This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Labor's carbon tax lie

Jump to new
Julia, I do agree and think that Abbotts real test will be in the transition from opposition leader to PM.

I don't know if you remember Peter Beattie in opposition. He was much like Abbott and was persistently negative about everything. I was actually surprised how he was able to transition into a reasonably long serving Premier. Whether Abbott can do likewise, only time will tell.

If he really is out of his depth as we are seeing with Gillard, I would think he would be replaced.
 
Spot on Sailsy.
 
Interesting that neither Canada nor the US have any intention of pricing carbon according to John Baird, Canada's Foreign Minister:




Link to ABC 7:30 report video (Carbon pricing discussion is around the 4 min mark)

Thanks to Andrew Bolt for the above link.
 

Funny stuff sails : Funny cos when he actually gets a chance to pass his own policy (off shore processing) he back flips and doesn't pass that either...yep great job 1 vote Tony is doing, considering he has actually only has influence over one thing and that was not passing his own policy.

Has anyone any idea about what is actual coalition policy? all the media reports is that he apposes everything and will repeal everything....hes policy platform seems to be about doing nothing other than repelling what the govt has done...the first govt in more than a decade to actually do anything positive.
 

So_Cynical - Abbott did agree to off shore processing provided the country was a signatory to the UNHCR. Whether or not he did it on compasionate grounds is not the issue. It was a reasonable request. It was Gillard who ultimately voted for on shore processing - and we know that because of the cabinet leaks. We also know that Bowen agreed with Abbott to go back to the proven system which is now a signatory to the UNHCR.

So, your trying to spin that lie won't work...

Abbott will release his policies when it suits him - I would think when an election is called. But until then he has the following going for him:

1. Repeal carbon tax
2. Re-instate the Pacific Solution
(those two thing alone would be a vote winner to anyone)
3. Abbott was part of a long serving coalition government. He has experience at governing which our current leader lacks. She never did the hard yards as being leader of the opposition.

So, although you clearly don't like Abbott or the coalition, this new labor have really done a good job of putting the majority of Australians off. Attacking Abbott ad nauseum doesn't remove the stench created by the debacles and the wasted spending we have witnessed in the last four years.

PS - thanks to Logique and Joea for more favourable comments to the same post...
 
sails said:
So_Cynical - Abbott did agree to off shore processing provided the country was a signatory to the UNHCR.
Click to expand...

Nauru wasn't under Howard





Actually it was tied with agreeing to Abbott also accepting Malaysia





( Abbott was second string and didn't really set the world on fire Howard mainly used him as an attach dog sound familiar?)

4. Repeal the mining tax (BHP is clearly not making enough)
5. Cut Gov jobs (currently same numbers as the 90's.)
6. Cut up to $70 bil in government services (it was Labor that raised the pension, Howard wouldn't don't expect Abbott to)

Supporting Abbott wont turn a sows ear into a silk purse.............
 
sails said:
So_Cynical - Abbott did agree to off shore processing provided the country was a signatory to the UNHCR. Whether or not he did it on compassionate grounds is not the issue.
Click to expand...

Compassionate...you have got to be kidding Kenya is a signatory to the UN convention...perhaps the boat people could be sent there? i hear the starving Somalian refugees are being really well treated in Kenya.

The coalition had a choice to either pass the legislation or not, vote for offshore processing in the location chosen by the govt of the day, or not...they chose not to support there own policy.

its as simple as that.
 
IFocus said:
Nauru wasn't under Howard
Click to expand...
What? Of course it was. Phillip Ruddock was the minister at the time.

So_Cynical said:
Compassionate...you have got to be kidding
Click to expand...
Why do you so constantly try to twist what a poster has said?
Sails said that 'whether the opposition's stand was born out of compassion or not is not the issue here', so why are you trying to suggest that she has suggested it was?
So silly.
 
IFocus said:
Supporting Abbott wont turn a sows ear into a silk purse.............
Click to expand...

Well their isn't a hope in hell of supporting labor. While I do support some of their policies they are just terrible at running things. This country is going backwards under labor in key areas of policy. And it has slide back to the 1980-early 90s labor stench.

The coalition had a choice to either pass the legislation or not, vote for offshore processing in the location chosen by the govt of the day, or not...they chose not to support there own policy.

its as simple as that.
Click to expand...

It's as simple as labor changed the policy in the first place and botched that as well.
 

Julia, I think ifocus was refering to Nauru not being a signatory to the UN convention during Howard's term.
Nauru has just signed up this year.
 
dutchie said:
But it will save the country from its current downward spiral!
Click to expand...

Amen to that, and while I'm at it Labor has also sold Australia’s prime farming land to overseas interests. Tony Windsor even sold his land to a mining company for an obscene profit. The carbon tax will see us lose money to overseas shams while supposedly we will sell to other countries (Umm where exactly will be bothered to buy so it will be profitable)
So Labors mantra is Sell out the actual assets and buy a lot of carbon credits wow great deal.
A lot of what Labor has done needs to be rolled back
 
I wonder how long it will be before the carbon tax forces Australia to embrace nuclear power?
It will be interesting when all our thermal coal is being exported and the choices left are pay stupid prices for renewable energy or adopt nuclear.
Then BOB will have a real issue on his hands, power generators saying, for example "we can give you nuclear at 0.20c/kw or renewable at 0.70c/kw".
I know which will win, it may end up a case of, be carefull what you wish for BOB.
 
Bob wouldn't have to even think about it, sp. He doesn't care what consumers have to pay for anything.
 
Building a dam would be the ultimate irony...

As for coal being exported, there's a debate in NSW at the moment regarding a government-owned coal mine. In short, that's pretty much the only thing standing between export coal prices and NSW power stations. At some point, electricity is going to get rather expensive I think...
 
Ah, but Sails, Greg Sheridan is from the Hate Media so incapable of writing anything that actually makes sense.

If, in fact, some of our esteemed leaders did take note of some of what he says, we might start getting somewhere.
 

Mate, the price of electricity is going to go balistic. The general public has no idea of the way the shutting down of coal fired stations is going to send electricity prices sky rocketing.
 
sptrawler said:
Mate, the price of electricity is going to go balistic. The general public has no idea of the way the shutting down of coal fired stations is going to send electricity prices sky rocketing.
Click to expand...
Yes, we have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How valuable are two parent families?
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Value Collector
February 2025
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
6K
ducati916
Market response to the Election outcome
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
9K
Telamelo
T
Bill Shorten: High Flying Fake Or The Worker's Friend
Replies
5
Views
2K
Investoradam
N
The Australian Human Rights Commission: A national disgrace
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
15K
Tisme
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...