Rudd's problem was that the CPRS was a costly ideological exercise in which the Australian electorate had lost interest. It is little wonder he killed it off. The only ETS worthy of the name, the European ETS, has not been known to have any actual effect on emissions even in Europe let along globally - and it costs billions. The only excuse activists have been able to think of for keeping this nonsense going is so that Australia can show leadership. The sad fact is that no country is going to follow where Australia leads. If you are seriously worried about emissions then adaption is the only policy. Deal with it.

The Government proposed an ETS trading scheme
which the Opposition rejected. The Opposition
and the Greens proposed Amendments under
Malcolm Turnbull's Leadership and eventually
the Government reached a reasonably amicable
agreement. The ETS proposal was squashed by
the Opposition in the Senate and as long as the
Opposition had a majority in the Senate the
Proposal would have never passed, especially
with Mr Tony Abbott as the current Opposition
Leader.

The Greens were willing to negotiate further,
unfortunately their requirements were not
realistic in the present Australian economic
environment.

Even then, the Govrnment took their scheme to
Copenhagen and attempted to convince major
players such as the US and China to reach an
agreement. Unfortunately, Copenhagen made minor
progress and everything was deferred until the
next Climate Change gathering.

With the current Opposition Party mentality and
their control in the Senate passing the Climate
Change Bill has as much chance as a snowball in hell,
so logically the Government has no other choice until
it has control in the Senate. It would be a senseless
waste of time and finance to pursue the matter as long
as Mr Tony Abbott is Leader of the Opposition.

With another Leader of the Opposition similar to the
progressive thinking of Malcolm Turnbull and Hockey,
the ETS Scheme might have a chance.

At the present time the Government has to push and
finalize the Health and Hospital Scheme and concentrate
on winning the next election.

On the other hand the Opposition in its usual and established
manner has never offered anything positive and chooses
to deflect their incompetence by attacking the Government.
And unfortunately as seen from the comments here, an ignorant
support base amongst some voters.

I would like to point out the Opposition's sincerity on
Health care, not only by looking at -
Tony Abbott's past record as
Health Minister, but also by
looking at their Party's -
receiving substantial donations from the
Tobacco Industry as reported recently in the media.

This raises another question whether their Opposition
to the ETS could be the result of possible donations
from the polluting companies.

"One of the first full econometric analyses of the EU ETS found it did significantly reduced emissions in its first few years, despite its many design flaws."

And I suppose that's what's responsible for the global cooling over the last 12 years? Thank god for all those government-funded econometric analyses of government-funded confiscations on the basis of government-funded computer models presuming governmental omnipotence, commanding the winds that blow.

A very good article Owen, your posted links add to it.

______

Atman

"People now realise Carbon is not an issue or even a pollutant." Which people are that Atman, care to provide evidence for your assertion?

"It is highly unlikely that man is causing any form of climate change particularly with CO2." Care to provide evidence, or is this too just an assertion?

"The predicted "continuous drought" has been washed away by record rainfall ..." Atman, who said "continuous drought", can you cite the source please?

"Europe has had its coldest winter in a long time" - yeah, and Canada had a very warm Winter Olympics. And on it goes.

_______

Leigh on his usual left, socialist, invective.

_______

Mark/Curmudgeon

"If you are seriously worried about emissions then adaption is the only policy. Deal with it."

If you are seriously worried about climate change, adapt.

If you are seriously worried about emissions, mitigate.

_______

Foxy

I agree, there is no way the government could have got this legislation through the senate.

_______

Peter Hume

At least 30 years is required to validate this climate trend - separating the signal (human induced forcing) from the noise (natural variability).

Cynics want to trash HadCrut - which data set should we use?

Who do you think should "fund" research into 'climate science'?
Indeed, do you think it should be researched at all, and if so, by whom?

"At least 30 years is required to validate this climate trend - separating the signal (human induced forcing) from the noise (natural variability)."

And so?

"Cynics want to trash HadCrut - which data set should we use?"

Who's "we"?

> Who do you think should "fund" research into 'climate science'?

Anyone who wants to.

> Indeed, do you think it should be researched at all, and if so, by whom?

By those who want to; and not by those who don't.

Peter Hume .. Touche! .. well said, don't let the idiots grind you down.