Professor Ross Garnaut has said that it is only a global solution that will have any impact global warming.
Now finally someone is talking some sense.
Opposition Emissions Trading Scheme spokesman Andrew Robb [ pictured below] is calling for the emissions trading scheme to be delayed for two years.
.
The meltdown had to be taken into account. ”It’s going to discourage other countries around the world, they’re going to look at other priorities, and it’s going to put pressure on the speed with which they tackle climate change,” he said.
The Government should also wait for the result of world climate talks in Copenhagen in late 2009.
Mr Robb reiterated the Opposition’s policy that emissions trading should start in ”2012 at the latest”.
.
Kevin Rudd should take his Emissions Trading Scheme to next federal election due in 2010. Like former Prime Minister John Howard did with the GST he should give the Australian public the opportunity to decide if we want it or not.
Doing that would allow the Australian public to have a good look at the full costs and implications of the scheme. I doubt the Rudd government would have the courage to do that.
.
Have your say!
.
Got a tip off, article or have you seen a video or item you’d like to be seen by the Agmates Community? If so please email it to us at news@agmates.com
Related Posts
- Professor Bob Carter Labels Emissions Trading Scheme as Economic Vandalism
- Global Warming Pioneer Dr James Lovelock warns Emissions Trading Scheme is a Waste of Time
- ABARE Chiefs Warn Australian Agriculture is Doomed Under Emissions Trading Scheme
- Emissions Trading Scheme - What A Fool Believes - Music Video of the day.
- Ian Plimer - “Emissions Trading Scheme - Why Bother?”
But if he takes it to the next election you would be voting between two parties with the same policy?
And he took it to the last election? the GST didn’t go twice did it? (did it even go once?)
I thought your mate humphrey didn’t like courageous decisions
Hey Matt, how are you mate,
Are you hopping into the Roo meat yet?
Firstly if he waits until after Copenhagen, at least we’ll be able to see if we are kidding ourselves or not.
Actually Howard did go to the election with the GST as the main issue - fully costed if you remember.
I don’t remember Rudd campaigning at the last election to introduce a Cap & Trade system that would put up peoples power bills by 37% and force farmers out of business or at best having to grow trees and Roos’s to stay on the land.
Lets wait for the treasury modeling and full details of what if will cost and what it will achieve for the climate globally ….. then let us decide if we as a Australians are prepared to pay $5 billion + annually to achieve absolutely zero reduction in global temperatures.
Your right Matt - Once fully explained to the Australian public - it would be courageous of him, very curageous.
Cheers mate
Hi Steve,
The only problem with having Wayne Goss’s “Mr Fixit”, our esteemed Prime Minister take ETS of whatever colour to the next election is that it gives more time for the propaganda machine to grind out more confusion.
As Von Curtis points out about “our ABC”, the programming is wall to wall Climate Change scaremongering, just as an example.
We can but hope that sense does prevail - or that we have a couple of “White Christmases”. Even then the CSIRO or BOM would put out another bulletin that it was caused by “Climate Change” due the rising carbon pollution from fossil fuels and methane from cow burps.
Shame on the ABC for sticking to reputable science and not snake-oils salesfolk! How dare they!
Oh MattB
You’ll have to watch out you don’t become stereotyped as a believer in James Hansen, Al Gore, Gavin Schmidt and Maurice Strong. You know, the “reputable scientists”.
You could lose your credibility as a thinker and be seen as one of the faithful dancing around a maypole at an Earthfirst celebration, praying to Gaia, accompanied by tambourines and drums from Maurice Strong’s followers.
On snake-oils sales folk, just because there are people that don’t believe the rhetoric put out by Hansen, Gore et al, doesn’t make them snake-oil sales folk, just people that have the hide to think.
And pleeaase don’t give us the rhetoric about Big oil, coal producers,power generation or even the tobacco lobby, it’s been done to death.(And is only a biased half of the story)
On “our” ABC. If you have read John Pilger’s “A Secret Country” you would see that “our ABC” became “their ABC” after the Silver Bodgie PM Robert J. Hawke installed David Hill as CEO. Hill has of course gone, but the legacy lives on.
“Yes Minister” comes to mind.
Rephrase that: Maurice Strong is not a scientist, but an advisor to the UN, amongst a lot of other power broking.
On the ABC : “Yes Minister” comes to mind.
” How high Minister?”
Oh MattB,
on snake-oil sales persons.
I don’t think the Czech President, Vaclav Klaus is a snake-oil salesman, an oil executive or whatever the usual critique is of a high profile climate sceptic.
He did experience the Communist boot in Czechoslovakia, and likens the current Man Made Climate Change frenzy of tax and control to the communist era.
Read one of his later speeches:
MattB, I’ll leave you with some homework.
- Lysenko
“Global warming is a myth and I think that every serious person and scientist says so.” is not the utterance of someone to be taken that seriously on climate. At best you could claim there is debate within science… but the reality is there are very very few climate scientists at all in the dissenting camp.
I’d look to his natural aversion to being told what do do, as a former soviet state, as what sets him us as a skeptical type.
Also - you don’t think that the president of a former soviet state, the USA’s darling child of freedom in the region, could be encouraged to back the US up on climate??
MattB,
Vaclav Klaus is an economist and therefore looks at things that effect people, populations and economies.
Debate?
I thought the “science is settled”. LOL
And Klaus also states that he was elected President, a ceremonial role. The policy makers are the government and the Prime Minister.
You did look up Lysenko?
Sounds like a Soviet, Stalinist version of James Hansen, particularly with Hansen’s calling for gaoling of dissenters and oil CEO’s (send ‘em to the Gulag)
Lysenko… ha ha I thought you meant homework on Klaus, and were just using Lysenko as a humerous soviet style sign-off - getting in to the theme a bit more
I’ll check him/it out.
And oh yes the science IS settled… I was meaning that even an extremist denier would only at best muddy the waters enough to suggest there is genuine debate… certainly not that it is settled the other way and that no serious scientists think AGW is real.