AQ: Australian Quarterly 89.1 Jan-Mar 2018 by AQ: Australian Quarterly

Vol 89 Issue 1 JAN–MAR 2018

From Trash to Treasure: Australia in a take-make-remake world including: Prof Samantha Hepburn | Prof Peter Saunders | Prof Andrew Scot t | Dr Samantha Sharpe & more

A King’s Ransom:

Resources & public benefit

Blockchain and the State: Vehicle or vice?

Hampstead to Hull:

Brexit and the ALP

How to subscribe

Subscribe and pay online at www.aips.net.au/aq-magazine/subscribe The subscription period is based on the calendar year: January to December – 4 issues per annum. Back copies will be forwarded.

Subscription Rates

Rates include GST. *GST does not apply on overseas subscriptions. Postage included in rate. Airmail used for overseas distribution.

AQ Individual and schools subscription AQ Individuals (Overseas) Individual Digital Subscription (through www.pocketmags.com.au)

$26 $35* $14.99

AIPS Membership includes AQ subscription

$88

Organisations (Australia) Organisations (Overseas – Asia & Oceania) Organisations (Overseas – Other than Asia)

$132 $145* $165*

AIPS Membership Overseas includes AQ subscription $110*

CONTENTS 19

Vol 89 Issue 1 Jan–Mar 2018

IMAGE CREDITS: Please see article placements

Vehicle or vice?

Australia in a take-makeremake world

Implications of Brexit and other overseas voting trends for the ALP

DR Samantha Sharpe and

Prof Andrew Scott

Blockchain and the state: Zac Rogers

From trash to treasure:

From Hampstead to Hull:

Prof Damien Giurco

Public benefit within a modern energy landscape

Australia will be called to account

A king’s ransom:

Alleviating poverty:

References

Prof Peter Saunders

Prof Samantha Hepburn

COVER IMAGE: © Maksim Pasko

JAN–MAR 2018

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

a word

Australian Quarterly

he lull of summer has finally set in – a relief after the final few months of the year. Those dying days of 2017 were a textbook illustration of the many gears that governments have to work in.

The furious build up of energy (on both sides) from the same-sex marriage debate was afforded release as the parliament rushed to be seen to undertake ‘democracy’. This, of course, followed months of trying to slow inevitability by any means possible. Meanwhile, Victoria quietly went about the business of legalising assisted dying, continuing their raison d’etre of being a thorn in the side of the conservative feds. And then, in horrifying detail, we witnessed the slow motion car crash that befell the Prime Minister, as he was hedged in on all sides regarding a Banking Royal Commission. It was a frantic end to a year that had little else to point at domestically. Yet even though it felt like the PM was treading water this year, the challenges facing Australia and the world have continued to amass. This edition of AQ would have to be one of the most diverse of recent years. This is what AQ does best, ranging across the full spectrum of the issues facing the country – from the risks/opportunity of blockchain technology to Australia’s obligations in the Sustainable Development Goals, from the promise and potential of a Circular Economy to the implications of Brexit for us all. Yet a common thread underpins them all – the growing need for dramatic paradigm shifts in how we act, how we think, and how we govern. It’s a theme increasingly prevalent in our public discourse; we have begun to push things too far for incremental change to be able to correct. So as you enjoy the long, lingering evenings, I hope that you’ll reflect on the small changes we can all make today to help avoid the dramatic crash tomorrow. And don’t forget to find us on Facebook (@AQAustralianQuarterly) and Twitter (@AQjournal). Have a long and carefree summer everyone!

Errata: In the Oct-Dec 2017 edition we incorrectly attributed the Sun, Wind and Fire article on the Contents Page – the correct authors of that article were Dr Colin A. Scholes and Dr Brendan Duffy.

Grant Mills

Editor-at-large

Notes for Contributors AQ welcomes submissions of articles and manuscripts on contemporary economic, political, social and philosophical issues, especially where scientific insights have a bearing and where the issues impact on Australian and global public life. All contributions are unpaid. Manuscripts should be original and have not been submitted or published elsewhere, although in negotiation with the Editor, revised prior publications or presentations may be included. Submissions may be subject to peer review. Word length is between 1000 and 3000 words. Longer and shorter lengths may be considered. Articles should be written and argued clearly so they can be easily read by an informed, but non-specialist, readership. A short biographical note of up to 50 words should accompany the work. The Editor welcomes accompanying images. Authors of published articles are required to assign copyright to the Australian Institute of Policy and Science, including signing of a License to Publish which includes acceptance of online archiving and access through JSTOR (from 2010) or other online publication as negotiated by the Australian Institute of Policy and Science. In return, authors have a non exclusive license to publish the paper elsewhere at a future date. The inclusion of references and endnotes is the option of the author. Our preference is for these to be available from the author on request. Otherwise, references, endnotes and abbreviations should be used sparingly and kept to a minimum. Articles appearing in AQ are indexed ABC POL SCI: A Bibliography of Contents: Political Science and Government. The International Political Science Abstracts publishes abstracts of political science articles appearing in AQ. Copyright is owned by the Australian Institute of Policy and Science. Persons wishing to reproduce an article, or part thereof, must obtain the Institute’s permission. Contributions should be emailed to: The Editor at info@aips.net.au

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

JAN–MAR 2018

Editor: Grant Mills Assistant Editor: Camille Thomson Design and production: Art Graphic Design, Canberra Printing: Newstyle Printing, Adelaide Subscriptions: www.aips.net.au/aq-magazine/ subscribe enquiries to: Camille Thomson, General Manager, AIPS, PO Box M145, Missenden Road NSW 2050 Australia Phone: +61 (02) 9036 9995 Fax: +61 (02) 9036 9960 Email: info@aips.net.au Website: www.aips.net.au/ aq-magazine/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/ AQAustralianQuarterly ISSN 1443-3605 AQ (Australian Quarterly) is published by the Australian Institute of Policy and Science. This project is supported by the Commonwealth Government through a grant-in-aid administered by the Department of Finance and Deregulation. ACN 000 025 507 The AIPS is an independent body which promotes discussion and understanding of political, social and scientific issues in Australia. It is not connected with any political party or sectional group. Opinions expressed in AQ are those of the authors. Directors of the Australian Institute of Policy and Science: Leon R Beswick (co-Chair) Andrew Goodsall Maria Kavallaris (co-Chair) Jennelle Kyd Suresh Mahalingam Ross McKinnon Peter M McMahon Peter D Rathjen

Blockchain and the state: Vehicle or vice? As ultramodern as they may seem, cryptocurrencies and their underlying distributed ledger technology (commonly referred to as the blockchain), represent the intertwined evolution of two prosaic yet fundamental pillars of civilisation: money and accounting. From the earliest issuance of barter tokens, to coins of precious metal, paper notes, then digital strings of ones and zeros – and the single and double-entry ledger accounting methods used to record transactions and ownership by trading houses and the first banks – one feature of these two pillars has been ubiquitous and constant: centralisation. ARTICLE BY: Zac Rogers

or all of these monetary systems to function an authorising intermediary has stood over issuance of currency, and stood between transactors, providing them with the capacity to trust one another. This stabilises the value of the medium of exchange, the security of the transaction, and the integrity of the record, whatever it may comprise. The intermediary accrued power via the indispensable role it played in facilitating trust, and the centralisation of authority, as corollary, literally created

image: © Jeremy Keith-Flickr

JAN–MAR 2018

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

A King’s Ransom

A king’s ransom: Public benefit within a modern energy landscape The most important structural solution to the rush toward final disorder is to restore some harmony between human laws and the laws of nature by giving law back to networks of communities. Fritjof Capra & Ugo Mattei, “The Ecology of Law” ARTICLE BY: Professor Samantha Hepburn

ustralia has an abundance of resources capable of generating energy – gas, brown and black coal, uranium, wind, water and sunshine. When the resource resides within the sub-stratum of the land it is subject to state ownership in accordance with Australia’s public resource framework. This effectively means that the state must look after the resource for the benefit of the public as a whole. Yet public benefit in this context has never been fully defined and is therefore grounded in unarticulated allocative assumptions. The general principle is to ensure that the management and exploitation of these public resources is conducted in such a way that it maximises their net benefit

and promotes distributional fairness. For the most part, benefit is generally presumed to mean economic gain. Existing governance frameworks, at both the state and federal levels, are grounded in the classic liberal assumption that economic prosperity generated through state-supported free-market environmentalism constitutes public interest. Hence, where an energy project promises job creation and wealth infusion this is treated, at both a political and regulatory level, as concomitant with public interest. Broader, non-economic benefits consistent with longer term notions of public interest are therefore marginalised and often ignored completely. This is particularly concerning within a transitioning energy landscape where issues such as social and environmental

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

JAN–MAR 2018

sustainability, decarbonisation, environmental justice, and public health are significant public interest concerns. Current governance frameworks are largely unresponsive to many of these broader collective value goals. Hence, approval processes for resource titling and environmental impact assessments do not adequately incorporate climate change imperatives or ecological sustainability objectives. These issues are often relegated into social licensing and/or community engagement protocols, the latter being conducted once a resource project has already commenced. Where they are taken into account within environmental impact assessment processes, it is at a discretionary level, meaning that the relevant Minister has the power to choose whether the climate change impact is of a sufficiently robust level to justify the imposition of stronger conditions. The proposed Adani mine in Northern Queensland is a good example. This project has consistently been touted by state and federal governments as having the potential to create thousands of jobs. The mining licence was issued by the federal Minister without an explicit and proportionate evaluation of some of the wider public interest concerns, and without a clear evaluation of the global impact of such a mine upon climate change

imperatives. These broader public interest concerns include environmental and ecological degradation of the Great Barrier Reef, domestic and global climate change commitments, intergenerational equity concerns, protection and conservation of world heritage areas, public health concerns, and transparency and accountability in the utilisation of public revenue for the progression of resource projects. Earlier this year, the Adani mine was subject to a legal challenge in Australian Conservation Foundation v Minister for Environment and Energy. In handing down their decision, Dowsett, McKerracher, and Robertson JJ in the Full Federal Court confirmed that the existing governance framework under our national environment act did not compel the federal minister to take account of broader public benefit issues such as global climate change imperatives when exercising his discretion. The Minister made the following findings with respect to the Adani mine: • greenhouse gas emissions pose an existential threat to the Great Barrier Reef; • the extent and persistence of such impacts depend to a large degree on how effectively the issue of rising levels of greenhouse gases is addressed worldwide; • the transportation and combustion overseas of the coal to be mined,

JAN–MAR 2018

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

A King’s Ransom

IMAGE: Insert

From trash to treasure:

Australia in a take-make-remake world In 2014-15 Australia produced 64 million tonnes of waste, the equivalent of 2.7 tonnes for every person.1 The good news is that 60% of this waste is recycled, however waste generation per person has increased by 1% per annum since 2007-08, and this trend is projected to continue. E-waste, including smart phones, tablets, laptops and computers generated 587,000 tonnes of waste in 2014. Of these discarded materials about 10% is exported for re-use, 65% is collected for materials recovery, and 25% goes to landfill.2 ARTICLE BY: DR Samantha Sharpe & Professor Damien Giurco

ot only do many of these products contain hazardous materials that should not be going into landfill, they also contain valuable, finite materials such as gold, copper, and platinum. Ten kilograms of electronic waste can yield 2 grams of gold, equivalent to the gold in a wedding ring. This may not seem much, until you compare it against the 10,000 tonnes of ore that would need to be processed to extract the same amount of gold from a mine site.3 The term ‘circular economy’ (CE) has

JAN–MAR 2018

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

Alleviating Poverty

Alleviating poverty:

Australia will be called to account It is easy to be wise after the event, but the widespread cynicism that greeted Bob Hawke’s pledge to ‘end child poverty by 1990’ was as wide of the mark as the actual pledge itself. Although Hawke himself has since admitted that the announcement was unwise and a deviation ‘from the script’, subsequent events have shown that the child poverty pledge was ahead of its time in two key regards: first, because of its emphasis on the need to set poverty targets; and second because of the focus given to the problem of child poverty, now acknowledged to be one of its most damaging manifestations. ARTICLE BY: Professor Peter Saunders

AUSTRALIAN QUARTERLY

JAN–MAR 2018

his is not to deny (again with the benefit of hindsight) that the pledge was unrealistic in terms of what could be achieved in such a short period – the commitment was made in the run-up to the 1987 federal election. Even so, it resulted in significant – and in many instances – long-lasting reforms being made to the system of income support for children (lead by reformist Social Security Minister, Brian Howe). Those achievements demonstrate the impact that poverty targeting can have when it is formulated and backed at the highest

https://aq.magazine.com.au/ www.zinio.com