I don't understand this article. The author appears to be arguing against the imposition of a carbon tax saying the proponents have both underestimated the costs and are using false rhetoric to promote it.
However he then says there no difference between the two Premier candidates.

O'Farrell has clearly stated the NSW election is a referendum on the Carbon Tax and he is clearly against it. Kenneally immediately attacked him for being a climate sceptic. She has since stopped since probably the focus groups are saying they agree with 0'Farrell. What else can he do to clarfiy his position?

The farmers sure have paid the price for Govn. to meet the Kyoto target. They have had their farmlands locked up and not been given any compensation for this. The Govn. then claims the benefits. How is this fair to landOWNERS.
How would others who live in the city react to Govn. coming to their home and demanding that they fill up the backyard with gumtrees and that they do not build any more buildings as to increase the footprint will mean the Kyoto target will be breached.

SAY NO TO THE CARBON TAX.

It is a FOSSIL carbon tax.
If you must burn something then burn wood.
The carbon in wood came from the air and returns when the wood is burned.