On the ABC’s 7.30 Report a couple of nights ago was a story that struck a very deep chord with me;

‘Renewable energy sector struggling’; http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2440907.htm

It is now more apparent than ever that our new PM is taking this country horribly in the wrong direction by not supporting the various forms of renewable energy, which are being boosted right up in other parts of the world, such as California under Governor Schwarzenegger. Obama has also promised huge inroads.

Australia is being left behind. Meanwhile we see Rudd’s Nation Building policy taking our country down the same old path of outdated infrastructure, not least on roads, and on a very active maintenance of extremely high population growth, as I mentioned in my last general thread;
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2357

Why on earth can’t he align his growth policy and job creation strategies with renewable energy?

There are massive numbers of jobs to be had in this sector. Why not place Australia at the cutting edge of this sort of thing, instead of allowing us to slip terribly behind, and then be beholden to countries that lead the way?

What about Environment Minister Garrett? My goodness, he is a terrible disappointment. He’s gone from one of my heroes when I was a Midnight Oil fan for a decade or more, to a sad sack if ever there was one. Check out what he had to say on the 7.30 Report in the link above.

This is extremely serious stuff. Where is Rudd’s headspace at with nation-building? Why is he so far off-track? Why don’t his colleagues or the Opposition object with the loudest of protests?

I agree Ludwig. It is in contrast with the government's environmental policy speak that it would support the automotive industries and others like aluminium without also supporting renewables industries.

A real commitment to reducing dependency on coal would be to roll out a domestic solar program that would see all new and older houses fitted with solar. In addition means testing the solar rebate was not in keeping with the government's claims of solid and progressive environmental credentials.

They're also doing what governments before them have done and watched while Australian innovations go overseas. We could have been exporting squillions of solar panels to California, creating jobs and raking it in. Instead we're sticking with the quarry model.

What a waste.

Ludwig, I think you know there are very powerful and influential vested interest groups that can hog-tie the aspirations of any well meaning politician whose life is only predicated by the time till the next election.

Q & A; If a government has enough backbone no one can hog tie them.

Ludwig; There is obviously a policy to build expressways as advocated
by Kevin Rudd on ABC1 TV last saturday.
Any large infrastructure project being started from about now will
be finished just in time not to need them. Here is a list that I know about.

The F3 to M2 dual road tunnel 8KM due to start 2009 2010.
Completion of motorway to Brisbane.
Second Sydney airport location not yet decided.
At least two new expressways in Melbourne.

There is a proposal to triplicate the rail line from Newcastle
to Strathfield for dedicated freight on one line and increased
passenger capacity for the Central Coast commuters at a cost of
$800 million.

Which infrastructure do you think will get the go ahead ?
Which infrastructure should get the go ahead ?

The ABC Child care fiasco is getting worse, the Government is putting
up another $30 million or so to continue till March.
A lady running child centres said that works out at a loss of $500,000
a year per centre so she doubts she will be taking up any of the centres on offer.

All in all it is becoming a real mess.
Rush out an spend they said. Put the money in the bank and the banks
will have more money to lend business and be able to employ people.
Spend it on TVs etc and a big percentage will end up in China.
I really don't think they understand how it works.

Oh dear Oh dear.

"There are massive numbers of jobs to be had in this sector. Why not place Australia at the cutting edge of this sort of thing, instead of allowing us to slip terribly behind, and then be beholden to countries that lead the way?"

Ludwig,
That sounds good in theory. Maybe "The Lucky Country" tag we have is because we've managed to have a great standard of living by taking a back seat on development and simply adopting the technological gains made by other countries. We effectively trade our primary products for manufactured products and technologies. It seems to work. And we don't have the entrepreneurship/slum divide that the US does. Just the quarry/beach epithet. Not great, but we can comfortably live with it.

Another reason for our somewhat stunted industrial status is the US got a big jump start on all other developed nations. It seems each time a home grown company gets to a certain level of productivity and maturity in Australia, it either feels the need to go offshore or it gets bought out by bigger overseas companies. The buds are always being nipped.

So, as we can't go head to head with the bigger players, we have to find our niche in the right sized market. It takes time.

I agree about Garrett. He just seems to throw around political lines. He's not very convincing