These figures include the cost of carbon emissions, but BNEF said even without a carbon price, wind energy remained 14 per cent cheaper than new coal and 18 per cent cheaper than new gas.

“The perception that fossil fuels are cheap and renewables are expensive is now out of date”,

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/renewables-now-cheaper-than-coal-and-gas-in-australia-62268

Made saltimbocca last night, too late saw someone had drunk the half bottle of white wine I had seen in the fridge earlier. So bubbled half a stubby Maibock into the frypan with the veal, sage and prosciutto, tbs sherry vinegar as well. Perfect! Different but perfect!

Watching Rudd on the news this evening crapping on about his call for continuing inquiries on swearing-gate my GF, who is politically neutral said, “I just wish this guy would go away.What a pest.”
What is he playing at?

I hope I don’t shock you Henry as we have different opinions on Rudd, but I don’t see why he continues to pursue this. I don’t think there is any interest by voters in it and I doubt most of Caucus cares.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/obamas-license-to-kill-999/

Surely the rest of the country will wake up to this fraud?
Won’t they?

Jeremy Sear has a theory on that:

http://somethingwonky.com/podcast/2013/2/8/31-tony-abbott-is-trying-to-pull-a-fast-one.html

”But it is absolute folly to then go and make them rock solid ‘promises’ when they are subject to revision due to all sorts of exogenous factors over which neither Treasury or the Government has any control. It is a trap for mugs.”

You don’t get it do you.

Unless you make that rock solid guarantee then you are not taking ownership. You are saying that you inflation figures are wrong. You are saying that your unemployment figures are wrong. You are saying that you don’t have a clue what will be spent on health education etc. You are saying that the entire budget is not worth a can of beans.

You are saying that the figures in your budget are wrong and cannot be trusted.

That leads to economic and political death.

He also reported that most of the problem schools belonged to a group of 55 that no-one wanted to tender for, because the sites had problems or were remote or whatever reason was used. He said these were bundled into one large tender on the principle that no school should miss out, and the tender was granted to Reed Constructions. Leece described the amount paid as probably excessive but warranted on equity grounds. It was these schools that dominated the Ray Hadley/Australian front page stories.

I wonder what happened to Reed Constructions?

Failed building group Reed Constructions may well have been trading while insolvent for several months before it officially entered administration, the liquidator of the company has suggested.
Liquidator Mark Robinson of PPB Advisory told SmartCompany this morning that although an investigation is still ongoing, it may very well be Reed was insolvent as early as March.
The company had been in dispute with the New South Wales Government over some projects. The report even says this may have contributed to the company’s collapse.
http://www.smartcompany.com.au/construction-and-engineering/051055-liquidator-reveals-reed-constructions-may-have-been-insolvent-for-months-before-collapse.html