During the Environment and Communications estimates hearing, Senator Leyonhjelm asked public servants if they knew anything about China's global emissions. The public servants seemed to have no information on hand.
Why are we paying huge salaries for these people when they don't know the very basics of their own field of expertise? I would be out of a job if I turned up to an important meeting and could answer even the most basic questions about my own field of study. I bet they get paid more than me. It wasn't that they didn't have the exact figures. They had absolutely no idea.
We'd all be alarmed to find out just how many public servants Australia employs who get paid much more than the politicians AND we can't vote them out of office!! The public servants in this video are probably 'acting' in someone elses position and receiving higher duties pay as are a disturbing number of senior PSs at any given time in our federal, state and local government departments!
We'll take that on notice,totally clueless people who are wasting billions of dollars for an agenda they have no quantifiable information on,virtue signalling and a carbon tax won't make a lick of difference to the climate,totally corrupted!@#
if the average person acted in a few or even just one of their traits such as useless, ignorant, out of touch, unprepared / lies, lack of production with mind boggling cost. all would be fired and it would be closed within days. agreed ulevo canada is just as bad as feminists have control law system for decades
Every video I watch with this man, the response is, " we don't have those figures at the moment" , "we will get those figures and will get back to you"
@@mikkelhoejen it's clearly stated in most of these videos through questions, what numbers they got and not got though. It is a case of those before the Senator not having done their home-work for this debate. Kind of like the Gender pay-gab video where he asked basic questions: Have you check this and that? Or is it just based on this?
Incredible that they don't even have even the most basic top line data on emissions for this hearing. As Leyonhjelm says, "a quick Wikipedia revealed that....etc etc." Point made.
HOW ON EARTH ARE THESE PEOPLE SO UNPREPARED!?! If i was told to do a job, and i came this unprepared, and just said to my boss "i'll take it on notice" Yeah, I'm fired. These people need to get fired, and removed. FFS!
It's amazing that these people come so unprepared for these sessions. Can you provide a follow up post of the next session on this topic when they close all the questions you posed that they couldn't answer the first time?
Given that the default assumption by those types is that climate science is undeniable, the questions would be more like "What is Australia doing to reduce emissions now?" "What more can Australia do to reduce emissions?" "How can we stop mounting pressure to use Nuclear power?" "On a scale of Gold to Platinum, how good can Australians feel morally?"
Well they are academics. They never really had anyone put them on the spot like this. They are just used to FAILING STUDENTS if they ask them these kind of pride hurtful questions. They just wanted people to ACT. That's it. That is because they think they are smarter than everyone else.
What I like about this Senator is that he asks the basic questions that people pushing their own agenda (and not just on this topic) SHOULD know the answers to, but somehow do not. It is like they only know how to look at their pet project through one perspective. Probably comes because they only discuss it with like minded people. Another of the dangers of societies and universities self censoring what can and cannot be discussed.
Haha, what a pointless agreement. And everybody was so outraged that the US pulled out. The agreement seems to make no difference whether anybody signs up or not.
Ryan Jolly the earth was here billions of years before us and will remain here billions of years after us!!! Ozone layer had a hole and now it doesn’t the earth looks after itself just fine giving me another tax won’t fix anything!!!
Here's a thought. If you think the planet is doomed, that sounds super important. Why not familiarize yourself with the data and then look at the "science" with a critical eye to see if maybe things aren't quite as bad as suggested by green groups. Maybe you could look at the long term tide gage data its self and you'd go "Gee, global warming only became a real issue in the 1980s yet sea level rise has been at the same rate IN THE DATA for over 100 years, yet these people are telling me the data says its accelerating." A few things like that and you really start to dig in and notice all kinds of disconnects between what the data v/s scientists say or what the IPCC says v/s what you hear in media or from green groups...and that's when you start having people call you all kinds of names and suggest you're evil because you answer false claims with the official data from the official sources.
@@cabudagavin3896 there's nothing we can do that wouldn't cost millions of lives. if man made pollution would indeed contribute further to climate change (which it doesn't as there's no proof of that) then it would still be nothing we could do, we're too small to have any meaningful effect on the planet's climate
He is clearly asking questions he already has the answers to just to showcase the ineptitude of most department heads. Former Senator David Leyonjelm is truly a gentleman amongst unqualified and corrupt politicians. He is sadly missed.
As David has said before, "our government is addicted to spending other peoples money". The Australian gov is addicted to 'wasting' tax payer money. This has got to change!
To be honest, that is pretty much every government. In Norway we have just as disgusting and incompetent people as well. Usually women who promote politics which are based on feelings, without any proper rationale or thought of the longevity and consequences of their policies / spending. As long as they feel good "here and now", that is all that matters to them. We quite literally gave 1 billion to Brazil to make them stop cutting down their rain forest. In the years we did that, them cutting down the rain forest ESCALATED! So stupid.
@@odinsplaygrounds Agreed, it is becoming more and more obvious that the left, right and everything in between are merely representations of governance in its many forms, and all with their own agendas that require a slave workforce, even if it is slavery under the veil of democracy.
Please supply things like name of department being questioned, purpose of meeting etc in video header so we can easily use this valuable resource.. Great work. Thanks
If there are no direct answers to the questions being asked, why is global warming and global emissions an issue? If this was as important as they make out, the answers would be on the tip of their tongue.
Guy "Do you have the figures broken down by country?" Lady "we don't have that information today" Judge Judy "Where do you think you were coming to today?"
It's not uncommon for senior executives to attend a meeting because they want face time yet be completely unprepared for the questions. I've spent many a meeting sitting behind my boss so he could turn and look at me whenever a question was asked and I'd feed him the answer. Best example I know was our executive was testifying before Congress (US) and spent a week preparing on the wrong things. And we told him those were the wrong things for that hearing but he wanted a lot of "ghee whiz" (his words) to impress them with. Made a complete ass of himself when they asked him about all the things we tried to prepare him for but he didn't listen.
Luckily, if public 'servants' don't do their job they won't get the arse for being incompetent parasites. They can go on to a stellar career of being ineffectual nobodies and retire with a package that would be the envy of anyone who spent their working life actually doing something worthwhile and not being recognised for it.
😂 “ we had no idea you were gonna ask is these questions about greenhouse gas emissions at this discussion of greenhouse gas emissions, but we are prepared to discuss every aspect of the lives of the Kardashians “ 😂
I thought the United States was the leader in Peter Principle bureaucrats. These videos demonstrate Australia is giving us a run for our (wasted) money.
If instead of taking the answers to these questions "on notice" they should have said that they'd "circle back" and then they'd be well qualified to be a liberal US press secretary.
6 people and one of them can't get on a phone to get the senators answers. We would be better off employing work for the dole ppl. They would probably do a better job.
We didn't bring any data because we didn't think we would have to answer questions relevant to even the basic aspects of our jobs. Now can we have our paychecks? We have to get to a meeting where we discuss things completely irrelevant to climate change.
Rhetorical Question: Do emissions corelate to population? If yes, then when we allow immigration to the tune of 1% of our population per year, then we should expect emmisions to increase accordingly. And no matter how diligent our population is wrt personal footprint, it is all for not. In 50 years, even without personal increases, our emissions will increasr by 50%. Give or take.
Bruce @ Enterprise Risk Services That shouldn’t be a rhetorical question, because the answer is not obvious at all. Firstly, how do the emissions of a typical immigrant compare to that of a typical native? I would assume there’s a significant difference, but it would vary by country and time. Secondly, does it actually scale like that? If I had the same country with double the people, assuming those people act the same, would it be logical to have double the emissions? I suspect not, because the population density would be different, the housing in cities would probably differ etc. Thirdly, if you can get it so that an average person is carbon neutral, then it doesn’t matter how many people you have. Wouldn’t that be a better solution?
@@fenhen You're using good arguments against stupid rethorical questionning. I don't expect you'll get an intelligent answer. Watching this video it's appalling how unprepared these people were, but i think where this senator wanted to lead them with this question was also quite bad. With his questions he clearly wanted to have them say "even if we do reduce to 0 our emissions, global emissions would still be on the rise". I find it a bit disingenuous because the true important number is emission per habitant, in wich case Australia is certainly a very bad example. It's a bit funny to see him do that when in another video talking about wage gap in nails the fact that when comparing different things you need to use the right unit. He is definetely an intelligent senator, but i wonder if sometimes he doesn't use this intelligence for self-serving goals.
@@ix-Xafraimmigration does not create growth, it creates the appearance of a bigger economy from the perspective of some one from the outside looking in but means that what you have is spread out amongst more people ie the standard of living falls which is pretty much what has happened in all countries using Blair economics.
Is there a follow-up meeting for the questions on notice? As for the whole "climate change", the current election is always saying they will do such and such to reduce our footprint. My question is why are these video's not put out on Australian media?
massive waste of millions of dollars in wages right here . do these public servants actually know anything at all besides deflecting answers and raising our taxes .
Ha! The question everyone avoids! It's not easy fleecing developing countries for money. It's much easier to fleece the West, where most people and companies are environmentally conscious, and as a result have taken a lot of measures to reduce emissions. Fact is, the more developed and free a country is, the cleaner it gets. But it goes further than this. These people don't care about the environment. If they did, they would care about all the forests and meadows that would have to be leveled to make room for solar farms. They'd care about all the birds killed by wind turbines. They would also care about the fact that, despite Germany's high investment rate in renewable energy, their emissions haven't budged. They would also care that the biggest drop in emissions was experienced by France when they moved over to nuclear power. If we want clean energy, environmentally friendly, financially viable, available, feasible, we have to return to nuclear power. Solar and wind are expensive, inefficient, harmful for the environment, and overall not feasible. People trying to push for renewable energy only want to make money.
I would expect the senator to ask the witnesses to go away until they are fully able to review and discuss (with information) - as they appear woefully unprepared! These questions are not of the minute detail (the effect of changing from one PV technology to another!) but are generic questions about how Australia compares to others and the future plans🤨
These figures should be well known to a civil servant working in this field. Are they not interested in their jobs? Are they disinterested and incompetent? Most certainly, embarrassing for Australia.
The Paris Agreement was not a pointless agreement. It was a document that served the nations of the world to set low ball goals that they were not planning on meeting but that would look good for the population that is worried about the next generations’ state of the planet. This was a very sad turn of events when nations signed it because it was not meant to actually do anything, not even slow down the inertia but lower the contributions to the ever increasing global environmental inertia. The most interesting part of this whole debacle is how bad the situation actually is and how it is something like Nuclear Energy that is the cleanest form of efficient energy currently available, as the emissions are captured in the earth and not dispersed in the atmosphere. Solar energy costs a lot to produce and the cells last only twenty five years. Wind is not a viable answer for a large grid. And hydro is still not as good as nuclear as it’s dependent on climate, expensive to build, destructive to fish populations, and competes with the use of water with the environment, human and animal communities
FFS I know this was recorded back in 2017 but I can answer most of his questions by a google search in seconds. And the questions he is asking are pretty simple (I'm only 3:24 into the clip) you would think anyone working for a senate environment committee would have these numbers at there finger tips(I would ). This is a disgrace!
Given the less than adequate performance of most Public Servants at Senate hearings, you need not be surprised. At least these PS's didn't sneer at Senator Leyonhjelm the way the token "experts" from the Office for Women did when their utter incompetence and incomprehension were exposed.
From watching so many of these there seems to be a direct correlation between the length of a woman's hair and her level of intelligence/preparedness. .
Why don't you just mention their avowed identity of an "unprepared bureaucrat"? Why mention their ascribed identity of ladyness? Claiming that someone's ascribed identity affects their performance is unlikely to help your case. Wait are you at least an equal opportunity offender and not just somebody targeting someone for arbitrary reasons? Or do you say want you think is effective when you see someone as incompetent (ya know you don't actually believe it but you reckon it would bother such psychographic)?
So they came to the meeting with no information expecting to be believed without ANY questioning what so ever. I've seen him dismantle others over bullshit like this. He's really trying to give these groups the benefit of a doubt and they ALWAYS fall short.
funniest thing is when he starts asking questions he already has the answers on the page infront of him.... he just wants to find the bullshiters sucks hes not heading the party anymore... we need more people like him in our so call "liberal" party here in Canada...
It is always a good idea to know what you’re talking about before you face a committee if you don’t want to look foolish, especially with this guy asking questions.
Yes,a complete farce,as is saying the great barrier reef is dying,a complete lie,but the media and the ABC left organisations are so happy to go along with it because they are part of the agenda!
Laughable, "I did a quick google search..." and found more information in a few minutes than these publicly paid employees did over the course of their job.
