Michael, so which is that you disagree with. Do you not believe renewables are competitive?
Malcolm Turnbull thinks renewables are competitive and thats is why he wants to remove subsidies.
So as far as the competitive bit both Shorten and Turnbull appear to be on the same page.
Subsidies are a seperate issue, Turnbull says subsidies aren’t needed. The point is renewables are needed more and more to meet our obligations to reduce emissions.
So some subsidy to encourage capital input is not a bad idea. Given coal power etc has been subsidised and even the plan to keep Liddell going would involve govt subsidy I cant see any problem with some subsidy to encourage cleaner power production and to fastrack investment in major power plants.
Saw this in Wikipedia:
"As of 2016, Federal energy policies continue to support the
coal mining and natural gas industries through
subsidies for fossil fuel use and production as the exports by those industries contribute significantly to the earnings of foreign exchange and government revenues.
[citation needed] Australia is one of the most coal-dependent countries in the world.
[1]Coal and natural gas, along with oil-based products, are currently the primary sources of Australian energy usage and the coal industry produces approximately 38% of Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions. In 2015 Federal policy reverted to a pro-coal economy with cuts to alternate and renewable energy government offices, targets and subsidies”
