What You Need To Know About | CIS

The Centre For Independent Studies

Hosted by Karla Pincott, What You Need to Know About is the podcast that covers exactly that. Hear from CIS’ experts on the key points of their research, providing you with concise and insightful overviews of complex topics. In each episode, we break down intricate policy issues, economic trends, social challenges, and more, delivering the essential information you need to stay informed in today’s fast-paced world. Join us as we cut through the noise and dive straight into the heart of matters that shape our society. Whether you’re a policy enthusiast, a curious mind, or just someone looking to grasp the essentials without getting lost in the details, What You Need to Know About is your go-to source for bite-sized yet comprehensive insights. read less
NewsNews

Episodes

The six fundamental flaws underpinning the energy transition
Yesterday
The six fundamental flaws underpinning the energy transition
The Australian Government wants to transition our electricity system to net zero carbon emissions by relying on wind and solar power – excluding alternatives such as small nuclear reactors. Its justification for this switch rests on the claim that a renewables-dominated system is environmentally beneficial and economically superior to using fossil fuels and nuclear energy. But its premise is based on a flawed argument which has left out key elements which portray a different picture. Dive in with Karla Pincott and Aidan Morrison, the Director of Energy Research, to learn what you need to know about the six fundamental flaws underpinning the energy transition. You can also read the whole paper here: https://www.cis.org.au/publication/the-six-fundamental-flaws-underpinning-the-energy-transition/  Hosted by Karla Pincott, What You Need to Know About is the podcast that covers exactly that. Hear from CIS experts on the key points in their research, providing you with concise and insightful overviews of complex topics. In each episode, Karla breaks down intricate policy issues, economic trends, social challenges, and more, delivering the essential information you need to stay informed in today's fast-paced world. Join us as we cut through the noise and dive straight into the heart of matters that shape our society. Whether you're a policy enthusiast, a curious mind, or just someone looking to grasp the essentials without getting lost in the details, What You Need to Know About is your go-to source for bite-sized yet comprehensive insights. #auspol #nuclear #energytransition
How wasteful spending pushes up major infrastructure costs
Dec 5 2023
How wasteful spending pushes up major infrastructure costs
Read the paper here.  A large amount of taxpayers’ money, state and federal, is expended on large scale infrastructure that is intended to play a crucial part in Australia’s growth and prosperity — although some of it is arguably wasteful or perhaps even pork-barrelling. And as the recent federal government Infrastructure Investment Review found in axing around 50 planned projects, some “do not demonstrate merit, lack any national strategic rationale and do not meet the Australian Government’s national investment priorities. In many cases these projects are also at high risk of further cost pressures and/or delays.” But major infrastructure projects in Australia are often also more expensive than comparable projects in other countries, even after even after adjusting for differences in currencies and purchasing power. While a 2014 Productivity Commission Inquiry report on public infrastructure argued that there were examples where Australia was competitive internationally, and that the systematic evidence was missing or incomplete, it noted that several commentators argued Australia performed worse than other countries. The PC, while arguing for substantial reform to our infrastructure processes, also noted there was “considerable uncertainty about many facets of construction costs. There are sometimes large and inexplicable variations in the construction costs for what appear to be similar activities, such as the cost per kilometre of rail projects.” It is unlikely that much has improved since 2014, especially given the findings of the recent review and estimates that construction costs increased more than 25% over the five years to mid-2022. There are several factors that contribute to the higher costs of major infrastructure in Australia. The available evidence on major infrastructure construction costs shows that there have been some recent significant increases in input costs. This particularly applies to labour and project management costs, plus contract design, complexity and poor management leading to risk offloading, cost over-runs and costly schedule over-runs. However, it is important to note that the cost of projects can also vary based on specific circumstances, project scope, and other factors. As listed below, and explained in more detail in the subsequent sections related to costs, factors that can contribute to higher costs for Australian infrastructure projects include: Labour and Industrial Relations: Australia generally has higher labour costs compared with many other countries. Wages, benefits, and labour regulations can contribute to higher project costs. Lower Productivity: Productivity is hampered by the lack of a sufficiently educated, skilled and engaged workforce, an efficient work environment, innovation, efficient procurement models and ultimately trust between industry stakeholders. Regulations and Standards: Australia has strict regulations and standards when it comes to construction, safety, and environmental considerations. Compliance with these regulations often adds to the complexity and cost of infrastructure projects. Design Complexity: Infrastructure projects in Australia often involve complex engineering and design requirements. This can include considerations such as environmental impact, sustainability, and resilience, which may contribute to increased costs. Project Management: Effective project management is crucial for successful infrastructure projects. Factors like inefficient planning, delays, and changes in scope can contribute to cost overruns. Risk Offloading: Project cost is often inflated in Australia by a misguided focus on unloading risk in the early stages of a project’s development. This is often driven by the type of contract that is presented to the industry by lawyers, with the objective of minimising up-front costs and putting most of the risks on the contractors. This practice is not generally followed in other countries, which look at ‘whole of Life’ costs and benefits, resulting in a more cooperative and cheaper outcome. *** Hosted by Karla Pincott, What You Need to Know About is the podcast that covers exactly that. Hear from CIS’ experts on the key points of their research, providing you with concise and insightful overviews of complex topics. In each episode, we break down intricate policy issues, economic trends, social challenges, and more, delivering the essential information you need to stay informed in today’s fast-paced world. Join us as we cut through the noise and dive straight into the heart of matters that shape our society. Whether you’re a policy enthusiast, a curious mind, or just someone looking to grasp the essentials without getting lost in the details, What You Need to Know About is your go-to source for bite-sized yet comprehensive insights.
Reforms to teacher education
Sep 26 2023
Reforms to teacher education
Hosted by Karla Pincott, What You Need to Know About is the podcast that covers exactly that. Hear from CIS' experts on the key points of their research, providing you with concise and insightful overviews of complex topics. In each episode, we break down intricate policy issues, economic trends, social challenges, and more, delivering the essential information you need to stay informed in today's fast-paced world.   Join us as we cut through the noise and dive straight into the heart of matters that shape our society. Whether you're a policy enthusiast, a curious mind, or just someone looking to grasp the essentials without getting lost in the details, What You Need to Know About is your go-to source for bite-sized yet comprehensive insights. Karla Pincott Karla Pincott is the Director of Communications at the Centre for Independent Studies, and the Managing Editor at BusinessWoman Media. Below is an excerpt from Glenn Fahey's latest article:  The proposed overhaul to teacher training will mean better prepared teachers and a greater expectation of training providers. But policymakers should see this as the start — not the end — of reform to the sector. With education ministers last week committing to the recommendations of the Mark Scott-led Teacher Education Expert Panel, the coming years will potentially see transformative change to initial teacher education. The shakeup provides much-needed improvement to teacher training standards, how training will be monitored, and how practical classroom practice can be prioritised in preparing teachers. This has been a long time coming and the lack of it has been undermining the education system. Shifting the reform effort so that it targets the quality of teacher training providers, not teaching students, is a refreshing change. Read more here.  Support us here.  #auspol 5YSGGR2Q2GNZSKOF
Politicisation – the attack on merit and our way of life
Sep 6 2023
Politicisation – the attack on merit and our way of life
Hosted by Karla Pincott, What You Need to Know About is the podcast that covers exactly that. Hear from CIS' experts on the key points of their research, providing you with concise and insightful overviews of complex topics. In each episode, we break down intricate policy issues, economic trends, social challenges, and more, delivering the essential information you need to stay informed in today's fast-paced world.   Join us as we cut through the noise and dive straight into the heart of matters that shape our society. Whether you're a policy enthusiast, a curious mind, or just someone looking to grasp the essentials without getting lost in the details, What You Need to Know About is your go-to source for bite-sized yet comprehensive insights.   Karla Pincott Karla Pincott is the Director of Communications at the Centre for Independent Studies, and the Managing Editor at BusinessWoman Media.   #auspol 5YSGGR2Q2GNZSKOF Below is an excerpt from Scott Prasser paper, which can be read here.  Types of politicisation in government Making senior appointments based on partisanship, personal relationships, loyalty;Political patronage — rewarding personal and political loyalty in appointments to government advisory boards and committees;Allocating public finds for political advantage;Public servants’ direct political involvement in campaigning and party activity;Appointments of those politically aligned but based on merit selection criteria (“meritorious mates”);Appointments on grounds of equity or ‘representativeness’ in addition to/or even instead of narrow position ‘merit’ criteria;Public servants serving in ‘political’ roles in developing policy (as distinct from sharing work with ministers);Development of a ‘responsive’ public service through contractual employment (giving ministers what they want as distinct from what they need);Expansion of ministerial roles and offices into more and more areas of administration through expansion of ministers’ offices and powers to oversee and supplant public service functions (giving directions, preparation of cabinet submissions, co-ordination).
Rental and Housing Affordability with Peter Tulip
Aug 30 2023
Rental and Housing Affordability with Peter Tulip
We need to relax zoning restrictions to allow more housing. At a society level, this requires more acceptance of higher density and less opposition to new development. We need to put more weight on the interests of renters and future home buyers and less weight on the interests of nearby residents. This rebalancing will shift the incentives for elected governments to act. Societal pressure over the issue of housing affordability is growing, but needs to be encouraged. Were the Victorian government inclined to do something to improve housing affordability, there are several measures it could take. One increasingly popular and effective approach is for the state government to set conditions that apply across local plans. For example, NSW removed limits on the construction of granny flats. New Zealand’s ‘Medium Density Residential Standard’ requires large cities to permit up to three storeys and three dwellings on all existing residential parcels of land. California’s AB 2011 allowed medium-density residential development to proceed by right in commercial zones. American research lists dozens of similar reforms. Minimum standards can prevent the worst restrictions. However, their uniformity is a limitation: different levels and forms of density are appropriate in different areas. Granny flats are not efficient in the inner suburbs, while high-rises are not efficient on the outskirts. In practice, blanket over-rides such as Auckland’s Unitary Plan have tended to increase density most on the outskirts; whereas Melbourne arguably most needs development in inner suburbs. A more flexible approach is for the state government to set and enforce construction targets for local councils, allowing each council to decide how the target should be met. Councils could choose a small number of high-density developments or a larger number of medium density developments. Either choice improves housing affordability. The important thing is that councils need to allow more housing. The quantity should be decided centrally; the type can be decentralised. An approach like this is followed in NSW and many foreign jurisdictions, including England, California and some Canadian provinces. However, most of those targets are too low and inadequately enforced. The rationale for the state government over-riding local councils is that the councils are biased against development. They represent nearby residents, not the direct beneficiaries — the newcomers moving into the area – nor the indirect beneficiaries, the renters and future home buyers who pay lower housing costs. Local governments will act like a cartel, restricting supply and driving up the price of housing. That benefits local property owners, but this is more than outweighed by the harm done to potential residents from outside the area and future generations. - Peter Tulip Read the rest of the paper here: https://www.cis.org.au/publication/rental-and-housing-affordability-submission-to-the-victorian-legislative-councils-legal-and-social-issues-committee/   5YSGGR2Q2GNZSKOF
Heeding expert advice
Aug 24 2023
Heeding expert advice
During the Covid-19 pandemic, state and territory leaders afforded great responsibility for decisions about managing both the impact of the virus and the expectations of a fearful public to unelected public health experts. Severe restrictions imposed on movement and association at the behest of these experts — Chief Medical Officers (CMOs) — lasted for many months. The exceptional circumstances of the pandemic hardly formed part of the regular routine of government. Indeed, so exceptional was the pandemic that dependence on advisors with medical and public health expertise might well have been unavoidable if government was to be effective. Faced with the need to assuage public fears, there was also a need for the public to hear what medical experts made of the pandemic and the dangers it posed. Most Australians readily complied with state-imposed edicts, apparently confident that governments were acting only in the best interests of citizens. However, many expressed concern that as the pandemic ran its course, political leaders appeared to be doing one of two things. Either they followed the advice of medical experts blindly and without regard to the social, economic and community impact of the imposed measures; or they ignored expert medical advice because of concerns about its likely impact would fuel worries that they were not doing enough to keep citizens ‘safe’.[1] These concerns only compounded as, during the course of the pandemic, medical experts began to fall out with one another, thereby dissolving any notion of universal medical consensus about how best to manage contagion.[2] As the pandemic ran its course, populations bowed to the dictates of chief medical officers. The will and wishes of the demos were subordinated to the opinions and directions of the knowledgeable few. While the Covid-19 pandemic provides a rare, if egregious, example, of their doing so, the ceding by elected representatives of decision-making to health bureaucrats is just one example of the problem that Adrian Pabst, a political scientist, has described as double delegation — “whereby representatives elected by citizens delegate power to unelected officials who are part of a professional political class.” Read the rest of the paper here: www.cis.org.au/publication/autho…rust-the-experts/ 5YSGGR2Q2GNZSKOF