“Australia is one of the world’s largest exporters of Liquified Natural Gas but, despite this fact, the largely foreign-owned gas industry has been making the bizarre claim that there is a shortage of gas in Australia,” said Dr Denniss.
“Peter Dutton’s rejection of that silly claim, and his proposal to tax gas exports to encourage greater local supply, is a watershed in Australian energy policy debate.”
Research by The Australia Institute shows that more than 80 percent of gas produced in Australia has been used for exports, and more than half of those gas exports were given away, royalty-free, to the gas exporters.
“Putting a tax on gas exports is an easy way to ensure that more of Australia’s gas flows to Australians and that they pay less for it,” said Dr Denniss.
“Introducing a cap on gas exports as well would be an even better way to both protect Australians from cost-of-living pressures and protect the climate from increased emissions from burning gas.
“The opportunity for Labor to expand on the Coalition’s policy is enormous.
“For decades, the major parties in Australia have seemed afraid to put the interests of Australian taxpayers ahead of the profits of the fossil fuel industry.
“But now that Peter Dutton has made the first step, the opportunities for the new parliament are unprecedented.
Princeton University has invited former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett to speak on Monday April 7 at 7pm. His visit is part of his tour across North American campuses, including Harvard, Columbia, and Yale, which coincides with the deportations, detainments, and disappearances of students at these same campuses by the Trump administration for protesting Israel’s war on the Palestinian people.
In this press conference, the New Jersey community of Palestinian, African-American, Jewish and civil rights advocates stand against the invitation of a man who has a history of racist policies and racist rhetoric. Bennett should be in prison, not in Princeton.
It can be hard to wrest one's attention from Trump's destruction of the world financial markets, but this morning the United State has moved one step closer to an absolute showdown between Trump's executive branch and the federal judiciary. The way it is shaping up also has the potential to tell us everything we need to know about the Roberts Court's willingness to well and truly destroy U.S. constitutional democracy.
Last week, federal District Court Judge Paula Xinis ordered the Trump regime to do everthing possible to return Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia from an El Salvador prison to the United States by 11:59 pm Eastern on April 7, 2025 – tonight. Today, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld this order, refusing the Trump executive's request for a stay, a pause in its taking effect. Both Xinis's opinion below and Judge Thacker's opinion in support of the Fourth Circuit decision deserve to be read in full. Thacker's bottom line:
The Tasmanian salmon industry has conceded that – following a recent mass death event on the state’s east coast – salmon from diseased commercial pens are being sold for human consumption.
It comes just days after the Albanese government and Dutton coalition worked together to ram through amendments to the Environmental Protection and Biosecurity Conservation Act, weakening the nation’s environment laws, specifically to protect the compromised salmon industry.
Questions now need to be answered by the federal Minister for Fisheries, Julie Collins, who is also the local member of Franklin in Southern Tasmania and has previously brushed aside problems with the salmon industry as a state issue.
It is now open for one of the multiple state ministers responsible for the Tasmanian Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE), including Eric Abetz and Jane Howlett, to show leadership and inform everyone what, if any, steps they will take to protect the Tasmanian community and economy from an industry that is out of control.
“The Saturday Paper’s revelations are deeply disturbing. Anyone still eating salmon should beware,” said Eloise Carr, Director, The Australia Institute Tasmania.
“Salmon Tasmania has admitted that diseased fish are being sold for human consumption. It is now also apparent that fish full of antibiotics are being sold on supermarket shelves.
Hello readers, apologies for my extended absence. It has been a little more than three weeks since my last piece, simultaneously published by Notes On The Crises and Rolling Stone, assessing the extremely alarming implications of the Federal Government taking 80.5 million dollars right out of New York City’s bank account. This temporary hiatus came out of a large set of background organizational and investigative reasons. The organizational reasons include some exciting expansion of Notes on the Crises which I will be able to go into detail about soon. While I will have updated on payments system issues later this week, some of the most challenging aspects of my investigative reporting are still ongoing. Thank you for bearing with me and stay tuned: I think you’ll find that what I have coming is worth the wait. Of course, I have a lot to catch up on…
A competitive and diverse news industry is key to a democratic society, keeping institutions accountable and transparent. But the ability of Australia’s Fourth Estate to perform that role is increasingly in doubt.
Australia was once labelled the “land of the newspaper” by British visitors, with a flourishing and diverse news industry, but for over a century its newspaper market has only become more concentrated and less competitive. In 1903 there were 21 daily newspapers in the capital cities, with 17 different owners; By the 1950s it was 15, with ten different owners. Now it’s even worse.
With an easy-to-follow decision tree and how-to examples, this report can equip you to respond across a range of situations— and lays the groundwork for you to create responses aligned with your own aims.
False narratives about refugees and migrants are increasingly shaping public opinion—both in Australia and globally. Understanding how misinformation works, and knowing when and how to respond, is crucial for fostering informed, fact-based discussions. Source
While the focus is on addressing misinformation in the Australian debate about refugees and migration, the framework can be adapted for use in other countries and across a variety of issues.
JUAREZ, Mexico – On New Year’s Eve 2020, as President-elect Joe Biden was at home in Delaware celebrating his imminent move into the White House, a mob of some 300 Cubans stormed out of Juárez, Mexico, in a mad banzai charge over one of the international bridges toward El Paso, Texas.
They swept past Mexican border guards, leapt pell-mell the wrong way over Mexican pay turnstiles, and sprinted for America in a crisscrossing stampede through traffic over the bridge lanes.
But alas, the outgoing Donald Trump was still in office, and his U.S. Customs and Border Protection Mobile Field Force, already riot-ready and waiting behind heavy concrete blocks tipped by concertina wire, stopped the migrant charge cold. Bunched up behind the barricades, the foiled mob loosed a telling chant:
“Bi-den! Bi-den! Bi-den! Bi-den! Bi-den!”
“They should let us pass. We are calling out to Mexico and the U.S. and to Biden, the new U.S. president, to remind him of the presidential campaign promises he made, to make him aware we are here,” said one of them, Raul Pino Gonzalez of Havana, to a Cuban news reporter.
A Non-Denial Denial: An independent traffic analysis of the proposed $7.5 billion Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) project shows that it won’t solve the actual traffic bottleneck between Portland and Vancouver. In response, bridge advocates have offered a statement purporting to dispute the study, which actually doesn’t deny its accuracy.
I loathe putting my thesis first (the thesis-first tradition is directly descended from people who didn’t actually believe that persuasion is possible), but here I will. The way that a lot of liberals, progressives, and pro-democracy people are talking about GOP support for authoritarianism is neither helpful nor accurate. Both the narrative about how we got here and the policy agenda for what we should do now are grounded in assumptions about rhetoric that are wrong. And they’re narratives and assumptions that come from the Enlightenment.
IBR and Metro effectively admit critics are right about problems with their traffic modeling
The real traffic problems on I-5 are outside the IBR project area, and won’t be solved by the $7.5 billion project
The documented errors in traffic modeling undercut the case for this megaproject, and show it would make traffic and pollution worse and would be a tragic waste of resources.
In October, the Just Crossing Alliance released a scathing report from national traffic expert Norm Marshall, finding that the traffic modeling for the proposed $7.5 billion Interstate Bridge project is badly flawed, and that the project will do nothing to relieve chronic congestion in I-5, because the critical bottleneck lies outside the project area. As Marshall said succinctly:
“The congestion is caused by bottlenecks to the south—at North Lombard in the southbound a.m. peak and at Victory Boulevard in the p.m. northbound peak, and there is no possibility that widening the bridge can address those problems.”
It was clear the Reserve Bank was unwilling to make a decision on Tuesday because of uncertainty regarding the leveling of tariffs by the Trump administration.
Although it was clear even at the time that Trump’s tariff policy would result in a slowing of the global economy and risk rising unemployment here in Australia, now that the scale of the tariffs is known, the RBA should reconvene and cut rates rather than wait until May 19-20.
The Reserve Bank should get on the front foot and do what markets and economists know is an almost certain rate cut.
Inflation is well within the target. Indeed, should the inflation figures for the first three months of this year be only slightly below average, the official CPI risks falling below 2%.
“The risks of the economy slowing more than anticipated are now heightened due to the Trump tariffs,” said Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at The Australia Institute.
“The Reserve Bank was wrong not to cut rates on Tuesday. The Australia Institute has been calling for those cuts to help bolster spending and deliver relief to households who have suffered from price rises that are not of their own doing.
“Waiting until nearly the end of May is far too long. The RBA should be nimble enough to realise that the tariffs levied by the USA are an unprecedented move that is already sending shockwaves through the world’s economy.
“It should get out in front and cut rates now rather than wait for Australia’s economy to be damaged further.”
On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg and Hayden discuss Trump’s tariffs, the Reserve Bank’s magic 8-ball monetary policy, and why minimum wage increases don’t drive up inflation.
This discussion was recorded on Thursday 3 April 2025 and things may have changed since recording.
Updated analysis by the Centre for Future Work at The Australia Institute reveals that a fair and appropriate increase to the minimum wage, and accompanying increases to award rates, would not have a significant effect on inflation.
The analysis examines the correlation between minimum wage increases and inflation going back to 1990, and finds no consistent link between minimum wage increases and inflation.
It also reveals that such an increase to award wages could be met with only a small reduction in profit margins.
The report, authored by Greg Jericho, based on previous work by both he and Jim Stanford, finds that an increase to the National Minimum Wage and award wages of between 5.8% and 9.2% in the Fair Work Commissions’ Annual Wage Review, due in June, is required to restore the real buying power of low-paid workers to pre-pandemic trends.
The report also finds that this would not significantly affect headline inflation.
James Hankins proposes a guest worker program that would address a half-century of shortcomings in American mass immigration policy. In its rare combination of hardheadedness and empathy, his argument calls to mind Victor Davis Hanson’s 2003 memoir/essay Mexifornia. Hankins is writing neither for economists nor for international lawyers, but for people who actually live in America and wish to do right by their neighbors, including the most recently arrived among them. This is going to be difficult.
We should be clear what Hankins means by “guest worker.” Aren’t illegal immigrants guest workers already? They are guests, after a fashion, and they do work. The expression “guest worker” means something different. Though the specifics can vary from country to country, the term means someone who is in the country where he works on sufferance. A guest worker has the right to work, but not necessarily the right to stay or become a citizen. Guest worker is an intermediate category between citizen and foreigner.
Hankins argues that elaborating such a special status for people would fix a few aspects of the present system that are especially unfair and perverse. By definition, illegal migrants do not belong here legally, but after long residence they may well belong here, and only here, culturally. What is more, their American-born children belong here unambiguously.
Full preferential voting is a proud Coalition reform – one that benefits every political persuasion
Compulsory voting and full preferential voting make up the backbone of Australian democracy, and protect us from voter suppression and disengagement seen in other countries. We owe both to the parties of the centre-right, what would become the Liberal–National Coalition.
Compulsory voting ensures that most Australians participate in elections. It removes the incentive for nasty campaigns to demoralise people so they do not bother to vote at all and deliberate maladministration to make voting so unpleasant for targeted groups that turnout is suppressed.
Both deliberate voter suppression and poor voter turnout are seen in countries without compulsory voting.
The reform was introduced federally in 1924 via a private member’s bill from the Nationalist Party reformer HJM Payne, nine years after a conservative government adopted it in Queensland. In the 1922 election, voter turnout was just under 60%; In 1925 – the first under compulsory voting – it rose to over 90%.
Why full preferential voting ensures your vote can’t be ‘wasted’
As for preferential voting, its great benefit is that it ensures that Australians cannot “waste” their vote. Under full preferential voting, Australians number every candidate according to their preference.
When newspapers began shutting down in big numbers a decade ago, it was hoped that moving online would broaden news diversity and ownership.
Sadly, the opposite has happened.
A new Australia Institute Discussion Paper reveals that many newspapers have moved online in name only.
It also found:
11 out of Australia’s 20 biggest cities have just one daily or weekly print newspaper.
Five of Australia’s eight capital cities have no competition in print news.
In 2008, there were just over 500 newspapers in Australia. In the following decade 106 shut.
The COVID pandemic was a mass-extinction event for Australian newspapers, with a further net decline of 184.
In 2024, 29 Australian Local Government Areas lacked a single local news outline, either in print or online.
“The vast majority of newspapers which stopped printing and told readers they were moving online have become little more than a social media page and subsection of a capital city newspaper website,” said Stephen Long, Senior Fellow and Contributing Editor at The Australia Institute.
“There are now many towns with no news outlet since the local paper shut down.
“That’s been a disaster for local journalism and local storytelling.
“Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was one of those who said newspapers moving online would lead to additional news diversity and avenues to competition.
“In the ten years since, the opposite has happened.
The Trump administration, including Elbridge Colby, who is soon to be confirmed as head of policy at the US Defence Department, is now telling Australia it needs to spend 3% of GDP on the military. That would be quite a large increase from what Australia currently spends, but rather than push back, both major political parties are fully in step with the view that Australia needs to spend more boosting our military.
The Treasurer, Jim Chalmers told reporters, “We’re taking defence spending from about 2 per cent of our economy to more than 2.3 per cent in the course of the next decade or so.” The Coalition also seems to be considering an advance on this position and lifting the military budget to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2029.
The budget papers explain just how much is being spent on both the ongoing military spending, as well as the capital investment.
For the capital investment, the budget papers give both “net capital investment” as well as “purchases of non-financial assets”. The main difference is that the former is adjusted for depreciation and amortisation, while purchases of non-financial assets are not adjusted. There really is no good reason for deducting depreciation and amortisation. They are both rather meaningless concepts when it comes to military assets – is anyone really caring about the decline in the commercial value of the tanks the army has? Moreover, almost all discussions of the budget balance etc are based on cash accounting, which excludes depreciation.
The American Mind’s ‘Editorial Roundtable’ podcast is a weekly conversation with Ryan Williams, Spencer Klavan, and Mike Sabo devoted to uncovering the ideas and principles that drive American political life. Stream here or download from your favorite podcast host.
The PBS is, literally, a life saver for Australian families.
The Australia Institute has compared the staggering difference between the prices Australians and Americans pay for some of the most common medicines in the world.
For example, Atorvastatin – a cholesterol pill which is among the top ten most prescribed drugs in Australia – is 125 times more expensive in the US. Australians pay $21.07 for a prescription of Atorvastatin. Americans are slugged $2,628.39 for the same medication.
A commonly used tablet for high blood pressure, Lisinopril, is almost 25 times more expensive in the US than in Australia.
More than 10 million Salbutamol asthma puffers are prescribed or sold over the counter in Australia each year. For every $30 Australians spend on these puffers, Americans are charged $50.
He and Bridget McKenzie say they will work out which jobs need to be cut when they are in government.
Australians – particularly the thousands who would lose their jobs – deserve better than a slogan without a shred of evidence that it will achieve anything.
Australia Institute research shows:
The Australian Public Service is not large in historical terms or by any international comparison.
Keeping public service employment numbers low is not efficient. Experience shows service delivery suffers and/or money is spent on contractors, consultants and labour hire workers to meet demand.
When the Albanese government took office, there was recognised under-investment in the public service. More staff were needed.
Underinvestment in the Australian Public Service was due to previous governments keeping public service numbers artificially low by placing a cap on staffing.
“Public service bashing without any detail is nothing more than cheap, nasty politics,” said Fiona Macdonald, Director of The Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work.
“Data from Services Australia reveals the recruitment of 5000 staff between 2023 and 2024 cut call waiting times to Centrelink by six minutes and calls to Medicare by nine minutes.
“It also resulted in cutting processing times for Paid Parental Leave claims from 25 days to four days, Job Seeker claims from 22 days to six days and online Medicare claims from 11 days down to two days.
On this episode of Follow the Money, Australia Institute economists Matt Grudnoff and Jack Thrower join Ebony Bennett to discuss the Australian economy and the federal election campaign.
This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 1 April 2025 and things may have changed.
The internet, from its inception, was created to be a tool of mass surveillance. It was developed first as a counterinsurgency tool for the Vietnam War and the rest of the Global South, but like many devices of foreign policy naturally it made its way back to U.S. soil. Yasha Levine, in his book Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet, chronicles the linear history of the internet’s birth at the Pentagon to its now ubiquitous use in all aspects of modern life. He joins host Chris Hedges on this episode of The Chris Hedges Report to explain the reality of the internet’s history.
It’s a reminder that despite women making up half the population, men outnumber women in most Australian parliaments and most party rooms.
Ten years ago the Liberal and Labor parties set the same target for women’s representation: 50% of parliamentarians to be women by 2025, this year.
While the Labor Party meets that target, the Liberal Party is far short of it.
When The Australia Institute crunched the numbers last year, male Liberal parliamentarians outnumbered female Liberal parliamentarians more than two to one.
The Liberal Party used to lead on women’s representation. Eight of the first 10 female federal MPs and Senators were Liberals.
Gough Whitlam’s “It’s time” win in 1972 included 93 male MPs and Senators – and not a single woman.
While things soon improved (it was not possible for them to get worse), it would be another three decades before the Labor Party was consistently more gender-representative than the Liberals at the federal level.
Nor were early Liberals opposed to quotas. As former Liberal senator Judith Troeth notes, “from 1944 the Liberal Party had reserved 50 per cent of the Victorian Division’s executive positions for women”.
The argument that quotas do not allow women to be selected on “merit” is facile: Coalition Cabinets always have a quota for National MPs.
The triumphal arch holds a very important place in the annals of Western architecture and urbanism. In Roman times it played a lofty honorific role, even though most Roman arches commemorated civic achievements and personages rather than military victories. The freestanding monumental arch was a syncretic creation, structurally derived from Etruscan gateways and decoratively enriched with Hellenistic architectural and sculptural forms. Its distinctive presence, which accommodated an astonishing variety in massing and detail, enriched towns and cities across the Roman empire, from Spain to Syria.
The monumental arch should be regarded as a universal entity—eminently appropriate, one would think, to a universal nation like these United States. The late, great historian of imperial Roman architecture, William L. MacDonald, noted how the arch corresponds to the classical concept of human proportions as delineated in Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man, in which a male figure is inscribed within an overlapping circle and square. The impost or “springing” of the opening within the arch corresponds, MacDonald noted, to the Vitruvian Man’s arms extended directly outward, while the curvilinear opening itself corresponds to his arms sweeping upward. The arch’s geometry thus addresses us as embodied beings. You can’t get more universal than that.
Media release number 2025-12: The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) today released a summary of the stakeholder feedback received in response to a consultation paper titled 'The Future System for Monetary Policy Implementation'. The feedback informed recent changes to the configuration of the RBA's open market operations (OMO), as discussed in a speech by Assistant Governor (Financial Markets) Christopher Kent.
Media release number 2025-11: The Reserve Bank of Australia's (RBA) new approach to monetary policy implementation – the 'ample reserves with full allotment' system – allows eligible counterparties to borrow as many reserves as they demand at open market operations (OMO). The RBA has recently announced some important updates to the operation of this system for monetary policy implementation, including the configuration of its OMO and the role of the overnight standing facility.
Our research has shown that minimum and award wage increases have no impact on inflation.
Those on the minimum wage are the poorest paid workers in Australia and they deserve to see their living standards improve.
The cost of living pressures of the past three years have hurt those on low incomes the most because the biggest price rises have been on necessities like food.
“Those on award wages have seen their real wage fall by nearly 4% since 2020 and they deserve a wage increase that will restore their living standards,” said Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at The Australia Institute.
“It is not surprising that business groups are arguing for a wage rise below inflation because that is what they always do.
“A decent wage rise for Australia’s poorest workers will not fuel inflation; it will only ensure those workers are able to keep their heads above water.”
Why do some cities seem to tackle complex challenges more effectively than others? Is Helsinki really able to address housing issues more nimbly than Sydney? If so, why? Or why does Cape Town excel in crisis response but not in addressing persistent problems like informal settlements? Our recently published research suggests that — at least in part — the answer lies not just in the cities themselves but in the broader environment in which they operate.
In his address to Congress this month, President Trump boasted—and justly so—of his administration’s astonishing success in stopping illegal border crossings over just six weeks. “Since taking office, my administration has launched the most sweeping border and immigration crackdown in American history. And we quickly achieved the lowest numbers of illegal border crossers ever recorded.” This is no Trumpian bombast: A 94% year-on-year reduction in illegal entries really is an unprecedented accomplishment. It is also a popular one: a majority of Americans approve of controlling the border.
An even larger majority—some 76%—approve of his policy of deporting undocumented aliens who have committed felonies. Even some on the Left like Jon Stewart have been wondering: if ICE knew exactly where to find all those murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and human traffickers, as clearly they did, why then did the Biden Administration never act to deport them? Good question.
