Catallaxy Files

Sinclair has discussed a couple of paragraphs from the Trenberth op ed, but forgive me for offering my two cent’s worth.

The 456 words of this op ed, presumably written by Trenberth and signed by 37 of his friends and colleagues is dwarfed by the 532 words used to list the author and his co-signers and their various credentials. It is typical of the folly of appealing to authority / credentials rather than mounting a sensible argument.

That 38 people would put their names to such a pathetic attempt at defence says a lot about their character and aptitude. After studying a second-rate ‘science’ and enjoying a long period of excessive returns for that study, they are now finding life is becoming a little more difficult and their views are coming under attack by scientists considerably more intelligent than these 38. Is this the best they can do?

So pathetic is the piece, it is irresistible to pull it apart.

Do you consult your dentist about your heart condition?

Well, yes. Dental health is an excellent indicator of one’s heart condition.

In science, as in any area, reputations are based on knowledge and expertise in a field and on published, peer-reviewed work.

Read the rest of this entry »

In an article in The Punch, Senator Matt Thislethwaite (formerly Deputy Secretary of Unions NSW) promises to provide

just the facts on Labor’s workplace reforms

The good Senator then states

A simple measure of unsuccessful bargaining in workplaces is the number of days lost due to industrial disputes. Since 1991 the number of days lost to industrial disputes has been falling. In 1991 the average days lost during the year was 239.4 days per 1000 employees.

To compare, last year the figure was 15.9 days lost per 1000 employees. This is a significant drop. There has been an average reduction in days lost to industrial disputes almost every year for the past two decades.

And provides this chart

Well, yes, Industrial Disputes Australia (Cat. No. 6321.0.55.001) shows that there were 15.9 days lost per 1000 employees during the last financial year. But it also shows that in the September quarter (the most recent publication, released on 1 December 2011), that there were 10.1 days lost per 1000 employees: an annual rate of 40.4 days. Thislethwaite also states

Since the introduction of the Fair Work Act, this figure has not risen higher than 20 days lost per 1000 employees.

With 10.1 days in the first quarter of 2011-12, it is likely that 20 days lost per 1000 employees will be exceeded this year.

Here is an alternative way to show the ABS data, with the trend not being quite as favourable to the good Senator’s argument.

 Thislethwaite seems to have a poor grasp on the concept of productivity. Here he seems focused on Keating’s 1992 industrial relations reforms, criticising Work Choices but neglecting to mention the likely impact of the Rudd/Gillard backsliding on industrial relations. These most recent examples of labour market policies, which reduce the flexibility of bargaining and which lead to higher wages without higher commensurate productivity tradeoffs, are more likely to lead to higher unemployment and lower productivity growth. Here, too, Thislethwaite seems to hitch his wagon to labour productivity rather than multi-factor productivity.

Although Thislethwaite is a Senator, he would do well to read the Productivity Commission’s submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics which is an excellent guide to productivity issues in Australia.

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh has announced that the Queensland election will be held on 24 March but that she will not go to the Governor, Penny Wensley, to advise a dissolution until 19 February. This means she will have more than two weeks before the caretaker conventions apply.

This is an outrage and unprecedented.

The Queensland Constitution, however, does not state the form in which advice by the Premier to the Governor should be received. The announcement of the election date by Bligh is therefore sufficient for Wensley to act – she should treat that as advice by the Premier (which it is) and dissolve Parliament and issue the writs for election. This would bring forward the caretaker period.

This would be the responsible and ethical duty of the Governor.

Not so long ago there was a clear distinction between news and opinion, with the former dominating. This has changed substantially over the past decades, especially with the advent of blogs. Opinion now dominates – perhaps reflecting growing demand for commentary.

There is nothing wrong with the relative growth of opinion over news – it helps us understand the world and to make sense of events. Yet we need to read opinion with care – there is an inherent bias in opinion writing to which writers succumb.

Catallaxy too has a bias – we look at the world with a focus on the individual rather than the collective. We try to examine incentives which drive behaviour. Above all, Catallaxy writers understand opportunity cost. In a sense, Catallaxy has a ‘right wing’ bias, although it is a jewel amongst the predominantly left-wing blogs and opinion pieces in newspapers.

Catallaxy also is mainly about opinion, with the occasional example of news. When I speculated that Kevin Rudd would be deposed as Prime Minister that was opinion. When Sinclair reported that he had been deposed – that was news.

There are a number of ‘sins’ which now infect journalism:

• masquerading opinion as news
• not citing sources
• not checking facts
• excessive use of  pejorative adjectives (for example: “extreme right wing commentator” or “climate change denier”)
• ignoring evidence which contradicts the argument.

The events of Australia Day when activists attacked the Lobby restaurant leading to the evacuation of the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader from the restaurant bring further focus on the role of the press gallery and media management in the Prime Minister’s Office. Lazy reporting (and bias) has led to press gallery journalists repeating statements from the PMO as if it were news.

Sadly the Government’s ministerial offices are filled with juveniles out to make political points that would be shameful on a university campus let alone in the Federal Government. Under Rudd and Gillard the role of spin has grown out of control, probably taking the worst from the former NSW Labor government. Under previous Federal administrations – both Labor and Coalition  - there was a level of dignity and judgement to be observed in ministerial staffers, especially those employed in the senior offices such as the PMO and Treasurer’s Office. No longer. The worst examples of poor judgement seem  to come from the PMO.

Unfortunately journalists allow this to persist – being witting (or unwitting) accompanists to those juvenile pranks which bring dishonour to the institution of Government and to the Prime Minister.

So we need to change the incentives – a key focus of Catallaxy. One privilege reserved  to the press gallery journalist is the press pass (Parliament House pass). Any journalist who is shown to have abused his or her position, including by repeating Ministerial statements without checking or sourcing should have his or her Parliament House pass removed for life.

We would then see more “The Prime Minister’s Office said …” rather than repeating some line as if it were true.

Peter Slipper could now deliver the coup de grâce to the Gillard Government. He has become Speaker which will automatically increase his superannuation payment even if he were to resign today. He is going to lose the next election in any case, so he may as well leave with his increased superannuation and his name in the official records as the 29th Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Perhaps it is a cunning plan by Slipper? Knowing that Gillard would dump on Wilkie at the earliest opportunity, Slipper lured the Government with an offer to stand as Speaker. Then, by resigning, he would walk away with more money and help pull down a government that he has sworn to oppose.

The governance of Australia is in crisis. The worst and most incompetent Government in Australia’s history is contemplating re-installing the worst Prime Minister in Australia’s history.  The House of Representatives is led by a person, Peter Slipper, who commands no respect. The Governor-General is disappointing.

Our nation is exposed to external risks from the US and Europe, and seems to be hoping for continued strong economic growth from China. Talk about putting our eggs in one basket.

In all areas we have gone backwards – we have squandered our resources, and increased our vulnerability. Our fiscal policy is in shambles – the government lacking courage and relying on the efficiency dividend. Our immigration policy is disorderly. We continue to throw vast resources at white elephant projects like the NBN. Industrial relations policy has been moved back to pre-Keating days, with Unions having their snouts in the trough. Our foreign policy has been diverted to a golden dream of a temporary UN seat, compromising our moral suasion. Public hospitals are being overloaded at the expense of private hospitals. Education policy is on hold. Our nation is shackled with an expensive and ineffectual carbon tax, while pursuing inefficient and expensive ‘alternative energy’ projects, eschewing nuclear power.

Meanwhile, our politicians award themselves (through their agent of the Remuneration Tribunal) huge pay rises, which have filtered to senior public servants and which will ultimately filter throughout the public sector increasing further the cost of government.

In short, we are paying more for a worse government.

Meanwhile, the Coalition is defined as being NOT Labor, rather than staking out a credible alternative. While the polling is strongly against the Government, the Opposition has been unable (perhaps being too risk averse?) to stake out a claim for office in its own right.

Many of our politicians may have the capacity to be effective ministers if properly led. This applies to both the Coalition and Labor. Yet the current leadership cohort in both parties lacks depth and also lacks the gravity, dignity and credibility that some alternatives outside Parliament offer. Looking inside Parliament for leadership is a form of constrained optimisation.

To be sure, the present Coalition is considerably superior to the Government. But that is insufficient. There is a risk of a further period of minority government which would be a great disaster for the country. The sooner that we see that backs of Oakeshott, Windsor, Slipper etc the better. The disaffected vote will not lead to a strong and credible new government. In such circumstances, an elected Coalition government is likely to be weak and hence a period of political instability and uncertainty could continue beyond the next Parliament.

Peter Costello and Kim Beazley are the two obvious candidates to restore credibility, dignitity, wit and humour, and gravitas to the Parliament. We don’t need former prime ministers such as Keating and Howard to restore this dignity – they have had their time and it is now the duty of others to restore the Parliament to the public’s confidence.

Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus was was a famed roman General who was held up as a perfect role model for Roman values and virtues. He had retired to  his small farm when the Roman Republic called him up in 458 BC to serve as their leader in fighting the threat from the Aequians and the Sabines which at the time were threatening the republic. He agreed and immediately on defeating the tribes, resigned the dictatorship and returned to his farm. This action – to serve one’s country in its time of need but to willingly step down from power – was rightly seen as great example for future generations of Romans.

This model of virtue should be followed by Peter Costello and Kim Beazley who should announce their willingness to return to Parliament to serve their country in its time of need.

There is no need for Costello and Beazley to take office immediately. They would attract the support of their former colleagues and could nominate for a seat at the next election, acting as de facto party leaders until that time.

At a stroke, the return of Costello and Beazley would restore the public’s confidence, and lead to a certain stable, credible majority government while ensuring that the defeated party could restore its image and stature. The risk of a restored Costello without Beazley would be that Labor would be decimated and this would be bad for Australia’s democracy – we need a credible Opposition for good government.

Some might argue that Costello and Beazley do not have the ‘mongrel’ instinct. That they are too nice and are team players. But in fact this is precisely what we need in our Parliament. Being a team player and exhibiting loyalty are old-fashioned values which seem to have been lost in the present Parliament. They need to be restored and should be valued.

Peter and Kim: lay down your ploughs and come back to save our democracy.

Clover Moore’s $6.3 million fireworks display strikes me as one of those moments of excess which should give us cause to reflect on the state of our society. After all, Clover says that the theme is ‘Time to Dream’. Is it heralding the beginning of a new carbon neutral dawn – after all it is claimed that the event was ‘carbon neutral’ (wouldn’t it be nice if one could buy an ‘opportunity cost neutral’ permit)?

Why not celebrate with expensive and frivolous fireworks (and as pet owners know, they are also distressing) while creating an expensive and frivolous carbon tax? Meanwhile, we should congratulate the Maritime Union of Australia for its successful campaign to make Australia’s waterfront less competitive and less productive. A double win for the isolated Australian continent.

Imagine if the Romans had invented an equivalent to the ‘carbon permit’ – say a ‘wild animal permit’ which would ensure that the gladitorial and animal fights were fully offset? For every giraffe killed in an arena, another would be born to offset the loss? Surely then the Roman Empire would not have fallen? For the want of a technology – the equivalent to our carbon tax – the Roman Empire met its end.

One of the advantages of a fully searchable Hansard is that it can show an MP’s priorities (or at least the priorities which he or she claims).

For Nicola Roxon it is smoking and drinking.

She has spoken about these twin evils dozens of times. Yet not once has she mentioned (in Parliament) ‘marijuana’, ‘hashish’, ‘cannabis’, ‘cocaine’ or ‘crystal meth’. Her only mention of ‘crack’ is in the context of ‘crack down’. And ‘speed’ in the context of velocity.

She may not, as Health Minister, have been able to stop Jack the Insider from smoking, but she has no doubt stopped many young Australians from taking up the habit.

Now, as Attorney-General, she can take fight against smoking and drinking to a new level. Where even Jack the Insider will have to give up his habit.

Watching the Supreme Leader, Kim Jong-un, mourning his father, Kim Jong-il, I get the sense that he killed his father just as Caligula killed his adoptive grandfather Tiberius.

Read the rest of this entry »

News Limited estimates that it has cost taxpayers $15 billion for the Prime Minister to retain her job. While not her money, it does give an indication of the value (to the Labor Government in any case) of retaining government. Would there be a price to the taxpayer too high?