Money is not the problem

 

I think many of you know about the surprise decision by the Autralian government in mid September 2021 to join the United States and United Kingdom in a pact called AUKUS for eight submarines to be built for Australia with propulsion coming from nuclear fission, some time between 2030 and 2040.

 

It was surprising for many reasons.  The first that comes to mind is that Australia is a country that for civil purposes does not use nuclear energy for electricity production but for nuclear medicine,1 and until yesterday had no military use for it.  The government declared that the use of nuclear technology will not extend to armaments.2

 

The second is that Australia already had a contract with a French company, Naval Group, to build twelve new submarines.  These were to work with diesel and electricity, and the basis for their design was actually a nuclear submarine, modified to change its propulsion from nuclear energy to diesel.  This contract had been thought to be worth $90 billion, from which $2 billion had already been spent.3

 

Naturally this was a slap in the face for the French state, which was determined to maintain a significant role in the Pacific, and the Australian contract was an important part of their strategy.  It was well known there were serious problems with the French project, with delays and an increase in costs, so much so that it was known the Australian government was looking at what alternatives there were for the Australian submarines.

 

Nevertheless it seems clear that these alternative considerations were made with great secrecy, and the French side were as surprised as the rest of the world with the step taken.

 

I do understand the advantages of a nuclear submarine, being able to remain permanently under the sea surface, on one that is powered by diesel, which has to resurface after some time to take on diesel and oxygen to be able to operate.  I also understand the fears of people about energy from nuclear fission, whose waste products can be used to build nuclear weapons.

 

What I wanted to comment here was about the expenditure, and the hypocrisy of our leaders that it demonstrates.

 

Consider now that the government has decided that instead of simply adopting the French nuclear submarine, adopt the American one, before even knowing how much this will cost.  It is thought that this new project will cost much more than the $90 billion of the French project.4

 

It is estimated that the Australian government will have to pay hundreds of millions of Australian dollars to the French Naval Group for tearing up the original contract.

 

Some time ago, the Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce declared he would not accept to increase the ambition of the country to combat climate change before knowing how much this would cost.5  Has Joyce accepted the AUKUS submarines without knowing the (astronimical) price?

When the government declares that something cannot be done because there is no money, it wasn’t planned, the price is too high or some variation thereof, the truth is that the subject is not a priority.  Period.

 

Take the Centrelink program, labelled Robodebt by its critics, which was trying to recover a few thousands of dollars apiece from those on social benefits, who had allegedly been overpaid.  Some time ago, this program was terminated hastily, after creating so much heartache amongst those who had unjustly been accused, and after many months of criticism.

 

Then consider the Jobkeeper benefit that was paid out until March 2021 as an assistance to organisations that estimated they were going to be worse off, to maintain the employment of hundreds of thousands of workers affected by COVID restrictions.  Lately, it was estimated that $13 billion were given to companies that in fact had not reduced their revenue during the pandemic, yet the government will not ask for the money back.6  Thirteen billion dollars!

 

On the other hand, the government agency Centrelink is attempting to recover $32 million from 11000 individuals, being overpayments related to the pandemic.7

 

Strong with the weak and weak with the strong.

 

1https://www.ansto.gov.au/about/what-we-do/at-ansto, retrieved 21/9/2021

2https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-16/australia-nuclear-submarine-partnership-us-uk/100465814, retrieved 21/9/2021.

3https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-02/defence-contingency-planning-french-submarine-program-germans/100184644, retrieved 21/9/2021

4https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/australian-politics/2021/09/17/aukus-nuclear-submarines-cost/, retrieved 21/9/2021

5https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/we-ve-been-sucked-into-this-before-barnaby-joyce-won-t-back-climate-action-before-seeing-the-cost-20210810-p58hm3.html, retrieved 21/9/2021

6https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/jobkeeper-largesse-tops-13b-20210828-p58mqm, retrieved 21/9/2021

7https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-16/welfare-pandemic-covid-centrelink-debts-jobkeeper/100379072, retrieved 21/9/2021