'It can't do much on petrol prices.'

1. Why did Rudd and Swan run around this country giving everybody the, now patently false, impression they could?
2. Why are they persisting with the stupid Fuel Watch scheme?
3. Why don't they reduce the excise by the amount of proportional increase? As the price went from under a dollar to over $1.50 the excise tax as well as the GST take both increased. Surely the states and the Federal Government could forego that hidden windfall to the benefit of lowering inflation and assisting working families. Why not?

But you are rigth there isn't much this Government seems able to do except spin, posture and make grandiose gestures.

Alco-pops what a bloody big joke. Want to know what kids are doing now?They are buying vanilla essence (90% alcohol) and mixing it with soft drinks. And the only tax take on that is GST and the bloody sugar content would be huge. So what do they do now? Ban the sale of vanilla essence to young people? What a bloody huge stuff up.

What uis going to be the cost to working families of emissions trading?

But you are wrong, this mob have not only differentiated themselves from Howards Government but have also diferentiated themselves from all reasonable thinking Governments... and it's only taken 6 months or so.

Unlike most Parliamentarians Dennis is bold and innovative by putting articles, and in this case a speech, up for critical comment on OLO.

I have opposing points though. As world oil prices are going to increase steadily from now on there is no gain from an Australian Government artificially protecting certain groups from price increases. Consumers and industriess must learn to economise in recognition of oil increase realities.

As Indonesia is finding now it is unaffordaable socially, politically and economically for government's to artificially keep down oil prices.

Petrol taxes are consumption taxes which most heavily impact on transport. If there is any way to dissuade people from buying gas guzzling 4WDs, V8s or 3rd or 4th family cars and speed boats then these methods should be supported.

Nuclear power is uneconomic and simply won't get up politically. Even the Libs have dropped their optional nuclear policy. Exporting our limited supplies of uranium while world pricess are still relatively cheap is shortsighted. We should keep it in the ground until (as OPEC has found with oil) this energy resource is highly prized.

Pete

I don't get why people who support taxes on petrol to reduce consumption also claim that oil is running out. If its true that we are running out of oil, then prices will go up and consumption will fall anyway.

Why impose additional pain on 'working families'? Abolish these idiotic taxes and let the market do what it does best: efficiently allocate scarce resources.

sharkfin "the left wing has latched on to global warming"

yes the whole AGW thing is a justification for government to increase its share of your earnings.

My term for it, as it will result in a carbon emmissions tax is "Socialism by Stealth"

Complain now and complain loud or we will all be frog-marched along the path of the national interest.

You know I thought 'government' was elected to represent the views and values of the electorate, rather than the electorate being the tax-cows of government engrandisement.

"Yes the whole AGW thing is a justification for government to increase its share of your earnings."

What rubbish! The 'whole AGW thing'! Trust you, Col, to latch on to a loaded term like that. You can be as dismissive as you like and talk up your conspiracy theories all you want. It won't change the inevitable march of global warming and climate change, which the overwhelming majority of the world's scientists all agree is real and happening and which very definitely is a result of human activity. All the evidence has been pointing that way for many years now and, if anything, recent data is only proving it's happening less gradually than earlier predicted.

What are you suggesting, Col? We leave it to the markets. We've had two decades in Australia of leaving it to the markets and we're more dependent on greenhouse-producing energy than we ever were. We need and most of us expect our government to step in and make the hard decisions. That's what government is for. Of course it will require some redirection of our taxes. It will also in my view require some big stick legislation to bring the big polluters into line. Oh no not more socialism! You'd better go and live on an island, Col! Or some tax-free haven where you can bask to your heart's content in your small government utopia, while the rest of us do the hard yards. It doesn't matter where you go though, or how much money you accrue in your free market heaven, you won't escape the rising temperatures, the rising sea levels and the increasing volatility in our weather. We're all in it together, Col.

Ah, Taswegian, there is no point in you trying to put down the Hadley
weather centre as the IPCC has been very happy to use their figures, up till now anyway.

Both the Hadley centre and satellite measurements are showing a slightly
falling world temperature up till last January when there was a sudden
fall of 0.7 deg.

Also the common phrase The Science is Settled is obviously not so as
there is significant scientific disagreement.

It is obvious that the government cannot be relied on to prepare us for
the coming oil price rises and we will simply have to adapt as best we can.

Unfortunately doing nothing and leaving it to the market will mean
that the rich will drive by while the poor and middle class will just
keep on walking or riding their bikes.

This will cause very great resentment and no doubt very serious trouble.