Labor's carbon tax lie

[noco]

Can someone please explain to me who is running this once great country of ours?

Is it Juliar, Gay Bob or Mouth piece Christine Milne? The latter two seem to have Juliar by the short and curlies. She bends over backwards to appease the Greens. What sort of a hold do the Greens really have on Juliar?

After Milne talked about a carbon tax on petrol, the 'GOOSE' comes out and says we won't rule that out either. So Swan is also in the Greens noose.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-turns-to-petrol/story-e6frg6xf-1226012289558

 

[Calliope]

Couldn't resist ............

That's cruel Trainspotter. I am starting to feel sorry for So-Cynical. How did you get him to do that?

 

[noco]

That's cruel Trainspotter. I am starting to feel sorry for So-Cynical. How did you get him to do that?

Yes, I feel sorry for So_Cynical too. He seems to be out on a limb all by himself on this one.
Callipope, some people can see through a key hole with both eyes.

 

[trainspotter]

Each person now creates 27.2 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent each year, or enough to fill 27 family homes. The figure is 27 per cent higher than the amount produced by American citizens and more than double the average figure for people living in industrialised countries.

Electricity generation, transportation and the production of non ferrous metals such as aluminium were the largest contributors to the high emissions levels.

And the solution is to put a PRICE on carbon is it? Check this out from ACF.

What’s the solution? Switch to clean energy sources – such as wind, solar and geothermal power. Australia is blessed as prime real estate for such new technologies and could become a clean energy super power.

But, there’s just one problem. In the current economic make up, clean technology is more expensive than old, outdated technology that creates pollution. So, from a pure economic sense, business is lacking the incentive to switch to cleaner technology.

What’s the solution this time? We need to make clean energy cheaper!

If it’s cheaper to produce clean energy than it is polluting energy, you can bet your bottom dollar businesses will be lining up to invest in solar, wind and geothermal projects across the country.

Whether it’s via a carbon tax, an ETS or a CPRS, the aim is the same – make clean technology cheaper by putting a price tag on pollution.

http://www.acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=3169

Don't you just LOVE the simplistic language of "old outdated polluting technology" vs ""clean and green technology" Fair dinkum this thing is a turd wrapped in glitter.

ROFL ....... so we tax the hell out of it rather then offering incentives for coal fired power stations to invest in cleaner technology like retrofitting CO2 capture systems or seriously looking into the solar rebate scheme whereby your house is your own electricity source?

But what about our "renewable energies" like wind and solar.

Wind and solar are intermittent technologies that can be used only when resources are available. Once built, the cost of operating wind or solar technologies when the resource is available is generally much less than the cost of operating conventional renewable generation. However, high construction costs can make the total cost to build and operate renewable generators higher than those for conventional power plants. The intermittence of wind and solar can further hinder the economic competitiveness of those resources, as they are not operator-controlled and are not necessarily available when they would be of greatest value to the system. The use of energy storage (such as hydroelectric pumped storage, compressed air storage, and batteries) and a wide geographic dispersal of wind and solar generating facilities could mitigate many of the problems associated with intermittence in the future.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/electricity.html

Ooooooooooerrrr ...... the price of carbon = Julia Gillards head on a spike.

Malcolm Roberts, executive director of the National Generators Forum, whose members are some of Australia's biggest polluters, says he needs more information.

"What the starting price of carbon will be, when emissions trading would commence, what will be the transitional assistance offered to households and industry," he said.

"One of the points that's missing from today's announcement is an agreement between the Government and the Greens about what the 2020 targets should be. We have to work backwards from the target to set the price."

Under the plan, businesses will not be able to get credits to pollute from overseas while the carbon price is in place, but they will be able to once the ETS is up and running.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/24/3148316.htm?section=justin

Why does this government INSIST on putting the cart beofre the horse? This is going to be one of the greatest shakeups of our economy and lifestyle and there is no detail?

Yet to be worked out apparently. GOSH that is just dumb.

 

[drsmith]

What planet is Tony Windsor on ?

"But I think the debate has to take place. The important thing about yesterday wasn't this nonsense that suddenly there's a carbon price out there, and a great big new tax as Tony Abbott likes to suggest. It's to initiate the debate."

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201102/s3148850.htm

Err, Tony, it's out there. Judging by Bob Brown's statement prior to the election that it would be introduced this term, Labor and the Greens agreed prior to the election as part of their alliance. I would also suggest that they have agreed on Petrol, but are waiting to judge the initial reaction before announcing it.

If the Greens are indeed pushing petrol to be included, all the better. Drunk with power, a greater porportion of the public will see them for what they really are.

Labor's throat ramming tactics with the MMRT was the final straw for Kevin Rudd's prime-ministership. Julia will lose this battle. There are lies and there are lies that stab at the heart of Australian values. This is the latter. At a minimum, it's Labor's Work Choices.

 

[trainspotter]

Oooooh the irony of it all !

 

[Smurf1976]

Christine Milne is a single issue zealot of the worst order.

Christine is single issue at any one time, but not single issue in terms of her political career.

Christine Milne's first real go at politics related to the proposal in 1988 to build a new pulp mill at Wesley Vale (Tas) so as to replace the existing two small mills at Wesley Vale (built in 1970) which were economically inefficient due to their small size, and also to replace the aging Burnie pulp mill (built 1938).

Bottom line is Tas ended up with the infamous Labor-Green Accord, the Australian (Labor) government got involved too and the Wesley Vale mill was never built, thus ending investment in the entire pulp and paper industry in North-West Tas. There was no point investing further into either the Burnie or Wesley Vale paper mills, if there wasn't going to be a viable source of pulp to process.

Pulp production from the old mill at Burnie ended ten years later in 1998 with the machinery essentially worn out (and totally outdated) and at Wesley Vale in 2010. The 3 (of originally 11) remaining paper machines at Burnie and Wesley Vale also ceased operation in 2010 thus ending all activity at the mills.

Burnie Mill alone once employed 4500 (about a quarter of the population of Burnie) and is now nothing more than a collection of sheds in the process of being stripped of anything of value (scrap metals etc). The population of Burnie has declined and it no longer officially qualifies as a city (though has continued to be named as such for political reasons).

Thanks Christine... The industry had a workable plan to ensure the future of both mills whilst getting rid of the well known environmental problems associated with the ancient Burnie pulp mill. But that wasn't good enough for the Greens, 4500 people being thrown on the scrap heap as a consequence.

Also during the Labor-Green Accord years (1989 - 1992) was the creation of a new National Park which just happens to sit on top of 60% of the state's known recoverable black coal reserves. This came just a few years after virtually all remaining hydro-electric resources had been declared off limits in 1983, thus leaving few viable options for expanding power generation in Tas in an economic manner.

Directly targetting key industries and especially power generation... Spot the pattern being followed here?

 

[Smurf1976]

The use of energy storage (such as hydroelectric pumped storage, compressed air storage, and batteries) and a wide geographic dispersal of wind and solar generating facilities could mitigate many of the problems associated with intermittence in the future.

So we need to build big dams, big transmission lines and dot wind turbines all over the place to make it work.

Yes, us technical people have understood that very well for some decades but you'll never get the Greens to admit that there's anything even remotely good about dams or transmission lines.

As I've said many times, the Greens in particular are in for a very rude shock once they realise the environmental consequences of cutting CO2 emissions. Get set for plenty more energy debates in the coming years...

 

[robusta]

Jones was purely pandering to his audience, the PM should of gave the DH a mouthful...seriously im done with the political threads, its just...i mean its like having to deal with the worst level of society, objectivity is a nonsense when dealing with the ASF right, or any extremists i would suppose.

Last word on the Carbon tax we are going to get (remember when i said a price on carbon was inevitable) what's become clear to me is that our political system is so totally floored that its a wonder anything positive ever gets done...the simplest things take decades to achieve because politicians get elected by people that simply wont accept inevitability.

Politicians spin to us because they have to, they sell policy because the masses need to be convinced that XYZ is good for them, they need it packaged and softened because the Masses haven't got a bloody clue....we should of had a price on carbon for the last decade or so but little Johnny etc couldn't do it, couldn't deal with the inevitable and the political ramifications of acting responsibly so they just did nothing.

And because of that, the coming pain will be so much worse than it ever had to be...in life doing nothing in the face of inevitability is never a good idea, works the same way in politics too, doing nothing is never a good option when something needs to be done to manage the inevitable.

I am with So_Cynical on this one.

Step away from the talkback radio and take a blood pressure pill.

This is politics and politicians we are talking about.

The job description is:
1) say whatever it takes to get elected

2) if elected do whatever it takes to be re-elected/remain in power, while getting away with whatever you can.

3) in not elected disagree with the govt on everything.

The above has been true of the Gillard, Rudd, Howard, Keating, Hawke... governments.

Now stop bleating on about what you can't change until next time you cast a vote.


“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”

Winston Churchill

 

[Julia]

What happens if I don't want to?

Just too bad. You should never have been silly enough, if you were, to believe Julia Gillard's promise that her government - in contrast to that of Rudd's - would be fully consultative.
Consider just the joke that constituted the so called "Multi Party Committee on Climate Change": how absolutely ridiculous. As we all know, the only people eligible to participate were those who were already believers in the need for a carbon price/tax.
Does she really think she has fooled the Australian people with this sham?

Can someone please explain to me who is running this once great country of ours?

Is it Juliar, Gay Bob or Mouth piece Christine Milne? The latter two seem to have Juliar by the short and curlies. She bends over backwards to appease the Greens. What sort of a hold do the Greens really have on Juliar?

I can't believe you have actually asked this question, noco. Perfectly obviously, she is dependent on the Greens, especially when they have balance of power in the Senate come July, to hold on to her job. It's as simple as that.
They tell her what she has to do, and whacko, she does it. To hell with any broken promises. She will just press that button that says "engage robot mode" and talk over everyone who questions her.

"One of the points that's missing from today's announcement is an agreement between the Government and the Greens about what the 2020 targets should be. We have to work backwards from the target to set the price."

In yet another outstanding demonstration of Labor's inability to get anything right, they have made this announcement prematurely, without any of the detail which is so fundamental.

Are they just 'testing the water' and if the reaction is too negative, that will guide their response?

 

[noco]

Can someone please explain to me who is running this once great country of ours?

Is it Juliar, Gay Bob or Mouth piece Christine Milne? The latter two seem to have Juliar by the short and curlies. She bends over backwards to appease the Greens. What sort of a hold do the Greens really have on Juliar?

After Milne talked about a carbon tax on petrol, the 'GOOSE' comes out and says we won't rule that out either. So Swan is also in the Greens noose.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-turns-to-petrol/story-e6frg6xf-1226012289558

Sorry Julia, I was being a little facetious. Hoping to bait the Juliar supporters.

 

[Julia]

With respect to the oft quoted assurance that Australia has the highest emissions per capita of population, I found this interesting:

The reason we are supposedly among the biggest carbon emitters per capita is because those figures - misleadingly - include the coal and gas we export, mostly to Asia, where they are burned in inefficient power stations or used to produce steel to build products that get sold all over the World. As carbon emitters we are actually quite low on the list, per person, after countries like the USA or many European countries where they have to heat their houses most of the year. I resent being tarred with the same brush as a Chinese power station.

Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? And what about all our bushfires?

 

[nulla nulla]

Just say whatever you think will get you elected and then do what you like once you win.

Be fair Slipperz, we all know both sides do this, convincingly.

Trainspotters has it right, plant more trees, put solar pannels on every roof and reduce the deisel subsidy.

If we went back to the polls every time a pollie did a back flip or was caught out with a lie, we would be at the polls all thetime.

 

[Slipperz]

Be fair Slipperz, we all know both sides do this, convincingly.

Trainspotters has it right, plant more trees, put solar pannels on every roof and reduce the deisel subsidy.

If we went back to the polls every time a pollie did a back flip or was caught out with a lie, we would be at the polls all thetime.

Well here's the policy documents prior to the election.

http://www.gogreeneraustralia.com/blog/index.php/2010/08/02/comparing-environmental-policies/

Presumably labor would argue a CPRS is a scheme not a tax and will only contribute to cost of living via increased power and petrol prices etc. But that in itself will translate to practically every facet of modern living.

Hence our esteemed ex legal eagle prime minister refusing to argue semantics with Laurie Oakes this morning. Very clever your honor.

se·man·tics   
[si-man-tiks] Show IPA
–noun ( used with a singular verb )
1.
Linguistics .
a.
the study of meaning.
b.
the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.

Ahhh the claytons tax. The tax we have when we're not really having a tax. Bit like the old flood levy isn't it.



And lets be realisic here if the CPRS does get up in whatever form it's the higher socio economic groups that are going to foot the bill. This is a socialist government we are talking about.

Anyone under a certain income is bound to get a CPRS rebate on their income tax thus creating an inequitable solution.

 

[IFocus]

Christine is single issue at any one time, but not single issue in terms of her political career.

Christine Milne's first real go at politics related to the proposal in 1988 to build a new pulp mill at Wesley Vale (Tas) so as to replace the existing two small mills at Wesley Vale (built in 1970) which were economically inefficient due to their small size, and also to replace the aging Burnie pulp mill (built 1938).

Bottom line is Tas ended up with the infamous Labor-Green Accord, the Australian (Labor) government got involved too and the Wesley Vale mill was never built, thus ending investment in the entire pulp and paper industry in North-West Tas. There was no point investing further into either the Burnie or Wesley Vale paper mills, if there wasn't going to be a viable source of pulp to process.

Pulp production from the old mill at Burnie ended ten years later in 1998 with the machinery essentially worn out (and totally outdated) and at Wesley Vale in 2010. The 3 (of originally 11) remaining paper machines at Burnie and Wesley Vale also ceased operation in 2010 thus ending all activity at the mills.

Burnie Mill alone once employed 4500 (about a quarter of the population of Burnie) and is now nothing more than a collection of sheds in the process of being stripped of anything of value (scrap metals etc). The population of Burnie has declined and it no longer officially qualifies as a city (though has continued to be named as such for political reasons).

Thanks Christine... The industry had a workable plan to ensure the future of both mills whilst getting rid of the well known environmental problems associated with the ancient Burnie pulp mill. But that wasn't good enough for the Greens, 4500 people being thrown on the scrap heap as a consequence.

Also during the Labor-Green Accord years (1989 - 1992) was the creation of a new National Park which just happens to sit on top of 60% of the state's known recoverable black coal reserves. This came just a few years after virtually all remaining hydro-electric resources had been declared off limits in 1983, thus leaving few viable options for expanding power generation in Tas in an economic manner.

Directly targetting key industries and especially power generation... Spot the pattern being followed here?

Smurf was any of the about linked to old growth forest?

 

[sails]

...If we went back to the polls every time a pollie did a back flip or was caught out with a lie, we would be at the polls all thetime.

Nulla, this is no small backflip. Carbon tax is a major thing and is comparable to the major changes that came with GST. She could wait until after the election in 2013 - why the rush for 2012?

How would you alp supporters have felt if Howard had simply forced his GST backflip without taking it to an election first? Sure there are other things that politicians backflip and can get away with, but not something as major or controversial as a carbon tax that will have a massive ripple effect.

It wasn't only Gillard that stated there would be no carbon tax under her government, Swan was even more catagorical just before the 2010 election:

The Deputy Prime Minister, Wayne Swan, said last week that if Labor won the election there would be no carbon tax during its three-year term.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-elect...s-out-imposing-carbon-tax-20100816-1270b.html

 

[Calliope]

With respect to the oft quoted assurance that Australia has the highest emissions per capita of population, I found this interesting:

"The reason we are supposedly among the biggest carbon emitters per capita is because those figures - misleadingly - include the coal and gas we export, mostly to Asia, where they are burned in inefficient power stations or used to produce steel to build products that get sold all over the World. As carbon emitters we are actually quite low on the list, per person, after countries like the USA or many European countries where they have to heat their houses most of the year. I resent being tarred with the same brush as a Chinese power station."


Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? And what about all our bushfires?

It begs the question doesn't it? Why does the Labor/Green coalition want to institute a carbon tax when everybody knows that anything we do will have a negligible effect on carbon output worldwide.

Our output of carbon is dwarfed by our increase in the carbon produced by China and India (and Korea and Japan) as a result of our massive exports of coal and iron ore feeding their huge manufacturing industries.

So why are they doing it? I think it is being driven by the Machiavellian hand of Bob Brown, his hatred of big business and his aim to redistribute the wealth.

Brown is finding it easy to manipulate Gillard, because she has to play to voters lost to the Greenies, and looking Green is a ploy to win them back.

 

[Slipperz]

It begs the question doesn't it? Why does the Labor/Green coalition want to institute a carbon tax when everybody knows that anything we do will have a negligible effect on carbon output worldwide.

Our output of carbon is dwarfed by our increase in the carbon produced by China and India (and Korea and Japan) as a result of our massive exports of coal and iron ore feeding their huge manufacturing industries.

So why are they doing it? I think it is being driven by the Machiavellian hand of Bob Brown, his hatred of big business and his aim to redistribute the wealth.

Brown is finding it easy to manipulate Gillard, because she has to play to voters lost to the Greenies, and looking Green is a ploy to win them back.

Perhaps we need some fresh talent in Canberra. The sort of people we can really trust.

Like these guys!



And the great hall would look nice with some genuine handwoven Tibetan 28 000 year old fakari rugs!

 

[-Bevo-]

Prime Minister Julia Gillard admits she promised there would be no carbon tax

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...be-no-carbon-tax/story-e6freooo-1226012679911

"What my vision was was to be elected as prime minister and to introduce an emissions trading scheme, which is not a carbon tax.''

I would have thought no carbon tax would equal no ETS, after all isn't a ETS still a tax as in Government sell carbon credits. This is very misleading don't remember her mentioning any ETS before the election, big mistake Julia the people are not as dumb as you think.

 

[Smurf1976]

Smurf was any of the about linked to old growth forest?

Sort of, but not really...

Not having a viable local processing operation simply resulted in a dramatic scaling up of raw wood production in an (ultimately doomed) attempt to remain profitable. That is, a switch to higher volume, lower value unprocessed wood exports rather than the historic mainstay of paper.

And if could be argued that there are trees in the National Park in question that were protected by virtue of it being declared a National Park. I think that most people with any knowledge of it would say that it has more to do with the coal than trees however.

But not to worry, I see that almost as soon as the carbon tax was announced we've now got not one, but two debates in the making here in Tas.

On another forum that's largely filled with Greens and others strongly to the left, they're in a bit of a flap now that someone's noticed a sort of new (actually over a year old) flow monitoring station and helicopter pad on an undammed river in the World Herritage Area. Now, so many people go rafting that it took a year or so for anyone to spot it, but now that they have it's causing quite a stir with all sorts of theories being argued as to what it's for and what's going on.

Meanwhile, I see that in other local news there's a plan to open a brown coal mine near Launceston. Yep, just a couple of days after the carbon tax is announced we get a plan for a brown coal mine. For the record, it's the same brown coal desposit at Rosevale that was the subject of plenty of debate and one serious power generation proposal during the 1980's. This time the plan is to turn the stuff into liquid fuels howeve.

That lot ought to keep the Greens and their suporters occupied for quite a while. A flow monitoring station in a World Herritage Area and someone else wants to open a brown coal mine. Hmm...

I said there would be some interesting debates coming. Though even I didn't expect anything quite so quickly...