Category: Uncategorized

  • The Values Ratchet MONBIOT

    1 of 45
    Why this ad?
    Debt Reliefdebtrelief.com.au – Reduce debt, repayments & interest rates. Free debt analysis.

    Monbiot.com

    Inbox
    x

    George Monbiot news@monbiot.com via google.com

    5:40 PM (16 minutes ago)

    to me

    Monbiot.com


    The Values Ratchet

    Posted: 10 Jun 2014 06:44 AM PDT

    How to ensure that nations slide ever further into selfishness, and ever further to the right.
    By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 11th June 2014

    Any political movement that fails to understand two basic psychological traits will, before long, fizzle out. The first is Shifting Baseline Syndrome. Coined by the biologist Daniel Pauly, it originally described our relationship to ecosystems(1), but it’s just as relevant to politics. We perceive the circumstances of our youth as normal and unexceptional – however sparse or cruel they may be. By this means, over the generations, we adjust to almost any degree of deprivation or oppression, imagining it to be natural and immutable.

    The second is the Values Ratchet (also known as policy feedback). If, for example, your country has a public health system which ensures that everyone who needs treatment receives it without payment, it helps instil the belief that it is normal to care for strangers, and abnormal and wrong to neglect them(2,3). If you live in a country where people are left to die, this embeds the idea that you have no responsibility towards the poor and weak. The existence of these traits is supported by a vast body of experimental and observational research, of which Labour and the US Democrats appear determined to know nothing.

    We are not born with our core values: they are strongly shaped by our social environment. These values can be placed on a spectrum between extrinsic and intrinsic. People towards the intrinsic end have high levels of self-acceptance, strong bonds of intimacy and a powerful desire to help other people. People at the other end are drawn to external signifiers, such as fame, financial success, image and attractiveness(4). They seek praise and rewards from others.

    Research across 70 countries suggests that intrinsic values are strongly associated with an understanding of others, tolerance, appreciation, cooperation and empathy(5,6,7). Those with strong extrinsic values tend to have lower empathy, a stronger attraction towards power, hierarchy and inequality, greater prejudice towards outsiders and less concern for global justice and the natural world(8,9). These clusters exist in opposition to each other: as one set of values strengthens, the other weakens(10,11).

    People at the extrinsic end tend to report higher levels of stress, anxiety, anger, envy, dissatisfaction and depression than those at the intrinsic end of the spectrum(12,13,14). Societies in which extrinsic goals are widely adopted are more unequal and uncooperative than those with deep intrinsic values. In one experiment, people with strong extrinsic values who were given a resource to share soon exhausted it (unlike a group with strong intrinsic values), as they all sought to take more than their due(15).

    As extrinsic values are strongly associated with conservative politics, it’s in the interests of conservative parties and conservative media to cultivate these values. There are three basic methods. The first is to generate a sense of threat. Experiments reported in the journal Motivation and Emotion suggest that when people feel threatened or insecure they gravitate towards extrinsic goals(16). Perceived dangers – such as the threat of crime, terrorism, deficits, inflation or immigration – trigger a short-term survival response, in which you protect your own interests and forget other people’s.

    The second method is the creation of new frames, structures of thought through which we perceive the world. For example, if tax is repeatedly cast as a burden, and less tax is described as relief, people come to see taxation as a bad thing that must be remedied(17). The third method is to invoke the Values Ratchet: when you change the way society works, our values shift in response. Privatisation, marketisation, austerity for the poor, inequality: they all shift baselines, alter the social cues we receive and generate insecurity and a sense of threat.

    Margaret Thatcher’s political genius arose from her instinctive understanding of these traits, long before they were described by psychologists and cognitive linguists: “Economics are the method; the object is to change the heart and soul.”(18) But Labour and the Democrats no longer have objects, only methods. Their political philosophy is simply stated: if at first you don’t succeed, flinch, flinch and flinch again. They seem to believe that if they simply fall into line with prevailing values, people will vote for them by default. But those values and baselines keep shifting, and what seemed intolerable before becomes unremarkable today. Instead of challenging the new values, these parties keep adjusting. This is why they always look like their opponents, with a five-year lag.

    There is no better political passion killer than Labour’s Zero-Based Review(19). Its cover is Tory blue. So are the contents. It promises to sustain the coalition’s programme of cuts and even threatens to apply them to the health service(20). But, though it treats the deficit as a threat that must be countered at any cost, it says not a word about plugging the gap with innovative measures such as a Robin Hood tax on financial transactions, a land value tax, a progressively-banded council tax or a windfall tax on extreme wealth. Nor does it mention tax avoidance and evasion. The poor must bear the pain through spending cuts, sustaining a cruel and wildly unequal social settlement.

    At the end of last month, Chris Leslie, Labour’s Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, promised, like George Osborne, that the cuts would be sustained for “decades ahead”(21). He asserted that Labour’s purpose in government would be to “finish that task on which [the Chancellor] has failed”: namely “to eradicate the deficit”. The following day the shadow business secretary, Chuka Umunna, sought to explain why Labour had joined the political arms race on immigration. In doing so, he revealed that his party will be “radical in reforming our economy” in support of “a determinedly pro-business agenda”(22). They appear to believe that success depends on becoming indistinguishable from their opponents.

    It’s not quite as mad as the old tactic among some Marxist groups of promoting inequality and injustice in the hope that popular fury would lead to revolution, but it’s not far off. Quite aside from the obvious flaw (what’s the sodding point of voting for a party that offers no substantial change in policy?), it evinces a near-perfect psychological illiteracy. When a party reinforces conservative values and conservative ideas, when it fails clearly to expound any countervailing values, when it refuses to reverse the direction of the Values Ratchet, what outcome does it expect, other than a shift towards conservatism?

    www.monbiot.com

    References:

    1. Daniel Pauly, 1995. Anecdotes and the Shifting Baseline Syndrome of Fisheries. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10. 10:430.

    2. Stefan Svallfors, 2010 Policy feedback, generational replacement, and attitudes to state intervention: Eastern and Western Germany, 1990-2006, European Political Science Review, 2, 119-135.

    3. Tom Crompton, September 2010. Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Cultural Values. WWF-UK. http://assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/common_cause_report.pdf

    4. Tim Kasser, November 2011. Values and Human Wellbeing. The Bellagio Initiative. http://www.bellagioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Bellagio-Kasser.pdf

    5. Shalom H. Schwartz, 2006. Basic Human Values: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. Revue Française de Sociologie, 47/4. http://bit.ly/1hL1JFJ

    6. Frederick Grouzet et al, 2005. The structure of goal contents across fifteen cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 800-816. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/89/5/800/

    7. Tom Crompton, September 2010. Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Cultural Values. WWF-UK. http://assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/common_cause_report.pdf

    8. Tim Kasser, November 2011. Values and Human Wellbeing. The Bellagio Initiative. http://www.bellagioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Bellagio-Kasser.pdf

    9. Kennon M. Sheldon and Charles P. Nichols, 2009. Comparing Democrats and Republicans on
    Intrinsic and Extrinsic Values. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2009, 39, 3, pp. 589–623.

    10. Tim Kasser, November 2011. Values and Human Wellbeing. The Bellagio Initiative. http://www.bellagioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Bellagio-Kasser.pdf

    11. Tom Crompton, September 2010. Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Cultural Values. WWF-UK. http://assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/common_cause_report.pdf

    12. Tim Kasser, 2014. Changes in materialism, changes in psychological well-being: Evidence from three longitudinal studies and an intervention experiment. Motivation and Emotion, 38:1–22. doi: 10.1007/s11031-013-9371-4

    13. Kennon M. Sheldon and Tim Kasser, 2008. Psychological threat and extrinsic goal striving. Motivation and Emotion, 32:37–45. Doi: 10.1007/s11031-008-9081-5 http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2008_SheldonKasser_MOEM.pdf

    14. Tim Kasser, November 2011. Values and Human Wellbeing. The Bellagio Initiative. http://www.bellagioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Bellagio-Kasser.pdf

    15. Kennon M. Sheldon, and Holly McGregor, 2000. Extrinsic value orientation and the “tragedy of the commons.” Journal of Personality, 68, 383–411. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-6494.00101/abstract;jsessionid=A7F705A627AE58C7814C6AC62749E128.f03t04

    16. Kennon M. Sheldon and Tim Kasser, 2008. Psychological threat and extrinsic goal striving. Motivation and Emotion, 32:37–45. Doi: 10.1007/s11031-008-9081-5 http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2008_SheldonKasser_MOEM.pdf

    17. Tom Crompton, September 2010. Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Cultural Values. WWF-UK. http://assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/common_cause_report.pdf

    18. http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/104475

    19. http://www.yourbritain.org.uk/uploads/editor/files/Zero_Based_Review.pdf

    20. “We will be cutting departmental spending in 2015-16 and not raising it, with no more borrowing to cover day-to-day spending”
    “The fundamental principle of the Zero-Based Review is that all spending is in scope and all budgets will be challenged. The review will cover all areas of public spending, including those that have been protected in the current Spending Review such as health”.

    21. http://press.labour.org.uk/post/87284550049/long-termism-in-public-finance-speech-by-chris-leslie

    22. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/30/labour-immigration-ukip-farage

    You are subscribed to email updates from George Monbiot
    .
    Email delivery powered by Google
    Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
  • Daily update: The crazy push for new coal generation in QueenslandDaily update: The crazy push for new coal generation in Queensland

    2 of 20
    Why this ad?
    Sir Walter Turf Pricewww.greenlifeturf.com.au/sir-walter – Guaranteed Instant Quality Turf Freshly Cut – We Deliver To You

    Daily update: The crazy push for new coal generation in Queensland

    Inbox
    x

    Renew Economy editor@reneweconomy.com.au via mail4.atl111.rsgsv.net

    3:24 PM (16 minutes ago)

    to me
    The crazy push for new coal generation in Qld, SA leaps towards 40% wind and solar, NSW green car discount plan could penalise EV drivers, Scrapping RET could snuff out community wind project, Central Aus salt mine considers 20MW solar array, The real budget emergency and the myth of “burnable carbon”, Customer focus could save utilities from death-spiral, What George told Dick about wind turbines, and Germany solar energy storage market nearing boom.
    Is this email not displaying correctly?
    View it in your browser.
    RenewEconomy Daily News
    The Parkinson Report
    Report recommends an 800MW coal fired plant for northern Queensland. But its assumptions are based on some crazy estimates for cost of renewables, and some hefty government subsidies for coal. The Abbott government loves the idea.
    The imminent completion of 270MW Snowtown wind farm will lift South Australia’s wind and solar energy contribution to 40 per cent.
    A flaw in the NSW government’s car registration discount proposal could wind up penalising hybrid and EV drivers, rather than rewarding them.
    Founder of Australia’s first community-owned wind farm warns changes to RET could undermine the landmark project and kill off future investment.
    Developers of proposed $400m salt mine look to 2MW solar array, and will consider storage options.
    Joe Hockey tried to manufacture a fiscal budget emergency whilst the real budget emergency – the climate carbon budget emergency – remains hidden from view.
    Electricity utilities can avoid their very own “Kodak moment” by becoming more customer-focused.
    George the Bull suggests if humans are serious about cutting the renewable energy target,  they might not be the smartest creatures on the planet.
    Solar energy plus storage system market in Germany is approaching a boom period,
  • Geology.com News – 14 Topics

    Why this ad?
    Australian Debt Reliefdebtrelief.com.au – Eliminate your debt w/Debt Relief Fill in our free debt analysis form

    Geology.com News – 14 Topics

    Inbox
    x

    Geology News fb@geology.com via google.com

    7:36 PM (5 minutes ago)

    to me

    Geology.com News – 14 Topics

    Link to Geology News

    Arizona Earth Fissures on Google Earth

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 11:02 AM PDT

    The Arizona Geological Survey has released “Earth fissures of central and southern Arizona”, the .kmz file.

    For Google Earth users it is a great tool for visualizing earth fissures. The data set includes all mapped fissures – 100s of miles – that have been published as part of the AZGS earth fissure program at http://azgs.az.gov/map_services.shtml That link takes you to their Map and Database services, the Google Earth fissures link is on the left side, third from the top.

    Here is a screenshot from Google Earth (black = continuous fissures; red = discontinuous fissures; green = unconfirmed fissures). If you don’t have a copy of Google Earth you can download and install it for free here“. Then just click the link on the AZGS website and the fissures file will automatically open in the Google Earth window.

    Polar Bear – POV Cams

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 08:38 AM PDT

    “This video was edited and compiled from raw footage recorded by a camera equipped radio collar that was put on a female polar bear in the Beaufort Sea during April 2014 by the US Geological Survey.” Quoted from the USGS video release.

    Watch out for Ticks!

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 08:25 AM PDT

    Spring and early summer are some of the most active times for ticks. Learn how to recognize ticks, how to avoid tick bites and how to remove a tick from your skin.

    Natural Gas Storage Below Normal

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:53 AM PDT

    The amount of natural gas in storage is far below normal. This could have a significant impact upon winter electricity rates and the availability of natural gas during the winter heating season.

    Evidence of Ancient Forest Fires

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:44 AM PDT

    “Scientists working in southern Saskatchewan, Canada have found fossilized plants showing evidence of an ancient wildfire, offering clues about forest ecosystems during the age of dinosaurs.” Quoted from the Christian Science Monitor.

    Related: Similar evidence is commonly seen in Carboniferous coal seams.

    Geoengineering Antarctic Ice Loss ?

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:41 AM PDT

    U.S. News & World Report has a speculative article about using geoengineering to curb Antarctic ice loss and sea level rise.

    Hydraulic Fracturing in Germany ?

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:40 AM PDT

    “In a potential shift in German energy policy, the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel is preparing a framework that would let energy companies extract oil and natural gas by the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing.” Quoted from The New York Times.

    Rescuing Corals from Dredging

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:29 AM PDT

    “Miami scientists scrambled last week to rescue a crop of unusually hardy coral from an unlikely underwater garden at the bottom of one of the world’s busiest shipping channels.” Quoted from the Miami Herald.

    El Niño Developing ?

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:23 AM PDT

    “As the probability of an El Niño winter increases, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego researchers are following the climate phenomenon as it develops off Southern California and finding that local readings closely hew to El Niño monitoring taking place at the equator.” Quoted from the Scripps press release.

    A New Type of Mosquito ?

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:18 AM PDT

    “In Maryland and the rest of the U.S., mosquito season begins with a new species, a new disease, and new strategies for pest control.” Quoted from the National Geographic article.

    An Eruption in Indonesia Caused Snow in Pennsylvania ?

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:07 AM PDT

    “Then on June 6th 1816 weather history was made when snow accumulated across much of England. Snow flurries occurred in the mountains of northeastern PA!”

    How Did Our Moon Form?

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 07:04 AM PDT

    “Newly analyzed lunar rocks have revealed the first direct evidence of the ancient smashup that created the moon.” Quoted from the National Geographic article.

    Labradorescence

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 04:31 AM PDT

    Labradorite is a feldspar mineral of the plagioclase series. Some specimens exhibit a schiller effect, which is a strong play of iridescent blue, green, red, orange, and yellow colors. Labradorite is so well known for these spectacular displays of color that the phenomenon is known as “labradorescence.”

    Mineral Hardness Picks

    Posted: 09 Jun 2014 04:30 AM PDT

    Mineral hardness picks are pencil-like tools that have points made from materials that match the hardness of minerals in the Mohs Hardness Scale. With them you can easily test the hardness of mineral grains in a rock and test the hardness of small-size specimens. In our opinion they are easier to use than pieces of minerals and allow you to obtain more accurate results. They also do not contaminate your specimen with particles of the hardness mineral.

  • A Rapidly Collapsing Antarctic Glacier The Size Of Florida Is Being Melted From Within By Geothermal Heat

    A Rapidly Collapsing Antarctic Glacier The Size Of Florida Is Being Melted From Within By Geothermal Heat

    Chris Pash Today at 5:00 AM 4
    Getty Images

    The enormous Thwaites Glacier, a rapidly changing outlet of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, is not only being eroded by the ocean it’s being melted from below by geothermal heat.

    The findings by the Institute for Geophysics at The University of Texas at Austin change the understanding of conditions beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet where accurate information has previously been unobtainable.

    The Thwaites Glacier has been the focus of considerable attention in recent weeks as other groups of researchers found the glacier is on the way to collapse.

    However, more data and computer modeling are needed to determine when the collapse will begin in earnest and at what rate the sea level will increase as it proceeds.

    Using radar techniques to map how water flows under ice sheets, the researchers were able to estimate ice melting rates and identify significant sources of geothermal heat under Thwaites Glacier.

    They found these sources are distributed over a wider area and are much hotter than previously assumed.

    The geothermal heat contributed significantly to melting of the underside of the glacier, and it might be a key factor in allowing the ice sheet to slide, affecting the ice sheet’s stability and its contribution to sea level rise.

    The cause of the variable distribution of heat beneath the glacier is thought to be the movement of magma and volcanic activity arising from the rifting of the Earth’s crust beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.

    Knowledge of the heat distribution beneath Thwaites Glacier is crucial information which enables scientists to more accurately predict the response of the glacier to the presence of a warming ocean.

    Until now, scientists had been unable to measure the strength or location of heat flow under the glacier. Current ice sheet models have assumed that heat flow under the glacier is uniform like a frying pan with even heat distribution across the bottom of the ice.

    The findings of lead author Dusty Schroeder and his colleagues show that the glacier sits on something more like a multi-burner stove with burners putting out heat at different levels at different locations.

    “It’s the most complex thermal environment you might imagine,” said co-author Don Blankenship, a senior research scientist.

    “And then you plop the most critical dynamically unstable ice sheet on planet Earth in the middle of this thing, and then you try to model it. It’s virtually impossible.”

    The Thwaites Glacier is the size of the US state of Florida, is up to 4,000 meters thick and is considered a key question mark in making projections of global sea level rise.

    The glacier is retreating in the face of the warming ocean and is thought to be unstable because its interior lies more than two kilometers below sea level while, at the coast, the bottom of the glacier is quite shallow.

    The collapse of the Thwaites Glacier would cause an increase of global sea level of between 1 and 2 meters, with the potential for more than twice that from the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet.

    The new findings are reported in the PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences),

    Although the Amundsen Sea region is only a fraction of the whole West Antarctic Ice Sheet, the region contains enough ice to raise global sea levels by 1.2 meters. Image Credit: NASA/GSFC/SVS

    Foll

  • An Early Double Dissolution? Don’t Hold Your Breath!

    Home  »  Uncategorized   »   An Early Double Dissolution? Don’t Hold Your Breath!

    An Early Double Dissolution? Don’t Hold Your Breath!

    Posted in Uncategorized By Neville On June 3, 2014

    Hold Your Breath!

    An Early Double Dissolution? Don’t Hold Your Breath!

    Posted in Uncategorized By Neville On May 27, 2014

    « JSCEM Recommends Optional Preferential Voting for the Senate | Main | Queensland set for another By-Election »

    May 19, 2014

    An Early Double Dissolution? Don’t Hold Your Breath!

    The tedious topic of a double dissolution seems to be doing the rounds again. In particular, there seems to be quite a lot of badly informed commentary on political blog sites on how a double dissolution would be brought on.

    Let me quote one website commentator who manages to encapsulate these misunderstandings in two sentences.

    “There will be a DD in early 2015 whether Abbott wants it or not (he very unlikely to want it as by then 2PP polling will be something like 60-40 against him!). Shorten will deny him supply, and rightly so.”

    This comment is wrong for two fundamental constitutional reasons. First, a Prime Minister may choose to call a double dissolution election but they cannot be forced to call one. Second, you cannot get a double dissolution from blocking a supply bill, though a government may choose to call a double dissolution on other grounds because supply is blocked.

    So let me go through the mechanism of a double dissolution and also clear up this issue with supply bills.

    The key point to make is that a double dissolution of the House and the whole Senate, followed by an election and possibly a joint sitting, is a significant constitutional event, not some euphemism for an early election.

    The double dissolution mechanism is set out in section 57 of the Constitution. It was drafted and endlessly debated in the 1890s constitutional conventions. It was a constitutional mechanism that allowed a government with a majority in the House of Representatives to overcome the blocking power of the Senate.

    The need for some method to resolve deadlocks between the House and Senate was created by the decision to give the Senate virtually co-equal powers with the House, something that was unworkable under the Westminster model of responsible government unless a deadlock provision was provided.

    As it was envisaged, Section 57 was a mechanism that would allow the population of the larger states as represented by the majority government in the House of Representatives to overcome the blocking power of the smaller states in the Senate. While the Senate never became the state assembly imagined by the constitutional drafters, the double dissolution power was still an important mechanism and has been used six times.

    The double dissolution power is unique to the Commonwealth constitution. It was a power created for the Governor-General to use in their name, not as the representative of the Queen. It is a power created by the Constitution and is not a reserve power inherited from the British Monarch.

    Putting the double dissolution mechanism in dot points, it consists of the following steps –

    • A bill must first pass the house and then be rejected, fail to pass or be unacceptably amended by the Senate.
    • After a period of three months, the bill may be re-presented to the House. After its passage through then House, if it is again rejected, fails to pass or is unacceptably amended by the Senate, then the legislation has become a ‘trigger’ for a double dissolution.
    • The Prime Minister may choose to use one or more triggers as ground for a double dissolution of both chambers followed by an election for the House and the whole Senate. This is not allowed to take place in the last six months of the House’s term.
    • After the election the legislation must be presented to the new House, and after its passage, must be presented to the new Senate.
    • If the Senate again rejects, fails to pass or unacceptably amends the legislation, then the Prime Minister can request that the Governor-General summon a joint sitting of the two chambers sitting and voting as one on the legislation. At the joint sitting, a simple majority of those members and senators present can pass the legislation which is then signed into law by the Governor General. A legislative (as opposed to ceremonial) joint sitting cannot occur without a double dissolution election having first taken place, and no other legislation can be considered at a joint sitting.

    The originally drafted Section 57 contained a requirement that three-fifths support was required for a bill to pass at a joint sitting. This was part of the draft constitution that failed to pass in NSW at the 1898 referendum. NSW Premier George Reid had the provisioned weakened to requiring a simple majority, one of several changes that strengthened the power of the Commonwealth government and the power of the larger states and led to the acceptance of the Constitution at a second referendum in 1899.

    This mechanism can be used for normal legislation but is almost impossible to be used in relation to appropriation and supply bills.

    The term ‘supply’ has a specific meaning for the parliament, but in its common use means the main Appropriation Bills that sets out how much money has been set aside for the normal working of each department in the next 12 months.

    The current appropriation bills were introduced with the budget speech last Tuesday. They specify how much money each government department can spend between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2015. These bills are in the process of passing the House, will soon go to the Senate, and have to be passed by by both houses before 30 June this year or government will cease to function on 1 July.

    That is why the blockage of the Appropriation bill cannot be a trigger for a double dissolution. As currently formulated, it is not possible for the Appropriation bills to be defeated and the parliament come back and debate them again in three months time. The government would have run out of money by then.

    Budgets usually include other pieces of legislation covering detail of the budget. For instance the current budget will require legislation or regulation changes that cover pensions, tax rates, Medicare and the like. Any legislation of this type could be used as a double dissolution trigger after a second blockage, though regulation disallowance couldn’t. Oppositions tend to be selective in deciding which budget measures to oppose, the least popular measures being least likely to become double dissolution triggers.

    Unless there is other legislation that the government can use as a trigger to obtain a double dissolution, the blockage of supply can only force a House of Representatives election. There is no ability for the blockage of Appropriation bills as currently formulated to be used as a double dissolution trigger.

    So what happened to produce double dissolutions in 1974 and 1975 following the blockage of budget bills?

    The answer is that both of those double dissolutions had a background in the blockage of supply or appropriation bills, but in both cases it was triggers created by other blocked legislation that permitted double dissolutions to take place.

    A key point of difference between today and the Whitlam government is the timing of the budget. Today the budget is in May and the appropriation bills cover the whole of the next financial year. Until the mid-1980s the budget was in August, and what is more correctly known as a ‘supply’ bill was passed in May to authorize government expenditure between 1 July and 30 November, pending the passage of the budget.

    In 1974 it was the blockage of the interim supply bill that saw Gough Whitlam advise for a double dissolution based on six other pieces of legislation. Whitlam warned the Senate he would do this if it blocked supply, and the holding of the election was made easier as the election replaced an already announced separate half-Senate election.

    In 1975, the Opposition controlled Senate deferred the passage of the budget bills, demanding the government first announce the holding of an election. The government had interim supply to get it through to 30 November, perhaps longer if it saved money on its spending.

    In the end the Governor-General Sir John Kerr intervened to resolve the on-going deadlock before the supply period ran out. He appointed Opposition Leader Malcolm Fraser as Prime Minister, who promptly authorized his Senate members to pass the budget, and then requested a double dissolution based on other Whitlam government legislation. The subsequent Fraser government made no attempt to revive the legislation used as the basis for the double dissolution.

    If the budget bills had not been passed by the Senate on 11 November 1975, then Kerr and Fraser would have been in a very messy constitutional pickle by being unable to fund the holding of an election. But that is a scenario for alternative histories rather than relevant to today.

    For historical reasons I do not believe the Labor Party will even consider blocking the appropriation Bills. The Labor Party has demonized conservative controlled upper houses that blocked supply against Labor governments in Tasmania in 1925 and 1947, the Cain Labor government in Victoria in 1947, and the Whitlam government in 1974 and 1975.

    That using upper houses to block supply and bring on an election is a last resort weapon can be shown by the reticence of Coalition controlled Legislative Councils in the early 1990s to block supply and bring down the Lawrence Labor government in WA or Kirner Labor government in Victoria.

    The only time the Labor Party has voted against supply in an upper house in a situation where it would bring down a government was in Victoria in 1952, and that was a much more complex case involving a government that also lacked a lower house majority.

    But let me assume for a moment that the Labor Party would go against its history and vote with the Greens in the Senate to defeat the Appropriation Bills. What happens next?

    First, if the government chose to call an election of any sort, an interim supply bill would have to be passed allowing government to continue functioning from 1 July until a new parliament could convene.

    When the Hawke government announced its intention to call a double dissolution election for early July 1987, it had to continue with the sitting of parliament until supply had been passed to cover the period until after the election.

    But what election could the government call? At this stage the only option is for a separate House election. There couldn’t be a half-Senate election and there could not be a double dissolution because no trigger exists that would permit Section 57 to come into play.

    There are several pieces of legislation concerning the repeal of the Gillard’s climate change legislation that could become triggers in the near future. (You can see a full list of possible future triggers via this link.)

    Of these bills, the only one that has passed back through the House and been re-presented to the Senate is the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013. If this were defeated in the next month, it would permit the calling of a double dissolution once interim supply was arranged.

    But using this bill as a double dissolution trigger would be the Prime Minister’s choice. If supply was blocked and the government was forced to an election, the Prime Minister could call a House election. Even if the Prime Minister had a double dissolution trigger, it is his choice to use it. The government can be forced to an election but it can’t be forced to a double dissolution.

    But two final political points also need to be kept in mind.

    First, any attempt to hold a double dissolution under the Senate’s current electoral system would be almost impossible. There would be even more parties and candidates contesting given the near halving of the quota for election. There will not be another election until changes are made to the Senate’s electoral system. Those changes can be legislated quickly but will need time to be implemented before an election can be held.

    A second political point is that the Abbott government’s budget is not the sort of budget you introduce if you desire an early election. It is the classic tough first term budget introduced in the hope that in three years time the anger will have subsided and the economy and budget would be in a better position.

    So everyone should just calm down and understand that in all likelihood the current government will be in place until the second half of 2016.

    Even if the government gets multiple double dissolution triggers, it will not use those triggers unless it thinks it can win the subsequent election.

    It is noteworthy that having floated the idea of a double dissolution last week, the government has quickly talked down the suggestion.

    In my opionion there is not going to be a double dissolution in the near future, and even in the more distant future, I cannot see any possibility of a double dissolution before late 2015 or the first months of 2016. Even then, a double dissolution will not occur unless the government thinks it will win.

    Posted by on May 19, 2014 at 02:28 PM in Double Dissolutions,

  • Trouble in the Antarctic

    Why this ad?
    Australian Debt Reliefdebtrelief.com.au – Eliminate your debt w/Debt Relief Fill in our free debt analysis form
    I am posting these items to allow readers access to scientific reports on what is
    happening in our polar regions. Scientists can only predict Ice Melt and sea level rise based on their studies. No one has a crystal ball that can give exact figures or indeed when events may happen
    Neville

    Typo correction

    Inbox
    x
    Neville Gillmore
    David Suggest would have to be be (omitted) Warming of 0.2°C from a month of …
    8:45 PM (2 hours ago)

    David Spratt
    many thanks, fixed.
    8:50 PM (2 hours ago)

    Neville Gillmore
    David.. Have you compiled a similar report on the Antarctic Icemelt please? I…
    9:08 PM (1 hour ago)

    David Spratt

    10:53 PM (3 minutes ago)

    to me
    Hi Neville,
    Sorry, i haven’t but I will when the Breakthrough conference is over in two weeks.
    Best single article was this piece by the lead researcher in the Guardian:
    Interesting what the research published in May found was very similar to the story we told in Climate Code Red in 2008 in Chapter 3:
    Trouble in the Antarctic
     
    Big changes are also underway at the other end of the world,
    in the Antarctic, where most of the world’s ice sits on the fi fthlargest
    continent. The majority of Antarctic ice is contained in
    the East Antarctic ice sheet — the biggest slab of ice on Earth,
    which has been in place for some 20 million years and which,
    if fully melted, would raise sea levels by more than 60 metres.
    Considered more vulnerable is the smaller West Antarctic
    ice sheet, which contains one-tenth of the total Antarctic ice
    volume. If it disintegrated, it would raise sea levels by around
    5 metres, a similar amount to what we would see with a total
    loss of the Greenland ice sheet.
     
    While it was generally anticipated that the West Antarctic
    sheet would be more stable than Greenland at a 1–2 degree
    rise, recent research demonstrates that the southern ice shelf
    reacts far more sensitively to warming temperatures than
    scientists had previously believed. Ice-core data from the
    Antarctic Geological Drilling joint project (being conducted
    by Germany, Italy, New Zealand, and the United States) shows
    that ‘massive melting’ must have occurred in the Antarctic
    three million years ago, during the Miocene–Pliocene period,
    when the average global temperature in the oceans increased
    by only 2–3 degrees above the present temperature. Geologist
    Lothar Viereck-Götte called the results ‘horrifying’, and
    suggested that ‘the ice caps are substantially more mobile and
    sensitive than we had assumed’.
     
    The heating effect caused by climate change is greatest
    at the poles, and the air over the West Antarctic peninsula
    has warmed nearly 6 degrees since 1950. At the same time,
    according to a report in the Washington Post on 22 October
    2007, a warming sea is melting the ice-cap edges, and beech
    trees and grass are taking root on the ice fringes.
     
    Another warning sign was the rapid collapse in March 2002
    of the 200-metre-thick Larsen B ice shelf, which had been stable
    for at least twelve thousand years, and which was the main
    outlet for glaciers draining from West Antarctica. An ice shelf
    is a fl oating sheet, or platform, of ice. Largely submerged, and
    up to a kilometre thick, the shelf abuts the land and is formed
    when glaciers or land-based ice fl ows into the sea. Generally,
    an ice shelf will lose volume by calving icebergs, but these are
    also subject to rapid disintegration events. Larsen B, weakened
    by water-fi lled cracks where its shelf attached to the Antarctic
    Peninsula, gave way in a matter of days, releasing fi ve hundred
    billion tonnes of ice into the ocean.
     
    Neil Glasser of Aberystwyth University and Ted Scambos
    from the NSIDC found that as glacier fl ow had begun to
    increase during the 1990s, the ice shelf had become stressed.
    The warming of deep Southern Ocean currents (which
    increasingly reach the Antarctic coastline) had also led to
    some thinning of the shelf, making it more prone to breaking
    apart. Scambos concludes that ‘the unusually warm summer
    of 2002, part of a multi-decade trend of warming [that is]
    clearly tied to climate change, was the fi nal straw’.
     
    Looking at the overall pace of events, Scambos says: ‘We
    thought the southern hemisphere climate is inherently more
    stable, [but] all of the time scales seem to be shortened now.
    These things can happen fairly quickly. A decade or two of
    warming is all you need to really change the mass balance …
    Things are on more of a hair trigger than we thought.’
    Much of the West Antarctic ice sheet sits on bedrock that
    is below sea level, buttressed on two sides by mountains, but
    held in place on the other two sides by the Ronne and Ross
    ice shelves; so, if the ice shelves that buttress the ice sheet
    disintegrate, sea water breeching the base of the ice sheet will
    hasten the rate of disintegration.
     
    In 1968, the Ohio State University glaciologist John Mercer
    warned, in the journal of the International Association of
    Scientifi c Hydrology, that the collapse of ice shelves along
    the Antarctic Peninsula could herald the loss of the ice sheet
    in West Antarctica. A decade later, in 1978, his views received
    a wider audience in Nature, where he wrote: ‘I contend that a
    major disaster — a rapid deglaciation of West Antarctica — may
    be in progress … within about 50 years.’ Mercer said that
    warming ‘above a critical level would remove all ice shelves, and
    consequently all ice grounded below sea level, resulting in the
    deglaciation of most of West Antarctica’. Such disintegration,
    once under way, would ‘probably be rapid, perhaps
    catastrophically so’, with most of the ice sheet lost in a century.
    Credited with coining the phrase ‘the greenhouse effect’ in the
    early 1960s, Mercer’s Antarctic prognosis was widely ignored
    and disparaged at the time, but this has changed.
     
    ( James Hansen says it was not clear at the time whether
    Mercer or his many critics were correct, but those who labelled
    Mercer an alarmist were considered more authoritative and
    better able to get funding. Hansen believes funding constraints
    can inhibit scientifi c criticisms of the status quo. As he wrote
    in New Scientist on 28 July 2007: ‘I believe there is pressure
    on scientists to be conservative.’ Hansen is responsible for
    coining the term ‘The John Mercer Effect’, meaning to play
    down your fi ndings for fear of losing access to funding or of
    being considered alarmist.)
     
    Another vulnerable place on the West Antarctic ice sheet
    is Pine Island Bay, where two large glaciers, Pine Island and
    Thwaites, drain about 40 per cent of the ice sheet into the sea.
    The glaciers are responding to rapid melting of their ice shelves
    and their rate of fl ow has doubled, whilst the rate of mass loss
    of ice from their catchment has now tripled. NASA glaciologist
    Eric Rignot has studied the Pine Island glacier, and his work
    has led climate writer Fred Pearce to conclude that ‘the glacier
    is primed for runaway destruction’. Pearce also notes the work
    of Terry Hughes of the University of Maine, who says that the
    collapse of the Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers — already the
    biggest causes of global sea-level rises — could destabilise the
    whole of the West Antarctic ice sheet. Pearce is also swayed by
    geologist Richard Alley, who says there is ‘a possibility that the
    West Antarctic ice sheet could collapse and raise sea levels by 6
    yards [5.5 metres]’, this century.
     
    Hansen and fellow NASA Goddard Institute for Space
    Studies researcher Makiko Sato agree:
     
    The gravest threat we foresee starts with surface melt
    on West Antarctica, and interaction among positive
    feedbacks leading to catastrophic ice loss. Warming in
    West Antarctica in recent decades has been limited by
    effects of stratospheric ozone depletion. However, climate
    projections fi nd surface warming in West Antarctica
    and warming of nearby ocean at depths that may attack
    buttressing ice shelves. Loss of ice shelves allows more
    rapid discharge from ice streams, in turn a lowering and
    warming of the ice sheet surface, and increased surface
    melt. Rising sea level helps unhinge the ice from pinning
    points … Attention has focused on Greenland, but the
    most recent gravity data indicate comparable mass loss
    from West Antarctica. We fi nd it implausible that BAU
    [‘business-as-usual’] scenarios, with climate forcing and
    global warming exceeding those of the Pliocene, would
    permit a West Antarctic ice sheet of present size to survive
    even for a century.
     
    Even in East Antarctica, where total ice loss would produce
    a sea-level rise of 60 metres, mass loss near the coast is greater
    than the mass increase inland (mass increase inland is caused
    by the extra snowfall generated from warming-induced
    increases in air humidity).
     
    While the inland of East Antarctica has cooled during
    the last 20 years, the coast has become warmer, with
    melting occurring 900 kilometres from the coast and in the
    Transantarctic Mountains, which rise up to an altitude of 2
    kilometres.
     
    Research published in January 2008 by Rignot and six of
    his colleagues shows that ice loss in Antarctica has increased
    by 75 per cent in the last ten years due to a speed-up in the
    fl ow of its glaciers, so that the ice loss there is now nearly as
    great as that observed in Greenland.