logo
Is selling off Santos to a foreign buyer in Australia's national interest? First, define national interest

Is selling off Santos to a foreign buyer in Australia's national interest? First, define national interest

The Guardian5 days ago

Amid the multifarious chaos of the past week, many of us might have missed the controversy over the proposed purchase of the energy business Santos by an overseas consortium. But the proposal is likely to create big problems for Australian governments and its resolution will reveal a lot about how Australian policymakers view energy and climate policy.
Santos is one of the largest and oldest Australian producers of oil and gas, second only to Woodside Energy (its name is an acronym of South Australia and Northern Territory Oil Search). The core of its operation is the Moomba gas field in the Cooper Basin, in the north-east corner of South Australia. The company now supplies gas to the entire eastern seaboard and has assets in the Timor Sea and Papua New Guinea.
The consortium proposing to buy Santos, called XRG, is owned by the Carlyle Group and the state-owned Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (Adnoc). Carlyle, named for the New York hotel where its founders met to set up the business, is one of the world's largest private equity companies, with close ties to what US President Eisenhower described as the 'military-industrial complex'. Its early years are described in Dan Briody's book The Iron Triangle.
Abu Dhabi is the wealthiest and most important of the United Arab Emirates. The value of its state-owned enterprises and sovereign wealth funds total over a trillion dollars. Abu Dhabi's wealth is derived almost entirely from oil and gas, so it is unsurprising to see its national oil company pursuing expansion through acquisitions like the proposed buyout of Santos.
Unsurprisingly the prospect of handing ownership of a large share of Australia's energy resources to buyers like these has raised concerns. Most commonly, these are expressed in terms of energy security or, more nebulously, national interest.
The issue of energy security can be dismissed pretty rapidly. Unlike the oil we import, the gas is physically located here. If we need it, we can keep it, regardless of the legalities of ownership, contracts and so on. At one time, perhaps, such an attitude might have raised concerns about sovereign risk, threats to future investment and so on. Foreign owners might have threatened us with action under Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) agreements. But the 'rules-based order' in which such concerns made sense, is largely a thing of the past, for good or ill. ISDS, in particular, is more or less dead. Even so, the government has shied away from fixing the absurdly unfavourable gas export contracts signed by Santos and others a decade ago.
Concerns about how the deal might affect our national interest are harder to address, mainly because Australian governments have no clear idea of what our national interest might be. It might be argued that we ought to be maximising the returns from our natural resources, while winding down fossil fuels, in line with the goal of achieving 'net zero' emissions globally by 2050. But there is no sign that Australian energy policy is motivated by such goals.
In fact, Santos has been a major player in the expansion of gas exports, notably of LNG from Queensland, and is pushing for even higher exports. The company has just received regulatory approval for the $5.8bn Barossa offshore gas project off the Northern Territory coast, described by critics as a 'carbon bomb'. The extra financial resources available to XRG might accelerate this.
What is in our 'national interest' is similarly incoherent in regards to tax revenue. Australia taxes its massive gas exports weakly, and it's hard to see how we would get a worse deal from a foreign owned company compared to an Australian one.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
Finally, neither Carlyle nor Adnoc can be expected to have any concern with the wellbeing of Australians. Carlyle, as a private company, is concerned with maximising its profits. Adnoc wants profits but also more influence over global markets. But it is a mistake to think that Santos cares any more, except about those Australians who happen to be shareholders, and who can expect a big payout if the takeover goes ahead.
John Quiggin is a professor at the University of Queensland's school of economics

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Over a third of people on sinking Tuvalu seek Australia's climate visas
Over a third of people on sinking Tuvalu seek Australia's climate visas

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Over a third of people on sinking Tuvalu seek Australia's climate visas

SYDNEY, June 29 (Reuters) - More than one-third of the people in the tiny Pacific nation of Tuvalu, which scientists predict will be submerged by rising seas, have applied for a landmark climate visa to migrate to Australia, according to official figures. Tuvalu's ambassador to the United Nations, Tapugao Falefou, told Reuters on Sunday he was "startled by the huge number of people vying for this opportunity", and the small community was interested to learn who the first lot of climate migrants would be. Tuvalu, one of the countries at greatest risk from climate change, which experts say is boosting sea levels, has a population of 11,000 on its nine atolls scattered across the Pacific between Australia and Hawaii. Since applications for Australia's visa lottery opened this month, 1,124 people have registered, with family members bringing the total seeking the visa to 4,052 under the bilateral climate and security treaty. Applications close on July 18, with an annual cap of 280 visas designed to ensure migration to Australia does not cause brain drain from Tuvalu, officials said when the treaty was announced in 2023. The visa will allow Tuvalu residents to live, work and study in Australia, accessing health benefits and education on the same basis as Australian citizens. "Moving to Australia under the Falepili Union treaty will in some way provide additional remittance to families staying back," Falefou said. By 2050, NASA scientists project daily tides will submerge half the main atoll of Funafuti, home to 60% of Tuvalu's residents, where villagers cling to a strip of land as narrow as 20 metres (65 feet). That forecast assumes a 1-metre rise in sea levels, while the worst case, double that, would put 90% of Funafuti under water. Tuvalu, whose mean elevation is just 2 metres (6 feet 7 inches), has experienced a sea-level rise of 15 cm (6 inches) over the past three decades, one and a half times the global average. It has built 7 hectares (17 acres) of artificial land, and is planning more, which it hopes will stay above the tides until 2100.

EXCLUSIVE I sold my family home for £400,000 in a raffle so we could move to Australia - it was the biggest risk of my life and I'll NEVER do it again
EXCLUSIVE I sold my family home for £400,000 in a raffle so we could move to Australia - it was the biggest risk of my life and I'll NEVER do it again

Daily Mail​

time4 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE I sold my family home for £400,000 in a raffle so we could move to Australia - it was the biggest risk of my life and I'll NEVER do it again

A mother-of-three who sold off her family home in a raffle to facilitate a dream move to Australia has revealed how she achieved the feat - and made £90,000 in profit. Natalie Rowcroft, 38, set out to sell her semi-detached home in Salford, Greater Manchester, in 2021 to pursue a better life for her family down under - but when the UK entered the Covid lockdown, it seemed an 'impossible' task. So instead of keeping her £290,000 house listed with estate agents and waiting for prospective buyers to make an offer, she took matters into her own hands and decided to offer the four-bedroom property up as a raffle prize. Natalie jumped on a trend growing in popularity in the UK with the help of competitions run by organisations like Omaze - the charity which offers luxury houses in dreamy locations around the country to lucky raffle winners. In recent years the UK has seen an explosion in property raffles after homeowners found their properties languishing on estate agent portfolios owing to Covid 19 and its subsequent lockdown. With tickets selling for as little as £1 in some cases, thousands of people around the UK take a punt on winning a home for the price of a packet of crisps - but while Natalie and her family managed to make money on their family home, she has revealed it's not something she'll do again in a hurry. Property raffles sell like hot cakes for the likes of Omaze, Raffle House, Elite Competitions and Raffall - the latter a platform that helped Natalie Rowcroft raffle her home off in a little over a month. The teaching assistant told MailOnline that when Covid struck she thought the 'world was going to end' and along with it, her dreams of selling up and emigrating to Australia. 'The lockdown made it impossible to sell our home, estate agents couldn't even bring anyone around [to view it]' said Natalie. And so she took the wild plunge to sell her family home in a raffle. After doing a little web research, she and her reluctant husband Bradley, also 38, put their home up for a £2 raffle at legal raffling company, Raffall. To sweeten the deal they threw in the family's BMW. In 45 days they sold £360,000 worth of tickets and waved goodbye to their home. But Natalie insists the process wasn't nearly as smooth as it reads. It all began with a 'crazy idea' she told MailOnline. 'I literally set it up online. Within the first day we sold 10,000 tickets. 'From then it just went absolutely crazy... it sort of blew up from then'. But Bradley wasn't convinced by his wife's plan, and told Natalie she had 'lost the plot' for wanting to sell their beloved family home in this way. Natalie admitted she too had some initial reservations as she had never raffled something worth hundreds of thousands of pounds before. But at a time when most people were left with nothing to do than watch TV and trawl the internet, Natalie saw a golden opportunity and reached out to strangers urging them to buy raffle tickets. In a matter of days she became a one-woman PR machine, employing her family of five - including three kids Bradley, 19, Aiden, 17 and Rhys, 12 - to plug tickets in a series of fun social media videos. Local media caught wind first before the Rowcrofts became a national internet sensation. 'The Manchester Evening News contacted us and then we had friends that were helping us share [our story]. We weren't that great with social media [back then] so a couple of friends helped us set up our Facebook page. 'I just needed to get it [the raffle] out there. We were in a pandemic, in a lockdown - we needed to get it out as far as we can'. The campaign snowballed and their faces were soon plastered across the BBC, ITV and even social media funnyman Tiny Tim wanted a piece of the action. Though grateful for the growing spotlight, Natalie said she couldn't keep up and lamented how a plan to sell their family home somehow became a 'full time job'. 'We did Facebook challenges, lives, TikTok videos... I was going through my Instagram inboxing every single person' she recalled. 'It was a full time job times two. It was literally from 4 o'clock in the morning 'til gone midnight. During those hours I was still answering messages. I just couldn't sleep because I was like 'I need to succeed'.' 'It was the school holidays so I was lucky that I was off during that period. I wouldn't have been able to work [otherwise]... it would've been impossible'. She fondly remembered sometimes selling up to 4,000 raffle tickets per live video thanks to the Rowcrofts' growing tight-knit online community: 'We were like the face of the raffle. People were invested in buying raffles because they wanted to see us succeed'. 'But it's a lot harder than you would ever imagine,' she continued. 'After four days in it was literally so much hard work and full on. People think "oh you're going to sell tickets instantly or it's a no brainer". 'If I was to rewind or if I knew how much work I would have to put into it I may have not have done it. But we had no option or choice'. Natalie can't put a price on the physical and mental strain the project caused her - but she can on the PR campaign, which she estimated to be a whopping £6,000. 'It costs you a lot of money to promote... it cost us a lot of money to boost posts on Facebook, all the printing, spending hours driving around' she explained. When she put up their home for a 90-day raffle, she expected to sell enough tickets to cover the cost of their home, solicitors fees and the mandatory 10 per cent owed to Raffall. But nothing more. But when she crunched the numbers, Natalie was pleasantly surprised to realise she had reached her goal within half the time frame, and still took home £90,000 in profit. She reflected on how brave she was to transform the idea into reality, particularly when her partner was unsure if it was the right thing to do. 'You've lost the plot,' he told her when she called him at work to propose her plan. Luckily a friend she consulted at the time reassured her it was worth a go and it all paid off. Natalie spoke on the 'crazy' number of people who constantly drove past the couple's home and wanted to confirm it wasn't a 'scam'. 'For the people that were saying it was too good to be true - I would send my address and say come to my house,' said Natalie. Natalie speaks to MailOnline from her new home in Brisbane, Australia where the family has lived happily for the last four years. She acknowledged that the move is a dream come true but remained adamant that anyone inspired to follow suit should get clued up on the weight of the task. 'It was a massive risk and never in a million years would I do it again. The amount of work it took. My life was on hold for 45 days. 'It was probably the biggest risk I've ever taken in my life, there was so much pressure on me because I had taken it on and had decided to do this. 'If we didn't meet the amount of ticket sales to sell our property we get to keep the property but we'd lose our time and the money we spent on our marketing. The winner would get a cash prize instead of our house but then we would get nothing.' As a mother of three, Natalie vividly remembers fearing for the safety of her family after having to welcome strangers into their lives in order to sell raffle tickets. The work of matriarch, businesswoman and PR machine at times became too much to bear. She said: 'I had to stay up and get back to everyone and message everyone and reply back. If I didn't people would say it's a scam.... it was scary. We gave our address to everyone. 'If one person calls me a scammer... with anything like that once you put your name to something and it gets that big you will get trolls and haters'. Speaking about why she'll never repeat the experience, she said: 'You get worried because you're putting your family out there and people know where your address is. Just all of that and the no sleep'. For anyone else who wants to raffle off their homes, Natalie's advice is to remain dedicated. Ultimately, one has to 'live and breathe' the raffle if they want it to be a success, she said. 'People started setting up their raffle accounts and contacting me saying "oh well we've not even sold any tickets". They were like "well how did you do it?" 'I'm like, 'scroll through my Facebook page',' she joked. 'I'm like for us it was literally day and night - you've got to breathe it. You've got to be fun, you've got to be active. 'If you've got a full time job and you're not on it [the property raffle] all the time tickets aren't going to sell. 'You have to physically put it out there and make people buy your tickets - they're not going to buy it just by putting a link online. It's not going to happen'.

Calls for Australia-wide crackdown on real estate ads that use AI to hide faults and lure in renters
Calls for Australia-wide crackdown on real estate ads that use AI to hide faults and lure in renters

The Guardian

time6 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Calls for Australia-wide crackdown on real estate ads that use AI to hide faults and lure in renters

The New South Wales tenants union has called for nationwide reforms to crack down on misleading rental advertisements after the state government introduced new laws in response to the growing use of artificial intelligence in real estate. The legislation, announced on Sunday, will require mandatory disclosure when images in rental advertisements have been altered to conceal faults and mislead rental applicants. The state government cited examples of real estate agents using artificially generated furniture that showed a double bed in a bedroom that was only large enough to fit a single in listings, or digitally modifying photos to obscure property damage. The new laws aim to stop the unnecessary collection of personal information to protect renters' personal data. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email About a third of people in NSW rent their homes and the state government has estimated that about 187,000 pieces of identification information were collected from renters in the state every week, from requiring personal photos and social media account details to revealing the number of tattoos an applicant had. If the bill passes parliament, a standard rental application form will be introduced to clarify what information can and can not be collected. The chief executive of the Tenants' Union of NSW, Leo Patterson Ross, said 'all renters in Australia' should be granted these protections. 'This is an area of renting that has had almost no protection for renters at a time that they are often vulnerable and under pressure to find a new home,' said Ross, who helped consult on the bill. 'We have seen some progress on standardising application processes in other states but they haven't included consideration of the whole range of ways information is being collected or ensuring advertising is an authentic representation of the property on offer, or at least manipulation is disclosed.' Ross said the use of fake photography had become a 'growing frustration' for many amid the growth of AI and digital manipulation. 'Being misled into visiting a property that is not suitable is frustrating for prospective tenants and may mean they miss out on other properties,' he said. 'But it also risks inflating the rent itself by inflating the number of people who appear interested in a place and increasing pressure on someone to rush to put in an application or even offer above the advertised rent.' Ross said just as with AI or embedded networks, governments should look at other important information that may mislead or significantly alter people's interest in properties. 'Landlords could also be required to disclose at the advertising stage the age of the photos being used, the repairs and other compliance history, the energy efficiency performance … and provide floor plans for the property as well as current required disclosures,' he said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The minister for better regulation and fair trading, Anoulack Chanthivong, said renters were 'entitled to dignity and privacy when living in a rental property – and this extends to their personal information too'. 'These reforms are a very commonsense solution to a very real problem for people in the rental market, and I would love to see other states and territories follow NSW's lead,' he said. 'Regulation reform is an ongoing journey and of course we are always looking at options to improve protection for consumers in the property market.' Corporations for agents and landlords would be up for penalties of $49,500 if they broke the privacy rules, or $11,000 for individuals, under the new laws. Individuals would be imposed $5,500 fines or $22,000 for businesses for non-disclosure of misleading or altered photographs. The NSW rental commissioner, Trina Jones, said cyber breaches and data theft were a 'major privacy risk' to individuals and the businesses the collected and held information. 'There's a cyber breach reported in Australia every six minutes,' she said. 'Renters shouldn't have to trade away their privacy just to find a place to live.' The chief executive of the Real Estate Institute of NSW, Tim McKibbin, said for the purposes of real estate transactions, including residential rentals, there was often a necessity for agents to collect some personal information. But he said when that no longer existed, information should be deleted. He said uploading photography that didn't accurately represent the property was a 'false and misleading' practice.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store