Morgan has released another poll just five days after the last, from a face-to-face survey of 1067 voters conducted last weekend. The agency’s figures had previously been holding out in the pre-budget Rudd honeymoon zone, but they have now come down to earth with a drop from 60-40 to 55-45. This has partly been driven by a drop in the Greens vote to 7.5 per cent from an anomalous 11.5 per cent last time.
Diogs @344 –
is that the 2008 Liberal Party Almanac?
Ron-
what do you think of the POST-Kyoto ratifications?
Good to see we agree, Ron 😉
Ron,
On income distribution, do you believe progressive taxation actually still works?
Take a hypothetical surgeon from Adelaide as an example , lets call him Perseus to protect his identity:
He works long hours, sees many patients and receives $380,000 per annum after he pays for medical insurance, practice expenses etc. Under our income tax scales he pays 40 cents in the dollar tax assuming he has no deductions.
However our hypothetical case:
Has a seperate service company which provides services to his practice: (tax is immediately reduced to 30 per cent from the top scale of 45 per cent for income over $180k)
Employs his spouse or partner in the practice at a modest “salary” of $40,000 hence attracting tax at 15 per cent instead of 40 per cent.
Loads up on interest deductions so he can convert his income to CGT (and ultimately take out at the discounted rate, ie 22.5% as compared to 45% on the top bracket)
All up in a good year he is able to cut his tax to 20 cents in the dollar (without sending dollars overseas).
The same would apply to any self-employed person or professional, is this just Ron?
Shock! Janet A suggests the LNP says they will only do an ETS if everyone else does it.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/moving_beyond_the_rhetoric
“The other strategy is to hasten more slowly and more sensibly. In other words, make support for an ETS conditional upon it being a meaningful and economically responsible action. That means telling voters that the Coalition will support an ETS if other major emitters are on the same track and then tailoring an emissions trading system that does not damage the economy.”
Centre
You got me wound up there ! Howard/Cossie kept tricking the battes with a false fist full of dollars , and we had ineffective leaders to combat the sneaky rodent
Jen
ratifying Kyoto now means you are part of the protocols now for negotiating the post 2012 Kyooto emmission targets What the big 4 want to do is get 13 emmitting Nations only together , make there side ‘deals’ (won’t efectively help CC) and then present it toi the Kyoto groups , what choice will othr countries hav but to accept what i reckon will be a sham CC world deal (and both Pres candidates want to go down this path) when the rich ones have already done a deal
IF they were thinking of CC first then they’d allm negotiate wITHIN Kyoto , under the IPCCscientists scenarios pressures
[Shock! Janet A suggests the LNP says they will only do an ETS if everyone else does it.]
Whenever people say this I have a mental picture of a whole bunch of people dressed up to the nines encouraging each other to walk through a door “After you” “Why no, but after you fine Sir!” “Oh no m’lady, but after you” “Thank you kindly, but I’ll wait until she goes first.”
Meanwhile, absolutely no progress is made.
354 ESJ
If I met Perseus, I would tell him that if he was a director of the service company which ran his rooms etc, he would be better off diverting 40% of his income into a family trust as the Medical Practitioners Act prevents him from running as a company as you suggest.
That way, he could split some of his income with his wife (and his daughter if she was disabled). He would not get down to a tax rate of 20%, more like 30%. He would probably feel quite guilty about this, especially if he was a liberal progressive, and would feel the need to channel his guilt somewhere.
LOl Diogenes,
I remember one company which said it didnt employ medical staff it simply got a cut of the fee for use of a room.
Shows On, that will give the major polluters heaps of ammunition to say no because we aren’t doing it, instead of putting pressure on those countries.
The current opposition is easily the worst that I have ever seen.
http://news.smh.com.au/national/james-erica-packer-welcome-baby-indigo-20080727-3lps.html
ESJ
too big to answer in 1 blog about progrssive taxation but yes its basicaly fair
Firstly , nil tax to 6K , 15% tax 6k to 30K , then 30% to 75K plus medicare levy
So at 75,000 income you are paying 22.8% tax , and people under tthat ar progressively paying less % tax I think thats fair
IF you go over 75,000 , you ar only paying the 40% on the excess over 75K up to 150K , then 45% on any excess I think thats fair OTHERWISE the poorer people would hav to pay more tax for the same Governmetn monies the Govt collects to spend on servicxes Well i can tell you the poorer people do not hav any more money over
Now to Companys , the rate of 30% is crazy as it opens up unfair loopholes you mentioned to get around progressive taxation seeing its so much lower than persl tax rates Its too low I would be most surprised if the % of income earners over 75,000 do not hav salary sacrifises , super , deductions here there & everywhere , homes as “offices” , exclusive personal car used supposedly for ‘business’ to get deductions , reverse loans to get interst deductions , ‘capital’ itms business to catch depresiation
Therefore the REAL tax most of the higher income earners pay would be far less than the gross figures i mentiond
What i do is my barbarian method I just drive around a few leafy rich suburbs with monstrosity mansions Now they ar all occouied, so they ar doing ok the petals Then i notice the 2 mercs side by side in the garage , then the tennis court and the swimmings pools i think they are ok , but the tax sysytem yes is a mess , lacking creativity & incentive but with too many loophols and the co tax rate is one of them
ron, grog, ShowsOn et al
Read the comments on Janet’s site. I defy anyone to read them all without putting a fist through their computer in frustration. I will leave a sample;
The coalition taking this stance (wanting an ETS but waiting for the big-emitter’s response to climate change) gives them a political edge on Labor in the next electin as being the real economic conservatives and wanting the best for Australia’s ‘working families’. After all, why cripple our ecomony to supposably ‘lead the world’ in ‘carbon reduction’ when it will inevitably be only another symbolic gesture, since China, India and other big-emitters could make our efforts pointless in months!
Good point Dr Janet
I think the coaltion must make a stand. If they are wrong and global warming is a serious problem Labor wins either way. If the alternative is true (dare to be a dissenter) and the earth starts to cool then it will be best to avoid any association with a carbon tax right now.
Fair Dinkum, Albrechtson’s make up has permanently penetrated, and is now tattooed to her brain.
PM Rudd is a strong leader who is prepared to make the tough decisions.
Feeling sexy are you Janet!
Ron – flat tax with a negative income tax for those under the poverty line, no deductions fairer?
Diogenoski
These ar the battle lines for the next electon i’ve been pessimisticaly talking about & fear will happen Th LCP are going to pay the same selfish stance as the US 2 candidates
The US 2 Pres candidates argument is unless China & India agree to hav the same emmissions target criteria as th US , then the US will not enter emmssions negotiations THAT then becomes the US 2 Pres canddtes first defense as to why they do not ratify Kyoto ! China & India rightly say thats unfair , but also sneakily won’t offer a deal either
They are all playing games with CC The Liberals ar a disgrace and by there stanse hav narrowed Sir Kevins CC options But I reckon he & Penny lane will still deliver the CC target policy in th White Paper , and th voters will hav a choice between there pockets & fear vs a cleaner ‘oz’ CC future , hopefully with those farms or equivalents The Libs hav no shame , its so frustrating to see th anti CC MSN & LCP comments
Diogenes @ 341 –
As a burns surgeon, I should point out that huge numbers of people with kerosene stoves get horribly burnt.
We had a kero heater when I was a kid and I have a vague memory of the glass bottle holding the fuel cracking and setting the thing alight.
But as dangerous as they undoubtedly are, kero heaters and stoves are much safer than the main alternative for the poor, wood. Wood smoke is a witches brew of carcinogens that globally kills nearly twice as many people each year as motor vehicles. Even in Sydney where wood heating is relatively uncommon it’s estimated about 400 people with respiratory and/or cardiovascular disorders die prematurely each winter as a result of inhaling it.
Wonder what the NRMA thinks of the coalition’s 1001 policies on greenhouse?
Ditch oil, go green: NRMA
Taxpayers should no longer give $10 billion a year in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, the nation’s peak motoring body says.
The NRMA wants to wean Australia off its “unhealthy and costly” addiction to oil by a massive boost to greener transport.
(my emphasis)
http://www.smh.com.au/news/energy-smart/ditch-oil-go-green-nrma/2008/07/27/1217097042468.html
It has been a horror last few days for the conservatives. Firstly, there is Cossie showing his hatred for Coconut at the funeral. Cossie has nobody – nobody but to blame but himself. He is a weak individual. All puff, no smoke.
Secondly, News Ltd’s Rugby League is seriously crumbling. We have had defections of the two best centres in Tahu and Gasnier, and now Sonny Bill. The hypocrites are complaining about loyalty (after the the raid by Superleague). AFL take note. It’s here for the taking.
And thirdly, one rich supporter has had a baby GIRL. As Brenda said recently, we all love our children the same.
ESJ
well it would be a starting point to discuss , addressing the poor at one end & the crazy deductions at th other , but i’d probabley want to negotite some ‘extras’ with you , in particular at least one level of ‘super tax rate’
One that it was revenue neutral , a second I’am very happy with deductions as incentives for verifiable R & D as it needs far more encouragement in ‘oz’ plus also our export industries to assist our balance of trade status A third would be infrastucture to make us more competitive Fourth some othr areas i’d probably like tax used as an incentive subject to definite verificabilite yA Fifth would be a better balanse of th old double tax on dividends to now effectiverly one tax but Co tax rates at 30% has created an imbalance
Sixth I’d loove to see an analysis by income group (GROSS earnings of a couple from the one entity) , before any deductions were made by anyone and the gross tax that would hav been payable , and compare that by income group to the net taxable income payable & th net actauly paid tax IF the 2 of us had that , then where a tax rate should be set , and where a secondery one should be set as a premium tax over a set income figure could be assessed
Contrary to the assertion by the Coalition that it is not in Australia’s interests to be a leader on Co2 emission reduction, we are sadly lacking well behind the UK & Europe.
{Plans to build Europe’s largest onshore wind farm in South Lanarkshire have been approved by Scottish ministers.
The 152-turbine Clyde wind farm near Abington, will be capable of powering up to 320,000 homes. }
{“The Scottish Government has an ambitious target to generate 31% of Scotland’s electricity demand from renewable sources by 2011 and 50% by 2020,” he said. }
{“Today’s announcement makes it virtually certain that the 2011 target will be met early and represents a significant milestone on the way to achieving the 2020 target.
“Scotland has a clear, competitive advantage in developing clean, green energy sources such as wind, wave and tidal power. }
Also, China is now officially the worlds highest emitter of Co2.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7517176.stm
363 Diogenes
Yep fist and wall are in close contact after reading JA. And what is all this “cripple our economy” bullsh*t?
It won’t.
371 Scorpio. Spot on. Just think if the Howard govt had introduced this back in 03-04. Firstly, they’d still be in power, and we’d be laughing at how we thought it could “cripple the economy”.
Now this is what I call “Global warming”.
The atmosphere of Venus is 96% carbon dioxide, 3% nitrogen & 1% others.
Temperatures can reach up to 464 degrees C.
If we keep going long enough, we might just catch up.
Yes Scorpio you are right
We are well behind Europe The EU have a combined target of 8% and shared between developed (higher target) and less developed lower target)
A principal the US selfishly will not apply
Examples of the fairness of the EU system are the targets UK has 12.5% Germany (incl East G) 21% , Italy 6.5% Belgum 7.5% , whilst some poor EU have very low targets The EU are on track for there 2012 target , so we ar NOT the leader at all in emmssions Sir Kevin will be joining the EU and Japan 6% Canada 6% targets , and sepite the MSN & selfish Libs I believe Sir Kevin & Penny lane will hold firm
I missed Insiders this morning, Paul Kelly gets it about right on Nelson’s strategy:
“Now, the great risk for Nelson is that he gives Rudd a golden issue here. Rudd is able to argue this simply proves, if you ever had any doubt, that the Coalition is a sceptic on climate change, that they will never do anything to address the issue. And I think in that sense he gives Rudd the chance to argue that the Government, the Labor Government, is in the middle ground, it wants to address climate change and it wants to try and do it in an economically responsible way. So that’s the great risk for Nelson.”
[We are well behind Europe The EU have a combined target of 8% and shared between developed (higher target) and less developed lower target)]
Those targets are easy for Europe because they use a lot of nuclear power. 75% of Australia’s emissions are caused by electricity generation. Even if you took every car and truck off the road, our emissions would only drop by 14%. If we are to find a solution to this we need clean electricity generation. Even Turnbull when environment minister said we really need to have emissions neutral electricity generation by 2050 if we are to hit any big targets.
Looking at what scientists have discovered about Venus, it beggars belief that GW deniers can be taken at all seriously.
{Observations of the planet Venus might assist efforts to tackle the threat of climate change here on Earth.
Data from a European probe orbiting Venus paints a picture of a planet that may once have been like Earth, but later evolved in a very different way.
Venus has undergone runaway greenhouse warming, where trapped solar radiation has heated the surface to an average temperature of 467C (872F). }
{It is now becoming clear why the climate on Venus is so different to Earth, when the planets themselves are otherwise quite similar.
“Our new data make it possible to construct a scenario in which Venus started out like the Earth – possibly including a habitable environment, billions of years ago – and then evolved to the state we see now.” }
The Coalition seem to want to create another Venus here!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7117303.stm
Ron,Scorpio
cop this
http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1919/83/
”
The EU is planning a new supergrid initiative that would harness the massive amount of sun pounding down on the Sahara dessert. The $71 billion plan would take a mere couple of decades to complete, but would supply a significant amount (some report ALL) of the EU’s energy needs. UK’s PM Gordon Brown already supports the idea, which is no surprise considering the new green face he is putting forward, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy is onboard as well.”
Realists 1 Nelson 0
ShowsOn
The 12.5% for UK & the 21% for Germany is still what they hav to reduce by 2012 & they ar on track Perhaps you ar thinking of France who hav no compariable target problem seeing 78% of there electricity is from nuclar
[The 12.5% for UK & the 21% for Germany is still what they hav to reduce by 2012 & they ar on ]
And how is the UK doing it? By building another 10 nuclear power plants over the next 15 years. Germany are trying to get out of nuclear, but it is easy for them to just important power from other countries which we can’t do.
Cutting emissions is easy for European countries. Their circumstances are not comparable to a country like ours that uses a lot more dirty energy per capita for mining and electricity generation.
381 ShowsOn. So the solution is….
Wind? Sun? Hot rocks?? Nuclear?
[381 ShowsOn. So the solution is….
Wind? Sun? Hot rocks?? Nuclear?]
Yes a bit of everything. The S.A. Geothermal plant should be producing electricity by early next year. And there is more solar per capita used in S.A. than any other state because any power put back into the grid receives a double rebate (half from the power company, half from the state government).
The Federal government should also make special planning laws to make it harder for local governments to block wind power on aesthetic grounds.
Question:
Will the Liberal National Party members in the Federal parliament attend the National Party room meetings, or the Liberal Party room meetings, or both?
Or will they choose which one to attend based on their previous affiliation?
Also, why doesn’t the webpage say Liberal National Party? All I see is LNP everywhere. Is it like KFC, they don’t want you to recall that the food is fried? 😀
Here is a great example how in trying to solve one problem, ie the increasing cost of fossil fuel, in this case, oil, other more serious problems are created.
{“Biofuel production has led to a large loss of wetlands in the US already,” explained Eugene Turner from Louisiana State University.
“They are now growing as much corn to produce biofuels as they used to export out of the country.”
Professor Turner told BBC News that the surge in demand for the crop had resulted in agreements to conserve areas on the margins of farmland being broken. }
{“Although that they may be 3-5% of the terrestrial surface, wetlands store about 20% of all terrestrial carbon, which amounts to 500-700 gigatonnes,” explained Professor Turner.
“We are releasing, on a net basis, about 3.5 gigatonnes into the atmosphere, so any small change in the carbon from wetlands going into the atmosphere has a big impact.”
He added that the future well-being of wetlands in the Arctic region was of particular concern.
“The places where it is going to proportionally warm the greatest is towards the Arctic; that region has an awful lot of wetlands. }
{“The ice is receding, so the carbon that is stored there is going to be released and that is a problem.”}
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7525613.stm
ShowsOn
The first ‘compliance’ year under Kyoto is Jan 2008 to Dec 2008 , where the av of the 5 years must be 5.2% The EU’s share was 8% from January to 2008 to 2012 It does not matter how Europe (the EU) reduce there emmssions by 8% a year av from now to 2012 , they are doing so ! there will be less CO2 by 8% , and they should be applauded Sir Kevin is going down th same track to reduce our emmissions and I believe he will stand firm and deliver
WHEREAS the big 4 US China India & Russia ar playing CC games blaming each othr my point was ignore the selfish big 4 , and ignore the Libs who are using the phoiny selfish US excuse of blaming China & India , we should do our own CC thing , and Sir Kevin is , despite the MSN
I’m just hoping we don’t leave it too late to make any worthwhile difference.
This is scary stuff. {OK, phytoplankton might not be the first thing you think of when you think of the Arctic – that’s probably ice – but this microscopic sea life is vital, not only to the future of life in the Arctic, but perhaps all life on the planet.
As Ray Leakey, chief scientist for the expedition, puts it: “The Arctic is getting warmer – it’s the fastest warming part of the planet. The melting of the sea ice affects not only the physical system, but also the plants and animals. }
{Take away the phytoplankton, and you put everything higher up at risk. More than that, what happens to phytoplankton at the poles will help scientists to predict what might happen to the types of phytoplankton that live in warmer oceans. In a warmer world, the polar seas heat up first.
So they are a laboratory, or test bed, for the rest of the world. }
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/7521339.stm
I meant to include this also.
{Because the startling fact is that the oceans – or more correctly, the life forms that live in them, account for about half of all the absorption by the planet of the carbon dioxide that circulates through the atmosphere. If we disturb that so-called carbon “sink”, then the world could be in big trouble.}
{The oceans’ carbon cycle goes something like this. The phytoplankton take in carbon from the atmosphere to survive. They’re eaten by microbes and zooplankton (like algae, but animals) – which give out CO2.
The phytoplankton and the animals that feed on them die, which locks carbon away in a stable form on the ocean floor.
Scientists suspect that warming the Arctic Ocean, and melting the ice above it so that more light filters through, will make life quite pleasant for many phytoplankton. }
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/7521339.stm
Scorpio
Gusface delivered a wonderful positive post , now you’v brought us back to reality
The latest Kyoto based full IPCC Report (called the Fourth Asessment) includes the input of more than 1,200 of the world’s top scientific authors and 2,500 scientific expert reviewers from more than 130 countries Andrew Bolt quotes 1 quack ! The Reort gives 6 possible climate scenarios , with between 2 degres to 3 degrees being th tipping point Only one of the 6 is under 2 degrees ! (thats 1.8 degrees)
My long posts ar just the frustration of seeing the selfish big 4 world players , the Libs & MSN ignoring irrefutable evidence
ron,
If the only information source that the Libs use to further their knowledge about the effects of global warming caused be human Co2 emissions is through publications by Uncle Rupe’s News Ltd, and they somehow get back into power in 2 years time, then we are all stuffed.
There is an absolute abundance of highly qualified information out there and readily available on the net, that, if they read some of it, even if only cursory, they would be forced to agree that something needs to be done and fast.
One thing that JA omitted to suggest in her article of advice to the Liberal Party Policy developers was to out green the Greens and contend that Rudd’s GG Policy doesn’t go far enough or fast enough.
Every time Rudd tries to catch up with them, they just need to go one step further ahead of him. What a mob of slack, unimaginative wank#rs the whole blankey lot of them are.
absolutely Scorpio
[One thing that JA omitted to suggest in her article of advice to the Liberal Party Policy developers was to out green the Greens and contend that Rudd’s GG Policy doesn’t go far enough or fast enough.]
Move to the left of the ALP? That’ll be the day…
Most rabid is the backbench. One MP claims 70 per cent either does not believe in climate change or is plain sceptical. When Nelson first broke ranks with Coalition policy a month ago, he emboldened this group. They were quietly hostile last year when the party room was not consulted on the emissions trading scheme policy that Turnbull and John Howard took to the election.
“We were staring at an electoral abyss. We had to pretend we cared,’ said one sceptic explaining why no one spoke out against the policy at the time.
They no longer feel constrained.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/pugnacious-nelson-ready-to-take-a-glove-again/2008/07/27/1217097054285.html?page=2
Thats the Lib all over – The Great Pretenders
Wealthy businessman Bob Day, Liberal candidate for Makin at last year’s federal election, has quit the Liberal Party after 20 years in protest at alleged internal manipulation that delivered the Mayo preselection to Jamie Briggs. Day was one of nine Liberals who sought preselection in Mayo. He is not commenting on whether he might stand in the by-election as an independent or Family First candidate. If nothing else, the Libs have lost a big donor.
this the funniest thing ive read in years:
You have to be old enough to remember Abbott and Costello, and too old to REALLY understand computers, to fully appreciate this. For those of us who sometimes get flustered by our computers, please read on…
If Bud Abbott and Lou Costello were alive today, their famous sketch, ‘Who’s on First?’ might have turned out something like this:
COSTELLO CALLS TO BUY A COMPUTER FROM ABBOTT
ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?
COSTELLO: Thanks. I’m setting up an office in my den and I’m thinking about buying a computer.
ABBOTT: Mac?
COSTELLO: No, the name’s Lou.
ABBOTT: Your computer?
COSTELLO: I don’t own a computer. I want to buy one.
ABBOTT: Mac?
COSTELLO: I told you, my name’s Lou.
ABBOTT: What about Windows?
COSTELLO: Why? Will it get stuffy in here?
ABBOTT: Do you want a computer with Windows?
COSTELLO: I don’t know. What will I see when I look at the windows?
ABBOTT: Wallpaper.
COSTELLO: Never mind the windows. I need a computer and software.
ABBOTT: Software for Windows?
COSTELLO: No. On the computer! I need something I can use to write proposals, track expenses and run my business. What do you have?
ABBOTT: Office.
COSTELLO: Yeah, for my office. Can you recommend anything?
ABBOTT: I just did.
COSTELLO: You just did what?
ABBOTT: Recommend something.
COSTELLO: You recommended something?
ABBOTT: Yes.
COSTELLO: For my office?
ABBOTT: Yes.
COSTELLO: OK, what did you recommend for my office?
ABBOTT: Office.
COSTELLO: Yes, for my office!
ABBOTT: I recommend Office with Windows
COSTELLO: I already have an office with windows! OK, let’s just say I’m sitting at my computer and I want to type a proposal. What do I need?
ABBOTT: Word.
COSTELLO: What word?
ABBOTT: Word in Office.
COSTELLO: The only word in office is office.
ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows.
COSTELLO: Which word in office for windows?
ABBOTT: The Word you get when you click the blue ‘W’.
COSTELLO: I’m going to click your blue ‘w’ if you don’t start with some straight answers. What about financial bookkeeping? You have anything I can track my money with?
ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: That’s right. What do you have?
ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: I need money to track my money?
ABBOTT: It comes bundled with your computer.
COSTELLO: What’s bundled with my computer?
ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: Money comes with my computer?
ABBOTT: Yes. No extra charge.
COSTELLO: I get a bundle of money with my computer? How much?
ABBOTT: One copy.
COSTELLO: Isn’t it illegal to copy money?
ABBOTT: Microsoft gave us a license to copy Money.
COSTELLO: They can give you a license to copy money?
ABBOTT: Why not? THEY OWN IT!
(A few days later)
ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?
COSTELLO: How do I turn my computer off?
ABBOTT: Click on ‘START’…………
gusface, going by some of the reports of the level of computer literacy of many members of the Liberal Party last year, I can readily see that scenario repeated with any number of Lib Front Benchers.
It probably explains why there are so many of them who are cl;imate change sceptics. They get all their information from the MSM, predominately the Oz and other News Ltd publications.
Scorpio
I instantly thought of the fiberals when i read it.
why the MSM does not do more parody of these bumblers is beyond me.
maybe they are hoping for more rivers of gold from the party of doublespeak.
From the OO, Nelson confirms the speculation of yesterday. He is only interested in getting elected. He has no interest in leadership or policy. Note the phrase “Rudd has misunderstood the electorate”. So now, the electorate makes policy given their vast experience in CC. The argument is going to be “national interest”, which is code for “electability”.
Yesterday, Dr Nelson said: “Our priority in deciding our policy is to act in Australia’s best interest and for Australia not to get too far out in front of the ‘big guys’ of greenhouse gas emissions, such as India and China.
“I believe that so far the argument on greenhouse gas emissions has been fairly emotional and wrapped up with the symbolism of ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. I think that is about to change as we look at the economic impact of an emissions trading scheme and we need to have our economic eyes wide open.
“I am not a climate change sceptic and accept something has to be done, but whatever happens has to be done in the national interest.
“In his rush, Mr Rudd has misunderstood the electorate and is about to be wrong-footed.”
Libs fall in line on climate
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24086961-601,00.html
In other news, the alcopop tax died a horrible death this morning. New figures (from the alcohol lobby) showed it had increased spirit sales (which is not necessarily consumption) by 10%. Fielding has said he won’t pass it based on these figures, and it looks like Mr X won’t either.
Liquor sale surge blunts alcopop tax
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24085831-5006301,00.html
“The national Interest”???
How about SURVIVAL!
Wankers.