Treasurer Swan’s alleged tools of trade.
As the Federal Budget approaches, renewable energy supporters — including solar power fans — tend to get a bit twitchy. You know the deal folks, Julia “The Ranga Boss Lady” Gillard tells Wayne “The Knife” Swan that we’re not getting enough revenue from the carbon tax and to go find some more.
The Knife then goes through the options: Tax polluters more? Pop round Gina “The Big G” place with the hat asking for more shekels Oliver Twist-style? Try another, fairer, mining tax?
Of course not. There’s the old, safe and tried-and-true option of gouging and cutting Government subsidies to renewable energy programs. This usually means two things: (1) The Treasurer (bless ‘im) sets solar energy squarely in his crosshairs and (2) the familiar “boom and bust” cycle takes its next inexorable turn as investors head for the door.
The feds (once again) show their preference for fossil fuel polluters over renewables when the money gets a bit tight.
Luckily a number of pro-renewable energy groups have seen this scenario on the horizon and have set up a petition at paidtopollute.org.au where you can go and petition the Treasurer to end subsidies to polluters. We encourage you to do so.
The campaign to end polluter handouts (and therefore balance the budget without having to slash renewable energy programs) is of course laudable. Imagine the extra money in the feds Budget should polluters be made to pay instead of receiving ever increasing handouts? (Hops down off high horse as feels self entering rant mode).
However the very fact that we — as solar fans — should be concerned about cutbacks to renewable energy programs raises another question. Should we, as the solar sector, be concerned about a lack of government support?
This is a variation on a theme that we at SQHQ have been banging on about for quite a while now. Rather than businesses withholding investments due to a lack of certainty in the solar sector (the aforementioned boom and bust factor), would a different approach to Government subsidies be more productive?
I speak here of a German-style sliding scale of Government support. One where subsidies are reduced as the solar sector establishes itself. The subsidies end as the sector is able to stand on its own two feet and investment is more or less guaranteed.
Arguments could be made that the familiar “boom and bust” cycle is what periodically kills the solar sector and a more guaranteed subsidy would add that all important certainty for investors. Secondly, taxpayers would be more likely to accept solar (and renewable) subsidies should this system be in place. Thirdly it would prevent cost-cutting Treasurers all over the land from casting their leery eyes over subsidies for solar power (the future of Australian energy) while sharpening the Budget knives.
What say you solar fans? Let’s continue the debate either here in the comments or over at our Facebook Page.
RSS - Posts
Without mining Australia would be in a recession and since when do poorer people buy more solar panels, that’s right they don’t. Why do you people always try to denigrate the only strong sector Australia has/had left, we can’t all install cheap chinese solar panels on roofs for a living.
Cyril – With solar now cheaper than an old Ford Falcon, even the budget minded suburbanites are getting into it as a great way to reduce power company extortion – 1 million Australian households and growing! Stop trolling for cash and get yourself some solar panels if you want your budget to balance!