Everyone’s power bills are going up, which made me wonder why the Australia Council was happy to make their power bill 7% more expensive for no reason at all.
Despite the same power coming through the plug (probably from a coal fired power station) the council elects to make their bills 7% more expensive so they can buy “green power”. What a scam and a waste of money.
Transcript
Senator Roberts: I want to follow up on something we discussed last time. You may recall that last estimates we had a conversation about your power bills.
Mr Collette: Yes.
Senator Roberts: A lot of people are talking about power bills these days.
Mr Collette: They are.
Senator Roberts: This is estimates, and one of the purposes of estimates is to assess how you are spending taxpayers’ money. That is what I want to revisit. Firstly, thank you for your detailed response, when you took my question on notice. That was SQ 23-003317. I hope all of the Public Service takes notes from you about how questions on notice should be answered. We appreciate it.
Mr Collette: Thank you.
Senator Roberts: In that answer, you said that you elect to add the green power product to your power bills. That is totally optional. You opt in, and you take extra money from the taxpayer to pay that expense. That is making your power bill 6.8 per cent—say seven per cent—more expensive than otherwise. Whether you opt in to pay the extra for green power or not, the same power comes through the same plug, probably from a coal-fired power station. But you are choosing to waste taxpayers’ money on this optional expense that makes no difference to what is turning the lights on. How much did you pay for green power over the last year?
Mr Collette: I will have to take that on notice, unless my colleague has the answer.
Mr Blackwell: I don’t have it.
Mr Collette: We will try to come back to you with an equally exemplary response.
Senator Roberts: Good, thank you. I don’t expect this of you, but do you have any guess as to what your power bill is?
Mr Collette: I would not like to guess, no.
Senator Roberts: Can you also tell me how much you expect to pay this coming year?
Mr Collette: I can’t tell you that, but I will certainly get that information for you.
Senator Roberts: You were established under legislation; correct?
Mr Collette: We are.
Senator Roberts: So I assume you have been established with the objective of funding the arts.
Mr Collette: Yes, we have, investment and advocacy.
Senator Roberts: Investing in arts and advocacy on behalf of the arts. Thank you, that is clarifying. What part of your objectives enables you to waste an extra seven per cent a year on a core component, power, when it is literally the same power coming through the plug whether you pay the extra expense or not?
Mr Collette: What part of our objectives? I think the Australia Council—Creative Australia to be—does have sustainability goals, and we try to exemplify those, which are important to the sector that we serve as well. Given that we invest in the sector, and we advocate for the sector, I think this is generally respected by the arts and creative industry.
Senator Roberts: I think you are wasting taxpayer money and that should be cancelled. Would not that money be better spent on the art that you are supposed to be funding?
Mr Collette: There is always a cost to investing in servicing the art that we are funding, and I think you will find that this is significantly respected by the sector.
Senator Roberts: The point is that you are spending an extra seven per cent on a key component—
Mr Collette: I understand that.
Senator Roberts: Same plug, same power.
Mr Collette: I understand that. But there are different kinds of value as well.
Senator Roberts: I am not arguing with you on that point.
Mr Collette: So this would be a small contribution to social and environmental value that is respected by the sector, and I am sure if you ask their general view on whether we should save whatever the sum is—seven per cent of our power bill, and I confess I don’t know our power bill as I sit here—you would find very broad support for what we do.
Senator Roberts: I think there is a lot of ignorance—and I am not singling you out; I think it goes right through the community—about this green power, because the same power comes from the same place through the plug, regardless of whether you pay that seven per cent or not. So I would like to know what benefit you get from that seven per cent.
Mr Collette: I will take that on notice and come back to you, once I understand the argument that I think you are making—that there is actually no difference in this power. I need to satisfy myself on that argument and then we can come back to you with a response.
Senator Roberts: I am pleased to hear that. Thank you.
Thank you Senator Malcolm Roberts
Perhaps it’s appropriate to return to duty of care, accountability and respect that, if you hold a public office or have a public service role, you are there to deliver services to the everyday human beings of Australia. To the best of your ability.
Any funds being spent, wouldn’t it be good to respect that this is other people’s money 💵.
Maybe I’m weird, yet my Father taught me to, at work, always give quality performance and never abuse the finances and property of whoever I was working for.
Like stationery and stuff. Sounds minor, it’s not, as I found over the years , many others took that stuff, for their kids, for their home etcetera.
As we approach the end of the financial year, it’s well known that people willy nilly spend up, in order to ensure, they get more of a budget increase for the new financial year.
As the general populace is suffering severely, it would be great if government departments treated our money with integrity.
Thanks for listening SMR
Thank you for keeping us in the loop
Dear Malcolm, Staff and Contributors,
November last year (2022) I brought to Malcolm’s attention a CSIRO publication for him to read.
TITLE “State of the Climate 2022”
I even made the offer to discuss any matters he wished to raise after reading the said publication.
I received no reply except to be placed on the mailing list to this website.
Taking up the invitation to contribute I started posting some comments.
I endeavoured to keep my comments polite, to the point and confined to the topics where I felt I could make some contribution to yours and your reader’s general knowledge.
There are many cases where the information provided by this website is at significant variance from general scientific knowledge and from what can be found on the internet.
In the interest of accuracy and understanding I attempted to bring these departures to the attention of all.
Stating (several times) my willingness to change my viewpoint in the light of scientific evidence I asked questions for any person to answer.
I have received only one (partially complete) answer to these questions.
I have even provided links to websites where related information could be found.
My main concern is the level of censorship applied to my inquiries.
Even replies, by others, to some of my postings were also deleted.
Requests for explanation of the censorship have been denied.
I do not expect to make any significant progress with this complaint as I am not in control of the website.
All I can do, in the hope of receiving meaningful answers, is to continue asking for clarification on contested areas.
NOTE
Examples of these allegations can be supplied if requested.
Cheers,
Col