What Rudd Government didn't achieve

The Wall Street Journal describes Kevin Rudd as Australia's climate moralist-in-chief. (Link in title) This is an obvious reference to his previous "greatest moral challenge of our times" statement. They go on to say:


• Mr. Rudd's about-face raises serious questions about the courage of his political convictions;


• In November, Mr. Rudd declared it would be "absolute political cowardice" to delay cap-and-trade.


•Little wonder the Rudd government tried to bury cap-and-trade by announcing a big crackdown on tobacco companies yesterday.

They are right about him trying to bury the ETS with his great big new tax on tobacco, but this tax also will bring in the billions that he threw at the states to get them to agree to his Titanic-Deck-Chair-like shuffle of the financing of healthcare.

Meanwhile, closer to home, a letter writer, Shane Budden to the Australian has also accused Mr Rudd of moral cowardice.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/goodbye-to-the-greatest-moral-challenge-of-our-time/story-fn558imw-1225859617325

Climate sceptics are all red herrings and quackery

Climate sceptics are all red herrings and quackery....At least according to Penny Wong.

In an article in the National Times today, Ms Wong (in an address to the first national forum on coasts and climate change) said: "The reality is that the Copenhagen Accord is an important and welcome step toward an effective global agreement on climate change.

It saw, for the first time, leaders agree to hold any increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius."

Oh, are they gods? Can they control the multi-facets of climate? The Vostok Ice-core samples show that temperature precedes rise in CO2 by 800+/-200 years. Can Ms Wong and her very large Climate Change Department change climate? It reeks of quackery to me!

She goes on to say: "Remember the people who have been barrackers for policy failure at home and abroad are the same people who have been peddling misinformation and misleading information about the science of climate change."

I almost agree with MS Wong on this one! Mind you, I would make a few small changes to her statement: Remember the people who have been barrackers for a Cap 'n' Trade scheme, both home and abroad, are the same people who have been peddling misinformation and misleading information about the science of climate change.

She goes on to issue some misleading information: "....facts like that 2009 was the second hottest year on record in Australia and the fifth hottest globally, and that 2009 finished the hottest decade in recorded history." She relies on the IPCC for her support but the IPCC AR4 has been greatly disputed. One of the lead authors of the IPCC, Mr Phil Jones, would dispute the statement that 2009 was the second hottest year on record.

There is a section on the Government's Climate Change Website called "Science - facts and fiction." Having read through that section, I could see the fiction but couldn't find the facts.

http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/climate-change/science.aspx

The Great Climate Change Con Trick Exposed

In his garden, James Delipole interviews Professor Plimer - tanned, rugged, white-haired sixtysomething — courteous and jolly but combative when he needs to be — glowing with the health of a man who spends half his life on field expeditions to Iran, Turkey and his beloved Outback.

The Great Climate Change Con Trick is exposed by Ian's wonderful book full of peer-reviewed references.

Let's forget any ETS or Carbon (dioxide tax.)

An Open Letter to All Members of Parliament

An Open Letter to All Members of Parliament
From the Carbon Sense Coalition

Soon our elected representatives will be asked to vote on Senator Wong’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

This scheme is not about carbon or pollution. It main effect is to provide for a cap on the human production of carbon dioxide, a colourless harmless natural gas. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than oxygen or water, the other two atmospheric gases on which all life on earth relies.

The bill will also levy a tax on whatever carbon dioxide is produced, and levy an excess production tax on anyone whose production exceeds the legal cap. It is a carbon dioxide Cap-n-Tax Bill.

There is no human activity whatsoever that does not generate carbon dioxide. Therefore any attempt to measure, cap and tax human production of carbon dioxide must eventually extend to every human activity (the UK government already floated the idea that every person be issued with a personal carbon ration card).

This is a very serious proposal, with wide-ranging implications for all aspects of economic life and personal freedoms. It could only be justified if there was a clear and urgent danger that additional human production of carbon dioxide is highly likely to cause dangerous global warming. There is no evidence that this is the case.

Neither the scientific questions, nor the cost benefit analysis has been subject to any critical independent analysis.

The diagram below illustrates the sequence of decisions that should be made before this bill gets assent. If the answer to ANY ONE of the boxed questions is “NO”, there is no justification for Australia rushing ahead with its Cap-n-Tax Bill.

This diagram, although light-hearted, has a factual basis and conveys some very serious messages.

It is highly unlikely that anyone could honestly answer “Yes” to every question, which is what is required to justify passage of the bill. This shows that there is a high likelihood that the bill will have NO CLIMATE EFFECT WHATSOEVER and thus a costly exercise in self delusion.

Our strong recommendation is that the Parliament rejects this bill entirely.

Ex- Union Boss threatens industry

From the article in the Brisbane Times datelined: May 31, 2009 - 11:09AM"

"Parliamentary secretary for climate change Greg Combet last week warned that business could lose out on assistance if the (CPRS)scheme had to be rewritten next year."

Using Unions tactics threatening business.

You can take the Combet out of the Unions but you can't take the....etc

Ms Wong Wrong again!

In an interview with "Webnewswire" Ms Wong, who didn't complete schoolgirl science, nonetheless created some schoolgirl-like howlers.

1 We think it’s in the national interest to try and secure a global agreement we know Australia needs....Well, we all know, even you MS Wong, that a global agreement will never happen. And why do you think that Australia needs a Global Agreement?

2 Carbon Pollution - oxymoron.

3. I think it is disappointing that Mr Turnbull continues not to listen to business calls for certainty... Like you, Ms Wong, Mr Turnbull will not listen to calls to look at the science rather than the political spin - IPCC; Al Gore etc see http: climatesceptics.com.au

4...not to listen to the science....Hello-o-o, who's not listening to the science Ms Wrong er Wong!

5...and to environmentalists who say we need a plan in place to reduce our carbon emissions... The Crazy environmentalists, yes. Ms. Wong, look at listentous.org.au. It is an anti ETS website set up by environmentalists - The Australian Environment Foundation - a different kind of environment group caring for both Australia and Australians.

Rudd's Embarassing Back-down on ETS

On the 7:30 report, left wing journalists Kerry O'Brien and Michael Brissenden were mildly critical of left wing PM Rudd.

Kerry Oh-Oh-Oh- O'Brien:

"Having said repeatedly that he would not delay the introduction of his carbon pollution reduction scheme next year, the Prime Minister announced today that he would be doing precisely that, putting it off until mid 2011, and softening the cost of the scheme for business until mid 2012."

Michael Brissenden:

"The Government had planned to begin implementing its carbon pollution reduction scheme by the middle of next year. Just last December the Prime Minister said a delay to that timetable would be reckless and irresponsible, bad for the economy and the environment. But yesterday's definitive position it seems is not necessarily suited to today's realities."

Slap on the wrist, PM!

And the Left wing ABC whose editorial policy says:

The board requires the ABC to demonstrate impartiality in two ways:

1. ….the board requires impartiality at the content or program level….

2…This means that while individual items of content can take a particular perspective on an issue, the ABC must be able to demonstrate at the platform level that it has provided its audience with a range of different perspectives on the subject under consideration. …..

Well, ABC, where is the the different perspective? Where is the alternative view from the around 50% of the populace that believes, make that knows, that AGW is a big hoax and to inflict a Carbon (Dioxide) Pollution Reduction scheme is completely unnecessary?

Rudd and Wong and their embarassing backdown

Kerry OB on the 7:30 report quotes Kevin 747 Rudd in the middle of the KFC (Kev's Financial Crisis)
"Penny Wong, it's only a few months ago in mid December that the Prime Minister said, and I'll quote, "It would be reckless and irresponsible for our economy and for our environment," to delay the introduction of your carbon emissions trading scheme."
and goes on to mention an embarassing U-turn.

Penny says inter-alia: ..."very significant global economic recession"... and ..."very substantial global economic crisis"
and between these she says: "...what we're trying to do is to shift Australia to a low-pollution economy."

A very noble aim, Penny, and I'm sure that there is not one Australian that would agree with a low-pollution economy. But, how do you pollute an economy?

Then MS Wong blows it! "....if you don't put in place a mechanism to reduce your carbon (dioxide) pollution..." Please explain?

Can you show us, Ms Wong, who didn't even do high school science, one bit of scientific evidence that shows carbon dioxide is pollution?

Then Kerry Oh-Oh-Oh- O'Brien says (timidly?) "Dare I suggest that this policy back flip has been framed as a political exercise for the next election?"

Another Hard-hitting interview from a hard hitting left wing journalist to a left wing politician on a left wing station that sponsors a left wing think tank AusSMC.

Thomas L Friedman lost the Ball

In the New York Times op-ed piece by TL Friedman (which I know is only an opinion piece) he seems to have lost the plot. He correctly mentions the failures of cap-and-trade - but poo-poos it anyway. He then goes on to say:

STRATEGY Since the opponents of cap-and-trade are going to pillory it as a tax anyway, why not go for the real thing — a simple, transparent, economy-wide carbon tax?

His next main point:

MESSAGE Climate change is a real threat to a healthy planet Earth — the only home we have.

Well, I would strongly dispute that! In fact he is wrong there. The climate of the healthy planet Earth has been changing since the beginning of time. The continuously changing climate has not harmed the healthy planet Earth in the past and I'm sure it won't in the future.

Does he mean the scurrillous use by globalwarming alarmist of the term "climate change" when they realised that the Earth had stopped warming? They did this because the Earth had stopped warming!

Climate Sceptics get political; Taxpayers $$$s down the tube.

Fairfax press' slightly tongue-in-cheek journal titled The Independant Weekly dated 17 March 2009
reports on the newly formed Climate Sceptics Party (TCS).

Interesting to note that they report the budget for the Department of Environment and Climate Change to be $50 Billion.
Page four of the budget's portfolio overview for DCC shows administered appropriations as $32 billion and departmental appropriations as $56.5 billion giving a total $88.5 billion. That's a lot of taxpayers dollars

NZ Prime Minister awake to Climate Change Hoax?

On the Scoop NZ Web site, NZ Prime Minister John Key is quoted as saying to Investigate Magazine that he wanted..

"to have flexibility so that if the science deteriorates and the climate change sceptics are right we have an ability to alter the impact on our economy".

Well, Mr Key, it's too late. The science has deteriorated and the climate change sceptics are right.

“As a result of learning of the Prime Minister’s comments, Greenpeace, one of the worlds leading NGOs in the climate change area, advised that it would not be participating further in the ETS Review Select Committee."

What a bonus. Not having to deal with the radical, human-hating Greens!

Hey, Mr Key, Looks like you are moving in the right direction! How about jumping ship and forming a NZ chapter of the (Australian) Climate Sceptics party. They can offer you (and any other person from outside Australia) an Associate Membership.
http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/

Carbon trading is not the answer, Co2 is not the culprit!

In a story in The Australian Newspaper dated on Saturday 21 Feb 09 with the sub-heading:
We need to hear other ideas on greenhouse gas reduction.
They give an explanation why the Rudd Government shut down the parliamentary inquiry into the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme after calling it only a week earlier.

Kevin Rudd is demonstrating he will brook no dissent to an immensely complex plan he intends to make law by the middle of the year. Under the CPRS, the Government will set a cap on greenhouse gas emissions and auction or give to industry permits to pollute.

Pollute???

Then the article goes on to mention the word that is always near to the alarmist's surface: Consensus.

The Government has a plan, the Opposition supports reducing emissions, although it is a little hazy on how to do it, and public opinion wants something done about climate change. But that is where the consensus ends...

Well, on February 6th, ABC News Radio ran a poll: Is Global Warming to blame for the current heatwave in Australia?

- Global Warming is a myth
- Yes
-No

The result showed that more than 90% thought that (Anthropogenic) Global Warming was a myth
and because the result showed a consensus that didn't fit into the ABC's global warming theology the result was pulled fromtheir past records.

The article goes on to state:

A carbon trading scheme is also open to manipulation by the financial engineers whose derivative trading packages came close to crippling the world banking system last year.
and
The system also subsidises the producers who receive carbon credits, in effect giving the Government the power to pick winners, with all the risk of political manipulation this brings.

Penny - Look at this

Steven Goddard has posted a graph showing CO2 rises lags behind temperature rise on Anthony Watts award winning blog Watts up With That?

Consider the earth 14,000 years ago. CO2 levels were around 200 ppm and temperatures, at 6C below present values, were rising fast. Now consider 30,000 years ago. CO2 levels were also around 200 ppm and temperatures were also about 6C below current levels, yet at that time the earth was cooling. Exactly the same CO2 and temperature levels as 14,000 years ago, but the opposite direction of temperature change. CO2 was not the driver.

As I said in my just previous post -

The lack of evidence showing CO2 to cause warming means Penny Wong has no excuse to introduce her new HAT (Hot Air Tax)

Crash or burn as Penny's Wrong Tax faces collapse

From SMH dated 20/Feb/09 in an article by Phillip Coorey and Marian Wilkinson:

The Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong, will tell a business lunch in Sydney the global financial crisis was no excuse for backing away from implementing the (ETS) scheme next year.

The lack of evidence showing CO2 to cause warming means Penny Wong has no excuse to introduce her new HAT (Hot Air Tax)

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25047319-2702,00.html
In the above link dated 13 Feb 09, Wayne Swann asked the House of Representatives economics committee to inquire into "the choice of emissions trading as the central policy to reduce Australia's carbon pollution".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02/20/2496497.htm?section=australia
However, one week later, according to the government biased and pro-global warming biased ABC, Treasurer Wayne (I'm not sure what I'm doing) Swan has asked the House of Representatives Economics Committee to call off an investigation into emissions trading, saying it has become "politicised".His decision late yesterday came after a day of confusion about whether the Government would delay the introduction of the scheme.

Back to the first SMH story. Penny is quoted as saying: "Our Government remains undeterred in our determination to implement the [trading scheme] because we know it is the economically responsible course of action for Australia."

Well Ms Wong, it will ruin the economy. Queensland, for example has already stated that it will cost 370,000 jobs.Your own government's research arm has warned of thousands of job losses and a $1.8b hit to the economy.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23747571-3102,00.html

Do you honestly believe it is the economically responsible course of action for Australia? Get out of here!

Is Penny Wong or Right (4)

Update on my post "Is Penny Wong or Right (3) http://talbyv.blogspot.com/2009/01/is-penny-wong-or-right-3.html
Where I said:
And following on from my post Is "Penny Wong or Right (2)" where she said on 4BC radio "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this (AGW) is real ..." a poll in the Australian newspaper as at today's date records: Are the heatwaves in Victoria and South Australia evidence of global warming?
Yes 8%
No 70%
Don’t know 23%

The Australian Labor Party's own News Network are running a Poll (Link in Title)
Is Global Warming to blame for the current heatwave in Australia?

Global Warming is a myth 94.1% Poll Updated 11am 8/2/09 with 128oo votes counted
No 3.1%
Yes 2.8%

So tell me, Penny, do you still or did you ever believe "that most Australians do have a view that this (AGW) is real
And Kevin 747, Wayne Swaan and Mr Tanner: Do you think it will be wise to intruduce a crippling carbon dioxide tax?

Is Penny Wong or Right (3)

On ABC (Australia) Rural, Penny Wrong...er Wong had this to say

"Meanwhile, Senator Wong says the heatwave gripping south-east Australia is part of what scientists predicted would happen.
Temperatures have soared into the mid-40s across Victoria and South Australia, and the hot weather is forecast to continue for the rest of the week."
In South Australia it is the hottest for 70 years! Back to the 1930's which NASA's GISS has said was the hottest decade in the last 100 years!
"Eleven of the hottest years in history have been in the last 12..."
Really, Penny, when Dr. R.K. Pachauri head of the IPCC made the same statement, he had to retract it!

And following on from my post Is "Penny Wong or Right (2)" where she said on 4BC radio "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this (AGW) is real ..." a poll in the Australian newspaper as at today's date records: Are the heatwaves in Victoria and South Australia evidence of global warming?
Yes 8%
No 70%
Don’t know 23%

Wong...er Wrong again, Pen!

Is Penny Wong or Right (2)

Penny Wong on 4BC:
"The consensus science is that climate change is occurring."

Well, sorry, Penny, Science doesn't work on "Consensus." and if it did, look at petitionproject.org and the more than 31,000 scientists that do not believe in AGW. I'll take your consensus and raise you...

"What I say is, have a look at what the IPCC said – that is not a radical group…"

Pardon, that biased and disgraced POLITICAL body???

When asked about the 31000 of the petition project, she, as usual dodged the question and answered "and... and... and I... to be honest with you.. think that most Australians do have a view that this is real ..."

Have you seen recent polling, Penny... oh yes, of course you have. Don't tell porkies!

"Are you willing to take the risk in terms of the reef, in terms of all of the economic impact of climate change. We see this as an economic responsibility issue."

I say- Ms Wong, Are YOU willing to initiate a CRIPPLING carbon (Dioxide) tax (aka ETS- aka Penny's new HAT [hot air tax])
on an unproven theory which is slowly sliding into oblivion?

Barnaby Joyce calls green fanatics eco-Nazis

First it was Professor William Happer (see my post Professor denies Global Warming Theory) who, when talking of scientist who believe in (anthropogenic) global warming, said: "This is  the Germans are the master race. The Jews are the scum of the earth. It's that kind of propaganda."

Now, our hero Barnaby Joyce likened the term "climate change denier" to Holocaust denier" and questioned why he was expected to fall into the "goose-stepping" parade of supporters. "The farmers, the people whose job is put on the line, the traders (like Al Gore-tb) they all have to be taken into account."

Senator Joyce said all Australians should take a breath (but don't exhale the CO2-tb) and take a serious look at the idea of an ETS.

See also my previous post Barnaby Joyce and the ETS.

James Hansen - Communist or Robbing Hood?

In a letter to Obama, James Hansen proposed "a carbon tax and 100% dividend:" a mechanism for putting a price on carbon without raising money for government coffers. The idea is to tax carbon at source, then redistribute the revenue equally among taxpayers, so high carbon users are penalised while low carbon users are rewarded.

Whoppee, the man is a new Robbing Hood taking from the carbon rich and giving to the carbon poor.

Or is it a new form of communism?

Does Mr Hansen know that it would require a new bureaucracy to manage the tax. Would this bureaucracy be funded from current income? I don't think so. Not all the money would go out.

What's his degree again...does Ph.D. stand for Pipehype dreams?

Barnaby Joyce on the ETS

Agmates Rural News has an article by Barnaby Joyce:

Some extracts:

"My current concern with the ETS is that a religious fervour has built up around the altar of global warming. Those at the altar have become ruthless in their denigration of alternate views."

"The similarity in this newest forte of socialism can be defined by the ultimate purpose of divesting the individual of their asset or income stream on the premise of an apparent greater moral good."

"Australia is going down a path of an ETS without the co-operation of the major emitting countries. It says that it is morally right to do so. The Rudd Labor Government and others say that unilateral action is a moral imperative. I look forward to the same fervour of moralistic rectitude as they approach the Mugabe issue in Zimbabwe."

Happy New Year, Barnaby. May you remain in Parliament protecting the interests of Australians for a long time.