Tips and rumours

Aug 20, 2012

Libs sprung on tax … Albrechtsen boo boo … ‘buy your degree’ …

From the Crikey grapevine, the latest tips and rumours … CarbonWatch: creative Coalition. Is the carbon tax to blame for the disappearance of H

Topics

8 comments

Leave a comment

8 thoughts on “Libs sprung on tax … Albrechtsen boo boo … ‘buy your degree’ …

  1. ian dale

    Albrechtsen got that one wrong l. Sophie did not run with the torch after a media outcry.

  2. robinw

    Universities were once places that took pride in that they made you think. It appears these days the people who run them have not even learnt that lesson.

  3. John Bennetts

    Master’s Degree, well-known uni, foreign student in a work team. Assignments handed out, roles negotiated for individuals, along with receivables, scope, etc. This was a major issue, because the sum of the parts was 100% of the assessment.

    Said student emailed from South America that she had just been married and was on her honeymoon, apologising for asking the others (3) in the team to make up for her.

    Long story short: 3 passes, one “Nul Points”, as they say on Eurovision.

    The uni did the correct thing, right down the line.

    See, not all stories are bad news.

  4. puddleduck

    Well you really can’t fault Daddy Gosper for taking care of his kids, can you? What was that scandal a few years ago where he allegedly used his influence to get one of his kids into the University of Melbourne?

    The Victorian Ombudsman had something to say about it:
    http://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/resources/documents/Report_on_investigation_into_a_complaint_about_preferential_treatment_of_a_student_by_Melb_Uni.pdf

    Hard to believe he’s into the Olympics where it’s supposed to be competition based on emrit (natural skill plus training), when he wants to advance his kids by influence not talent.

  5. CML

    Loved the “Carbonwatch – Creative Coalition” article!!
    I vote for the second brown paper bag – LOL!!!

  6. Steve777

    All of the outlandish claims being made by the Opposition and business with regard to the Carbon Pricing should be being called and challenged by the media, but for the most part this is not happening.

    In the case of the Senator’s claims, the BS detectors should be going into overdrive. The Carbon Price will increase the cost of power by about 10%. So the cost of a product that is produced by slave labour (where the slaves provide their own food and accomodation) and for which all inputs apart from power are free would be expected to increase in price by 10% on account of the Carbon Price.

    As for refrigerants, well the chemistry and economics of producing these must be pretty strange indeed if their price is to go up by 400%. The customers of businesses pushing this claim should challenge them to show their workings. For example, the claim could be plausible if producing a ton of refigerant gas (including profit margin) costs $23, the production process produces four tonnes of carbon for each ton of refrigerant and it is produced by one of the 300-odd companies that are subject to carbon pricing.

    The other thing that should be called is that the Opposition seems to be encouraging (or at least providing cover for) businesses to try it on. Why are they getting away with it? The media in this country is for the most part lazy, biased or both.

  7. John Bennetts

    @ Steve777, Posted Monday, 20 August 2012 at 6:04 pm

    Liability for carbon tax is not assessed how you think. It is not $23 per tonne.

    It is $23 per tonne of CO2-e, which means the equivalent mass of CO2 which would cause the same atmospheric damage if released.

    Now, I don’t know the costs of manufacture of refrigerant gases, but as an example, consider methane, which is a common product present in natural gas, coal seam gas, wood smoke, compost heap emissions, cow burps and termite respiration and is emitted by mushrooms as they grow. Methane is about 24 times as potent, weight for weight, as CO2.

    The tax on a tonne of methane is thus 23 * 24 = $550 or so per tonne.

    Presumably, there are even nastier gases than methane. Some may be refrigerants.

    It is entirely possible, indeed probable, that some refrigerants will incur a carbon tax of $600 per tonne.

  8. Steve777

    Thank you John, an interesting post. My point still stands, though. In my example, if producing a ton of refrigerant produced about 160kg of methane as a waste product, a 400% price increase might be in order, but the customers for refrigerants should certainly push back and insist that their suppliers justify the increase.

    It is obvious that some businesses, with the support and cover of the Opposition in some cases, are trying it on. I doubt that the good Senator has checked the chemistry or the economics behind any of the price increases being attributed to carbon pricing. If the manufactures of refrigerant gas can justify the price increase, well and good. The industry has an incentive to change their process, which is the intention of carbon pricing . It would be up to the government to justify why this is necessary for the longer term good. I think it’s fair to say that for most goods and services, any price increase of more than a few percent needs to be justified.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...