The Hydrogen Fuel Discussion: What's the Buzz?

Hydrogen Fuel Station Sign [Source: Bexim CC BY-SA 4.0] 

On 7th December 2021, I was invited to join John Poljak of keynumbers to discuss some of the issues around hydrogen fuel and its potential impacts on transport and logistics. There is quite a buzz about hydrogen as a clean and abundant fuel to help to reduce carbon emissions. 

But for the general transport enthusiast, there is not much information available. John and I were invited to the Annual General Meeting of the Victorian Chapter of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILTA) to address some of the 'known knowns' and 'known unknowns' of hydrogen and its policy implications.

John has developed a wonderful discussion tool he calls "Key Numbers" to allow groups to brainstorm and spitball various "what if" scenarios by drawing on relevant data, or the key numbers' of various scenarios. 

John has some twenty years of experience in the offshore energy industry and really knows what he is talking about, especially when it comes to the statistics and presenting these in a digestible way for lay audiences. He is the brains behind the operation of keynumbers and did all of the legwork for our presentation.

We used keynumbers in our presentation to the ACT Chapter of CILTA via MS Teams at the Department of Infrastructure in Canberra on 11th October 2021 entitled Road Pricing and Electric Vehicles: Where to from here? John demonstrated how various fuel efficiencies compared with the Victorian and NSW governments' decisions to adopt a 2.5 cents per kilometre charge for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles compared with the fuel excise which is currently set at 43.3 cents per litre as at August 2021.

A video recording of the presentation is below:

 

The slides we used for the presentation are below. If the recording of the session is available, I will add it to this post at a later date.

The Hydrogen Fuel Discussion from University of Canberra

Background Reading

Australian Renewable Energy Agency: https://arena.gov.au/renewable-energy/hydrogen/.

Bordoff, J. & O’Sullivan, M.L. (2021). Green Upheaval: The New Geopolitics of Energy, Foreign Affairs, January/February.

Department of Industry, Science Energy and Resources. Australia's Long-Term Emissions Reduction Plan: https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/australias-long-term-emissions-reduction-plan.

Department of Industry, Science Energy and Resources. Growing Australia's hydrogen industry: https://www.industry.gov.au/policies-and-initiatives/growing-australias-hydrogen-industry. 

Hydrogen Fuels Australia: https://www.hydrogenfuelsaustralia.com.au/.

Greber, J. (2021). Reality check for Morrison and Taylor’s golden ticket to net zero. Australian Financial Review, 18 November.

International Energy Agency (2019). The Future of Hydrogen: Seizing today’s opportunities. Report for the government of Japan, June.

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (2021). Hydrogen Fuel Basics. US Department of Energy.

University of Sydney (2021). What you need to know about hydrogen energy. 22 January.

We must align our university research with Australia’s strategic intent

 

Publish or Perish? (Photo: Whiskey Monday via Flickr CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Academics often have lofty ideals about passion-driven curiosity in designing research projects. But these ideals are rarely practical. Changing times demand a changing focus in our approach to publicly funded research.

The ‘publish or perish’ metric drives many researchers to trendy topics that have little consequence in terms of Australia’s place in the world. In fact, the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) program has had the opposite effect, with Australian research journals rarely meeting the desired first quartile rankings that are essential for promotion in the academy.

The Prime Minister recently stated that the ‘publish or perish’ metric must give way to the commercialisation imperative. While this may be possible in some disciplines like the industrial sciences, this too is a flawed metric. And the potential for commercialisation in our current public-funded research system is a nightmare of bureaucratic red tape that will take more than good intentions to overcome.

Take the national Science and Research Priorities administered by the Department of Industry as a case in point. Third on the list is transport, which includes policy and other areas that are related to the social rather than the industrial or natural sciences. 

Health is the ninth priority. If the pandemic has taught us anything, it is that the science is fine. But the social and political issues have caused more problems than the natural sciences can explain in any meaningful way.

To be sure, energy and other policies are underpinned by science, but the practical approaches to deploying the science are beset by politics to ‘satisfice’ rather than deliver the most efficient or effective solution.

To take the national research priorities seriously, universities need to be incentivised to align research centres that establish collaborative networks focused on publishing research not only in the best journals but in Australian journals that are open access and available for anyone to use for free. It is rather strange that publicly funded Australian research outputs are hidden behind a commercial paywall and often in overseas journals.

When I was in Canada in 2007 a Harvard professor suggested that the best way to commercialise research is for companies to hire the best PhD graduates in the relevant field and to pay them to develop the company’s own intellectual property. Partnering with universities is such a barrier to commercialisation that it is hardly worth the effort.

Australia’s track record with commercialising our own competitive advantages leaves much to be desired. Take for instance the native macadamia nut. The US produced the most of this native crop until Australia gained ground up until 2015, only to lose the title to South Africa recently.

Consider also the CSIRO’s development of ‘fast wifi’ technology. Our world-leading research organisation had to fight its way through US courts to claim fees from their 1996 patent. If a government research agency has problems commercialising, what hope have our lumbering universities?

We are entering a stage in our strategic situation that will rely heavily on the higher education system if we are to address the challenges of the future. Our submariners need PhDs in nuclear engineering or physics. We need social and political approaches to effectively deploy scientific solutions. We need a cadre of educators sympathetic to our national priorities. And we need to provide incentives to keep the best educators in the sector.

Changing trade and security relations in the post-pandemic world order stress the importance of commercialising research. But so too is the necessity for language skills in Japanese, Hindi, Chinese, and Indonesian. Australians are notoriously monolingual, and this remains a barrier to commercialisation in the region.

There is scope for passion-driven research and academic freedom, and such ideals do not have to be at odds with the national research priorities. But if we are to ensure our future prosperity and security, commercialisation is one of many approaches to address the end of free market globalisation.

Rather than force all academic disciplines to commercialise, the key to integrating our research outputs is to align universities with our national research priorities. Such research must also prioritise open access publication in Australian journals if the outputs are to be useful.

M5 Incident: Myriad Aspects to Regulation and Road Safety

 

M5 Incident 28th October 2021. Photo by Michael de Percy CC BY-ND 4.0

Recently, while driving at 100 km/h on the M5, I saw a box on the road ahead. I assumed it was a cardboard box, an item that routinely appears on the M5. Instead, the box was made of checker plate and was full of tools. I saw the vehicle two ahead of me swerve so I moved over as far to the right as possible to avoid the object. But the vehicle in front of me struck the toolbox, causing the tools and spray paint in the box to hit the front of my vehicle. You can see the rest in the video. I did not add the soundtrack, I was listening to the stereo at the time. I stopped the vehicle, got out to check the driver was OK but then grabbed my phone and called 000 while checking for fuel leaks and smoke before approaching the vehicle. As I opened the door of the ute, the diver popped his seatbelt, scrambled out, and stood up next to me. I asked if he was alright and he said "I think so!" That was a lucky day on so many counts.

The next day I found my dashcam had recorded the incident. I hope this helps improve road safety or helps to educate others in any way that improves road safety in Australia. After commuting between Sydney and Gunning for the last two years on a frequent basis, I can say that driver arrogance and over-confidence on our highways are potential killers. But in the video below, this factor was absent. Fortunately, the B-Double missed the ute. Fortunately, nobody was driving like a lunatic. But add an arrogant and aggressive driver to the mix, and you do the math. It's pretty clear. I am so glad I was not being tailgated at the time.

The toolbox had apparently fallen off a new vehicle that had had professional modifications made to it. This brings into question the regulation of light commercial vehicle modifications. Heavy vehicles and their modifications are regulated and audited. But light commercial vehicles appear to exist in a regulatory void that may need addressing. To be sure, there are many lessons to be drawn from this incident, and I hope to report on some of the educational activities that might derive from this particular incident.

Here's the dashcam video:

Road Pricing and Electric Vehicles: Where to from here?

A road use charge on EVs is not a disincentive [Source: Mariordo, CC BY-SA 2.0]

Details for this event are available here: https://ciltinternational.org/events/road-pricing-and-electric-vehicles-where-to-from-here/.

Please note I will be updating this article over the next few days to provide more of the detail behind our presentation at CILTA in Canberra entitled "Road Pricing and Electric Vehicles: Where to from here" on 12th October 2021 with John Poljak, the founder of www.keynumbers.com.

The slides from our presentation are available below:

Road Pricing and Electric Vehicles: Where to from here? from University of Canberra

Background reading

Dossor, R. (2015). Revenue from road use. Parliamentary Library Briefing Book - 45th Parliament. Canberra: Parliamentary Library. https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departmen ts/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook45p/FundingRoads. 

Model of Critical Junctures

See my paper with Stephen Darlington from the AusPSA Conference 2021 here: https://www.politicalscience.com.au/2021/09/apsa-2021-conference-paper.html.

EV Road Use Charge: What's happening now?

Victoria: Road use charges of 2.5c/km (Victoria) on zero and low-emissions vehicles (ZLEVs) from 1 July 2021 (equivalent to fuel exercise charges). Note that conventional hybrids are not considered to be ZLEVs. Source: https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/registration/registration-fees/zlev-road-user-charge.

NSW: 2.5 cents per km (indexed) for electric vehicles and 2 cents per km (i.e. 80% of EV charge, indexed) for plug-in hybrid vehicles, by 1 July 2027 or when EVs reach 30% (whichever comes first). Source: https://www.nsw.gov.au/initiative/nsw-governments-electric-vehicle-strategy/road-user-charge 

SA: $3,000 subsidy with 2 cents per km (indexed) for plug-in hybrid vehicles, and 2.5 cents per km (indexed) for any other electric vehicles, by 1 July 2027 or 30% (as per NSW)

Timing

Infrastructure Partnerships Australia (2019) Road User Charging for Electric Vehicles. URL: https://infrastructure.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Road-User-Charging-for-Electric-vehicles-1.pdf.

Introducing a road user charge for electric vehicles is a home run reform. It represents a win-win for infrastructure users and taxpayers. But there is a catch – reform must be delivered soon.

keynumbers

• Headline versus reality: Keynumbers https://keynumbers.com
• Signal versus noise: EV road use charge 2.5c/km versus ICE Fuel excise at $0.427/litre
• Australia as a laggard? See Canada (which manufactures EVs) (comparative data)
• London congestion charging does not reduce congestion in the same way a distance-based charge, so not a panacea for congestion management
• NSW toll roads – M4
• Rome – surge pricing fast lanes

Incentives

KPMG Canada (2021):

“For those already inclined to buy an EV, they were motivated by environmental concerns, lower operating costs, tax incentives, and the prospect of reduced insurance premiums. For them, tax incentives were much less of an incentive than the environment or lower operating costs”.

Other incentives:

• Investment in charging infrastructure
• Reductions in registration fees
• Reductions in stamp duty and other purchasing-related subsidies
• ‘Soft’ loans 

Disincentives

Range anxiety:  https://www.chasingcars.com.au/news/electric-vehicles/we-test-five-electric-cars-until-they-die-in-an-australian-ev-range-test-model-3-kona-leaf-zs-ev-and-e-tron-tested/.

KPMG Canada (2021) (replicated findings of Electric Vehicle Council 2020):

“The main reasons cited by those planning to buy a vehicle but not an EV are the high cost (60 per cent); limited driving range [range anxiety] (51 per cent); lack of charging infrastructure (50 per cent); dubious battery lifespan (30 per cent), limited model options (24 per cent); and recharging time (24 per cent).

• 83 per cent of Canadians believe the auto makers should be required to invest in a national charging infrastructure.
• 89 per cent want EV charging stations installed at "every gas station" as well as shopping malls and grocery stores.
• 61 per cent say the pandemic made them realize that they need a vehicle. They said they would rather drive than take public transport.”

See: Electric Vehicle Council in partnership with carsales (2021). Consumer Attitudes Survey 2021. URL: https://electricvehiclecouncil.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021-EVC-carsales-Consumer-attitudes-survey-web.pdf.

Particulate emissions

OECD. https://www.oecd.org/environment/measures-needed-to-curb-particulate-matter-emitted-by-wear-of-car-parts-and-road-surfaces.htm.

Advocacy since 2015

• Based on understanding of technological inventions as critical junctures
• "Road Users Must Pay, Sooner Rather Than Later", The Conversation, 16 June 2015.
• "Toll war revs up: Sydney drivers face congestion tax or road user-pay system", The Sunday Telegraph, 12 July 2015.
• Getting serious on roads reform is one way our political leaders can get back on track, The Conversation, 25 August.
• De Percy, M.A. and Wanna, J. (Eds.) (2018). Road Pricing and Provision: Changed Traffic Conditions Ahead. Canberra: ANU Press. DOI: http://doi.org/10.22459/RPP.07.2018.
• Road user fee a step to reform: Those who drive petrol-fuelled cars are subsidising drivers of electric vehicles. The Australian, 25 November 2020. 
• Pearls and Irritations https://johnmenadue.com/road-pricing-must-start-with-electric-vehicles/ 

Webinars and wonders: A running sheet of interesting events during s2, 2021

Photo by Pkdowling313 [CC BY SA 4.0] 

 

I am listing the webinars I have attended this semester so I can keep track of those I wish to return to or to write up later. I will improve this page over the rest of the semester and add links where available.

24th August 2021, 3pm: NATSEM online workshop on electric vehicle policy.

26th August 2021, 11am: ANU SPIR, Revisiting the Baconian Method, Professor John Ure.

31st August 2021, 5pm: ANZSOG@ANU Online Book Launch. Politics, Policy and Public Administration in Theory and in Practice: Essays in honour of Professor John Wanna.

31st August 2021, 5pm: Sydney Institute, Twenty Years after 9/11 – The Hon John Howard AC.

3rd September 2021, 10am: CEDA Roundtable: Rapid antigen testing for Covid-19

3rd September 2021, 3pm: CEDA  Duty of care: meeting the aged care workforce challenge

6th September 2021, 12pm: CEDA Building trust in technology

13th September 2021, 12pm: CEDA Pandemic to endemic - beyond the jab. Speakers: Laureate Professor Peter Doherty AC, Melinda Cilento, Chief Executive, CEDA, Professor Raina MacIntyre, Head, Biosecurity Research Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW.

13th September 2021, 5pm: Sydney Institute Christianity and Australian Jurists – Chris Merritt, Justice Geoff Lindsay, Professor Wayne Hudson & Anne Henderson.

20th-22nd September 2021: Australian Political Studies Conference, Macquarie University.

23rd September 2021, 3.10pm: University of Canberra Human Research Ethics Committee, Ethical by Design: The Principles of the National Statement, Ian Pieper, Anesh Nair, Matt Muskat.

23rd September 2021, 5pm: Lowy Institute Australia's submarines: The world reacts.

27th September 2021, 6pm: United States Study Centre NATO Expert Talk Series: NATO's arms-control agenda.

29th September 2021, 12.30pm: Centre for Independent Studies, On Liberty EP70 | Peter Jennings | Did Australia buy the right boat? AUKUS, AUSMIN, and the "forever" alliance.

29th September 2021, 5pm: Lowy Institute Aiding the Pacific’s economic recovery.

30th September 2021, 10am: Sydney Institute, China, the United States and All That – Thomas Friedman.

30th September 2021, 6pm: Centre for Independent Studies Is Populism A Threat To Liberal Democracy? Professor Joe Forgas

5th October 2021, 3.30pm: CEDA Improving Australia's digital competitiveness

6th October 2021, 11am: Sydney Institute India and Pakistan after the Return of the Taliban – Sadanand Dhume.

6th October 2021, 12pm: The Australian Plus event, What Really Happened in Wuhan. Sharri Markson.

7th October 2021, 11am: United States Study Centre, The future of US politics: A conversation with The Brookings Institution's Sarah Binder and Thomas Mann.

12th October 2021, 6pm: CILTA, Intelligent Docks - Reducing congestion, demurrage, overtime and emissions. Adam Welch, Practice Manager, Assurance at Bestrane. https://ciltinternational.org/events/intelligent-docks-reducing-congestion-demurrage-overtime-and-emissions/.

13th October 2021, 9am: Centre for Independent Studies, The New Cold War. Professor John Mearsheimer.

14th October 2021, 4pm: Lowy Institute, In Conversation with Philippine Foreign Secretary Teodoro L. Locsin Jr.

18th October 2021, 12pm: Lowy Institute, 2021 Lowy Institute Media Lecture. Yalda Hakim.

21st October 2021, recorded: Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Papua New Guinea and the Belt and Road Initiative: the road to ruins or riches, Sarah O'Dowd.

26th October 2021, 5pm: The Sydney Institute, Dark Emu, Bruce Pascoe and the Hunter/Gatherer Controversy – Geoffrey Blainey & Warren Mundine.

11th November 2021, 6pm: Lowy Institute, 2021 Lowy Lecture — Jake Sullivan, US National Security Adviser.

11th-12th November 2021, 10am to 4pm: ACSPRI, Questionnaire Design Online. Dr Gordon Emmerson.

NSW ICAC Model: 'Shame culture' institution not suited to Australian democracy

Poor timing of the announcement into the investigation of Gladys Berejiklian aside, the NSW ICAC model represents a 'shame culture' institution that is not suited to Australian democracy.

The announcement by the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) of an investigation into the NSW Premier's alleged "breach of public trust" the week before lockdown ends was inherently political, despite it being within the institution’s powers.

The many people who voted for the NSW Government can be justifiably upset by the timing and the fact that unelected bodies like ICAC can influence political leadership in times of crisis. What system of redress do voters have toward this unelected body? 

Citizens do not vote for ICAC, but ICAC has created a situation that has toppled the leader of the party the majority of voters in NSW wanted to be in government. 

In the context of the current crisis, NSW citizens may be justifiably confused by the over-reach of power given to ICAC. Adam Smith's ‘impartial and well-informed spectator’ would be right to question whether ICAC’s actions were politically motivated.

In addition to preventing corruption, the model for ICAC in NSW has created a situation where an unelected body can ruin a state premier's reputation by doing little more than raising a suspicion. Simply put, the model for the NSW ICAC, originally designed to root out endemic corruption in 1980s NSW, has more recently focused on a process of ‘naming and shaming’.

To be sure, ICAC has had its successes in fighting corruption, but since its founding in 1988, three NSW premiers have now been named and shamed. The first two premiers lost their positions but were subsequently found not to have broken the law.

And a third premier has been shamed initially through collateral damage from a public hearing into another person, and subsequently through a public announcement of an investigation. This resulted in her resignation.

ICAC's powers need to be reviewed. Its current model can disrupt political leadership at the whim of an announcement. Three unelected bureaucrats, one full-time and two part-time commissioners, effectively hold the power of veto over state premiers in NSW.

A similar anti-corruption body has been debated at the federal level. But rather than the NSW model, the proposed federal model would not have public hearings. Some say that this is wrong - if it is good enough for others then it is good enough for the political elite.

But imagine if a prime minister was wrongly named and shamed and the federal government imploded like the NSW government is imploding this week? There is a clear incentive for enemies of the Australian state to use this system to destabilise our national government. Arguably, a federal anti-corruption body in the same mould as NSW represents a national security risk.

The NSW ICAC requires reform. Unelected bodies that have such power over our liberal democratic system are a destabilising force. That a third NSW premier has fallen from the 'shame culture' response created by ICAC suggests the efficacy of ICAC has been compromised by this capability.

But even if ICAC finds that the NSW Premier acted unethically (as opposed to illegally), is the political instability worth the finding? Voters are best able to decide who should lead them. Finding political solutions to political problems is a basic principle of liberal democracies.

The key issue is prosecuting something versus publicly naming and shaming. ‘Naming and shaming’ creates collateral damage that cannot be undone. Public hearings that destabilise our political system do not make politicians more accountable. They distract our political leaders from doing their jobs, especially in times of crisis. 

The concept of the rule of law provides for the rights of individuals and the inherent principle of innocence until proven guilty. Nevertheless, in cases such as those relating to national security, the burden of proof can be reversed. But the point is that the 'accused' engages with the legal process.

NSW ICAC investigations, when announced, do not facilitate the concepts of 'innocent until proven guilty' or rely on the reversal of the burden of proof. ICAC announcements are a form of naming and shaming that reinforces the perception of guilt.

The NSW ICAC model represents a 'shame culture' institution that is not suited to Australian democracy. Any federal anti-corruption body would benefit from closer adherence to the accepted norms of the rule of law and avoid the naming and shaming model adopted in NSW.

Has China compromised its long-term strategic discipline?

The image tweeted by Chinese Government spokesman Zhao Lijian in 2020.

I was rather surprised when China's spokesman Zhao Lijian tweeted the image above. My reading of Mao Tse-Tung seemed pretty straightforward in terms of a long-term strategy for China. Even during the changes brought about by Deng Xiaoping in the 1990s that led to having a foot in both camps (socialist/capitalist), it was not an undoing of Mao's strategy.

For example, Mao warned that by 2001 China would be a great socialist industrial country, but:

...we must be modest - not only now, but forty-five years hence as well. We should always be modest. In our international relations, we Chinese people should get rid of great-power chauvinism resolutely, thoroughly, wholly and completely. "In Commemoration of Dr. Sun Yat-sen" (November 1956). 

It was certainly the case that following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Deng Xiaoping seemingly adapted Mao's strategy to changing circumstances, in that:

It is perfectly true that we should learn from the good experience of all countries, socialist or capitalist, about this there is no argument. 

Further, and although not blindly trusting the West, there was no strategic intention by Mao to start a war:

As for the imperialist countries, we should unite with their people and strive to coexist peacefully with those countries, do business with them and prevent a possible war, but under no circumstances should we harbour any unrealistic notions about them.

So what has brought about the change in China's strategy? Today, I was fortunate enough to be able to pose this question to New York Times columnist, Thomas Friedman, at a Sydney Institute event:

 

It was interesting that Friedman couldn't work it out either. It just doesn't make any sense. I would argue that China has messed up its foreign and strategic policy, perhaps echoing Mao's warnings against great-power chauvinism. The discipline that China sustained for the last eight decades is impressive, yet it has been so readily undone in just a few short years. 

For me, at least, it justifies Australia's strategic policy response, and the world has changed yet again. What an interesting period of history to have witnessed.

Will Australia's Nuclear-powered Submarines Negate the Regional Bomber Concept?

The Rockwell B1-B Lancer Bomber. Photo by USAF [Public Domain].

Australia's F-111 strike aircraft was a major element in defending the sea-air gap to Australia's north. The RAAF's F-35A Lightning II fifth-generation fighter and the stop-gap F/A-18F Super Hornet provide an up-to-date air force.

RAAF F-111s during Exercise Kangaroo '81 [Public Domain]

But without a long-range capability, I couldn't help but think our ability to deter a would-be attacker was rather anemic. That all changed with the decision to develop a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines as part of the new AUKUS trilateral security partnership.

The nuclear-powered Virginia class attack submarine has been touted as an option for the RAN.
Photo by DVIDSHUB [CC BY 2.0]

But what about the regional bomber concept that has been touted as another possibility for commanding the sea-air approaches to Australia?

This week I attended a live YouTube webinar hosted by the Centre for Independent Studies featuring the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Peter Jennings. I was able to ask Peter the question: Do nuclear-powered submarines negate the need for a regional bomber concept to fill the sea-air gap capability left by the retirement of the F-111s?

Here is his thoughtful response:

The B1-R concept adopts the United States' retired B1 Lancer bombers and converts them to an Australian variant that has the potential to reinstate the lost sea-air gap capability.

For more information on the regional bomber concept, this article by Stephen Kuper (2020) sets it out well: Supporting allied long-range strike: Reviving the B-1R regional bomber concept. 

Developing a Professional Narrative: One of My Own

Lake Pejar, Upper Lachlan Shire, NSW, 13 March 2021.

My point here is to demonstrate to my students why I think a personal narrative is so important. While I don't pretend to have achieved any notable measure of success, I can say faithfully that I have achieved everything I dreamt I would. But like Lily Tomlin:

All my life I always wanted to be someone. I see now I should have been more specific.

But my own journey has provided enough lessons that I am confident I can convey those lessons to my students in a way that is either meaningful now or at some 'aha!' moment in the future. At least I can hope. Oh, wait, the Stoics were not big fans of hope... but I digress.

Keswick, Gunning NSW. Built by the Caldwell brothers in 1926.

I always wanted to work in Canberra as an academic. But first, I wanted to be a fighter pilot (I became an army officer and qualified as an air contact officer - so close!); to be some kind of member of the clergy to study theology (I became a local officer in a Salvation Army corps - deputy bandmaster and Songsters leader - my family has a long history with the Salvos dating back to the 1890s in Guyra); to be a senator (I decided a long time ago that I do not have the wherewithal to be a politician); and to be a political scientist. But I was more specific. I wanted to be a political scientist in Canberra but live in the NSW regions somewhere around Canberra. In a federation house (my great-grandparents' federation house in Haberfield was amazing).

And now that's exactly what I do. I measure my level of satisfaction y the way I wake up in the morning. If I leap out of bed ready to tackle the day's challenges, it's all good. But I vowed never to keep doing the same old thing if I woke up thinking 'By God, I cannot stand this job!' I had that experience when I was 19 and I took a chance and resigned that day. I joined the Army Reserve and did all sorts of casual jobs and, two attempts later, I marched into Duntroon.

Air Contact Officer course 1996, RAAF Base Williamtown just before calling in F/A-18 ground attack missions marked by my artillery battery at Singleton Military Area.

My point is not to suggest that I am any model of success - far from it - but that I wrote down what I wanted years ago and it has slowly materialised. Not necessarily easily or through good management, but it has all transpired. I remember sitting in the scrub at Shoalwater Bay Training Area imagining I was doing my PhD at ANU, being supervised by Professor John Wanna, who was one of the authors of my textbook, Davis, G., J. Wanna, J. Warhurst and P. Weller. (1993). Public Policy in Australia. Second Edition. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. 

I liked John's writing style and in 2013, I graduated with a PhD in Political Science from ANU with John as my supervisor. The key point is not that it happened, but that it was a part of my narrative, my story.

My 1993 policy studies textbook at Deakin Uni in 1994 with my signed copy of John's first edition.

To cut a long story short (and to reserve a few things that are for me!), below is a recent narrative I wrote about why I was applying for a committee role - and who I am, and what I stand for - which is what I am asking my students to do this semester.

Description of the candidate and their reasons for nominating:

Description of the Candidate

Dr Michael de Percy FCILT is Senior Lecturer in Political Science at the Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra. He holds a PhD in Political Science from the Australian National University, a Bachelor of Philosophy (Honours) from the University of Canberra, and a Bachelor of Arts from Deakin University. He is a graduate of the Royal Military College, Duntroon, where he received the Royal Australian Artillery prize. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, and he is an editor of the Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy. Michael’s research focuses on the scholar-practitioner nexus in the disciplines of transport and telecommunications policy, comparative politics, historical institutionalism, government-business relations, and leadership. His recent publications include Politics, Policy and Public Administration in Theory and Practice: Essays in honour of Professor John Wanna, ANU Press, 2021 (with Andrew Podger and Sam Vincent); Populism and a New World Order (in Viktor Jakupec et. al. Rethinking Multilateralism in Foreign Aid, Routledge 2020); and Road Pricing and Provision: Changed Traffic Conditions Ahead, ANU Press 2018 (with John Wanna). Michael's research articles have been published in Policy Studies, the Australian Journal of Social Issues, the Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy, the Australasian Transport and Research Forum, and Public Administration Today. His expert commentary has been published in The Australian, ABC's The Drum, The Canberra Times, The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, John Menadue’s Pearls and Irritations Public Policy Journal, and The Conversation, and he has also appeared on numerous television and radio news programs. Michael teaches government-business relations, political leadership, and professional development subjects for social scientists in a Bachelor of Politics and International Relations degree, and he also teaches leadership in MBA programs in Australia and overseas. Michael's blog Le Flâneur Politique (ISSN 2652-8851) and podcast on his research, teaching, and community engagement activities are available at www.politicalscience.com.au and you can follow him on twitter @madepercy.

Reasons for Nominating

Following a career change in my early thirties, I fulfilled a long-held wish to become a political scientist. Political science has fascinated me since primary school after winning a politics competition and missing class to attend a local council meeting. I have been hooked ever since. I have political party committee and campaigning experience at the local, state, and federal levels. I attended my first APSA conference in 2004 as an honours student and I have remained involved in APSA as much as I have been financially able over the years. As my career has progressed, I have become more involved in conferences and other activities, including the APSA Teaching and Learning Group and contributing to the APSA-inspired Australian Politics and Policy project through Sydney University Press. I am now at a stage in my career where I can give back to my profession, and I am putting myself forward as a candidate for the position of Ordinary Member on the APSA Executive Committee. I bring to the committee over thirty years' experience in committee work, leadership, and strategic planning and I have a strong desire to see political science in Australia continue to increase its relevancy to citizens, governments, and businesses, and also to promote the study of politics by potential students at all levels. My pedagogical approach is based on my experience as a first-in-family university degree recipient, and I see the study of political science not only as a way to learn more about the world that we live in, but also to develop oneself in the liberal arts tradition, learning not only to become more aware of our own calling but also to become more vigilant and enlightened citizens. I am now in a position to represent the discipline and the Australian Political Studies Association faithfully, and I offer my service to you.@madepercy.

The Outcome?

I lost. I doubt our 'narratives' were the compelling reasons people voted for their preferred candidate. But the reflective aspect remains useful, in that we can create our story and live it.

Sun Tzu said:

Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all that I can?

Or consider the (allegedly) Harley Davidson advertisement:

When Writing The Story Of Your Life, Don’t Let Anyone Else Hold The Pen

The point is that it is up to you. And if you don't like your story, you have the power to re-write it.

AusPSA 2021 Conference Paper: Diagrammatical Approaches to Operationalising Historical Institutionalism as a Method in Comparative Politics

Diagramming Path Dependent, Punctuated Equilibrium, and Critical Junctures in EV Policy

Diagrammatical Approaches to Operationalising Historical Institutionalism as a Method in Comparative Politics

This week, I presented a paper with Stephen Darlington from the ANU on our approach to diagramming historical institutionalism as a method of process tracing in comparative politics. The abstract and our presentation are provided below.

Abstract

Historical institutionalism is often regarded as the least rigorous and the more tautological of the ‘new institutionalisms’, but this reputation is undeserved. We argue that historical institutionalism, when viewed as a method for, rather than a theory of, examining institutional stasis and change, can provide a rigorous approach to process tracing that is useful in examining the impact of institutional legacies on contemporary political issues. Famous historical institutionalist scholars, including Kathleen Thelen, suggest that systematic approaches to comparative temporal analyses can help to overcome the shortcomings of the inductive method in comparative politics. While many comparative political studies adopt historical institutionalism as an approach to examining temporal sequencing, few studies specify how historical institutionalism is used as a method and even fewer do so explicitly. Borrowing from other disciplines that have a long history of using diagrams to explain changes to the status quo, this paper examines the benefits of adopting visual heuristics to operationalise historical institutionalism in comparative political studies. Benefits include a systematic approach to capturing past legacies that inform present choices, identifying key periods of stasis and change, and identifying the specific exogenous and endogenous pressures and tensions that result in critical junctures within a temporal sequence.

Diagrammatical Approaches to Operationalising Historical Institutionalism as a Method in Comparative Politics from University of Canberra

Policy Legacies from Early Australian Telecommunications: A Private Sector Perspective

Rylstone Telegraph Office [CC BY-SA 4.0 by Cabrilis]

My latest research article, Policy Legacies from Early Australian Telecommunications: A Private Sector Perspective, has been published in the Journal of Telecoms and the Digital Economy.

Abstract

The purpose of this article on the policy legacies from Australia’s early telecommunications history is not to present a counterfactual to Australia’s choice of public monopoly provision of early telecommunications services, but rather to indicate the extent that politics limited the private sector’s role in deploying early telegraph and telephone infrastructure in Australia. The article begins by outlining a theoretical framework for analysing government’s role in deploying new telecommunications technologies, before investigating some of the less familiar literature on the historical impact of government intervention on the private sector in the early Australian telegraph and telephone industries. It then discusses some of the political issues relating to the subsequent liberalisation of the telecommunications industry in Australia and concludes with a discussion of the historical legacies of government intervention on the private sector in the Australian telecommunications industry.

Professional Orientation: The Journey Continues

The journey of a modern hero, to the island of Elba [Public Domain]

 Dr Jean-Paul Gagnon is a University of Canberra philosopher in democracy studies. As a senior lecturer in the School of Politics, Economics, and Society he delivers subjects, with colleagues, on politics, public policy, philosophy and professional orientation. E: jean-paul.gagnon@canberra.edu.au. 

In this podcast, Dr Jean-Paul Gagnon and Dr Michael de Percy discuss their approach to teaching Professional Orientation, a first-year professional development unit in the Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, and its relationship to Professional Evidence, the capstone unit for professional development for third-year students.

Professional Orientation: The Journey

Dr Jean-Paul Gagnon is Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Canberra

Dr Jean-Paul Gagnon is a University of Canberra philosopher in democracy studies. As a senior lecturer in the School of Politics, Economics, and Society he delivers subjects, with colleagues, on politics, public policy, philosophy and professional orientation. E: jean-paul.gagnon@canberra.edu.au. 

In this podcast, Dr Jean-Paul Gagnon and Dr Michael de Percy discuss their approach to teaching Professional Orientation, a first-year professional development unit in the Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society.

The Writing Process: Part D

 

"Ivy Mike" hydrogen bomb test by the US, Enewetak Atoll, 1 November 1952 [Public Domain].

Part A is still coming, Part B is here, and Part C is here. Part D is the finished product below that didn't get published and then went into Part A, only to be taken out by my co-author except for a few bits and pieces that seem to work in Part A. WTF?

My point is that writing is not a process where you sit down and write a first draft and it gets published. If you do, then God bless you. But for the rest of us, "The first draft of anything is shit" (Hemingway, apparently).

Anyway, my point is to record my process. The entire exercise has revealed to me the following:

• Twitter is indeed a place for venting frustrations, even if the people venting are part of the fourth estate and they create an echo chamber of nonsense that somehow gets picked up by the politically correct brigade.
• I am more centre-right than I thought I was. "Woke" culture is a thing and it annoys me tremendously.
• While "woke" culture annoys me, so does conservatism. In some things I am conservative, but in most others, I am more likely to remain a liberal in the sense of John Locke and John Stuart Mill.
• Putting my work out there and getting helpful feedback is enlightening. A student said to me at the end of semester that my marking feedback (I put in a good deal of effort and I was 'nice') was like a conversation and the student wanted to keep that conversation going. I have had the same experience with Part A, even though with other works I have had to contend with fragile narcissists wielding what little power they have. Knowing the difference is rather powerful.
• Writing conforms to the maxim of Antoine de Saint-Exupery: “Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away”.
• Marcus Aurelius (Meditations, 4.31) was right: "Love the humble art you have learned, and take rest in it".
• I am dedicated to my craft. I write because that is what I do. When I do not write, I feel empty.

Here's Part D. 

Morrison’s stewardship amid COVID-19 outrage culture

Political leadership is challenging at the best of times, but PM Scott Morrison’s ability to end the leadership merry-go-round has had a lasting impact on Australian politics, much to the outrage of some.

Morrison’s legacy will be the National Cabinet, a form of executive federalism that has seen greater federal-state cooperation than ever before. It replaced COAG with little ceremony and barely a hint of outrage.

Meanwhile, the ABC appears to be focused on undermining the government, with alleged activism by senior journalists taking centre stage and creating an opinion fog that impacts the ABC's pandemic information, confusing many citizens.

And if Twitter's #auspol was the barometer for political leadership in Australia, you would think that things were going to the dogs. Even The Conversation’s ‘academic’ articles on Morrison are largely negative in tone.

For those who agree with market liberalism but shun conservatism, there is a gaping hole in Australian politics. But that doesn't change the fact that during one of the worst periods in recent history, Morrison is presiding over a period of extraordinary good fortune in Australia.

Despite the bushfire debacle and tenuous Trumpism of the early stages of the pandemic, Morrison is still holding firm. His remarkable resilience and ability to reset are not lost on voters.

If we had good political intelligence systems, we could analyse cause and effect and determine how good policies might be predicted. Instead, ideology gets in the way and policies are judged by people (on both sides of the political spectrum) who express their opinions while hogging the microphone.

While the focus on the performance of political leaders has dominated the media, there has been little talk about the structure of Australia's blood market or the vaccine manufacturing capabilities of CSL, or whether such an important capability should be nationalised or have more competition introduced for future responses to pandemics.

Instead, the PM and state premiers are good/bad, competent/not competent, doing the right thing/doing the wrong thing, and a host of other things that have impacted confidence of the AstraZeneca vaccine and Australia's ability to deliver vaccinations within existing production and logistics capabilities.

Misinformation supporting ideological positions is rife. Take for example the infographics being used by the Twitterati to criticise the PM and Australia’s pandemic response. Many Australians have had their first shot, and the poorly framed infographic will see Australia leap ahead of other countries in the region once the second shot is delivered. 

But the polls show that Morrison is still leading the pack. Under the conventions of our Westminster system, Morrison has been chosen to lead and the polls continue to show his government is in a strong position to win the next election. 

But with all the outrage against the current PM on Twitter, one could be forgiven for thinking this wasn't the case.

Janet Albrechtsen recently called Twitter “a putrid trough of polarisation where angry people sup for repeated hits of unplugged outrage”. But who are the Twitterati talking to?

When the life of the average Australian is pretty good given the global COVID-19 social, health, and economic crises, you'd think that the position of PM would be given its due respect. Not so the Twitterati.

The reality is that there is no alternative leadership proposition from Labor, and repeated calls by Greens leader Adam Bandt to form a coalition with Labor would only destroy Labor in the long run. And when the time comes, the Greens’ aspirational policy platform is unlikely to survive the political realities of a federal budget if they ever get into power.

At the Sydney Institute a few weeks ago, I asked Kevin Donnelly about “middle Australians” caught in the midst of the ongoing "culture war".

Donnelly said it was important for political leaders to "speak" to their "base". John Howard did this, as did Bob Hawke before him; and of course Menzies spoke to "the forgotten people”. Malcolm Turnbull paid the price when he was unable to speak to the party faithful.

Despite what the Twitterati says, word on the street largely supports Morrison and the Coalition (for now).

Morrison’s stewardship of the National Cabinet demonstrates a complex set of skills needed to ameliorate formal weaknesses in the Constitution, particularly for health-related responsibilities. In the meantime, the outraged minority’s screams for instant gratification would see Australia return to the leadership follies of the immediate past.

But that would require realistic leadership alternatives. In the meantime, outrage culture has a lot to answer for hampering collective responses to the pandemic.

With ideologically-driven critics ignoring support for the Morrison government in the polls, it brings to mind some words from the poet Criss Jami: “the devil's happy when the critics run you off”. How outrageous!

Better the devil we know.

The Writing Process: Part C

The so-called 'controversial' photo of PM Scott Morrison arriving at RAAF Williamtown.

Where's Parts A and B? You will have to wait for Part A - it will be published later this year. But students in my Political Leadership class in semester 2, 2021 will be using my latest chapter as their main open source text. Here I want to outline my frustrating personal writing process (for posterity and just because).

Part B of this writing process is actually an earlier blog post entitled "PM Scott Morrison's leadership: The devil's happy when the critics run you off".

Whenever I write about something, I find myself (re)discovering my earlier education and, most importantly, recollecting my reading over the years. I was writing the chapter on Political Leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic and I was getting sick and tired of the negative nonsense on Twitter.

Back in the day, I participated in former Senator Kate Lundy's Public Sphere events. The report from the event back in 2009 is available here. Now I know that Twitter is annoying. I was one of the many who thought social media was going to revolutionise democracy. Of course it didn't but some things,  like the Creative Commons licensing for Australian Government documents, were a direct result of Lundy's Public Sphere process. 

After deleting my Twitter account back in 2012, it wasn't until 2015 that I came back to the fold but as a broadcaster rather than an active participant. Many of my friends, colleagues, and acquaintances use Twitter and it often proves a useful resource but at other times it is just annoying.

Back to my point. I penned my Part B article on Morrison. Now, don't get me wrong, I do not identify as a conservative, but I get really pissed off when people on Twitter are all so anti-everything. Get a new PM (who?), this was done poorly (and you would have done what exactly?), and so on. So, in my role as the Political Flâneur, I penned the Part C article (below) supporting Morrison.

After I had vented my frustration, I decided to write an 800 word article and send it to my new favourite news media publisher. It was not published on the Friday, but they liked it and would try for the following Monday. My next article, "The Writing Process: Part D", was an amendment to Part C, and followed the National Cabinet meeting on Friday 2nd July 2021.

Here is the original article, stemming from my "Part A":

Political leadership and outrage culture during COVID-19

Political leadership is challenging at the best of times, but PM Scott Morrison’s ability to end the leadership merry-go-round has had a lasting impact on Australian politics, much to the outrage of some.

Morrison’s legacy will be the National Cabinet, a form of executive federalism that has seen greater federal-state cooperation than ever before. It replaced COAG with little ceremony and barely a hint of outrage.

Meanwhile, the ABC appears to be focused on undermining the government, with alleged activism by senior journalists taking centre stage and creating an opinion fog that impacts the ABC's pandemic information, confusing many citizens.

And if Twitter's #auspol was the barometer for political leadership in Australia, you would think that things were going to the dogs. Even The Conversation’s ‘academic’ articles on Morrison are largely negative in tone.

For those who agree with market liberalism but shun conservatism, there is a gaping hole in Australian politics. But that doesn't change the fact that during one of the worst periods in recent history, Morrison is presiding over a period of extraordinary good fortune in Australia.

Despite the bushfire debacle and tenuous Trumpism of the early stages of the pandemic, Morrison is still holding firm. His remarkable resilience and ability to reset are not lost on voters.

If we had good political intelligence systems, we could analyse cause and effect and determine how good policies might be predicted. Instead, ideology gets in the way and policies are judged by people (on both sides of the political spectrum) who express their opinions while hogging the microphone.

While the focus on the performance of political leaders has dominated the media, there has been little talk about the structure of Australia's blood market or the vaccine manufacturing capabilities of CSL, or whether such an important capability should be nationalised or have more competition introduced for future responses to pandemics.

Instead, the PM and state premiers are good/bad, competent/not competent, doing the right thing/doing the wrong thing, and a host of other things that have led to the collapse in confidence of the AstraZeneca vaccine and Australia's ability to deliver vaccinations within existing capabilities.

Misinformation supporting ideological positions is rife. Take for example the infographics being used by the Twitterati to criticise the PM and Australia’s pandemic response. Many Australians have had their first shot, and the poorly framed infographic will see Australia leap ahead of other countries in the region once the second shot is delivered. 

But the polls show that Morrison is still leading the pack. Under the conventions of our Westminster system, Morrison has been chosen to lead and the polls continue to show his government is in a strong position to win the next election. 

But with all the outrage against the current PM on Twitter, one could be forgiven for thinking this wasn't the case.

Janet Albrechtsen recently called Twitter “a putrid trough of polarisation where angry people sup for repeated hits of unplugged outrage”. But who are the Twitterati talking to?

When the life of the average Australian is pretty good given the global COVID-19 social, health, and economic crises, you'd think that the position of PM would be given its due respect. Not so the Twitterati.

The reality is that there is no alternative leadership proposition from Labor, and repeated calls by Greens leader Adam Bandt to form a coalition with Labor would only destroy Labor in the long run. And when the time comes, the Greens’ aspirational policy platform is unlikely to survive the political realities of a federal budget if they ever get into power.

At the Sydney Institute a few weeks ago, I asked Kevin Donnelly about “middle Australians” caught in the midst of the ongoing "culture war".

Donnelly said it was important for political leaders to "speak" to their "base". John Howard did this, as did Bob Hawke before him; and of course Menzies spoke to "the forgotten people”. Malcolm Turnbull paid the price when he was unable to speak to the party faithful.

Despite what the Twitterati says, word on the street largely supports Morrison and the Coalition (for now).

However, Michelle Grattan of The Conversation points to what may be the undoing of PM Morrison, if Morrison's captain’s call to indemnify GPs who administer AstraZeneca leaves the government “facing the heat without the ‘shield’ of its advisers” if it backfires.

But that would require a realistic alternative government. In the meantime, “outrage” culture has a lot to answer for hampering collective responses to the pandemic.

With ideologically-driven critics ignoring support for the Morrison government in the polls, it brings to mind some words from the poet Criss Jami: “the devil's happy when the critics run you off”. Outrageous!

Better the devil we know.