#MonetaryPolicy201 is a monthly series about the basics of monetary policy. It’s a “201” series because I will be grounding the basics of monetary policy on their largely forgotten legal foundations. The beginning of this series will focus on various aspects of the question “What is Money Finance”? This is Part 1. You will need a paid subscription to read entire articles in this series. Find the link for paid subscriptions, which are 50% off for a limited time, here. It is reader support which makes my Freedom of Information Act project, archival research and general writing possible.
Please recommend an institutional subscription to your academic library or employer (details here)
Transgender people are scrambling to update names, IDs, passports, and other documents out of fear of what a second Trump administration may bring. LGBTQ+ organizations have rushed to help in whatever ways they can.
Author and former speechwriter Don Watson joins Dr Emma Shortis on After America to discuss what Trump’s re-emergence reveals about the United States and how Australia might respond differently to a second Trump administration.
This discussion was recorded on Monday 9 December 2024 and things may have changed since recording.
At its meeting today, the Board decided to leave the cash rate target unchanged at 4.35 per cent and the interest rate paid on Exchange Settlement balances unchanged at 4.25 per cent.
The Reserve Bank of Australia had a great opportunity to give Australians – and the nation’s sluggish economy – something both desperately needed before Christmas.
But, once again, the RBA has failed.
By leaving interest rates on hold at 4.35%, the Reserve Bank has failed to do what is right for Australians.
It has failed to do what is right for the economy.
And it has failed to learn from its own mistakes.
Australians have suffered unnecessarily for too long. Cutting interest rates would have eased that suffering. Cutting interest rates would have provided some sensible stimulus to an economy which has almost ground to a halt.
“The RBA’s interest rate settings have smashed households and smashed businesses,” said Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at The Australia Institute.
“Headline inflation is within the bank’s target band. What is it waiting for?
“Last year’s review of the Reserve Bank criticised it for keeping rates on hold for 30 meetings in a row, when a rate cut would have stimulated a stagnating economy. It’s happening again.
“An interest rate cut today would not have been an act of Christmas goodwill. It would have been an act of common sense.
“Now, thanks to the RBA, many Australian families face an unnecessarily bleak Christmas.”
In October, I had the pleasure of seeing national security analyst, Dr Miah Hammond-Errey speak on a panel about mis- and dis-information at this year’s SXSW Sydney. I was impressed with her nuanced and informed take on the topic and how she described the data-extractive business models of digital platforms as key to understanding and therefore tackling mis- and dis-information. It aligned strongly with our thinking at Digital Rights Watch, that we need to disrupt the business models of Big Tech and digital platforms, rather than rely on content moderation as a solution to the mis- and dis-information problem, and the best way to do that is by strong and meaningful reform of our privacy law. In this interview, Miah reflects on the unlikely pairing of national security and privacy, the role of human rights and how we might regulate Big Tech.
Kate: Your background is in intelligence and national security, how did you become interested in privacy?
Miah: It is a good question! As a national security analyst, I am perhaps an unexpected privacy advocate. The short answer is that I had the luxury of analysing technology and security for my PhD and leadership roles and recognised that without addressing privacy vulnerabilities we cannot resolve the security vulnerabilities either.
Last year, scientists warned that the Maugean skate – a stingray-like marine animal dating back to the dinosaur era – was heading for extinction.
The Minister is now considering two separate reviews which will decide whether the skate survives – or becomes extinct.
The reason the skate is facing extinction is because, in 2012, the salmon industry was allowed to undertake a massive expansion of fish farms in Macquarie Harbour, the Maugean skate’s only habitat. One third of the Harbour is part of the Tasmania’s Wilderness World Heritage Area and the skate is one of its natural values.
Pollution from these large, foreign-owned fish farms has led to severely depleted oxygen levels in the harbour’s waters.
Now, the powerful salmon lobby – grossly exaggerating its importance to the local economy – wants to be exempt from environmental laws.
A newspaper advertisement promoting the petition states: “The salmon industry in Tasmania is owned by three foreign corporations, including JBS, which has been convicted of corruption. None of their salmon farms have paid company tax in Australia since 2019 according to Australian Tax Office data.”
“Australians are not stupid. They are starting to see through the lies and spin of these powerful multinational corporations,” said Eloise Carr, Director, The Australia Institute Tasmania.
“Now we need Australians to ensure their politicians don’t fall for the misinformation being spread by these corporations pillaging Australian waters.
This week, Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek decided not to reconsider the environmental impacts of three coal mines, mines that are almost big enough to swallow Sydney whole.
Owned by BHP, Mitsubishi and other multinational corporations, these mines will impact koalas, gliders and many other threatened species.
Minister Plibersek’s decision was not surprising.
The Environment Council of Central Queensland had previously asked her to reconsider other coal mines. She reconsidered … and then approved the mines anyway.
That decision set up the embarrassing situation of Australia’s Environment Minister fighting in court to approve coal mines, alongside mining companies against environment groups.
To be clear, when the Environment Minister had to choose a side – coal companies or the environment – she chose coal companies.
And there’s plenty more in the coal companies’ stockings.
Research out this week from The Australia Institute shows that the NSW government spends five times more money promoting coal than it has budgeted for helping mining communities’ transition away from coal.
The state’s four regional “Future Jobs and Investment Authorities” are supposed to “support communities reliant on the coal industry to secure their long-term economic future as the global demand for coal declines over time”.
These authorities have a combined initial budget of just $5.2 million and a promise of more money in 2028.
A fascinating biography of one of Australia’s most respected and well-regarded politicians.
An idealist as well as a pragmatist, and someone who believes passionately in equality, democracy and empowerment, Race Mathews has inspired and mentored many.
Race was principal private secretary to Gough Whitlam in the lead-up to Whitlam’s election as prime minister, then an MP in the Whitlam government, and later served in the Victorian Government as Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Community Services.
Race Mathews: A Life in Politics is the biography of a politician, academic, author and reformer, tracing the life of Race from childhood and his political awakenings to working for fellow Fabian and great mentor, Gough Whitlam, in ‘the most tumultuous, and by far the most rewarding’ time of his career. His key successes include helping to develop policies on education and Medibank (later Medicare), conducting a major review of the police force, gun control, improving disaster management after the 1983 Ash Wednesday bushfires, opening the Arts Centre on Southbank and establishing the Melbourne Writers’ Festival.
Drawing on a memoir Race began, but did not finish, and interviews, articles, speeches, books and her own diaries, Iola Mathews, journalist, author and Race’s partner for over fifty years, provides personal insight into the life and work of one of our most highly respected politicians. Watch the recording of the event below.
Instead of learning from the review they seem determined to repeat it. Meanwhile Australians suffer from an economy with higher interest payments, higher unemployment and more people struggling.
Before they make their decision on interest rates on Tuesday, the Reserve Bank board should read the RBA review, particularly where it criticised them for not reducing interest rates from 2016 to 2019. Back then, inflation was outside the RBA’s target band of 2% to 3% but, unlike today, it was not too high but too low. Inflation was less than 2% for almost that entire period.
Given the high rates of inflation over the last two and half years you might think, what’s the problem with low inflation? Isn’t inflation bad?
While high inflation can cause problems, so does low inflation. Low inflation means the economy is stagnating. It is a sign that it is not growing as fast as it could and because of that unemployment is higher than it needs to be. The correct monetary policy response to inflation being below the target band is to cut interest rates and stimulate the economy.
But back in 2016, rather than cut, the RBA kept rates on hold for a record 30 consecutive meetings. The longest period in RBA history. The review was scathing, saying this was responsible for approximately 270,000 additional people being out of work for a year.
So why didn’t the RBA cut rates?
It’s because they keep getting the link between unemployment and inflation wrong.
The federal government must prioritise ending Australia’s massive social housing shortfall, Everybody’s Home said, as a new report reveals housing stress is the fastest growing main factor triggering homelessness.
This year’s Australian Homelessness Monitorreports a 36 percent rise in new service users citing housing affordability stress as their primary reason for seeking support from homelessness services in the three years to 2023-24.
The research by UNSW in partnership with Homelessness Australia also found that in recent years, the risk of homelessness has been affecting a broader range of people, with an increasing proportion of workers seeking crisis support.
Everybody’s Home spokesperson Maiy Azize said: “Australia’s worsening housing crisis is fueling the rise in homelessness. People simply cannot afford insanely high rents week after week – it’s pushing many into housing stress, leading them to sleep in cars or improvised dwellings, and on couches or the streets.
They spoke of freedom and pain, of respect and discrimination on this frigid Wednesday outside the U.S. Supreme Court. They talked about the lives that have been saved, the people who have thrived and the individuals who continue to live with uncertainty and apprehension.
And time and again, they spoke of the urgency of the moment.
Hundreds of trans people, relatives and allies gathered outside the courthouse in the nation’s capital while the justices heard oral arguments in U.S. v Skrmetti, a case that will decide the fate of health care for trans youth in Tennessee and beyond. Anti-trans advocates thronged the court as well.
New polling from The Australia Institute reveals that although Aussies love giving gifts, much of what we buy will spend years in the back of a cupboard and, ultimately, end up in landfill.
So, while it might be a season of joy, it’s also the season of waste, which is bad for the environment and bad for the hip pocket.
The Australia Institute surveyed 1,009 Australians between 13 and 15 November 2024 on issues relating to gift giving, consumption and spending habits during Christmas time. The margin of error is ±3%.
Key Findings:
Australians waste more than $1 billion on buying Christmas gifts for people that don’t get used.
Nearly one in two Australians (47%) do not think about how the gifts they buy for others will eventually be disposed of.
Over three in four Australians (77%) like buying gifts for people at Christmas, but over half of Australians (52%) would prefer it if people did not buy them gifts at Christmas.
A greater number of Australians buy gift wrapping paper (69%) than gift bags (52%). However, gift bags are more likely to be reused (65% of those who use gift bags reuse them) than wrapping paper (24% of those who use wrapping paper reuse it).
Nearly two in three Australians (64%) agree that it is better for the economy when people buy fewer things that don’t get used.
Salmon companies are ripping off Tasmania and trying to pass it off as yet another ‘jobs vs environment’ fight. This is the kind of fight that Tasmanian politicians love to have, and like performing seals, the Tasmanian government and opposition have lined up to bark and do their tricks.
But the fight over salmon farming is different. All three major companies are owned by multinational corporations. Tassal is owned by a major Canadian company and Petuna is owned by a Japanese-New Zealand corporation. The third main salmon company in Tasmania, Huon, is owned by JBS. JBS is a Brazilian corporation infamous for corruption. JBS’s bribery of Brazilian politicians played a big part in its expansion and its arrival in Tasmania.
These corporations literally want Tasmanians to accept their crap.
To be more precise, the poo and other discharge from salmon farms in Macquarie Harbour generates the same amount of nitrogen pollution as sewage discharged by a city of half a million people – that’s more than double Hobart’s.
Dumping the equivalent of two Hobart’s worth of sewage in a World Heritage-listed harbour has consequences. And the best-known is the impact on the Maugean skate, a stingray-like creature that has been around since the dinosaurs and lives nowhere else in the world.
Extinction bells have been tolling for some time for the skate. Scientific advice to the Australian Government is unequivocal that salmon farming is the key threat to its survival.
An interview with Chris Geidner of Law Dork about what he thinks happened at oral arguments in US vs Skrmetti and whether journalists should smooth the way for the high court to uphold bans on gender-affirming care for youth.
Pavlos Roufos is a Greek political economist living in Berlin. He has a PhD in political science from Kassel University. He works on central banks, constitutional law and European integration from the 1920s to today, with a special emphasis on the Eurozone crisis. You can find his newsletter "The End of Times" here
AI-enabled goods and services are now commonplace in the Australian market and people interact with AI-enabled products in their daily lives. These products range from entirely online digital products, such as subscription streaming services for entertainment and customer service chatbots, to internet-connected physical goods such as digital assistants in smart phones and smart speakers, to internet-of-things goods that have little to no human interactivity, such as robot vacuums.
AI-enabled products present unique challenges to consumers’ ability to participate fairly and safely in the market and enact their consumer rights using the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). The largest challenge is the opacity of AI and algorithms, making it difficult for individuals to assess whether a good or service meets the consumer guarantees of acceptable quality and fitness for purpose. Consumers understand there is a problem when a toaster doesn’t toast, however it’s near impossible for everyday people to assess the quality and efficacy of AI-enabled products, making it equally impossible to seek remedy using the ACL.
In the broader context of digital markets, in which AI-enabled products exist, practices of deceptive design, unfairness and manipulation should be addressed through economy-wide provisions. As such, DRW supports the introduction of a prohibition on unfair trading and refer to the work of consumer groups such as CHOICE and Consumer Policy Research Centre for further elucidation of the benefits of an unfair trading ban.
The report, Greenwashing Coal in New South Wales, reveals a stark contrast in funding priorities. State government organisations which are meant to be supporting communities with the transition away from coal have an initial budget of just $5.2 million, while public subsidies for coal research and promotion far exceed this amount.
Key points:
● The NSW Government’s proposed Future Jobs and Investment Authorities for the Hunter, Illawarra, Central West and North West regions aim to assist coal-reliant communities’ transition. But they are severely underfunded with a collective budget of just $5.2 million for all four authorities.
● These Authorities are not able to access increased funding from the Future Jobs and Investment Fund until 2028-29.
● Organisations devoted to promoting and prolonging the NSW coal industry, by contrast, have significantly more resources:
○ Coal Innovation NSW spent $27 million last year and has a balance of $45 million.
○ The coal industry organisation Low Emissions Technology Australia (LETA) is promoted as a $700 million fund. This fund is publicly subsidised, but recently asked to stop receiving contributions due to a significant surplus of funding.
The report calls for the abolition of Coal Innovation NSW and associated funds. It also recommends royalty deduction subsidies to LETA be immediately abolished.
Holding someone’s trust means people believe what you say to be true. Speaking the truth consistently wins people’s trust.
But trust isn’t always treated with the deference it should be. Too often it can be abused, with truth usually the first to pay the price.
There were a few instances this week which had us thinking about trust and the role it plays in dictating what is true or not.
One was the somewhat slavish and uncritical reporting of the Business Council of Australia’s ‘Regulation Rumble’ report which loudly declared Victoria the “worst state in Australia to do business”.
Headlines across Australia’s media outlets swallowed the conclusions: ‘Victoria ranks last for business amid state spending splurge’, ‘Victoria ranked worst state in Australia for business’ and ‘Victoria ranked worst for business as Labor debates brand damage in Albanese stronghold’ were just some of the headlines. And not just at News Corp – that last one was the ABC.
To the casual observer, it seems that media outlets are faithfully reporting on an independent report. But a cursory glance at the ABS data on business investment – you know, the raw numbers of where private business is putting its money – showed investment in Victoria was outstripping nearly every other state.
The representative of the three large, foreign-owned salmon farmers in the Apple Isle has made many claims about the economic impact of moving fish farms out of Macquarie Harbour. The research behind those claims remains secret.
The Australia Institute challenges those making unsubstantiated claims to a debate about what needs to be done in Macquarie Harbour.
“It’s time to start calling out the lies, exaggeration and misinformation,” said Eloise Carr, Director, Australia Institute Tasmania.
“It’s factually incorrect to describe the industry in Macquarie Harbour as ‘small.’ Currently, 9,500 tonnes of salmon and trout come out of the harbour annually. The amount of nitrogen pollution this contribute to the harbour is the same as the sewage discharged from a city the size of Hobart.
“Dumping the equivalent of Hobart’s worth of sewage in a World Heritage-listed harbour has consequences. And the best-known is the impact on the endangered Maugean skate, a stingray-like creature that has been around since the dinosaurs and lives nowhere else in the world.
“The science could not be clearer: fish farming is the primary threat to the skate. That’s what Australia’s top scientists are telling us.
The American material life is taken for granted. Things just appear. There is no consideration for what country the Empire destroyed to fuel their cars, which people are earning pennies inside sweatshops for their clothes or how many children’s hands touched the lithium in their phone batteries fresh out of the mine. The U.S. Empire makes sure these realities are out of the public consciousness and only the shiny, finished products end up in the public view, no questions asked. Matt Kennard, founder of the independent investigative outlet Declassified UK, joins host Chris Hedges on this episode of The Chris Hedges Report to talk about his book, “The Racket: A Rogue Reporter vs The American Empire.”
Until 2020, Western Australians didn’t experience the energy price pain of their east coast cousins because all its domestic gas reserves were reserved for the domestic market. Up until then, all the gas WA exported came from offshore reserves, mostly in Commonwealth waters. That changed four years ago, when the WA Labor government allowed the export of onshore gas.
Why did the WA Labor government change the policy?
Good question. Woodside started running out of offshore gas for its giant North West Shelf export terminal, and decided to turn to the domestic reserves to keep feeding it. But it needed some help.
Enter media magnate and fossil fuel investor Kerry Stokes and his company Beach Energy. Beach Energy owned the licence for some of WA’s onshore gas reserves and wanted to export that domestic gas because gas sold on the international market fetches higher prices than it does domestically.
Beach Energy made a deal with Woodside to export its domestic gas. And then it used its considerable influence to lobby the Western Australian government to let them do it. In August 2020, while most attention was on the pandemic and the border closures, then-premier Mark McGowen announced Woodside could export WA’s domestic gas for five years – and a lot of it … the equivalent of around a quarter of the total gas used in WA!
So, what is the problem?
Woodside now wants to extend the deal for another 50 years. And that’s terrible news for Western Australians.
Outside supporters of trans rights showed their fighting spirit. While inside, questions about detransition signaled court’s openness to gender affirming care bans.
Draft Consolidated Industry Codes of Practice for the Online Industry (Class 1C and Class 2 Material) under the Online Safety Act 2021
We recognise there are genuine challenges regarding the safety of vulnerable groups, including children, as well as the distribution of unlawful material online. We also recognise the legitimate interest of the Australian government to promote safer online services to individuals across Australia.
As a leading Australian organisation working to protect our collective digital rights, DRW is primarily concerned with ensuring an appropriate balance is struck with regard to the impact upon individuals’ and communities’ rights, including any adverse impacts it may have on privacy, digital security, and freedom of speech and expression.
As always, we emphasise that privacy and digital security are essential to uphold safety. Questions of legitimacy, proportionality, and reasonableness also must be carefully considered in any rights-balancing activity when determining online safety policy interventions. Digital Rights Watch is contributing to this consultation in the spirit of seeking to ensure that Australia’s approach to online safety does not end up disproportionately undermining safety in the quest to enhance it.
Digital Rights Watch has been involved in many Senate committee consultations since our founding in 2016. Never before have we witnessed such a shocking display of misusing the committee inquiry process as a sham consultation for the purposes of “box-ticking” community engagement.
We are dismayed to see the government prioritise the theatre of policy-making in the lead-up to a federal election over meaningful legislation over the long-term. It is particularly egregious to expect a Senate committee inquiry to provide adequate analysis with such short timescales as in the terms of reference. We do not have any confidence that this inquiry can return anything of use in the time available other than to insist upon a longer period of consultation and analysis for this important policy issue.
It is a gross disservice to the children of Australia and the Senate to use this committee inquiry to distract from the evidence that the government has failed to do adequate policy development in this area, yet is determined to push through this amendment despite expert advice from many relevant fields.
We apologise to the committee for exceeding the desired length of submission, but we have simply not had the time to make this one shorter.
There are lots of ways to protect workers in Tasmania, but there is only one way to protect the critically endangered Maugean skate. The skate has been around since the time of the dinosaurs. It has just one home – Macquarie Harbour. It’s globally unique – the only known brackish water skate in the world. It’s recognised internationally as one of the natural values of the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area.
Minister Plibersek says she will listen to the science and follow the law. Australian government scientists are unequivocal that salmon farming is the key threat to the skate’s survival. Top Australian independent scientists have confirmed this. Scientists have also told us how to save the skate: stop salmon farming.
“Is anyone other than the AWU seriously suggesting we should not listen to science and not follow the law?” said Eloise Carr, Director, Australia Institute Tasmania.
“But, of course, if they want to do what the AWU says – as the elected government – that’s obviously their choice to make.
“Democracy is about choices. We used to hunt whales, log the Daintree and mine asbestos and all those industries created some jobs.
“There are lots of places where salmon can be grown but only one place in the world where the Maugean skate can live. If we chose a bit more salmon over the last of the dinosaur fish, then it speaks volumes about our priories.”
On this episode of Follow the Money, Australia Institute Chief Political Analyst Amy Remeikis joins Ebony Bennett to discuss the slings and arrows of the political year, why Australia doesn’t use its power on the international stage, and how next year’s federal election campaign is shaping up.
This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 3 December 2024 and things may have changed since recording.
Robust banks are a cornerstone of a healthy financial system. To ensure their stability, it is desirable for banks to hold a diverse portfolio of loans originating from various borrowers and sectors so that idiosyncratic shocks to any one borrower or fluctuations in a particular sector would be unlikely to cause the entire bank to go under. With this long-held wisdom in mind, how diversified are banks in reality?
