Terry McCrann: Minerals body bends to keep BHP’s money

THE Minerals Council of Australia has embraced BHP’s (cynical) stupidity and its annual $1.9 million cheque, writes Terry McCrann.

THE Minerals Council of Australia has embraced BHP’s (cynical) stupidity and its annual $1.9 million cheque.

Three months ago BHP demanded the MCA change its (lukewarm) stance on global warming — to join BHP in worshipping loudly and often at the Church of Gaia — and to also abandon its support for new coal-fired power stations.

For what could be more ridiculous — a minerals industry lobby group supporting the use of a major mineral? If that’s not put a stop to, what would we see next?

BHP AT ODDS WITH NATION’S PEAK MINING GROUP OVER ITS LACK OF SUPPORT FOR CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY

MINING TITAN’S ANTI-COAL THREAT TO MINERALS COUNCIL AGAINST NATIONAL INTERESTS

Tourism Australia encouraging tourism to, well, Australia? The banking association lobbying on behalf of banks? The disturbing list is almost endless.

Either the MCA stopped and switched or BHP would take its $1.9 million a year — around 17 per cent of the MCA’s budget — and go home.

It would likely also have been followed by Rio Tinto which worships at the same Church of Gaia, for exactly the same cynical — and stupid — reason as BHP; and so close to one-third of the MCA’s budget would have disappeared.

Asked to choose between the money and fact-based reality, the MCA has chosen the money.

It’s now making the ritualistic statements demanded by BHP on behalf of the Church of Gaia of transitioning to a low-emissions global economy and acknowledging that sustained global action was required to reduce the risks of “human-induced climate change”.

There’s both a bit of wriggle room and even more BHP-quality stupidity in the insertion of that word “global”. Picture: AFP/ William West

There’s both a bit of wriggle room and even more BHP-quality stupidity in the insertion of that word “global”.

The MCA clearly thinks it’s cleverly carved an ‘out’ if it becomes clear, as indeed it already is, that we are not going to get “global action” on climate change.

The Paris Acord is a joke and a fraud not even hiding but strutting in plain sight. It’s got nothing to do with “tackling climate change”.

It’s all and only about keeping the great gravy train of so-called climate action — multi-billion dollar handouts to countries, to companies and to main-chancers generally; and conferences and research grants and yet more and more conferences — chugging merrily and carbon dioxide emittingly along.

Previously, under former CEO Brendan Pearson — forced out by BHP — MCA had prioritised energy affordability and reliability over (CO2) emissions reduction.

Now it’s embraced BHP’s demanded triple aims of “reliability, affordability and Australia’s commitment to reduce emissions” as equals.

Fact-based reality used to tell the MCA that the first two are fundamentally incompatible with the third. If you want the first two, you have to abandon mindless emissions reduction.

Previously, fact-based reality had led the (Pearson) MCA to call for new (high-efficiency, low-emission) coal-fired power stations: an entirely rational and commendable exercise in informed self-interest — both for the industry and for the country.

Now, the Pearson-less MCA has embraced BHP’s fraudulent construct of a “technology-neutral approach” where no one technology was favoured over others.

Why fraudulent? Because BHP means absolutely no such thing: its idea of a “technology-neutral approach” is to either impose regulatory costs on coal-fired power or subsidise so-called renewables and indeed, preferably, both.

And this month we saw Resources Minister Matthew Canavan announce he had fundamentally lost the plot by embracing so-called carbon capture and storage — just another way of artificially and pointlessly ramping up the price of coal-fired power.

The cynical method, such as it is, in the BHP (and Rio) embrace of the Church of Gaia and so-called “action on climate change” is that we, in Australia and the rest of the developed world, will cut back on emissions, while China will go on merrily emitting, using BHP’s coal and iron ore.

But it’s also very stupid. Trashing what you do is never a good idea: BHP should ask the banks about the NAB’s similarly dumb “we’re breaking up with the other banks” ploy.

The cynicism retags BHP as the Big Un-Australian. The stupidity adds the word Big “Dumb” Un-Australian.

NAB WAS THE STUPID VICTIM

THE first two days of the banking royal commission has exposed some pretty impressive stupidity by NAB.

But, it’s important to note, historical stupidity, some years ago.

They created an incentive for their staff to at the very least ‘oversell’ home loans; and even more, as detailed, to engage in outright fraud.

BROKERS ARE HOMING IN ON MORTGAGE WEAK LINK, ROYAL COMMISSION HEARS

NAB HANDS OVER BOMBSHELL BRIBE REPORT

BANKING ROYAL COMMISSION SWAMPED

You’d pick up a bonus on the loans sold and if you were ‘clever’ a kickback as well.

But, just exactly who is the victim in all this?

Yes, customers got loans they would not otherwise have got. Perhaps: that’s not entirely or uniformly clear. But even so, does that make such a person a victim?

It seems to me the real victim is the bank.

It lost money. It ended up with a regulatory headache, damaged its brand and has ongoing issues and costs. Sure, a victim of its own stupidity.

But is this so unknown and so unusual in any business? Does it justify a full-on RC?

What next? An RC into staff pilfering from stores? Into shoppers not fully scanning or mis-scanning at those supermarket self-serve check-outs?

So NAB was slow at reporting the bad behaviour to ASIC. What exactly was ASIC expected to do about it? NAB had moved to clean it up and sack the miscreants.

Indeed, given ASIC’s — poor — record, what would it have done about it?