Menzies House

How Malcolm Fraser gave away the Moon , Asteroids and the rest of the Solar System to International Socialism.

Ralph Buttigieg condemns Malcolm Fraser's decision to ratify the "straight on Marxism" of the Moon Treaty, and discusses how its damaging effects will increase in the years to come:

Its been known for decades that there are vast resources in Space. Asteroids contain nickel, iron and platinum group metals.  The Moon has He3, an isotope that could fuel nuclear fusion reactors. Lighter elements and water are also available. These minerals could provide humanity with extraordinary abundance. Previously the idea of  extraterrestrial mining has been seen a pure speculation but recently that speculation has taken a major step towards reality.  In April a high powered team of entrepreneurs  announced the formation of Planetary Resources a company that has asteroid mining as its goal. Its founders include film maker-explorer James.Cameron,  X-Prize founder Peter Diamandis,  Google  executives Larry Page,  Ram Shriram and  Eric Schmidt, former Microsoft executive and veteran astronaut Charles Simonyi,  and Ross Perot Jr., the son of Ross Perot. These are serious men with serious money, the project has to be taken seriously. 

Australia has a long mining history so so it was  to be expected  that Australians have started taking  an interest. Leonhard Bernold from the University of New South Wales has given much thought as to how to mine the Moon and deal with the dust problem.  Duncan Steel again from University of NSW has explained the role local astronomers can play in such ventures.  However despite what ever comparative advantage Australians may have , its really beside the point because Malcolm Fraser shut the door on Australian Space development years ago.

Space is not some fantasy  filled with Angels and Klingons . People need to remove the restriction of the “Only One Earth” thinking and remember that the planets and moons of our Solar System are new territories available for economic development and eventual settlement. Conceptually   they are no different the New Worlds of the Americas and Australasia. However there's not going to be much economic development without a functioning market and a market economy requires property rights . When Captain Cook came to Australia the first thing he did was raise the Union Jack and claim the territory for King George 3rd . So when Governor Phillip  came here with the First Fleet   land titles could be allocated. Titles that would be recognised anywhere in the British Empire.  Traders need to own something for them to trade it. Developers need to own title to land to raise capital and develop it. In my view its the lack  of Space property rights that's has held up Space development. 

There are two international treaties relevant here. Firstly there's the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies of 1967,  commonly called the Outer Space Treaty which  most countries have signed. That treaty forbids nations claiming sovereignty over extra terrestrial bodies and thereby bans the most time tested way of establishing property rights. There's some dispute if this treaty completely  bans property rights, some lawyers say it does others say it does not. However it does not explicitly say  private property is banned. In fact if space organisations such as NASA have taken legal action to get back  Apollo Moon material which they claimed to own.   

Some people have been happy to work with the Outer Space Treaty and have developed schemes to establish Space property rights.. Rand Simberg from the Competitive Enterprise Institute has propose  a plan that would allow the development on Lunar and Martian resources without huge government funding.   

However its another treaty that the real killer. The Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies of 1979,  commonly called the Moon Treaty specifically forbids property rights.

Why Conservatives Should Cheer, Not Condemn Newt's Moon Base

Ralph Buttigieg defends the "Moon Base" as a way to "destroy the dangerous socialist Only One Earth mentality":

Newt Gingrich recent Moon base proposal has produced much negative reaction. It has ranged from “ its “lunacy”, “can not be afforded” or my favorite “Dadadadaaaa da “ . While such criticisms would be expected from Democrats sadly much of the ridicule comes from conservatives.. Its not my intention to discuss Mr Gingrich suitability for the Presidency, what I want to discuss is his Space policy and how Space can give us the freedoms and prosperity we want.

Firstly lets look at the United Nations view on our future. According to the UN we must redefine economic growth and "retool world economy for sustainability.":

The panel challenged leaders to recognise that "current global development is unsustainable."

"We need to chart a new, more sustainable course for the future, one that strengthens equality and economic growth while protecting our planet," UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said in Addis Ababa to mark the release of the panel's report, which outlines more than 50 policy recommendations.

Its a world view based on the “ Only One Earth” mentality. Its the philosophy of the Greens. There’s nothing new about it, “the Limits to Growth” report put out by the Club of Rome came out in the 1970's . Because resources are believed to be limited it accepts the government has to limit our freedoms. The end result would be a bleak future were wealth creation would be limited and freedom replaced by bureaucracy.

There's another view, The Space Frontier Future. It recognizes we are residents of a Solar System with over nine planets , many moons and countless asteroids. A future the believes our species is not bound to any single planet but fully capable of expanding out throughout the Solar System.

Reform Taxation and Reform the States

Give revenue control back to the states, writes Ralph Buttigieg.

Let’s face it, our state governments are a disgrace. Problems such as lack of public transport, poor roads and failing hospitals are primary the responsibility of the states but they seem incapable of doing much about them. So poor have state governments become at doing their job that there are increasing requests for the Commonwealth government to take over various responsibilities such as hospitals and even calls to abolish the states altogether.

Five common misconceptions

Ralph Buttigieg details his top five myths in the Australian political system.

There are some commonly held political beliefs which make no sense but which a large proportion of the electorate seem to hold. It doesn't seem to matter how well educated the person is; these misconceptions have seeped into the national mindset are almost impossible to remove. Today I would like to share my top five with you.

To increase infrastructure spending reform welfare spending

There are other ways to manage infrastructure funding if we reform other areas of government spending, writes Ralph Buttigieg.

Infrastructure and its requirement for capital seems to be on everyone's mind at the moment. Most recently the Sydney Morning Herald reported a Price-Waterhouse study which claims we can not meet expected infrastructure demands due to a lack of capital. It demands we give up our cars, live in smaller homes and generally change our life styles. Drastic measures indeed but what about other options?

Nukes for Defence

Nuclear submarines may solve our ongoing submarine woes, writes Ralph Buttigieg.

The Rudd Labor government has a complete ban on nuclear energy for Australia. However concerns over global warming have increased support for the nuclear option. After all, nuclear energy is the only emission free method of producing base load power. Tony Abbott believes it’s an option we need to seriously consider. Peter Cosgrove has come out in support and so has Labor Party stalwart Bob Carr. Yet there is another reason to support nuclear power – defence.

Let Liberal Party members elect the Leader

Why not follow the British Conservative Party method of electing leaders, asks Ralph Buttigieg.

Lets face it the Liberal Party is completely hopeless at electing its leaders. Its ridiculous that we are in our first term of opposition but are up to leader number three. There's nothing new about this of course, how many leaders did we go through last time until John Howard was elected leader? Remember it was his second go and he only got there because he was last man standing. The State situation is no better, NSW Liberals have been playing musical chairs for 15 years.