The Forum > Article Comments > Howard and Kyoto: was he wrong for the right reasons? > Comments
Howard and Kyoto: was he wrong for the right reasons? : Comments
By Jenny Stewart, published 14/4/2008Why, as a shrewd politician, did John Howard not ratify the Kyoto Protocol?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
-
- All
Posted by bigmal, Monday, 14 April 2008 1:00:14 PM
| |
Because Howard, unlike Kevin Rudd, was not a flashy populist politician to go along the stream but had the political and moral fortitude to go against it. His four major policies, of the GST, the war in Iraq, immigration, and industrial legislation, were most unpopular among the electorate, but he had the strength of character to implement them because he believed they were beneficial to the long term interests of the country.
http://kotzabasis8.wordpress.com Posted by Themistocles, Monday, 14 April 2008 2:32:28 PM
| |
That is wrong: “Tackling climate change is widely acknowledged to be one of the greatest policy challenges facing the international policy community”. Not “tackling” but “adapting” to climate change the task is as my English allows understanding the difference between “adopt” and “adapt”. And not my only English-as-second-language is confused with these words as clear from the reading of articles by some high-race-belonging native speakers of.
It seems Mr. J.Howrad’s approach was lacking anything decreasing the mates’ profiting with even elementarily-precautionary environmentally-supportive practical investment suggesting. Posted by MichaelK., Monday, 14 April 2008 7:20:07 PM
| |
Well said Themistocles and bigmal. John Howard- a man true to himself.
I await Keveryman's quotas on coking coal at $350 a tonne. Posted by palimpsest, Monday, 14 April 2008 8:01:36 PM
| |
"GST, the war in Iraq, immigration, and industrial legislation"
Er. Except none of these were good for the country, and he was finally voted out on the last? Apart from GST, all are in the process of being repealed... Posted by Chade, Tuesday, 15 April 2008 12:50:29 PM
| |
It would be nice to know which of these anonymous internet users who have posted on this article are in the pay of a political party, or who are a member of a political party.
Disclaimer: I am a member of NO political party and any points of view are entirely of my own volition, my own brain cells, and with no public agenda, except to make my personal point of view known. Posted by spritegal, Tuesday, 15 April 2008 6:45:29 PM
|
Then in Feb 2008, or sometime after, leave the Kyoto agreement as he would have been able to, because in Feb 2008 the three year moratorium would have expired, permitting all signatories to opt out.
Perhaps he wasnt that cynical after all.