RAJ CAIRNS REPORT


3 Comments

THANK YOU


I have today nominated for the Caretaker Councillor  position  for Division  3 on Cairns Regional Council.  i would sincerely like to thank the followers and commentators to this blog  for making it a great experience ,i  have tried to be as informative on topics that affect the daily life of the Cairns community  as possible and get past the spin  ,the world is changing rapidly  and it is difficult to keep up with the 24 hour news cycle

i will now focus my attention on Division 3 so  sadly this Blog has to come to an end .

Thank You

Raj

an explorer at heart: My natural instinct   when confronted with a problem is to act; to consider all implications of  possible actions – then to act in a way that will make things better


1 Comment

How will the new government in Queensland fix the Budget——-If NZ can fix its budget with reform, so can we – The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)——–If New Zealand and the UK can successfully implement reforms to fix their budget then so can Australia. Spreading populism and false hope will only lead to trouble down the track, writes Dan Tehan.


 

If New Zealand and the UK can successfully implement reforms to fix their budget then so can Australia. Spreading populism and false hope will only lead to trouble down the track, writes Dan Tehan.

Every day Australia borrows another $100 million, and Bill Shorten is doing all he can to make this the norm. When you haven’t delivered a budget surplus in 25 years, sadly this is in your interests.

For the ALP, if you can’t fix the problem, just ignore it altogether.

The New Zealand and UK governments are taking a different approach, successfully implementing reforms and spending restraint. This is leading to economic growth and budget repair.

In Australia, despite the opposition of the Labor Party, we must continue to do the same.

 

 

 

If NZ can fix its budget with reform, so can we – The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation).


Leave a comment

Will the domination of Public Service Unions lead to the end of western democracy————-When Labor opposes privatisation it is not defending services. It is defending its power to take more money from workers in private businesses and give it to unionists in state ones – unionists who in turn reward Labor with donations. It is a giant scam – a Ponzi scheme in which the rest of us are the first to lose our money. And jobs. .—Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog


Public sector unions are the last Labor bastion. That means Labor’s economic strategy is based largely on making sure as many unionists as possible are kept working for the government, which can then be squeezed for more money. The Daily Telegraph explains:

NSW Labor leader Luke Foley … has presented a stark choice ahead of next month’s elections.  Voters have the option of voting for the current government, which promises to secure many billions of dollars through long-term leasing of NSW’s electricity infrastructure in order to fund massive advances in health, education and transport — or they can vote for Labor, which promises to do basically … nothing.

Announcing yesterday that Labor would commit to just $10 billion in infrastructure funding over 10 years, not nearly sufficient to meet this growing state’s requirements, Foley declared electricity infrastructure would remain under inefficient state ownership — exactly what overpaid unions want.

“Labor’s plan is a smart, affordable solution to building the projects NSW needs,” Foley claimed, “while keeping our electricity network in public hands and using the profits they make to pay for teachers, nurses and police.”

That’s just great. In exchange for missing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to obtain a colossal leasing windfall, with its gigantic subsequent benefits for all citizens of this state, NSW would be able to cover its wages bill…

This sounds like the worst deal of all time — unless, of course, you are among the union members who stand to gain through continued state ownership and its associated rip-off pay levels.

Foley’s lame promise makes several issues clear. First, it is now more obvious than ever that NSW Labor is controlled by unions, just as it was controlled by unions during previous Labor attempts to modernise and embrace privatisation.

On the very day of Labor’s policy announcement, the Electrical Trades Union and the United Services Union declared members at state-owned Ausgrid and Endeavour Energy would begin four-hour rolling strikes next month in a bid to enforce excessive wage claims.

When Labor opposes privatisation it is not defending services. It is defending its power to take more money from workers in private businesses and give it to unionists in state ones – unionists who in turn reward Labor with donations.

It is a giant scam – a Ponzi scheme in which the rest of us are the first to lose our money. And jobs.

When Labor opposes privatisation it is not defending services. It is defending its power to take more money from workers in private businesses and give it to unionists in state ones – unionists who in turn reward Labor with donations.

It is a giant scam – a Ponzi scheme in which the rest of us are the first to lose our money. And jobs.

 

 

More taxes but less development: another fine mess promised by Labor | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog.


Leave a comment

What happened to the Natural Disaster Insurance Review FOUR PIVOTAL RECOMMENDATIONS


 

On 4 March 2011 the Hon Bill Shorten, MP Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation announced an independent review into disaster insurance in Australia  following the floods in January 2011.

Recent widespread flooding and other extreme weather events have caused devastating losses which have been borne by individuals and businesses, State and local Government, community organisations, the Australian Government, private insurers and reinsurers.

Final report:

The Final Report was publicly released on 14 November 2011.

To meet these requirements, the Panel is making four pivotal recommendations. They are: Pivotal Recommendation 1: Architecture That an agency sponsored by the Commonwealth Government be created to manage the national coordination of flood risk management and to operate a system of premium discounts and a flood risk reinsurance facility, supported by a funding guarantee from the Commonwealth. While this new agency would need to be established under Commonwealth legislation, to function effectively it would need to operate along the lines of a joint venture between the Commonwealth, the States and the insurance industry. Given the right level of expertise and authority, the right kind of governance structure and accountability, and a brief to apply itself exclusively to these matters, a single agency of this kind would have the wherewithal to succeed where previous efforts of cooperation, in good faith, amongst a myriad of agencies and departments of government (Commonwealth, State and local) and insurers have yielded limited results. Pivotal Recommendation 2: Availability That all home insurance, home contents and home unit insurance policies include flood cover.

While acknowledging that many insurers are working hard to extend the availability of flood cover, their initiatives alone will not meet the community need. Pivotal Recommendation 3: Affordability That a system of premium discounts be introduced in order that most purchasers of home insurance, home contents and home unit insurance policies in areas subject to flood risk be eligible for discounts against the full cost of flood insurance. The nature of flood risk, whereby flood prone land can be identified because it has a higher risk of flood than other land, can lead to high insurance premiums for flood cover in these locations with the result that flood cover, if available, will generally be seen as unaffordable. Pivotal Recommendation 4: Funding The Commonwealth Government guarantee the payment of claims by ensuring that, whenever a funding shortfall occurs in the reinsurance facility through claims exceeding the funds held in the facility, the Commonwealth would meet the shortfall and the Commonwealth would seek reimbursement of a portion of the shortfall from the State or Territory government in whose jurisdiction the flood occurred. The existence of such a guarantee would ensure that discounts offered for affordability purposes do not increase the premiums for householders with no flood risk. It is notable that these four pivotal recommendations represent an integrated system. A new government-sponsored agency charged with national coordination of flood risk management and with operating the system of premium discounts and the flood risk reinsurance facility, supported by a funding guarantee from the Commonwealth, would create the capacity to deliver flood insurance premium discounts, and also to influence flood risk mitigation and ensure the availability of flood insurance to all relevant policyholders. Flood insurance premium discounts are a prerequisite for homeowners to be able to afford to purchase flood cover, which in turn makes it possible to deliver on the Review Panel’s conclusion that unequivocal insurance coverage for flood is central to addressing the community need. It is important to note that, in recommending that flood cover be included in all home contents and home unit insurance policies, the Review Panel is not recommending that insurance itself be made compulsory. There need also be no increase in premiums for policyholders who have no flood risk and no cross subsidisation of insurance premiums among policyholders. By way of further explanation of the recommended new national agency, it would have two key functions, national coordination of flood risk management and operating the flood risk reinsurance facility

The Government’s Response to the Final Report is available on the Assistant Treasurer’s website.

 

 

Natural Disaster Insurance Review – Homepage.


Leave a comment

How will the new LABOR GOVERNMENT handle the money grab by Energex without increasing the DEBT——-CCIQ says money grab by Energex is overly excessive » CCIQ—————-Energex is seeking a total of $8.4 billion in revenue (up from $7.4 billion in the previous five-year regulatory period). “The practical result of this complex issue is that Queensland electricity consumers will be paying a higher electricity price than they otherwise should have to if Energex was to adopt comparable industry benchmarks,” Mr Behrens said. Energex has reportedly experienced significant under-recovery of revenue in the previous regulatory period and is seeking compensation for this variation against budget through their 2015-2020 proposal. This under-recovery has arisen from lower than forecast energy usage resulting from increased energy conservation, use and installation of energy efficient appliances and the high uptake of solar PV.


 

CCIQ says money grab by Energex is overly excessive

Monday 9 February, 2015 | By: Darrell Giles | Tags: EnergexAustralian Energy Regulatorelectricity prices

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland (CCIQ) says Energex’s bid for more money is “excessive” and will only put electricity prices up.

CCIQ has provided a submission to the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) in response to Energex’s regulatory revenue proposal for 2015-2020.

Every five years the electricity network distributors apply to the AER for their allowed revenue over that period. Energex’s proposal seeks to recover less capital expenditure (capex) and operational expenditure (opex) than the previous regulatory period.

The revenue approved by the AER is passed directly on to consumers, with the more revenue recovered, the higher the costs for consumers.

CCIQ General Manager of Advocacy Nick Behrens said Queensland small businesses had seen unsustainable increases in electricity prices in recent years.

“The AER revenue determination process is particularly pertinent, as the network cost component makes up more than half of the average electricity bill. Therefore, in order for small businesses to see real cost savings, the network charges must be drastically reduced,” he said.

CCIQ conducted a survey of 1100 small businesses in December 2014 which found increasing electricity prices the most significant business cost issue, with 65 per cent indicating a major or critical concern with the cost of energy.

Energex is seeking a total of $8.4 billion in revenue (up from $7.4 billion in the previous five-year regulatory period).

“The practical result of this complex issue is that Queensland electricity consumers will be paying a higher electricity price than they otherwise should have to if Energex was to adopt comparable industry benchmarks,” Mr Behrens said.

Energex has reportedly experienced significant under-recovery of revenue in the previous regulatory period and is seeking compensation for this variation against budget through their 2015-2020 proposal. This under-recovery has arisen from lower than forecast energy usage resulting from increased energy conservation, use and installation of energy efficient appliances and the high uptake of solar PV.

“Queensland consumers are already heavily burdened by the impost of costs associated with the Solar Bonus Scheme and it is unacceptable that they should be responsible for compensating the failure of Energex to adequately forecast demand,” Mr Behrens said.

“Additionally CCIQ is disappointed to see that Energex attributed little in its proposal to address the impact that emerging technologies are likely to have on the overall demand and customer rates.

“CCIQ’s submission focussed on bringing down the costs of capex, opex and the WACC. The submission also addressed issues with Energex’s consumer engagement, the solar bonus scheme and future technology.”

The AER will make a draft determination by late April. The network distributors will then be able to submit a revised proposal and the AER will make a final determination by the end of October 2015.

CCIQ’s submission can be viewed on our website: https://www.cciq.com.au/advocacy/submissions/

 

 

 

 

CCIQ says money grab by Energex is overly excessive » CCIQ.


Leave a comment

How will the new LABOR GOVERNMENT stop the ERGON MONEY GRAB, and still pay of State Debt—–CCIQ says money grab by Ergon Energy is overly excessive » CCIQ——————-Ergon Energy is seeking a total of $7.6 billion in total revenue (up from $7.1 billion in the previous period). “CCIQ finds these costs excessive particularly given the massive overspend in the previous period on network upgrades,” Mr Behrens said. CCIQ conducted a survey of 1100 small businesses in December 2014 which found increasing electricity prices the most significant business cost issue, with 65 per cent indicating a major or critical concern with the cost of energy.


CCIQ says money grab by Ergon Energy is overly excessive

Monday 9 February, 2015 | By: Darrell Giles | Tags: Ergon EnergyAustralian Energy Regulatorelectricity prices

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland (CCIQ) says Ergon Energy’s bid for more money is “excessive” and will only put electricity prices up.

CCIQ has provided a submission to the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) in response to Ergon Energy’s regulatory revenue proposal for 2015-2020.

Every five years the electricity network distributors apply to the AER for their allowed revenue over that period. Ergon Energy’s proposal said there would be some price stability for consumers over the next five years – however CCIQ believed there were significant savings to be made on small business electricity bills.

The revenue approved by the AER is passed directly on to consumers, with the more revenue recovered, the higher the costs for consumers.

CCIQ General Manager of Advocacy Nick Behrens said Queensland small businesses had seen unsustainable increases in electricity prices in recent years.

“The AER revenue determination process is particularly pertinent, as the network cost component makes up more than half of the average electricity bill. Therefore, in order for small businesses to see real cost savings, the network charges must be drastically reduced,” he said.

Ergon Energy proposed reductions in its capital expenditure (capex) and operational expenditure (opex) from the previous regulatory period, but a higher weighted average cost of capital (WACC) than recommended benchmarks.

Ergon Energy is seeking a total of $7.6 billion in total revenue (up from $7.1 billion in the previous period).

“CCIQ finds these costs excessive particularly given the massive overspend in the previous period on network upgrades,” Mr Behrens said.

CCIQ conducted a survey of 1100 small businesses in December 2014 which found increasing electricity prices the most significant business cost issue, with 65 per cent indicating a major or critical concern with the cost of energy.

“The practical result of this complex issue is that Queensland electricity consumers will be paying a higher electricity price than they otherwise should have to if Ergon Energy was to adopt comparable industry benchmarks,” Mr Behrens said.

Ergon Energy will also be passing on the costs of the Queensland Government’s solar bonus scheme costs to consumers through Feed in Tariff recoveries expected to total over $700 million over the five years.

“Small businesses in regional Queensland have experienced crippling electricity price increases over the past seven years due to a massive over investment in the network infrastructure,” he said.

“CCIQ’s submission focussed on bringing down the costs of capex, opex and the WACC. The submission also addressed issues with Ergon Energy’s consumer engagement, the solar bonus scheme and incentive payments.”

The AER will make a draft determination by late April. The network distributors will then be able to submit a revised proposal and the AER will make a final determination by the end of October 2015.

CCIQ’s submission can be viewed on our website: https://www.cciq.com.au/advocacy/submissions/

Post your comment

You cannot post comments until you have logged in. Login Here.

Comments

No one has commented on this page yet.

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments

 

 

 

CCIQ says money grab by Ergon Energy is overly excessive » CCIQ.


Leave a comment

How is the new Labor Government going to address high ELECTRICITY PRICEs, when their economic case is based on getting HUGE PROFITS from ERGON and keeping electricity prices HIGH—–Australian households pay different amounts to access national electricity network—————–One of our standout findings is that costs are extremely patchy across Australia with some people, particularly in parts of Queensland, paying extraordinarily high network costs,” said the national director of Uniting Care Australia, Lin Hatfield Dodds. “Financial counsellors across the country consistently report that power bills are one of the biggest sources of financial distress for Australians trying to survive on a low income.” The report shows a worrying trend for households struggling with high power costs. The gap between the least expensive and most expensive network tariff has doubled over the past seven years, it shows. “This is why the Australian Energy Regulator is so important, and why the current debate happening between the regulator and the network companies is so important for all of us to pay attention to,” Ms Hatfield Dodds said.


Australian households are paying far more than people in comparable countries in electricity network charges, with huge discrepancies across different states, a new report has found.

Electricity network service providers in Queensland have the highest charges in Australia, while Victoria is the lowest cost jurisdiction in the National Energy Market.

The new report, commissioned by Uniting Care Australia, shows the highest network charges in Australia’s National Energy Market are four times more than the lowest charges, and double the highest prices charged in Britain.

It also shows that Australia’s network service providers are increasing their fixed charges more quickly than their variable charges, while there is a big discrepancy in the level of fixed charges across the country – ranging from zero to more than $500 a year for an average household.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australian-households-pay-different-amounts-to-access-national-electricity-network-20150210-13b47s.html#ixzz3ROH3V4mA

 

Australian households pay different amounts to access national electricity network.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 856 other followers