Backroom Baz: Dan Andrews' team throws city gath without him
Andrews' former chief of staff Lissie Ratcliffe, her deputy Jessie McCrone, ex strategy guru Ben Foster, and one longtime spin doctor formed FMRS Advisory last year to flog their corporate and government knowledge to cashed up clients.
After what Baz is told was a slow start to get up and running they must be doing OK, given the swish party at QV's No Vacancy Gallery on Wednesday. It was a who's who of Labor-aligned politicos from Lord Mayor Nick Reece to MPs Danny Pearson, Michaela Settle and Belinda Wilson.
VCCI boss Paul Guerra was there as were a slew of former advisers to top ministers including Lisa Neville, Tim Pallas and Martin Pakula. Royal Children's Hospital comms boss Kog Ravindran was among the crowd as was current staffers from Jactina Allan's office. One person noticeably absent from the do? Dan himself.
Which made Baz feel better for not getting an invite. Maybe next year. Jaclyn goes green for maiden budget
When she delivers her first budget this week, Jaclyn Symes will be only the second of our top bean counters to be granted permission of the lower house to appear in its glorious green chamber to do so.
Symes is just the second upper house MP to hold the position, following Brumby government treasurer John Lenders.
Manager of government business, Mary-Anne Thomas, said she was looking forward to welcoming Symes.
'I will reflect that I am a person that normally does not really welcome those from the other house into this place,' she said.
'I think that this is the people's house and that we are the engine of government here in the Legislative Assembly.
'The house of review does its job, but seriously we are the people on the ground every day responding to the needs of our constituents. However, in this case, I want to make an exception because I do very much look forward to welcoming our Treasurer.'
Baz is told it's still to be decided whether Jac will be allowed to bring her knife in, or be forced to leave it at the door. Watch this space. Unearthing the past
The federal election might be over, but Baz couldn't let this one go.
First-time Labor candidate Tully Fletcher ran a troubled campaign in the Bass Coast seat of Monash, which led to a rare swing towards successful Liberal candidate, Mary Aldred.
But why? Could it have been locals unearthed some of his controversial statements: like publicly describing Hillary Clinton's personality as being akin to a mythical creature renowned for its unpleasant stench, comparing Julia Gillard to a character from TV show Yes Minister and sternly criticising the party's factional system?
The comments were made in newspaper editorials he co-authored when he was a law student and co-editor of the Australian National University student newspaper, Woroni.
Mr Fletcher declined to comment this week, including on whether his comments about Ms Clinton were sexist. 'It's a no comment from me,' he said.
Mr Fletcher and his co-editor also called for Australia to dump the Royal Family, calling the Monarchy 'patently ridiculous'. Mr Fletcher's view on the monarchy was in stark contrast to the people he sought to represent on the Bass Coast, who in 1999 voted overwhelmingly in favour of retaining the monarchy.
Mr Fletcher was, until the campaign, working as a director at consultancy firm Deloitte.
Before that he worked as a staffer to Andrews government minister Martin Pakula. He declined to comment on his future plans. $600k annual pay salary up for grabs
It's been a couple of weeks since Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry boss, Paul Guerra, announced he was moving on to greener pasture with Melbourne Football Club.
So it begs the question, who will fill the big shoes and flash jackets he'll leave at VCCI's Collins St headquarters?
Former Property Council head turned podcaster Danni Hunter's name keeps getting mentioned, as does that of Committee for Melbourne boss Scott Veenker.
Long running VCCI chief of staff, and sometime acting boss, Chanelle Pearson, is also considered a contender, if only an outside chance.
Baz is told the field of candidates is growing slowly, but among the small grouping there is some fierce competition for the coveted job which boasts access to Melbourne's top movers and shakers, and a $600,000 annual pay packet to boot. Nice work if you can get it. Great debate back for more
Spring St's newest and greatest annual event is back.
After the huge success of the inaugural Great Debate between pollies and journalists last year, it's back for a second go in what has become one of the Victorian Parliament's most anticipated nights.
Baz can hardly think of a better way to raise money for charity. Last year more than $15,000 was raised for the Lions V District Skin Cancer van which provides a free skin testing service across the state. This year all funds will go to Need for Feed to support drought-stricken farmers.
The question? That AI politicians would be better than real politicians. The Australian Financial Review's Sumeyya Ilanbey, ABC's Raf Epstein and 3AW's Tom Elliott will take on minister Gabrielle Williams, the Liberal Party's David Hodgett and Jade Benham from the Nationals.
Baz reckons the debate is fast on its way to becoming Spring St's own entertainment and networking opportunity with charity the big winner. Tickets here. Credlin: Why didn't the Libs call out Labor's super tax? Read related topics: Daniel Andrews
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
This systemic problem in our federal elections is not being adequately addressed, and it's growing
After every election, Parliament's powerful electoral matters committee reviews that election. This time, it must be a top priority to deal with the rising number of votes that are struck out as informal. People absolutely have the right to choose "none of the above" when they step into the polling booth, but there are just as many, if not more, who are attempting - and failing - to exercise their precious democratic right. We need to do far more to make sure the rules are simple, consistent and clear. That responsibility rests with everyone from schools, to the media, citizenship preparation courses, the political parties and the Australian Electoral Commission. Why is nobody upset that an extraordinary 18,274 voters had their ballots excluded from the May election count in just one electorate - the south-western Sydney seat of Werriwa? It was the highest number and greatest percentage of informal votes in any of the 150 electorates contested at the federal election. Yet there is no outrage that 17.26 per cent of the voters in a marginal seat were not heard. It was double the rate from the previous election and the number of ballot papers rejected was far greater than the eventual winning margin of 11,870 for Labor's Anne Stanley. In some individual polling places in Werriwa more than one-in-four votes were struck out. In Ashcroft it was 28 per cent. Werriwa was the worst, but it was by no means the exception. In a staggering 20 seats, the informal vote was larger than the winning margin. Nationwide, almost 920,000 votes were excluded from the count. In the nail-bitingly tight seat of Bradfield in Sydney's north, won by Nicolette Boele by 26 votes, there were 6656 informal votes. In the Victorian seat of Goldstein, where Liberal Tim Wilson wrestled the seat from teal independent Zoe Daniel, the informal vote was 18 times higher than the winning margin of 175 votes. Even in the ACT seat of Bean, where Labor's David Smith got a massive scare from independent candidate Jessie Price and prevailed by only 700 votes, more than three times as many votes, 2670, were ruled informal. And in the south-western Sydney seat of Fowler, which was hotly contested between Independent Dai Le and Labor's Tu Le, the informal vote rose by 3.4 per cent with 15,079 ballots struck out in a seat where the margin was 4974 votes. More people voted informally than for the Liberal candidate. In 11 seats, more than one-in-10 votes were ruled informal, and across the nation, it was 5.6 per cent of all votes cast, which is the highest since 2013. And that doesn't include the 1.7 million people who were enrolled and didn't turn up to vote on the day, early or at all. Based on past trends, and it will vary for every electorate, about 40 per cent of people choose "none of the above". About half of this cohort deliberately left their ballot paper blank. The other half marked the ballot paper in some way, such as writing slogans, adding candidate names such as Donald Duck or Donald Trump or drawing genitals. There's always someone who writes their own name on the ballot paper. But that leaves a large group who tried to vote properly yet are not being heard, and are still most likely unaware their vote is not being counted. The Electoral Commission instructs staff to assume the voter intended to cast a formal ballot, and it will allow votes where numbers are crossed out or over-written as long as the "intent" of the voter is clear. In the election, there were some suspiciously high informal voting rates in hospitals and aged care homes, while in one small northern NSW booth, electoral officials inexplicably gave people the wrong advice. These are exceptions that can be fixed, but there is a systemic problem that is not being adequately addressed. It is no accident that NSW has 19 of the top 20 electorates for informal votes in the House of Representatives. In a NSW state election, you can simply put the number 1 next to the candidate you want and not mark any other boxes. In a federal election, you must number every box without repeating or missing a number. Former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who holds the seat of Riverina, which had 13,443 informal votes, says it is "madness" that federal, state and local government voting systems are different. And he is not the only one calling for a rethink. Regardless of whether we have a compulsory or optional system to number every box on the ballot paper, this is a situation that must no longer be tolerated. Many high-profile independent candidates also unwittingly contributed to the problem by handing out how-to-vote cards that had the number 1 next to their name and the other boxes left blank. Electorates with a high proportion of citizens born overseas have high levels of informal voting. The Electoral Commission knows this and says it "ran a significant communications campaign" translated into more than 30 languages and had information at every polling venue. The informal vote in most of these areas is rising, so it's not working. And too many votes are knocked out because voters simply make a mistake in sequentially numbering each box by either repeating a number or missing one. There's a whole other debate about people reaching the age of 18 who have poor literacy and numeracy that leaves them unable to complete a ballot paper. If this growing problem is not tackled, we're on a trajectory to have one million informal votes at the next election, with the majority of those cast by people who intended to have their voice heard. Surely, we can do better to make sure every vote counts. After every election, Parliament's powerful electoral matters committee reviews that election. This time, it must be a top priority to deal with the rising number of votes that are struck out as informal. People absolutely have the right to choose "none of the above" when they step into the polling booth, but there are just as many, if not more, who are attempting - and failing - to exercise their precious democratic right. We need to do far more to make sure the rules are simple, consistent and clear. That responsibility rests with everyone from schools, to the media, citizenship preparation courses, the political parties and the Australian Electoral Commission. Why is nobody upset that an extraordinary 18,274 voters had their ballots excluded from the May election count in just one electorate - the south-western Sydney seat of Werriwa? It was the highest number and greatest percentage of informal votes in any of the 150 electorates contested at the federal election. Yet there is no outrage that 17.26 per cent of the voters in a marginal seat were not heard. It was double the rate from the previous election and the number of ballot papers rejected was far greater than the eventual winning margin of 11,870 for Labor's Anne Stanley. In some individual polling places in Werriwa more than one-in-four votes were struck out. In Ashcroft it was 28 per cent. Werriwa was the worst, but it was by no means the exception. In a staggering 20 seats, the informal vote was larger than the winning margin. Nationwide, almost 920,000 votes were excluded from the count. In the nail-bitingly tight seat of Bradfield in Sydney's north, won by Nicolette Boele by 26 votes, there were 6656 informal votes. In the Victorian seat of Goldstein, where Liberal Tim Wilson wrestled the seat from teal independent Zoe Daniel, the informal vote was 18 times higher than the winning margin of 175 votes. Even in the ACT seat of Bean, where Labor's David Smith got a massive scare from independent candidate Jessie Price and prevailed by only 700 votes, more than three times as many votes, 2670, were ruled informal. And in the south-western Sydney seat of Fowler, which was hotly contested between Independent Dai Le and Labor's Tu Le, the informal vote rose by 3.4 per cent with 15,079 ballots struck out in a seat where the margin was 4974 votes. More people voted informally than for the Liberal candidate. In 11 seats, more than one-in-10 votes were ruled informal, and across the nation, it was 5.6 per cent of all votes cast, which is the highest since 2013. And that doesn't include the 1.7 million people who were enrolled and didn't turn up to vote on the day, early or at all. Based on past trends, and it will vary for every electorate, about 40 per cent of people choose "none of the above". About half of this cohort deliberately left their ballot paper blank. The other half marked the ballot paper in some way, such as writing slogans, adding candidate names such as Donald Duck or Donald Trump or drawing genitals. There's always someone who writes their own name on the ballot paper. But that leaves a large group who tried to vote properly yet are not being heard, and are still most likely unaware their vote is not being counted. The Electoral Commission instructs staff to assume the voter intended to cast a formal ballot, and it will allow votes where numbers are crossed out or over-written as long as the "intent" of the voter is clear. In the election, there were some suspiciously high informal voting rates in hospitals and aged care homes, while in one small northern NSW booth, electoral officials inexplicably gave people the wrong advice. These are exceptions that can be fixed, but there is a systemic problem that is not being adequately addressed. It is no accident that NSW has 19 of the top 20 electorates for informal votes in the House of Representatives. In a NSW state election, you can simply put the number 1 next to the candidate you want and not mark any other boxes. In a federal election, you must number every box without repeating or missing a number. Former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who holds the seat of Riverina, which had 13,443 informal votes, says it is "madness" that federal, state and local government voting systems are different. And he is not the only one calling for a rethink. Regardless of whether we have a compulsory or optional system to number every box on the ballot paper, this is a situation that must no longer be tolerated. Many high-profile independent candidates also unwittingly contributed to the problem by handing out how-to-vote cards that had the number 1 next to their name and the other boxes left blank. Electorates with a high proportion of citizens born overseas have high levels of informal voting. The Electoral Commission knows this and says it "ran a significant communications campaign" translated into more than 30 languages and had information at every polling venue. The informal vote in most of these areas is rising, so it's not working. And too many votes are knocked out because voters simply make a mistake in sequentially numbering each box by either repeating a number or missing one. There's a whole other debate about people reaching the age of 18 who have poor literacy and numeracy that leaves them unable to complete a ballot paper. If this growing problem is not tackled, we're on a trajectory to have one million informal votes at the next election, with the majority of those cast by people who intended to have their voice heard. Surely, we can do better to make sure every vote counts. After every election, Parliament's powerful electoral matters committee reviews that election. This time, it must be a top priority to deal with the rising number of votes that are struck out as informal. People absolutely have the right to choose "none of the above" when they step into the polling booth, but there are just as many, if not more, who are attempting - and failing - to exercise their precious democratic right. We need to do far more to make sure the rules are simple, consistent and clear. That responsibility rests with everyone from schools, to the media, citizenship preparation courses, the political parties and the Australian Electoral Commission. Why is nobody upset that an extraordinary 18,274 voters had their ballots excluded from the May election count in just one electorate - the south-western Sydney seat of Werriwa? It was the highest number and greatest percentage of informal votes in any of the 150 electorates contested at the federal election. Yet there is no outrage that 17.26 per cent of the voters in a marginal seat were not heard. It was double the rate from the previous election and the number of ballot papers rejected was far greater than the eventual winning margin of 11,870 for Labor's Anne Stanley. In some individual polling places in Werriwa more than one-in-four votes were struck out. In Ashcroft it was 28 per cent. Werriwa was the worst, but it was by no means the exception. In a staggering 20 seats, the informal vote was larger than the winning margin. Nationwide, almost 920,000 votes were excluded from the count. In the nail-bitingly tight seat of Bradfield in Sydney's north, won by Nicolette Boele by 26 votes, there were 6656 informal votes. In the Victorian seat of Goldstein, where Liberal Tim Wilson wrestled the seat from teal independent Zoe Daniel, the informal vote was 18 times higher than the winning margin of 175 votes. Even in the ACT seat of Bean, where Labor's David Smith got a massive scare from independent candidate Jessie Price and prevailed by only 700 votes, more than three times as many votes, 2670, were ruled informal. And in the south-western Sydney seat of Fowler, which was hotly contested between Independent Dai Le and Labor's Tu Le, the informal vote rose by 3.4 per cent with 15,079 ballots struck out in a seat where the margin was 4974 votes. More people voted informally than for the Liberal candidate. In 11 seats, more than one-in-10 votes were ruled informal, and across the nation, it was 5.6 per cent of all votes cast, which is the highest since 2013. And that doesn't include the 1.7 million people who were enrolled and didn't turn up to vote on the day, early or at all. Based on past trends, and it will vary for every electorate, about 40 per cent of people choose "none of the above". About half of this cohort deliberately left their ballot paper blank. The other half marked the ballot paper in some way, such as writing slogans, adding candidate names such as Donald Duck or Donald Trump or drawing genitals. There's always someone who writes their own name on the ballot paper. But that leaves a large group who tried to vote properly yet are not being heard, and are still most likely unaware their vote is not being counted. The Electoral Commission instructs staff to assume the voter intended to cast a formal ballot, and it will allow votes where numbers are crossed out or over-written as long as the "intent" of the voter is clear. In the election, there were some suspiciously high informal voting rates in hospitals and aged care homes, while in one small northern NSW booth, electoral officials inexplicably gave people the wrong advice. These are exceptions that can be fixed, but there is a systemic problem that is not being adequately addressed. It is no accident that NSW has 19 of the top 20 electorates for informal votes in the House of Representatives. In a NSW state election, you can simply put the number 1 next to the candidate you want and not mark any other boxes. In a federal election, you must number every box without repeating or missing a number. Former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who holds the seat of Riverina, which had 13,443 informal votes, says it is "madness" that federal, state and local government voting systems are different. And he is not the only one calling for a rethink. Regardless of whether we have a compulsory or optional system to number every box on the ballot paper, this is a situation that must no longer be tolerated. Many high-profile independent candidates also unwittingly contributed to the problem by handing out how-to-vote cards that had the number 1 next to their name and the other boxes left blank. Electorates with a high proportion of citizens born overseas have high levels of informal voting. The Electoral Commission knows this and says it "ran a significant communications campaign" translated into more than 30 languages and had information at every polling venue. The informal vote in most of these areas is rising, so it's not working. And too many votes are knocked out because voters simply make a mistake in sequentially numbering each box by either repeating a number or missing one. There's a whole other debate about people reaching the age of 18 who have poor literacy and numeracy that leaves them unable to complete a ballot paper. If this growing problem is not tackled, we're on a trajectory to have one million informal votes at the next election, with the majority of those cast by people who intended to have their voice heard. Surely, we can do better to make sure every vote counts. After every election, Parliament's powerful electoral matters committee reviews that election. This time, it must be a top priority to deal with the rising number of votes that are struck out as informal. People absolutely have the right to choose "none of the above" when they step into the polling booth, but there are just as many, if not more, who are attempting - and failing - to exercise their precious democratic right. We need to do far more to make sure the rules are simple, consistent and clear. That responsibility rests with everyone from schools, to the media, citizenship preparation courses, the political parties and the Australian Electoral Commission. Why is nobody upset that an extraordinary 18,274 voters had their ballots excluded from the May election count in just one electorate - the south-western Sydney seat of Werriwa? It was the highest number and greatest percentage of informal votes in any of the 150 electorates contested at the federal election. Yet there is no outrage that 17.26 per cent of the voters in a marginal seat were not heard. It was double the rate from the previous election and the number of ballot papers rejected was far greater than the eventual winning margin of 11,870 for Labor's Anne Stanley. In some individual polling places in Werriwa more than one-in-four votes were struck out. In Ashcroft it was 28 per cent. Werriwa was the worst, but it was by no means the exception. In a staggering 20 seats, the informal vote was larger than the winning margin. Nationwide, almost 920,000 votes were excluded from the count. In the nail-bitingly tight seat of Bradfield in Sydney's north, won by Nicolette Boele by 26 votes, there were 6656 informal votes. In the Victorian seat of Goldstein, where Liberal Tim Wilson wrestled the seat from teal independent Zoe Daniel, the informal vote was 18 times higher than the winning margin of 175 votes. Even in the ACT seat of Bean, where Labor's David Smith got a massive scare from independent candidate Jessie Price and prevailed by only 700 votes, more than three times as many votes, 2670, were ruled informal. And in the south-western Sydney seat of Fowler, which was hotly contested between Independent Dai Le and Labor's Tu Le, the informal vote rose by 3.4 per cent with 15,079 ballots struck out in a seat where the margin was 4974 votes. More people voted informally than for the Liberal candidate. In 11 seats, more than one-in-10 votes were ruled informal, and across the nation, it was 5.6 per cent of all votes cast, which is the highest since 2013. And that doesn't include the 1.7 million people who were enrolled and didn't turn up to vote on the day, early or at all. Based on past trends, and it will vary for every electorate, about 40 per cent of people choose "none of the above". About half of this cohort deliberately left their ballot paper blank. The other half marked the ballot paper in some way, such as writing slogans, adding candidate names such as Donald Duck or Donald Trump or drawing genitals. There's always someone who writes their own name on the ballot paper. But that leaves a large group who tried to vote properly yet are not being heard, and are still most likely unaware their vote is not being counted. The Electoral Commission instructs staff to assume the voter intended to cast a formal ballot, and it will allow votes where numbers are crossed out or over-written as long as the "intent" of the voter is clear. In the election, there were some suspiciously high informal voting rates in hospitals and aged care homes, while in one small northern NSW booth, electoral officials inexplicably gave people the wrong advice. These are exceptions that can be fixed, but there is a systemic problem that is not being adequately addressed. It is no accident that NSW has 19 of the top 20 electorates for informal votes in the House of Representatives. In a NSW state election, you can simply put the number 1 next to the candidate you want and not mark any other boxes. In a federal election, you must number every box without repeating or missing a number. Former Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who holds the seat of Riverina, which had 13,443 informal votes, says it is "madness" that federal, state and local government voting systems are different. And he is not the only one calling for a rethink. Regardless of whether we have a compulsory or optional system to number every box on the ballot paper, this is a situation that must no longer be tolerated. Many high-profile independent candidates also unwittingly contributed to the problem by handing out how-to-vote cards that had the number 1 next to their name and the other boxes left blank. Electorates with a high proportion of citizens born overseas have high levels of informal voting. The Electoral Commission knows this and says it "ran a significant communications campaign" translated into more than 30 languages and had information at every polling venue. The informal vote in most of these areas is rising, so it's not working. And too many votes are knocked out because voters simply make a mistake in sequentially numbering each box by either repeating a number or missing one. There's a whole other debate about people reaching the age of 18 who have poor literacy and numeracy that leaves them unable to complete a ballot paper. If this growing problem is not tackled, we're on a trajectory to have one million informal votes at the next election, with the majority of those cast by people who intended to have their voice heard. Surely, we can do better to make sure every vote counts.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘Bigger than Amazon': Trump's crypto genius is about to hit Aussie bitcoin believers
'Bitcoin has now overtaken silver and Amazon to become the fifth-largest global asset, as investors increasingly see it as a complement to gold. With subdued retail activity, this rally is being led by ETFs, corporates, and long-term holders, not speculation. 'The United States is rapidly cementing its position as the global hub for digital asset investment.' By comparison, some Australian industry participants are becoming frustrated at what they perceive as a glacial pace of innovation. Labor has proposed licensing, sandbox, and stablecoin frameworks – bills that could look similar to the proposed US laws – but is yet to introduce draft legislation. There's also plenty of scepticism to contend with: Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock last year said bitcoin had 'no role' in the Australian economy or payments system, and ASIC chair Joe Longo has also dismissed bitcoin's rally as an example of 'the bigger fool theory' in which overvalued assets can be resold to naive buyers. Australian senator Gerard Rennick last month enraged the global bitcoin community when he branded the cryptocurrency a 'Ponzi scheme'. Loading Lucas said that while Labor made meaningful progress with cryptocurrency reforms over the past 12 months, patience was beginning to wear thin. 'Institutional capital moves at scale and speed; we need more than consultation papers,' she said. 'The industry is eager to see bold yet balanced implementation to ensure we remain globally competitive. Australia risks falling behind if we don't act with the same urgency [as the US].' David Lavecky, chief executive of blockchain finance firm Canvas, said Australia could use its own 'crypto week' to spur investment. Steps like the Reserve Bank's digital currency pilot 'Project Acacia' should be welcomed, according to Lavecky, but he agreed with Lucas that more urgency is required. 'An Australian 'crypto week' must be about substance, not hype,' he said. 'We would showcase regulated innovation like Project Acacia's tokenised bonds and stablecoins, not just trading chatter. 'The government is making the right moves ... Stablecoin laws and the RBA's Project Acacia are exactly where blockchain should be focused: improving financial markets' efficiency, cutting costs and improving liquidity in financial markets.' While institutional investors are leading the bitcoin frenzy, some retail investors are eager not to miss out. Almost a third (31 per cent) of Australian adults now own cryptocurrency, according to the Independent Reserve Cryptocurrency Index, with Baby Boomers the fastest-growing cohort. Edward Carroll, head of global markets at MHC Digital Group, is urging prospective investors to take a breath, however. 'Bitcoin should be a considered component of a diversified portfolio, not an all-in investment,' he said. Loading 'Rather than reacting to short-term market noise, investors should take a long-term perspective on the asset... We would encourage a dollar-cost averaging strategy to smooth out short-term sentiment-driven swings. Its strong performance reflects broader concerns about a debt-laden financial system, with many investors seeing it as a hedge against inflation and negative real yields in traditional fixed income markets.' For BTC Markets analyst Lucas, not all digital assets are created equal. Bitcoin was the world's first cryptocurrency, and has disparate characteristics to meme coins and other newer digital assets. 'Bitcoin, for example, has a fixed supply of 21 million, that scarcity underpins its investment thesis and role as a potential store of value,' she said. 'Many other tokens don't have that feature, which affects their long-term appeal. 'As always, risk management remains essential. Volatility is part of the asset class. Investors should take a long-term view, diversify sensibly, and ensure they understand what they're investing in.'
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
‘Bigger than Amazon': Trump's crypto genius is about to hit Aussie bitcoin believers
'Bitcoin has now overtaken silver and Amazon to become the fifth-largest global asset, as investors increasingly see it as a complement to gold. With subdued retail activity, this rally is being led by ETFs, corporates, and long-term holders, not speculation. 'The United States is rapidly cementing its position as the global hub for digital asset investment.' By comparison, some Australian industry participants are becoming frustrated at what they perceive as a glacial pace of innovation. Labor has proposed licensing, sandbox, and stablecoin frameworks – bills that could look similar to the proposed US laws – but is yet to introduce draft legislation. There's also plenty of scepticism to contend with: Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock last year said bitcoin had 'no role' in the Australian economy or payments system, and ASIC chair Joe Longo has also dismissed bitcoin's rally as an example of 'the bigger fool theory' in which overvalued assets can be resold to naive buyers. Australian senator Gerard Rennick last month enraged the global bitcoin community when he branded the cryptocurrency a 'Ponzi scheme'. Loading Lucas said that while Labor made meaningful progress with cryptocurrency reforms over the past 12 months, patience was beginning to wear thin. 'Institutional capital moves at scale and speed; we need more than consultation papers,' she said. 'The industry is eager to see bold yet balanced implementation to ensure we remain globally competitive. Australia risks falling behind if we don't act with the same urgency [as the US].' David Lavecky, chief executive of blockchain finance firm Canvas, said Australia could use its own 'crypto week' to spur investment. Steps like the Reserve Bank's digital currency pilot 'Project Acacia' should be welcomed, according to Lavecky, but he agreed with Lucas that more urgency is required. 'An Australian 'crypto week' must be about substance, not hype,' he said. 'We would showcase regulated innovation like Project Acacia's tokenised bonds and stablecoins, not just trading chatter. 'The government is making the right moves ... Stablecoin laws and the RBA's Project Acacia are exactly where blockchain should be focused: improving financial markets' efficiency, cutting costs and improving liquidity in financial markets.' While institutional investors are leading the bitcoin frenzy, some retail investors are eager not to miss out. Almost a third (31 per cent) of Australian adults now own cryptocurrency, according to the Independent Reserve Cryptocurrency Index, with Baby Boomers the fastest-growing cohort. Edward Carroll, head of global markets at MHC Digital Group, is urging prospective investors to take a breath, however. 'Bitcoin should be a considered component of a diversified portfolio, not an all-in investment,' he said. Loading 'Rather than reacting to short-term market noise, investors should take a long-term perspective on the asset... We would encourage a dollar-cost averaging strategy to smooth out short-term sentiment-driven swings. Its strong performance reflects broader concerns about a debt-laden financial system, with many investors seeing it as a hedge against inflation and negative real yields in traditional fixed income markets.' For BTC Markets analyst Lucas, not all digital assets are created equal. Bitcoin was the world's first cryptocurrency, and has disparate characteristics to meme coins and other newer digital assets. 'Bitcoin, for example, has a fixed supply of 21 million, that scarcity underpins its investment thesis and role as a potential store of value,' she said. 'Many other tokens don't have that feature, which affects their long-term appeal. 'As always, risk management remains essential. Volatility is part of the asset class. Investors should take a long-term view, diversify sensibly, and ensure they understand what they're investing in.'
