Australians are a supplier of salient ideas

So what exactly does Australia contribute to the world? Why should other countries listen to what our politicians have to say? Kevin Rudd is by no means an investment banker, but Mr Rudd was in the United States pitching Australia as an investment safe haven because of Australia's perceived resilience in a time of great economic uncertainty. The pitch was made in the offices of Private Equity (PE) partners Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) and there were representatives from Moody's, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and various other PE firms. 

Strangely, according to Kim Beazley, Ambassador designate to the United States, Australia is a "supplier of salient ideas" and that this could be seen through "the responses of President Obama to [kevin rudd ] in the last couple of days on the G20 issues and the global warming issues". Mr Beazley was probably referring to Australia's proposed compromise deal under which developing countries would set their own binding schedules to cut carbon pollution. However, the United States has merely described this idea as a "constructive proposal".

What exactly was Kim Beazley implying when he said that Australia was a "supplier of salient ideas"? The natural interpretation would be that Australia simply provides good ideas, the other interpretation is that Mr Rudd is a "legal internationalist". That is, someone who is preoccupied with processes, forms and structures and spends little (if any) time thinking about the outcomes. Alternatively, to be blunt, Mr Rudd merely talks the talk, but does not walk the walk.

Evidence to back up this point can be seen from Mr Rudd's ambitious reform agenda aimed at lifting Australia's influence in international affairs, including the creation of an Asia-Pacific community (similar to that of the EU) or the establishment of a nuclear non-proliferation commission. His diplomatic background was supposed to improve foreign relations with Japan, China and India. Two years later, none of above have eventuated. In fact, Australia's relations with Japan, China and India have arguably deteriorated as Liberal Senator Russell Trood stated in an interview with The Weekend Australian.

With regards to Rudd's climate change policy, he is happy to force the Australian people and corporations into higher costs of energy and ultimately higher costs of living despite the wrath of the global financial crisis. Furthermore, he was happy to force Australians to accept this predicament despite having little international support to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The emissions trading scheme (ETS) was tested in the European Union and failed, so why would it succeed in Australia? The ETS is really a scheme that proliferates the free market into environmental policy making. Ultimately, corporations or groups which do not pollute will sell their carbon credits to the highest bidders (usually the highest polluters). The net carbon reduction is negligible, but the costs are borne by consumers and corporations to the benefit of the government.

Hopefully, kRudd's ETS is just another of his "salient ideas" and that a climate change policy based on legislation and regulation forcing the reduction in fossil fuel extraction and pollution and the shifting resources towards research and development of renewable energy sources.