Agmates member Peter Gough writes:
.
There are two comments that need to be made about the CPRS back down.
It was only a few days ago that Penny Wong greeted Professor Ross Garnaut’s proposal to delay the scheme with cries of derision and statements about the impending doom that would result from even the slightest delay.
What happened Penny ?
I might be a bit slow but I haven’t noticed any new changes in the last fortnight. Or is it just that Kevin forgot to tell you that he was going to pull the pin ? Worse still, has a decision to reverse one of the the most important Labor election platforms been made on the run in the last week ? I think not !
The real problem is not jobs but the financial elephant in the room.
I refer of course to the Federal Court’s judgement regarding compensation for loss of property rights compensation.
Spencer -v- Commonwealth of Australia {2008} FCA 1256
In the Federal court the Honourable Justice Emmett in paragraph 149 of the decision there is a strong endorsement of the Property Rights of Mr Spencer as quoted below :
.
149 “I consider that Mr Spencer has established that there is a serious question to be tried as to whether he has suffered such sufficient detriment as a consequence of the 1997 Vegetation Act and the 2003 Vegetation Act as might constitute a taking or acquisition in respect of Saarahnlee.
Further, to the extent that there was a benefit to be derived from the grant of carbon sequestration rights by undertaking voluntary restraint, it is certainly arguable that Mr Spencer has been deprived of that benefit.
Whether the restriction is such as to constitute a taking or acquisition or expropriation may depend upon detailed evidence of value. Nevertheless, there is at least a seriously arguable case for concluding that there has been an acquisition of property of Mr Spencer’s.”
.
By signing the Kyoto protocol Lu Kewin has exposed the Commonwealth to a massive payout to rural landholders. Implementing a CPRS and including soil carbon sequestration ( as is now being considered by the Obama administration in the USA ) will result in what has been estimated at between 5 and 10 Billion dollars compensation to the rural sector land holders.
This would be totally unacceptable to Labor and Liberals alike.
Watch for the referendum ( at the next election) clarifying the position in the Constitution of State Governments and Municipal Councils in such a way as to remove this huge compensation payout.
You heard it first on Agmates !
*****
END
First by posted here.
Have Your say!
May 5, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Well said Peter, er Charlie. I had a good laugh at a letter in today’s Observer from Penny Wong extolling the virtues of the ETS.
>:o :-$
“The Rudd Government believes everyone has to do their fair share to reduce the carbon pollution that is causing climate change,” she says.
The letter goes on to say that businesses will save costs by cutting pollution, and ” We are doing this because science tells us this pollution is causing climate change. And we know that failing to take economically responsible action on climate change will cost us jobs. In Queensland, industries like agriculture and tourism will be hit particularly hard…”
A footnote from the editor states the letter was received on Friday May 1. Oops…
So did the PM forget to tell his chief champion of the ETS what was about to happen? The writing was on the wall, but Penny kept telling everyone that come hell or highwater, the ETS was going to be introduced next July, it would create green jobs, save the planet, show other nations what they should be doing, it was our moral duty, even when just about everyone was growing more dubious by the day.
And on the land clearing / compensation controversy there was another interesting story in today’s Observer. I don’t blame farmers for being confused and angry. Here’s the link
http://www.gladstoneobserver.com.au/story/2009/05/05/farmers-come-a-cropper-in-new-state-plan/