Bring on the next royal commission

Some big questions from last Friday’s edition of Crikey: first off, who will be next to take a hit after the banks? Is it time to look around for the next worthy target? There’s certainly no shortage of contenders. Secondly, and it’s certainly related, what’s the legacy or Karl Marx in 2018? Helen Razer obviously has a view, but we’d love to hear yours too.

Re: Bernard Keane’s “Banking crisis exposes our tendency to disequilibrium”

Mark Freeman writes: Dear Crikey, Bernard Keene claims there’s been a regulatory backlash in Australian energy markets. It’s no wonder he didn’t elaborate. Electricity distribution is still priced by fantasy asset valuations, gas networks remain opaque and unregulated, the AEMC continues to delay five-minute wholesale electricity pricing and unregulated petrol prices display little competitive pressure.

The only respite comes from state governments. Queensland ordered its generators to stop manipulating 30-minute settlement electricity markets leading to price reductions. South Australia has reined in gas leakers and ancillary services with the giant lithium battery. This is all quite apart from action to hasten renewable energy uptake where the states are doing their best to fill in for the conflicted and hopeless feds. 

The whole Australian energy market is overdue for proper regulation preceding renewal and I’d suggest it be next in line for an unrestricted royal commission. 

John Richardson writes: After completing autopsies on the stinking carcasses of the financial services energy sectors, Bernard Keane wonders where the next “burning platform” will appear. For my money, why would anyone walk past the private health insurance racket?

Terry Goulden writes: Unfortunately the answer to the question in your last paragraph — “will politicians make the same mistake of allowing powerful corporations to get their way all the way to the crisis point when regulation-by-backlash sets in?” — is yes.

As communism worked very well on paper but not in the real world, free market forces do the same; that is, work well as a theory but fall down in practice. Maybe we could try the in-between economic way, that is, a semi-regulated economy. Australia used to be one when our Liberal Party actually was Liberal not neocon. Unfortunately I doubt if any of the current members of the Liberal Party or the corporate class would have the self interest to admit how much their economic ideology is just plain wrong.

Re: Helen Razer’s “Happy 200th birthday, Marx, you wonderful, misunderstood shit-stirrer!”

Djbekka writes: Thanks for the shout out about Karl. I have been thinking a lot about him recently. You know, the stuff about the financial sector being unproductive? We sure are seeing that in spades right now. My other big thank you to him is the concept “contradiction” — how could we live without that? I know so many people who say of some policy or other — some person or other, too — but that contradicts this? Yeah, I say, we’re all contradictory — get over it! Then I see a really puzzled face as the person works it out. Hurrah. Happy 200!

Howard writes: Nicely put Helen and a very timely reminder. The “crisis tendency of capitalism” continues. Long live the memory of the “wonderful, misunderstood shit-stirrer” Karl Marx.

Kyle Hargraves writes: Firstly, Helen, despite some correspondence to friends to the contrary (from frustration etc.) Marx was NOT a shit-stirrer. Marx identified the origin of profit (via surplus value) and his home country did not care for it. The longer version would occupy too much space but I am happy to provide it. As an aside, like Dickens, he put his kids into top-end schools (which is the smart thing to do). Marx was actually very bourgeois (roughly – from the French: people of the city).