Labor Blog

38 Comments

• 

  zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Wednesday, 15 September 2010, 04:15

  Wouldn't the people those applying the funds compelled purchase of Bonds aggregates still be talking to the same market participants as a bloke running a steel mill would facing the auction prices of an Emissions Trading Scheme. Except there would be another middleman between him and his cost reduction?

• 

  lyphuong from Walkerville , SA Sunday, 12 September 2010, 17:12

  Dear Ms Guillard, The PM has responsibility to present the plans, to explain clearly the ideas to the nation. The PM doesn't have to defend / fight every minute of the day because it shows inability to visions. Best wishes.

• 

  Sauman from Salt Lake City , West Bengal Sunday, 12 September 2010, 16:12

  @Sangerer:"I proposed the Green Bank that issues Green Bonds, Carbon Bonds, Enviromnetal Bonds and Community Bonds" Damn impressive.That is the way to go.Green Producer Banks piggy backing on green sustainable equity with a green exchange fired by green energy with a simple clean carbon card(I call it) that becomes the single simple entry point for all components. The decentralised micro grids again a part of the whole sustainable network.With the pupullation the size of Australia we can do that in three years.And I am fair dinkum. One reason I logged into this site is to actually Lobby for the same issue of how to involve Canberra in real time challanges and solutions that Australia can provide.If they wake up to real facts.In other words educating the educated. These were the same challanges that I faced in India.Where the scenario is harrowing. Havent yet come to the point of actually breaking barriers.But from the hard copy ,things are getting softer. A few tools that can work in this case is to have an alternate network.Which works on the basis of Intilligent Reporting from ground zero.With a two way feed back system.The advocacy system must be self funded in its whole entirity and sustainable to prevent intrusion or vested interest.You know media and some fame hungry social do gooders do. I will send you a mail shortly.Has been on my to do list.Been running around like a headless chook in the City of Joy(Man who ever named that). But you are right all through.There with you in all your initiatives.Count me in. Lets get the gig on the road.Waking Canberra.Waking Australia. The biggest threat is the environment.Hence the biggest oppurtunity for Australia to be the show case model of an achievable green model economy.This is what we need to translate to the horse traders and other punters in the power game.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 12 September 2010, 15:12

  @Suaman Since I proposed the Green Bank that issues Green Bonds, Carbon Bonds, Enviromnetal Bonds and Community Bonds to the PM's energy efficiency paper administered by the Dept. of clImate change ( someone should do somethig about this silly name... I mean lets call it "gambling on a 50 year weather forcast") during Rudd's tenure, I suspect it is sitting on the shelf gathering dust. So the question is how do we get it back on the agenda and actually get it through this parliament. My thoughts are: raise Julia's credibility by delivering on Climate Change through a positive and responsible fiancial mechanism that provides a proper investment banking solution to reduce CO2 via a budget neutral position. ( A big mouthful but thta is what the Green Bank acutally is in political terms) I have started the lobbying. However, I am worried that the election has destroyed the will to deliver in the short term.... with more mindeless talk fests and horse trading planned. I am thinking of approaching "Get Up" as well as doing a direct campaign. I am also approaching large Co-OP's and companies such as Wesfarmers. The farmers backing the AWEI want an answer that doesn't break them and they want the right to develop their own micro-grids and connect to the grid as an additional revenue source. Many of them are worried of losing their farms because of rising energy costs and are seriously considering off grid cooperatives if the politicians can't deliver a sensible answer soon. Any ideas on how we can use this site as a proper campaign site to get the new crew in Canberra doing somehting that actually makes sense are welcome!

• 

  Sauman from Salt Lake City , West Bengal Sunday, 12 September 2010, 13:12

  @Sangerer:I agree that why should Australia wait for an UN resolution.Using EPA guidelines we can formulate our own APA which essentially uses a honey comb network of tools to offset the Industry-farming-mining and lifestyle emissions.The ideal situation would be to get it down to consumer level of building consiousness about the ramification and expected results to shift the economy towards a participatory mode.Where no one is left out.Every individual and life style counts.The technology and connectivity tools and technology are available. Then the argument of having the concept of tax rise or another tax is wiped out from the dictionary. The creation of a bundle using corporate social responsibility,individual responsiblity and state responsibility working in unsion to combat common local needs and problems.The corpus fund that can be created is dependent totally on the mandate and pre set targets.With SNS ,DNS,and eventually the knowledge grid created thereof.Works as cost negative inclusive development program on micro and macro level. Media will probably have another take on this.As it will question the very role the forth pillar of democracy and it's present functions.For an ideal combination a healthy media platform with citizens reporting is the natural transition that will then happen in this vastly over hyped arena.From a fault finding to a solution seeking platform. The Carbon fund can then work on a people/politics/producer/press/power collective consortium methodology. And "Yes"Sangerer.These are all possible.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 12 September 2010, 00:12

  @spacek Wow. I lost you there about have way through mate! I thought I was the only one who had read the Argus....

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 12 September 2010, 00:12

  @zedlive I think we are both concerned about how to make this work. Please don’t misunderstand me. I am not a proponent of raising GST in order to have an efficient carbon tax system. I think the GST will be raised to pay for the health expenditure plan. It is however one option. The option I would prefer to see is to manage carbon emissions and all other pollution through an EPA regulatory mechanism. In this way the heavy polluters would be targeted. I would also suggest that rather than allowing the cost to be passed onto the consumer I would pay the penalty into a Green Bank in the form of Carbon Bonds. Carbon Bonds or / industry infrastructure Bonds would be tied to specific industry pollution reduction projects and underwritten by the Reserve Bank. The Bonds would also be non tradeable and therefore could not be exchanged on an international carbon trading market. Since polluters have the opportunity to raise money from the Green Bank on the guarantee of the Bonds they have purchased for pollution reduction projects the actual cost of would be the difference between the Bond value and the loan rate. This would in effect deliver a very effective price cap on any price increases. This system has several advantages over a carbon tax as well as using a GST increase. The most significant advantage is that that it targets heavy polluters without passing the full cost onto consumers. It would also stimulate investment into energy efficiency since the Carbon Bonds are an asset guarantee that does not impact on corporate cash flow. The other advantage is that Australia does not have to wait for a UN resolution. It would alos be solution that neither the Greens nor the independents could fault. Therefore, politically a good option for this parliament.

• 

  zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Saturday, 11 September 2010, 19:11

  The objective is to hold the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere below a particular level. We know what emits CO2, how CO2 reduction of those known emissions can occur, and we know what CO2 level will result given certain levels of those known emission activities [to a level of accuracy sufficient to act to achieve the objective]. All we need is policy to influence those emissions toards the goal. There are some peripheral points you make that I would take issue with, [I think to a better statement of GST would be to regard it as a tax on "final" production rather than "all" production for example] but I think we can both accept we both know a thing or two. Where I think you and I differ is that I am not so concerned about day 1 or even year one of Carbon Trading. It is a major change, a major transition, and to state it as otherwise is to misjudge. But where it takes us to is the policy sweet spot, blind to sectional interest, driven by the common good [no one below the line, suppotive of those who wish to differentiate themselves from others above the line], and smack bang down the centre of the Australian way. The Australian way is not the American free enterprise at all costs [though the US is an outstanding country and I would drop in the trenches alongside them] or the socialistic tendancies of the Europeans [though it would be hard to not admire the Eupropeans]. It is a merging of the two. Carbon trading does that. Carbon trading says that. And it says it with one of the couple of most precious things we have - our natural environment.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Saturday, 11 September 2010, 01:11

  Gillard was pushed into this post by that compete and utter dumkopf, Shotjoke. On doing a google search I found Oakeshott in another incarnation is an armor and sword supplier -- ha, how appropriate, because the redhead will be ousted the minute the polls dip -- and that cuckold Shorten with his GG ma in law will get in as another UNELECTED PM. He is a moral wasteland. As for that insufferable buffoon eejit Oakeshotte, consulting his offspring 4 and 6 on the election, I am wondering if he loses his seat whether he will become a reserve Wiggle. Certainly has the annoying Happy Clappy tendencies. He is an embarrassment to the Independents, and fortunately saw the error of his ways before he totally ballsed up any position -- he has already lost Lyne, they can see he is eccentric on a good day, mad on a bad, and Liberals won the primary vote - Labor had 11 per cent in Lyne. If this is not so, how can you Labor apologists explain the garnering of 16 seats for the LNP? And what happens with the seats uncounted -- do we then have the rightful winner installed? Do we give the Red Queen the flick -- or flicknife as it were? She reminds me of Stephen Bradbury -- last man standing, who won the gold medal -- hollow victory, but like sinking the white whilst playing snooker and your opponent wins by default. It is only because voting is compulsory, and, particularly in the Robertson electorate where many welfare recipients live, who will obviously vote Labor -- and vote to avoid getting fined that the redhead managed to get in by the very thin skin of her teeth. Bob Katter, who you all laugh about, and I have had MANY arguments with acquaintances of mine, is the only one apart from Tony Abbott, who has retained any sense of credibility. Notice how Abbott congratulated the Welsh rarebit -- it would not have been reciprocal from she who declared "Game On" -- how many voting cards were tampered with in Lindsay? Computer voting is the only way to go -- funny how the Greens are always banging on about saving paper, with all this rubbish. We could all be provided with a code from the AEC and vote on our home computers, or school computers on polling day. Antony Green would know by the end of the night. And if the Labor/Greens alliance is to be, then surely this preferential excrement that got the UK aboriginal in could be dispensed with. They will not last one year, let alone three. I look forward with gusto to see these morally bankrupt individuals implode. How do you Labor stalwarts explain Rudd trying to coerce Katter into voting for the red headed Welsh harridin -- when Bob felt sorry for the way Rudd was so cruelly despatched by the Arbib, Bitar, et al. Rudd's wounds healed quickly. Perhaps he is now sporting stigmata - to you lot, the Titian Princess already has a halo - may it turn into a crown of thorns. Notice the Labor Boys are not saying much! Did you know Rudd did it (helped the vixen) for $47K extra in his retirement package if he stayed until October? Pieces of silver! Dignity for money. No respect. I felt sorry for him before, now, NOTHING! And apparently this churchy boy never was religious until attaining PM status I know from somebody in his electorate. And Tony Windsor sold his farm to the Chinese for $5M when preaching to the farmers in his electorate to refrain from doing so in the Liverpool Plains debacle. Sangerer, I find it hard to understand that any descendant of somebody who emigrated from Europe (my grandmother and grandfather were treated like crap, had to sell their business etc., prior to the Velvet Revolution - Ceske then employed Frank Zappa as cultural attache, how bizzare!) could tolerate this socialistic bunch of nogoodniks. I am not talking Wales here, where the redheaded TWICE UNELECTED human carbuncle PM of ours has sprung from, but continental Europe. You obviously deal with dimwits in your employment, as do I. I too am sick of these generation Ys who know everything, are full of undeserved attitude, and as arrogant as hell. They also have the manners of some of Paul Keating's piggery inhabitants. Notice how PJK has been very quiet of late -- probably too disgusted with the skullduggery of the middle eastern mafia that dispensed Iemma, Rees and Rudd. They will never have Gillard the Musical -- but Abbott will do her slowly, to reverse history, as Keating said to Hewson, and Casey Bennetto created Keating -- which has won several awards. Rudd the Musical would have to include religous chants and silversmiths, I feel. But Paul Keating did have style, and Gough Whitlam was a true statesman -- Hawke and his botoxed bimbo Blanche have lost all cred. Why are they still receiving pensions -- including Malcolm Fraser -- and getting gold passes, cars, secretaries et al. If old Malc hates the Liberals so much, he could have ethics and refuse his pension. How far from the Labor ethos has this party strayed! Can't you all see it -- Stevie Wonder could. This party has a cancer within which will NEVER be cured -- after the low act done on Rudd. And now the state Labor KKK after her emotional and beliveable welcome to country bizzo at PH the other day, does nothing for Arthur Syron -- seen on Stateline tonight, at Eveleigh, with his priceless Aboriginal artwork -- they are being evicted. He is in a tin shed in the Railway yard which has damaged several pieces of precious artwork from NT etc. Do they just "Smile for the Camera" for photo opportunities - tks Steely Dan. 1234Jimmy -- you were treated like turd -- so much for a democracy. The same as they treated the tobacconist in Queanbeyan who dared to anything to her after the mongrels put cigarettes up with five hours notice who was going broke. NO RESPECT. Human rectums. The sooner this illegitimate government is flushed down the toilet of their own creation, the better. Bring on Twiggy Forrest and Clive Palmer -- bring on the boats -- possibly the refugees can move into the lodge while she works out what to do with the hairdresser -- who was down inspecting the floodwaters at Shepparton the day she was "elected" i.e. pushed in by the bushies. Is he getting a job too? Adam Bandt's partner was working for Gillard before the election. Come on, the writing is on the wall -- this mob are total fornication wits. I hope she's wearing a white shirt when the Wiltshire comes out again to stab her! Ooh, sweet revenge. Abbott will be in for at least as long as Howard. And don't all tell me to suck it up -- that is so crude. God, I think this one is even longer than Sangerer's.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 10 September 2010, 23:10

  @zedlive A fine point of distinction between a tax on consumption and a tax on the side effects of production. A pollution tax is aimed at calculating the full cost of production. For over 40 years economics have pointed out that the national accounts are inaccurate because the full cost of production is not presented in the national accounts. The problem to counting all costs of production has been the value attached to the environment. Industry has always argued that the cost to the environment is intangible and unquantifiable in terms of standard business accounting practice. During the last 40 years considerable work has been done on quantifying the cost of polluting a river, dumping a city’s waste in landfill or in redeveloping an open cut mine and disposing of nuclear waste. Since these costs where never calculated as part of the marginal cost of production, the original proponents of the consumption tax argued that it should be added as true measure of the cost of production. When the tax was finally implemented by the Howard government it was considered that this would raise the rate of the GST ( which is a flat tax applied to all stages of production) would be too high (around 18%) and therefore politically unacceptable. The powerful business lobby groups also argued that this would stifle investment since the costs were simply not quantifiable, e.g. the cost of disposing packaging, transport etc, because of too many unknowns. Take the mountains of coal fly ash produced by the 22 power stations currently burning 14million tons of coal per annum to supply Australian’s with energy. What is the true cost of storing this waste? To be honest, not one of the power station operators can provide a definitive answer since the cost has simply not been calculated properly. For that matter, what is the cost of a rise in global temperature by 2 degrees? Do we include the current Victorian floods and count the recent floods in Pakistan and China? This is truly where the problems of counting the effects of pollution start. If we begin to talk about a carbon tax, let alone a more broadly based pollution tax the problem accounting is very real. Another thing that must considered is the question where do we stop. Plastic packaging is made from carbon. Do we tax every plastic drink bottle and plastic packages. Do we tax the plastics used in cars or in any other product such as carbon nanotubes. How do we differentiate between those products that we consider to be socially acceptable and those that have a net negative pollution impact? Since all products end up as consumer products in some form or other, the simplest mechanism to account for the by products / consequences of production was to slap a pollution levy on the consumption tax (GST). In a sense you are therefore correct ‘zedlive’. The GST does not differentiate because the Howard government introduced it as a flat tax grab that was primarily aimed at reducing other, less efficient methods of taxation. The fact that the Howard government GST was a completely different beast to the original GST is both historical and political. Apart from reducing some state and federal taxes it became another fraud perpetrated on the Australian people without achieving any net redistribution of income or addressing the core issues. - Let me now address the second part of your question. An artificial price on carbon of say $23 -$25 per ton would not reduce CO2 emissions to remain within the target Zone of 2-3 degrees as requested by the European and UN climate change commission. This would only be achieved if the price was above 42 euro. The question is, what is the true cost of a 2-3 degree increase in temperature and how will this be added to the cost of production. Even if it is added to the cost of production, the question is who will pay. The consumer, or will the cost be evenly spread between consumers to avoid gross inequality. Once again, we are at a tax. In order to achieve a tax value the thought is that we must quantify an artificial price. This assumption is wrong since the current market cost of carbon is below $10 US per ton in Europe. So why would any country want to artificially nominate a value above it. It would simply mean that European companies would swap their European based carbon bonds for Australian carbon bonds at a 2:1 increase. Causing a carbon bubble ( artificial economy) on the international market. The thought is that the price differential would create an influx of overseas investment as international companies rush to trade the higher value Australian carbon bonds. Instead, what will happen is a direct swap by overseas companies who receive greater incentives for higher value bonds from the European FIT and energy efficiency regulatory mechanisms. In short, it would deliver no net investment influx as European companies cash in on the 2:1 value differential . This in turn would actually prove a disincentive to reduce global carbon reductions and the most serious polluters would be compensated at a 2:1 ratio above the market value by Australian tax payers paying european and US companies. In short, you are correct in assuming that there will be a net impact on the cost of production. This impact is that the Australian tax payer will subsidize overseas companies to the tune of 2:1, or at a net loss of investment to overseas owned companies. Why anyone would want to compensate overseas owned companies by formulating a tax policy that compensates overseas companies for the pollution created in another country is beyond me. It is just plain stupid. I can see why Ross Garnaut would cobble together such a stupid policy that essentially relies on a global carbon trading system to be established first. Only a complete moron would nominate an artificial price for carbon above the current market rate. In the absence of an international carbon price mechanism the sensible thing is to issue Carbon Bonds that are tied to specific EPA infringements and regulated through a tied EPA regulatory mechanism for the heavy polluters. In the case of Coal Fired Power Stations, this mechanism would assist them with the financial means to recycle the 14 million tons of fly ash waste and directly reduce the level of carbon pollution they create. Since this would generate additional income, there will be no net effect on the price of electricity. In fact, with the price of cenospheres at $800 per ton Australia’s power station owners will make even more money. Not that this will tranlate into lower prices! Heaven forbid if the electricity monopoly will actually do something good for the rest of us....!

• 

  zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Friday, 10 September 2010, 21:10

  The GST is about taxing without having any differential impact on production. The price on carbon is about taxing to have differential impact on production. Are they as similar as you state?

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Wednesday, 8 September 2010, 10:08

  Labor will have an opportunity to test what went wrong in the upcoming Victorian election. At the federal level the spotlight will be firmly on the Greens pie in the sky tax policies. Already the Brumby government has announced fear about the inner Melbourne seats around Richmond, Brunswick etc, falling to the Greens. What they have not bothered with is the swings against Labor in country Victoria for the same underlying causes. I say the same causes, but clearly these causes have different emphasis, as the debate with the nationals has highlighted. Since I have a spectrum of members on my books that range from the young radical student to the ultra-conservative farming elements I have a very good understanding what drives the 72% of voters who fall into this category. Whereas the young are affected by the emotional impact of the words “climate change” and are geared to broad sweeping action that has little to do with careful deliberation about the consequence of these actions, the conservative hard nosed farming elements are no less concerned. The difference is the emphasis. This is now plainly evident in the words of Bob Katter, Rob Oakeshot and Tony Windsor. The common elements between the young and reckless and the conservative farmers is the important part of what Julia needs to now take into account. These common elements are based on one single principle. “ How do you manage the transition from a carbon based economy to a green clean tech economy without causing energy poverty ( through energy price increases), losing jobs and decimating against the rural sector. The simple mechanism of a carbon tax is wholly discredited as a singular measure by all creditable analysts in the industry. Although a price on carbon does have a role to play. Linking an artificially agreed price to the nominated carbon tax rate as the single corrective mechanism is neither appropriate nor sophisticated enough to deal with the issue even though economists will tell us that this is a fundamental mechanism that we must have. It must be remembered that economists who argue for a carbon tax as the primary mechanism are generally arguing in favour of any mechanisms that will support the increase of a weberian bureaucracy at all levels. If indeed a single Carbon tax that was determined by an artificial carbon price was the panacea to all evils we could simply raise the GST by 7% and collect the revenue in this fashion. In fact, this was one of the original discussion points when the GST was first proposed during the 1970’s. No! These types of sledgehammer solutions will drive the dairy industry into oblivion and cause the elderly and those who can least afford it into energy poverty just as surely as a carbon tax will cause the price rises to be passed onto consumers without impunity. The mechanisms to shift carbon dependence towards green sustainable technology must never be that simple. The Brumby government has not worked it out and is depending on its massive advertising budget that sells smoke and mirrors to a sophisticated electorate to stem the tide. In truth the issue of managing the shift from a carbon based economy is dependent on two key elements; community participation and community ownership. This requires that the 2000-2001 renewable electricity supply act has to be scrapped and re-writtent to cover minimum SREC generation, co-generation and tri-generation limits of 4MW and more. It includes removing the monopoly control over third party grid access. It includes signing a uniform national feed in tariff agreement with all states covering all renewable genration and energy efficiency options. It includes setting national urban and regional planning and building codes that allow people to set up 25KW wind turbines on individual properties in urban areas and cluster community micro-grids of 4 MW and more. It involves legislating a financial and banking mechanism that delivers direct finance options to councils, community cooperatives as well as farming and indigenous cooperatives that will allow these groups to build independently owned and run micro-grid solutions that are connected to the national green grid. It means that we manage the pollution created by the heavy polluters through an EPA regulatory mechanism that caps and restricts cost flow on to the consumers by ensuring that the EPA penalty is used to directly reduce the pollution created by those who create it. Only in this way can we simulate rural / regional and indigenous communities. Only in this way can we deliver jobs for the bush and reduce our carbon pollution rapidly. If a tax was the answer, Europe, the US, India and China would not hesitate. No a tax is only one answer and even here it is important to ensure that its implementation and management is carefully constructed to take into account the social and economic impact of it. The fact that Labor in Victoria has not bothered to understand the basic mechanisms of managing the transition from a carbon economy and fails to capitalize on intelligent policy will cost it votes. However, in the words of one senior Labor MP, why make an effort in Liberal controlled country seats when we have no hope of getting a swing big enough to win. Well, my answer is simple! You might not get the votes to effect a swing in a conservative country seat, but you might just stop the rot in the rest of the state. So stop thinking large scale centralized monopolies and satrt thinking small scale community owned, community based micro-grids. The rest of the globe is. Why is this so hard to understand??

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Monday, 6 September 2010, 15:06

  Once again the mining tax “rapatoors”. I am in general agreement with the 40% on profit. However I would probably organize the tax better and have a smarter implementation strategy. I would allocate 10% as a resource extraction levy to be paid to states for infrastructure, another 10% as a resource depreciation allowance that compensates the Australian people for loss of its non-renewable resources, 10% as an environment and pollution levy to be paid into a Green Bank investment infrastructure fund ( superannuation) and 10% as a straight profit tax to be paid into a health, and education fund. At least this way only the mugs and corporates who demonstrate no social or moral obligation to the Australian people would ever dare to pay for an add against this initiative. It is so sad to see a good policy watered down by the mining tycoons because of Labor’s poor strategy and hasty implementation..... Let us hope that Labor has learned something from its poor track record in basic project management of vital policy.

• 

  raypastoors from Diamond Creek , vic Monday, 6 September 2010, 11:06

  It is clear Labor can form a stable government when it has support for the greens which controls the senate. The only worry is the greens pressuring Labor to have a 50% tax on the mining sector. This would be redicuolous. I doubt Julia and her analysts will do this but still a concern. Global warming is an interesting topic. Is it real is it not? There have been some varying views on this but it's one thing, "better to be safe than sorry". If we do nothing and it's real, what will we say? If we do something and it isn't, we have become more efficient. Australia and NZ are commited to a green future. Countries like the USA and China are not and should be held accountable for their ignorance in environmental policy,

• 

  Sauman from Salt Lake City , West Bengal Sunday, 5 September 2010, 21:05

  Sengerer:"What we needs is responsible scientists and engineers who will work with us to fix the mess. The rest is not relevant.". That says it all. But to get the system to filter the good and the social scientists and engineers and provide them a platform to create needs to be created. Half the time the paper pushing accountants and lawyers are either getting high on combination of power and chardonay and refuse to come out of the glass house to acknowledge that they are to support the sytem.Not booby trap the theme. @Rayzor:Mate the real story of the dino eco theory has many cover ups. But facts are many,thruth is one.We need to form an alternate resilient responsible renewable rejuvenated economy.Without depending on "Oil". Possible.Very very much so.But the initial stumbling block is to side with that one vision.Of Building Australia Clean,green and rich.Fair,free and forward.The dream time excess of the fossil freedom is a illusion. Advance Australia Fair. Thoughts from Exile:)

• 

  1234jimmy from burwood , pissed right off Sunday, 5 September 2010, 20:05

  no mate but it's a good way to get things off your chest!

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 5 September 2010, 19:05

  This site is a first trial site “Werz51” put together by some marketing and advertising people with little know how of online. So the answer is no.... There needs to be some involvement by some heavy duty IT guys with a hell of a lot of online experience before anything will change. On last count, there were no more than about a dozen serious online gurus with more than 15 years in the industry in this country and we have not been asked. - @Rayzor, the debate moved on a long time ago. No one who is actually at the serious level of policy debate is interested in the climate science. We are not interested because regardless of the climate science we have to ween our economy away from fossil fuels because they will eventually run out. Australia will have no petroleum by 2020. This means we have to either import or increase bio-fuel production or both. Most of us professionals don’t give a darn about the climate science because we are working on how to manage the transition from a carbon based economy to a future high tech green technology based economy without either crashing the economy or causing great pain to every consumer. This is where the real debate is. We have moved on from the buff heads in the ivory towers reporting a bunch of statistics and validating some freak theory a long time ago. The professionals accept that something has to be done and we are working on fixing the mess. We don’t need a scientist publishing some scare theory. What we needs is responsible scientists and engineers who will work with us to fix the mess. The rest is not relevant. So get with the times and stop dredging up the past. We are at least 20 years ahead of you, “Rayzor”.

• 

  Rayzor from Malanda , Qld Sunday, 5 September 2010, 16:05

  Siding with the Greens is a big mistake they are the Green Taliban. So here is something for you's all to have a long hard think about.. Name just three clear signs the planet is warming as the alarmists claim it should. Just three. Chances are your “proofs” are in fact on my list of 10 Top Myths about global warming. And if your “proofs” indeed turn out to be false, don’t get angry with me. Just ask yourself: Why do you still believe that man is heating the planet to hell? What evidence do you have? So let’s see if facts matter more to you than faith, and observations more than predictions. MYTH 1 THE WORLD IS WARMING Wrong. It is true the world did warm between 1975 and 1998, but even Professor David Karoly, one of our leading alarmists, admitted this week “temperatures have dropped” since - “both in surface temperatures and in atmospheric temperatures measured from satellites”. In fact, the fall in temperatures from just 2002 has already wiped out a quarter of the warming our planet experienced last century. (Check data from Britain’s Hadley Centre, NASA’s Aqua satellite and the US National Climatic Data Centre.) Some experts, such as Karoly, claim this proves nothing and the world will soon start warming again. Others, such as Professor Ian Plimer of Adelaide University, point out that so many years of cooling already contradict the theory that man’s rapidly increasing gases must drive up temperatures ever faster. But that’s all theory. The question I’ve asked is: What signs can you actually see of the man-made warming that the alarmists predicted? MYTH 2 THE POLAR CAPS ARE MELTING Wrong. The British Antarctic Survey, working with NASA, last week confirmed ice around Antarctica has grown 100,000 sq km each decade for the past 30 years. Long-term monitoring by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports the same: southern hemisphere ice has been expanding for decades. As for the Arctic, wrong again. The Arctic ice cap shrank badly two summers ago after years of steady decline, but has since largely recovered. Satellite data from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Centre this week shows the Arctic hasn’t had this much April ice for at least seven years. Norway’s Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre says the ice is now within the standard deviation range for 1979 to 2007. MYTH 3 WE’VE NEVER HAD SUCH A BAD DROUGHT Wrong. A study released this month by the University of NSW Climate Change Research Centre confirms not only that we’ve had worse droughts, but this Big Dry is not caused by “global warming”, whether man-made or not. As the university’s press release says: “The causes of southeastern Australia’s longest, most severe and damaging droughts have been discovered, with the surprise finding that they originate far away in the Indian Ocean. “A team of Australian scientists has detailed for the first time how a phenomenon known as the Indian Ocean Dipole - a variable and irregular cycle of warming and cooling of ocean water - dictates whether moisture-bearing winds are carried across the southern half of Australia.” MYTH 4 OUR CITIES HAVE NEVER BEEN HOTTER Wrong. The alleged “record” temperature Melbourne set in January - 46.4 degrees - was in fact topped by the 47.2 degrees the city recorded in 1851. (See the Argus newspaper of February 8, 1851.) And here’s another curious thing: Despite all this warming we’re alleged to have caused, Victoria’s highest temperature on record remains the 50.7 degrees that hit Mildura 103 years ago. South Australia’s hottest day is still the 50.7 degrees Oodnadatta suffered 37 years ago. NSW’s high is still the 50 degrees recorded 70 years ago. What’s more, not one of the world’s seven continents has set a record high temperature since 1974. Europe’s high remains the 50 degrees measured in Spain 128 years ago, before the invention of the first true car. MYTH 5 THE SEAS ARE GETTING HOTTER Wrong. If anything, the seas are getting colder. For five years, a network of 3175 automated bathythermographs has been deployed in the oceans by the Argo program, a collaboration between 50 agencies from 26 countries. Warming believer Josh Willis, of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, reluctantly concluded: “There has been a very slight cooling . . .” MYTH 6 THE SEAS ARE RISING Wrong. For almost three years, the seas have stopped rising, according to the Jason-1 satellite mission monitored by the University of Colorado. That said, the seas have risen steadily and slowly for the past 10,000 years through natural warming, and will almost certainly resume soon. But there is little sign of any accelerated rises, even off Tuvalu or the Maldives, islands often said to be most threatened with drowning. Professor Nils-Axel Moerner, one of the world’s most famous experts on sea levels, has studied the Maldives in particular and concluded there has been no net rise there for 1250 years. Venice is still above water. MYTH 7 CYCLONES ARE GETTING WORSE Wrong. Ryan Maue of Florida State University recently measured the frequency, intensity and duration of all hurricanes and cyclones to compile an Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index. His findings? The energy index is at its lowest level for more than 30 years. The World Meteorological Organisation, in its latest statement on cyclones, said it was impossible to say if they were affected by man’s gases: “Though there is evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record to date, no firm conclusion can be made on this point.” MYTH 8 THE GREAT BARRIER REEF IS DYING Wrong. Yes, in 1999, Professor Ove Hoegh-Gulberg, our leading reef alarmist and administrator of more than $30 million in warming grants, did claim the reef was threatened by warming, and much had turned white. But he then had to admit it had made a “surprising” recovery. Yes, in 2006 he again warned high temperatures meant “between 30 and 40 per cent of coral on Queensland’s Great Barrier Reef could die within a month”. But he later admitted this bleaching had “minimal impact”. Yes, in 2007 he again warned that temperature changes of the kind caused by global warming were bleaching the reef. But this month fellow Queensland University researchers admitted in a study that reef coral had once more made a “spectacular recovery”, with “abundant corals re-established in a single year”. The reef is blooming. MYTH 9 OUR SNOW SEASONS ARE SHORTER Wrong. Poor snow falls in 2003 set off a rash of headlines predicting warming doom. The CSIRO typically fed the hysteria by claiming global warming would strip resorts of up to a quarter of their snow by 2018. Yet the past two years have been bumper seasons for Victoria’s snow resorts, and this year could be just as good, with snow already falling in NSW and Victoria this past week. MYTH 10 TSUNAMIS AND OTHER DISASTERS ARE GETTING WORSE Are you insane? Tsunamis are in fact caused by earthquakes. Yet there was World Vision boss Tim Costello last week, claiming that Asia was a “region, thanks to climate change, that has far more cyclones, tsunamis, droughts”. Wrong, wrong and wrong, Tim. But what do facts matter now to a warming evangelist when the cause is so just? And so any disaster is now blamed on man-made warming the way they once were on Satan. See for yourself on http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm the full list, including kidney stones, volcanic eruptions, lousy wine, insomnia, bad tempers, Vampire moths and bubonic plagues. Nothing is too far-fetched to be seized upon by carpetbaggers and wild preachers as signs of a warming we can’t actually see. Not for nothing are polar bears the perfect symbol of this faith - bears said to be threatened by warming, when their numbers have in fact increased. Bottom line: fewer people now die from extreme weather events, whether cyclones, floods or blinding heatwaves. Read that in a study by Indur Goklany, who represented the US at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: “There is no signal in the mortality data to indicate increases in the overall frequencies or severities of extreme weather events, despite large increases in the population at risk.” So stop this crazy panic. First step: check again your list of the signs you thought you saw of global warming. How many are true? What do you think, and why do you think it? Yes, the world may resume warming in one year or 100. But it hasn’t been warming as the alarmists said it must if man were to blame, and certainly not as the media breathlessly keeps claiming. Best we all just settle down, then, and wait for the proof—the real proof. After all, panicking over invisible things is so undignified, don’t you think?

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Sunday, 5 September 2010, 13:05

  Can someone tell me if there's part of this website that someone from government reads. Or a place where they may even answer questions? I know I'm dreaming, expecting them to respond to the people they need to elect them.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 5 September 2010, 13:05

  I don't know '1234jimmy'. I have spent 20 plus years in edcuation and education consultancy and there is one thing I can say to you as a former teacher and academic. No one can teach anyone anything. The best that any good educator can do is to inspire you to learn. If you are inspired to learn then maybe you are prepared to listen to what a teacher / academic has to say on a particular topic. If you have bothered to learn anyhting then you will be able to form an informed opinion about the topic. That is all the best teacher in the world can ever hope for because at the end of the day good teachers are about showing people how to think and learn for themselves. --->Sorry about this little bit of edcuation theory, mate. Stay on this site and contribute your opinion!

• 

  1234jimmy from burwood , pissed right off Sunday, 5 September 2010, 12:05

  so the two most influential women in politics shake hands and form an unholy alliance, ie, gillard and bobbie brown! hah and arrogance is what becomes her! the welsh bloody git! read how she and rudd treated me below..... part one...... when i asked julia gillard for an answer to my legitimate her reply....."NOTHING"! after several ignored emails i sent one to rudd! his reply "NOTHING"! so after becoming sick of being bloody well ignored by scumbags i sent him a particularly scathing email which *****ing attracted his attention BIG *****ING TIME! he despatched federal police officers to my door not just once but twice! oh yes i'm certainly happy with you labor toads! she alone cost you lot my vote! but the strangest thing.....i am treated like a leper in a third world country and ignored by all the so-called "HONORABLE" pollies! did i say third world country??? well it is as i live like complete ***** from day to day! and i certainly can not remember being told that i was having my pension increased by 1500 dollars per annum! well i think it must be so because the housing commission increased my rent by 30 dollars a week! so you see mr brumby i am now worse off than i was 3 months ago! could you ask tanya plibersik or someone who knows what the hell is going on to contact and explain how nit is that my standard of living is not as *****ing standard at all???? part two..... and hasn't the standard of teachers hit rock bottom! when i was at school at least teachers taught stuff....not like today where they are too worried over the girls wearing make-up or how they wear their hair or if they have studs or whatever! todays teachers are some of the dumbest but most arrogant *****s around! take that word "GOT" for instance.....we had it drummed into us that we should NEVER use that word but find alternatives, but you look at most of our politicians (and i use that word loosely) who make speeches or give interviews on national television and how often do these feral scumbags use that word!!!! when illiterate people gain power like these dumb teachers that enter politics these days what hope have we to advance our country when scum run it? see what happens when teachers enter politics? our morals, our ethics, our literacy and numeracy skills hit sub-rock-bottom! to use your favorite word GET on it!

• 

  1234jimmy from burwood , pissed right off Sunday, 5 September 2010, 12:05

  part one...... when i asked julia gillard for an answer to my legitimate her reply....."NOTHING"! after several ignored emails i sent one to rudd! his reply "NOTHING"! so after becoming sick of being bloody well ignored by scumbags i sent him a particularly scathing email which *****ing attracted his attention BIG *****ING TIME! he despatched federal police officers to my door not just once but twice! oh yes i'm certainly happy with you labor toads! she alone cost you lot my vote! but the strangest thing.....i am treated like a leper in a third world country and ignored by all the so-called "HONORABLE" pollies! did i say third world country??? well it is as i live like complete ***** from day to day! and i certainly can not remember being told that i was having my pension increased by 1500 dollars per annum! well i think it must be so because the housing commission increased my rent by 30 dollars a week! so you see mr brumby i am now worse off than i was 3 months ago! could you ask tanya plibersik or someone who knows what the hell is going on to contact and explain how nit is that my standard of living is not as *****ing standard at all???? part two..... and hasn't the standard of teachers hit rock bottom! when i was at school at least teachers taught stuff....not like today where they are too worried over the girls wearing make-up or how they wear their hair or if they have studs or whatever! todays teachers are some of the dumbest but most arrogant *****s around! take that word "GOT" for instance.....we had it drummed into us that we should NEVER use that word but find alternatives, but you look at most of our politicians (and i use that word loosely) who make speeches or give interviews on national television and how often do these feral scumbags use that word!!!! when illiterate people gain power like these dumb teachers that enter politics these days what hope have we to advance our country when scum run it? see what happens when teachers enter politics? our morals, our ethics, our literacy and numeracy skills hit sub-rock-bottom! to use your favorite word GET on it!

• 

  1234jimmy from burwood , pissed right off Sunday, 5 September 2010, 12:05

  part one...... when i asked julia gillard for an answer to my legitimate her reply....."NOTHING"! after several ignored emails i sent one to rudd! his reply "NOTHING"! so after becoming sick of being bloody well ignored by scumbags i sent him a particularly scathing email which *****ing attracted his attention BIG *****ING TIME! he despatched federal police officers to my door not just once but twice! oh yes i'm certainly happy with you labor toads! she alone cost you lot my vote! but the strangest thing.....i am treated like a leper in a third world country and ignored by all the so-called "HONORABLE" pollies! did i say third world country??? well it is as i live like complete ***** from day to day! and i certainly can not remember being told that i was having my pension increased by 1500 dollars per annum! well i think it must be so because the housing commission increased my rent by 30 dollars a week! so you see mr brumby i am now worse off than i was 3 months ago! could you ask tanya plibersik or someone who knows what the hell is going on to contact and explain how nit is that my standard of living is not as *****ing standard at all???? part two..... and hasn't the standard of teachers hit rock bottom! when i was at school at least teachers taught stuff....not like today where they are too worried over the girls wearing make-up or how they wear their hair or if they have studs or whatever! todays teachers are some of the dumbest but most arrogant *****s around! take that word "GOT" for instance.....we had it drummed into us that we should NEVER use that word but find alternatives, but you look at most of our politicians (and i use that word loosely) who make speeches or give interviews on national television and how often do these feral scumbags use that word!!!! when illiterate people gain power like these dumb teachers that enter politics these days what hope have we to advance our country when scum run it? see what happens when teachers enter politics? our morals, our ethics, our literacy and numeracy skills hit sub-rock-bottom! to use your favorite word GET on it!

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Saturday, 4 September 2010, 23:04

  Sangerer, I fail to see how you can excuse the slogans of the Labor Party "moving forward", and the boring monotonous drivel of the Welsh born PM -- yet attack the Liberal Party. Everybody has their slogans, they are all monotonous on repetition. I still would not trust the red head after she stabbed Rudd in the back. You think the Labor Party are the best of a bad bunch, I gather from your writing -- I don't agree; and I have relatives who have lived through socialism, so all of this nationalisation has me afraid for the future of this country. If Gillard gets in, she can hardly claim a mandate, as she has achieved this dubious, poisoned chalice through manipulation. I would say there will be an election within 12 months -- she will probably offer another $900 to those who do not think of the consequences -- this is why I say make voting non compulsory -- who would bother? Only zealots -- the dumbing down of Australia is complete now; I have heard people say they are voting to avoid a fine, so why bother?

• 

  MisterLabor from Maroubra , New South Wales Saturday, 4 September 2010, 21:04

  Actually a Labor-Greens agreement will prevent the Coalition from forming the next government and I want to see Gillard in office again for the next three years before I'll vote Liberal in the next election.

• 

  JohnBrown from Brighton, Brisbane , Queensland Saturday, 4 September 2010, 20:04

  I can never understand why the party chases the Green vote. It is not like they have anywhere else to go. To sign an agreement with the party that was responsible for not backing the ETS legiskation is ludicrous. No one is holding the greens accountable and they set to reap the benefits of a hung parliament. The ALP needs to remeber its is a great party in its own right and take the lead.

• 

  Sauman from Salt Lake City , West Bengal Saturday, 4 September 2010, 17:04

  @Sengerer:"I can send a spare copy of the Constitution including some relevant HIgh Court judgements to West Bengal or Utah if you want, "Sauman"? " Please dont bother. Postage costs. Age.com version available.On Com.Both in Utah and in the cyber slums of City of Joy. Thanks anyway.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Saturday, 4 September 2010, 16:04

  I can send a spare copy of the Constitution including some relevant HIgh Court judgements to West Bengal or Utah if you want, "Sauman"?

• 

  Sauman from Salt Lake City , West Bengal Saturday, 4 September 2010, 14:04

  What do you think the chances are sometime in the next 3 years? Naw.Maybe after the cigar runs out.Who knows.But damn funny.These guys are crazy.Mad maniacs on the lose. I wander how many of them ever read the constitution?:)!.We will comes to terms:)

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 3 September 2010, 13:03

  Forgot to mention the pokies, “Spacek”. The pokies back down is on the cards because the Premiers will get their backs up. Besides, the contracts that Jeff the dodgy ex-useless soldier from the ladder empire spoon up the .....se, sell all the public assets to make himself look good has done is look away the contracts for 90 years. Therefore, Wilkie is barking up the wrong tree legally because the liberals made sure that no one in Victoria can touch their mates. Having said that, there is a way round it. Since the constitution is on the agenda,.... hallelujah for finally doing something about this antiquated document that rules or nation, ..... we might as well address the core of these issues including the pokies and all other state based separatism and nonsense. You know the clauses I mean. Yes, I am talking about the root of all evil and that is all clauses in the constitution that refer to, make reference to with their intent or substance: “ the residuary of power is reserved to the states”. Not even a federal system such a Switzerland , one of the models the founding fathers based the constitution on, contains these pathetically useless, wasteful, nonsensical, divisive, separatist and totally idiotically backward clauses and intentions. Let’s fix that and Wilkie might just get his pokie reform. You reckon we can do it. I am mean the legal advisers have been doing brandy and cigars in the Melbourne Club for over 100 years over that one???? What do you think the chances are sometime in the next 3 years?

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 3 September 2010, 12:03

  I can feel the pain “Spacek”. I always said that the round robin in the back rooms will boil down to some serious pork barrelling. I am also the person who suggested that we stop all this rubbish by legislating a % of GDP for each of the major infra-structure areas: health & welfare, communications, transport and resources, industry & environment, education, science & technology, defence & foreign affairs. As part this initiative I have always maintained that these major infra-structure areas should be managed through a series of 5 year plans and that the core expenditure elements for them should be immune from political, ideological and electoral impact of any kind. That way we have continuity, proper management in place, avoid the waste and poor management, promote better policy debate, a responsible media and maybe attract some quality people into parliament. Let’s face it, only in QLD can you elect some clueless kid in nappies! We might as well vote for a monkey next. - Both NSW and QLD state politics is on the nose. I agree! Victorian state politics is run by the silent mafia crouched behind a wall of denial. I advised about the possible loss of Lindsay's seat many month before the election was called because the Greens mobilized almost three years ago and captured a ground swell of labor voters over the inability of the Brumby government to get its act together on energy efficiency, energy generation and energy price stability. I have a bunch of community organizations on my books. They range from feral tree-huggers, surfers to conservative farmers who all have one common goal. They all want energy security and energy price stability. So when you get this sort of ground swell, anyone with a brain has got to be thinking that something is up. So what did Greg Hunt do? Well he and his liberal mates exploited the discontent with a bunch of slogans, insincere promises and by actively undermining and misrepresenting community concerns. What are Brumby and federal labor doing? They ignore the issues, make unethical claims about how wonderful their policies are, commission reports and promise paltry ineffective solutions that do not address the core of the community concerns. Please ‘Spacek” no one has more to complain about how both major political parties conduct themselves than me. If you have an issue with me than on balance I think that Labor is less unethical then the liberals. That I grant you! If that is your issue then yes you are correct in your summation. However, let me remind you that I was the only one who advise the labor heavy weights of these issues many month ago and I told them “ unless you do something genuine and substantial you will lose Lindsays seat”. Well, my words came to pass because no one is listening. As far as Rudd’s assignation is concerned! Yep mate, you got my vote on that act of blatant political stupidity. As far as the poor management of major policy initiatives by the Rudd tenure, yep, you got my agreement on that too. No one hates pathetic policy implementation and poor project management more than me. It has been my job for years to fix the mess that some of these pathetic drone managers, heads of departments etc, create, because they are generally clueless and only interested in their own self-importance. Only yesterday I listened to some dude who told me “ I have just taken over and found a few problems that need fixing. I don’t care how you do it as long you make me look good, ensure that I meet my KPI’s and get me that bonus because my wife is pregnant and I want to renovate the house”. Talk about self-serving and pathetic management..... mate.... that is the sort of people I deal will “Spacek’ at all level of public and private live and I am so sick of the sycophants and useless drones. I am so sick of the 20 & 30 something’s with egos that just don’t match their ability.... Spacek --- we are on the same page here. -- “ahtee84” , your links are going nowhere on Zeitgeist. Is that intentional? Since I am German I have a good handle on the meaning of the word and its abuse by non German speakers who have some wacky notions about gestalt and the imperatives of a relational aspect of the theoretical cultural imperative of communality. Give me a break with the pseudo quackery. I expect this sort of garbage in a design or architectural studio where the kids have the opportunity to vacillate over the cultural and ethical foundation of thought versus intent. -As far as the green economy is concerned! The debate amongst the professionals is about the functional imperatives that put in place appropriate financial mechanisms to aid the transition of the carbon based economy to the 21st century green tech economy. Have a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbduj3ss80I ----this. Then tell me what ‘Geist’ is in your “Zeit”, or what Zeit is in your own Gestalt....paahahah, spare me the student drivel.

• 

  ahtee84 from none , none Thursday, 2 September 2010, 23:02

  capitalism does not blend with green economy, because true green economy does not need capitalism. as long as my mentioned about those sector does not change, there is no change for the rest. it cannot come along, more info - http://bit.ly/cSPtww other - http://bit.ly/d3N8Xm

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Thursday, 2 September 2010, 23:02

  You are all deluded. Just wait until the redhead backs down on pokies. The Yank won't have it here -- we have more pokies than anywhere IN THE WORLD! Wilkie has obviously been bought. Abbott agreed to REBUILD the hospital, the redhead only to update it. The deal with Bob Brown smacks of total immorality. jellio111, I totally agree -- you are living in Queensland where Bligh only got in through dodgy tricks, and both friends and relatives of mine are wanting her out. You are the only sensible blogger who can see that Rudd was knifed by this red headed Welsh harradin. What about the costings Labor has not released, what about the deaths with insulation, not mentioned! Sangerer, your salivation is nauseating, and it would appear Bitar and Arbib have been getting writers' cramp doing the dodgy with the votes. How come Lindsay swang back to Labor after the Pellazano affair? This is a dirty stinking mess, and what do you mean, Sangerer, about "family ties" -- nepotism, perhaps? If Abbott did that you would be the first to bark your complaints. I thought the Labor party was such a shining beacon of morality. You are all full of rubbish, I hope Windsor does not vote -- Oakeshott the happy clappy can be bought, and I hope Katter does not vote. But they will be committing political hari kari if they go with Labor. My bet is Oakeshott gets a seat in parliament (probably speaker) so he can gutlessly avoid his electorate. If Wilkie claims that most of the people in Denison wanted Labor -- can Katter not claim, with a huge Liberal vote in Kennedy, as can Windsor, the same "paradigm". If you want the country stuffed for another three years -- you are welcome to the unAustralian Gillard. Remember ONLY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD where this travesty occurs. Think of Barack Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Thursday, 2 September 2010, 21:02

  74 and two to go. Ok, I take it back! Wilkie has got some morals and knows that the Liberals are dodgy. Gillard might just make it! I think we might have to ease Oakeshott into an agreement and if Bob can come to an agreement on the mining tax we just need to work on family ties. This might just be workable!

• 

  zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Thursday, 2 September 2010, 19:02

  DavidK, the alexia traffic rank is currently 90,057 in the world [see http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http://www.alp.org.au]. Lets see if it can be taken to 90,056.

• 

  jellio111 from brisbane , queensland Thursday, 2 September 2010, 15:02

  2 words - SELL OUT!! a further example of the Labor selling their soul for the best deal to sit their behinds on the PM seat. I have been a staunch labor supporter for years but since the knifing of Ruddsy i have seen nothing but the Labor party jossling for position and filling in holes to try and be everyones best friend just so Ms.Gillard can be firmly seated in the lodge. How about the Labor party get back to being a staunch political party who actually stands for something and stands behind their morals instead of looking for the easy fix. I am in QLD and dont you thing Anna Bligh has done enough damage up here on yor behalf. Looking for a quick sell on OUR assets to payback money she has continually spent and put the QLD economy in a tough situation. Please Labor party, look back in the past and take note of when the Labor party actually stood for something solid and stand firm for once.

• 

  DavidK1 from Warrnambool , Victoria Thursday, 2 September 2010, 12:02

  I really would like to know if any one, other than the contributors, actually reads this, or any of the Party blogs?

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Thursday, 2 September 2010, 01:02

  Great! 43 – 43 and three to go with Abbott on the nose. I thought that Abbott was hoping to get away with the budget hop. He must have heard me laughing ‘cause I swear I saw his ears wiggle today. Not that the media actually gave him a hard time about his budget deceit and darned lies. As it is, lets see whether the actual pollies are going to grace us with their presence on this blog. So who should be here to debate the Greens agenda? Penny, Wayne, Martin, who is attorney general??, Rudd if he is the new Foreign Affairs and or Defence MP and yes Julia. -- Since we are all here, let’s begin. I consulted on the first two high speed rail projects in the mid 80’s. Not much a problem here as long as we can use the existing tracks (corridors) to build the high speed rail infrastructure. I am sick of dealing with the ferals in the trees and the farmers who reckon their cows are going to get run over. Since we need the fare to be competitive with air transport and convenient with regards to rail station parking and access, the new rail hubs are likely to be in the suburbs of Melbourne, Adelaide, Canberra, Sydney and Brisbane. Therefore we will need to cupgrade the suburban rail networks of all cities the high speed service applies to. It is great to have done all this work already and just have to dig it up from the archives. --->Doing a major re-write of the Constitution, well done! The agenda does not go far enough. 'Yes' on aboriginal and municipal council inclusion. Yes on Gay's etc. We have needed something that gets us away from the religous freaks to balance the scales on social justice. We have also had a need to fizx mandatory detention and I still sugegst that you beef up drone survailance and keep the pressure on Indonesia for shipping registration requirements so that you can target the corruption and criminal elements. Parliamentary process and procedure reform gets my yes vote as well as everything else proposed. It is all a no brainer and long overdue. My only worry is the stipulation that we are going to put in the Carbon Tax before we are going to fix the Feed IN Tariff, the energy efficiency requirements and all other aspects that will actually make the tax work if it is designed to penalize the heavy polluters. Once again we have it the wrong way round. We get the sledge hammer to crack the nut and wonder why the pulp is; well pulp! Stipulating that only people who are in favour of the tax should be on the committee excludes anyone who has a better economic and financial model then a simple tax model! NZ has introduced a $25 /MT tax and the cost of petrol and electricity increased by one third over night. That is approximately 40 cents per litre and an average of $700 per year on electricity (avg $2 per day).What has the net investment effect been for NZ so far. Since NZ has already dedicated itself to geothermal and Hydro, little increase in the existing investment cycle is evident. There has also been no increase in the uptake of solar or wind, co-generation or tri-generation and energy efficiency measures due to the tax. In fact, the anticipated investment NZ hoped to achieve from the Carbon Tax has not eventuated because the necessary policy instruments that drive renewable energy uptake and energy efficiency were simply ignored. So the question is, will the Greens haste towards a Carbon Tax push us down the road of once again doing everything in reverse. Don’t get me wrong. I approve of a Carbon Tax. However, I would like to see the tax as an EPA penalty system that is applied with the option of converting the tax liability to non-tradeable Carbon Bonds that are pegged to specific carbon reduction target projects of those who incur the EPA penalty. This measure is not the first measure. It is however one of many that must be implemented and that compliment one another. That is why I thing any party that insists that a Carbon Tax is the first and most important thing to do is simply barking up the wrong tree. It is one of the things that can be done to target large and persistent polluters who fail to implement and adhere to targeted reduction measures.