal gas and nuclear and we should willingly supply them!
Your post makes it abundantly clear that kowtowing to IPCC demands only begets more IPCC demands. The moral of that story should be to follow the lead of our climate change heroes in the PRC and firmly tell the IPCC to get stuffed.
I agree, but then I have to think hard about unforeseen consequences, and as a small population nation reliant on international trade and support of allies for defence.
From time to time Australians question our need to spend on defence assets but they obviously fail to consider that if we expect defence support from our allies we must do our best to support them and wherever they ask for our assistance.
overpriced useless “support” like the lemon f(d) 35s?
or out of date nuke subs?
bases that MAKE us a top target?
The pity is that not one of these “diplomats” is likely to know anything about the validity of the “science” behind the moves on fossil fuel reduction.
I mean, what might be the knowledge of the last diplomat on the list?
Lucinda Wright former DFAT officer, 1975-1989
Is Lucinda able to help Australia in any material sense? Geoff S
One question that needs to be answered by these Green knobs.
Are the Greens EU, US Australia willing to open 1000s of new mines across their countries to feed their renewables energy future furnaces ?
Because millions upon millions of renewables wont dig themselves out of the ground.
The look on the Greens faces when they realise that we need to dig up Kakadu and Cape York because rich in rare earths, priceless.
My employer company explored around Kakadu before it became a park or was would heritage listed. We were forced off valid mining leases, without compensation, because of world heritage, just as we were finding significant new uranium mineralization.
My employer company explored some of Cape York and wished to concentrate on a tiny area near of leases near Lockhart River, looking for sand minerals like Rutile and Zircon. We were denied entry of park grounds.
My employer company wanted to be granted exploration licences over a tiny area near Shoalwater Bay, further down the East coast of Queensland. It was made into a military training area and a national park. We were denied access.
All of this happened before 1995.
Strange type of encouragement. Strange type of land grab. Strange type of no compensation.
What the heck are regulators up to?
Geoff S
Contrary to politicians’ beliefs, science is not about how many times a falsehood is repeated. Science is about hypothesis, evidence, support or disproof – and the alleged Global Warming Crisis was disproved decades ago.
The climate fraudsters strictly ignore observations that disprove their false very-scary Global Warming narrative. They no longer debate the science because they know they always lose. They just vilify and shout down their opponents.
There is never been any credible scientific evidence to support the Catastrophic Human-made Global Warming (“CAGW aka “Climate Change”) hypothesis. It’s been a BIG LIE since circa 1970, a fifty-year fraud – Wolves stampeding the sheep for political and financial gain.
The alarmist scientists know that their climate models “run hot”, and routinely and grossly over-state actual observations of warming, which are minor and not dangerous. The only measureable impact of increasing atmospheric CO2 is improved crop yields, hugely beneficial to feed the world.
The CAGW hypo ASSUMES that increasing atmospheric CO2 caused by burning fossil fuels causes dangerous global warming. HOWEVER. since ~Feb2020, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have continued to increase, but the world has been getting COLDER, perhaps alarmingly so. The CAGW hypothesis is being disproved once again as we speak.
“VIRTUALLY EVERY SCARY PREDICTION BY GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS IS FALSE.”
“Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.”
https://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=112896
By the end of 2020, the climate doomsters (aka the IPCC and the radical greens) were proved wrong in their scary climate predictions 48 times. At 50:50 odds for each prediction, that is like flipping a coin 48 times and losing every time! The probability of that being mere random ignorance is 1 in 281 trillion! But no sensible person makes a 50:50 prediction – at 60:40 the odds against being this wrong are 1 in 13 quintillion; at 70:30 the odds against being this wrong are 1 in 13 septillion. ***
With their falsehoods, the climate doomsters have wasted trillions of dollars and millions of lives, mostly in the developing world. Crimes against humanity!
THE CATASTROPHIC ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING (CAGW) AND THE HUMANMADE CLIMATE CHANGE CRISES ARE PROVED FALSE January 10, 2020
https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/the-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-warming-cagw-and-the-humanmade-climate-change-crises-are-proved-false.pdf
***Note: Imagine you took your car to the IPCC garage, and you got it back but it would not start. So you take it back, and it still won’t start. So you go back to the same IPCC garage a third time, and your car still won’t start!
At some point, wouldn’t you take it to another garage? Not our “brain trust” in NYC. In effect, they’ve taken that car back to the same IPCC garage 48 times and it STILL won’t start.
Let’s stop talking about Emissions and Greenhouse Gases (plural). It’s only CARBON DIOXIDE that’s worried about. And there is absolutely no way that anything we do will control an inevitable rise in CO2. So better relax and get used to it. It doesn’t affect the weather.
Over a decade ago in Canada the leader of the Liberal party at the time told Canadians that the EU would punish them unless they had a carbon tax in place. He was handily defeated by Stephen Harper in the next federal election.
Except Canada has had a carbon tax for at least 4 years, the Aussies could add an “export” carbon tax for countries who want it… The US doesnt even have a carbon tax, why are they even saying anything to the Aussies? Likely competition, if Aussie has a tax and the US doesnt, they will sell more and undercut the Aussie price…
Normally that’s true. The Saudis had the West “over the barrel” when they raised prices in
’73 & ’79- they raised prices cuz they could. Demand was >> supply if they pulled out of
the market. Who else could the West go to?
PM Morrison affirmed on 19th April 2022 that there would be no carbon tax from any Party under him as leader. Geoff S
So why did these former taxeaters only copy Albanese?
Labor shifts its stance on coal mines ‘as much as the wind changes position’ (msn.com)
As if we didn’t know the usual suspects.
Each way Albo.
It’s hard to take seriously any group that doesn’t list its members on their website, has a website that is only registered until 2023 (in Singapore), and uses Gmail as its means of communication
“The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson
–
–
There sure are a lot of Honorables listed in that letter. Australians better start counting their spoons.
That list of diplomats reads like the passenger manifest of Golgafrinchan Ark Fleet Ship B.
Except that they are the ones likely to build it and condemn the rest to getting wiped out from unsanitised phones!
It is hard to imagine these ex diplomats etc are so stupid as to actually believe the scary CO2 monster story, so what is their angle, how do they gain from it?
Diplomats are generally the first to tout the gov’t line. It has to do with where their pay comes from….
This also applies to public servants and academia who have bought the CAGW line, who trusts the CSIRO and BoM in relation to climate issues now that they have been exposed as incompetent’s with their useless models and dodgy ACORN datasets and homogenization processes,
Bend-over or else
Let me get this straight. The EU needs lots of energy for industry & to keep their bodies above room
temperature next winter. The Aussies have lots of energy to sell. Other countries like Chindia also
get lots of energy they need from Australia & and have ~40% of the world’s people who can buy
whatever the Aussies make in a year in a month or two. Seems like the EU’s all bark & no bite!!! 😮 😉
It’ll be the usual reversal – “words speak louder than actions” – they’ll publicly decry Australia, slam their government for anything the EU doesn’t agree with then quietly exempt the commodities they need from Australia from all extra tariffs or sanctions.
They’ve done exactly that with sanctions against Russia. They suddenly realized they needed fertilizers (particularly nitogenous from natural gas), petroleum, NG, grain, cooking oils, a number of metals …
You also left out Australia only has a small trade with EU because of the EU regulations and the trade is heavily in EU favour. The Australia economy would improve in a tit or tat trade war and their would be less BMW cars and the like in the country.
Yet another opportunity for self-important elites to signify their imbecility by putting their signature to a document saturated with sanctimonious righteousness while unburdened with reality.
“But climate change is not a domestic issue. It is a global issue which poses a significant threat to Australia’s national security and future economic prosperity. We have seen the effects of climate change in abundance over recent years, with drought, the devastating Black Summer and recent Western Australian bushfires, and catastrophic flooding in Queensland and NSW.”
Bushfires and floods have nothing to do with and were not caused by “climate change”. During a negative PDO and La Nina weather patterns bring wet weather to the east coast. A positive PDO and El Nino weather patterns bring dry conditions to the east coast.
The EU is paying Russia billions of dollars per week for fossil fuels and doing so with a land war in Europe and more empire building by Russia. They have a lot of nerve.
Australia needs to add an export tariff on all lithium and processed lithium for export.
I had to suggest that ‘black face’ (Canada) was a complete idiot in terms of attacking his own people.
Aus is about second or third in that league. What are these idiots thinking?
There is a reason that US/UK/AUS are part of a new alliance. AUS may be getting kicked out soon. CAN was never considered for some reason.
Meanwhile, in Australia, a couple of coal units are out of action, and electricity prices are heading upwards.
https://joannenova.com.au/2022/04/australian-electricity-price-doubles-ceo-explains-prices-up-due-to-lack-of-coal-power/
One can only imagine what will happen when they intentionally shut down a few more of those old reliable coal fired turbines.
What is desperately needed down here are some new reliable coal fired turbines, but the political climate is now so moronically challenged by the anti-CO2 yappers, that those are unlikely to eventuate.
Australia should to look after the needs of current people..
.. not ‘former” people, they are irrelevant,
.. and almost certainly living high on government pensions.
A bigger threat to Australia is kowtowing to international demands for how we run our country.
Ok lets just have a look at their ”concern” here….
”We are a group of former Australian diplomats concerned about Australia’s current lack of commitment to time-bound targets to achieve rapid reductions in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions and the implications this has for the climate and environment we bequeath to future generations.”
So. Let’s presume Australia is responsible for 5% of the 1 degree C rise in global temperature over the last century. (we all know that’s complete nonsense of course but let’s go with it)
That means AU has caused 0.05 degrees C (1/20 of 1C) over 100 years. So if we cut our emissions by 100% TODAY, we would reduce the temp by that much. If we cut our emissions by 50% over the next say 10 years, we would reduce the terrifying heating of the planet by…. 0.025 or 1/40th of 1 degree over the next decade. I think the math is correct but regardless, you would have to admit, it’s a stupendous amount. Well worthy of a letter to the PM!
Australia needs to repair its relationship with China. Without asking the US for permission.
You need to think that through again.
So they couldn’t get a Scientist stupid enough to stick his head out?
And I note they are no longer calling for us to save the climate but instead to “to restore Australia’s international standing” – i.e. to get in good with the political types bent on destroying Western civilisation.
I thought we were supposed to follow the science, not suck up to politicians and bureaucrats.
I am a retired Trade commissioner and nobody asked me!!’
Looks like i have been cancelled.
All woke BS stirred by people who never had a real job.
I had to show one how to open a bank account , and buy a car in a foreign country.
And the stories I know about some of them would make your hair curl, but cannot be published due to the possibility of being sued.
quoting Victoria newland
F the EU
bad enough japan n china get our lpg cheaply
while aussies are paying near 1$ for lpg car fuel and being told of shortfalls in supply for us at home.
What a mountainous load of utter manure.
The only thing that “poses a significant threat to Australia’s national security and future economic prosperity” is their proposed (NON) “solution” to the imaginary “crisis,” which will do orders of magnitude more damage to Australia’s (or any country stupid enough to embrace such economic suicide) “national security” and “future economic prosperity.”