The article confirms that Australia is inextricably involved in major carbon pollution despite claims of a minor role. The fact that Chinalco (essentially an agency of the Chinese government) wants to buy a chunk of Rio Tinto shows that the Chinese want more foreign coal and iron ore. Steel smelting produces 1.7 tonnes of CO2 for every tonne of steel. I believe India's steelmaking industry also needs Australian coking coal as they lack suitable domestic sources.

It is astounding that even as Minster Wong talks about local emission reductions the Treasurer banks on increased coal exports. In mid 2008 emissions from Australian coal burned overseas were about the same (600 Mt CO2) as domestic emissions from all sources including transport. As hinted one option would be to levy a coal export tax or perhaps impose a carbon tariff on finished good from certain countries. That's if Australia cleaned up its own act first. A simpler approach might be to say that all coal production for both domestic and export must shrink say 4% a year ie no more coal mining after 25 years.

Arthur

Vey good article. It is important that analysis is put forward that shows the flaws in the Aust govt's reliance upon China as if every thing will ke ok and we will just return to boom times.

It also shows the threat that a rampant China may have on the planet, although it has decided it must make every effort to secure a greater slice of the cake to improve living standards for its larege population.

And it also shows the obvious contradiction with Labor's claim to be concerned with the environment given it hopes that China booms.

the article as usual is a beatup written in ignorance of realities

see that australia has FORWARD signed many agreements in us dollars[20 year agreements to accept us fiat currency]as i told rudd last year, when the dollar falls[as it inevitable will, the au will need to fall with it..,

having no deficit is of little importance is we of industrial colluded nessisity must retain us dollar parity[being that our exports are valued in the falling dollar]..we must fall to retain parity,..to keep in the business of selling our resources[all valued in us$]

thus giving the poor was if you like creating a debt.. because having no debt means a steady rise in au$..getting less return in us%[anyhow rudd got what i mean]

see that china will boom shortly[building one coal fired generator each year means the so called mineral boom shortly will BEGIN[the much vaunted previous claim of mineral boom was a clear lie[it was a petrol exise boom[you mugs]see the fall in petrol price created the 200 billion gap of govt revenue[as we get cheaper gas[the govt gets less income from the petrol exise]

howhard did away with death duties and gave us gst[but the media dont report fact[never did debate the global cooling[nor the global wareming only sold us on climate change[to get in the carbon tax for the derivitives traitors and the money masters,

that will be installed on EVERY thing[then we pay gst/fuel exise on top[heaps of moiney comming soon..thus the quick recovery[via your paying gross carbon-tax based on a lie,of climate..[small]change]..lol

why bother explaining it to the idiots of this world,..rudd rightly kept the NEW TAX low,..cause he knows its a lie..[but made by those who rule the world,..and want their global tax..but them ignorant greens who want their lies and us to believe their fears too[O]

who seek to anilate the human monster via race specific genocide the same as the neo-con teutonic natzies..[money changers]running the fine-antial system for their own benefit,..and built in bonus for trading their carbon credits..[the neo/new..next..[bubble][O][0]O.O00.oo...

Dear Arthur, some interesting points however, I think the issues facing Australia are much broader in terms of what we are facing and the policies (or lack of) that are potential enablers or inhibitors to future prosperity.

I’m deeply disturbed by the way our government approaches problems, policies and assumptions.

Each potential problem is either: 1. redefined in the way it is presented, or 2. the policy “slides down the side” of the problem, or 3. deferred policy. I cannot think of a single policy that has, is or will be tackled head on.

I am willing to turn a blind eye to the populist rhetoric associated with, petrol watch, grocery watch, saying sorry, ending the blame game and signing Kyoto.

The spending is (hopefully) done. What we need to understand now is what policies will position Australia with a low cost, efficient economy to power out of recession ahead of our competitors.

The absolute key to this is being debt free before the recession ends, otherwise debt costs will inhibit investment, jobs, project implementation, economic growth and social support.

If this budget is the response to the toughest economic challenge for 70 years, so we are told, why is this not the toughest budget we’ve had in 70 years? It is the softest in at least the last 30 years.

As mentioned in today’s Australian, Michael Stutchbury points out that Swan’s deficit plan is based upon “Structural budget balance”. The GFC is one of the cyclical impacts on budget revenue and expenses. It seems that none of the cyclical factors that got us here are factored into how we will get out and when.

The recession we had to have under Paul Keating featured Australian made cyclical factors. Now we have not only our own cyclical factors, but those of every one of our trading partners. Why are we being “sold” treasury estimates that specifically exclude these? And why are we swallowing it? Where are the policies we actually need?

"It is astounding that even as Minster Wong talks about local emission reductions the Treasurer banks on increased coal exports."

Astounding by the standards of common decency, yes.

But are you really astounded to learn yet again that politicians are liars and frauds and cannot be trusted? Yet you, correct me if I'm wrong, are calling for *more* political control of production decisions. You want to inflict this on *more* of your fellow citizens, you want them to have more of their lives and property controlled by this utterly unethical process, you want them to suffer corporal punishment if they won't obey these shysters and criminals. Perhaps you should take a look at your own credibility.

Wing Ah Ling ,you have a brillaint grasp of the Aussie vernacular.It is not the colour of your skin or your genetics that makes people forge a common identity,it is our grasp of language.

That said ,I think our recovery will be very slow.I don't think we have reached bottom yet.We've sold most assets worth anything and there is nothing left to flog off.China will recover,but we have to do better than just exporting resources and energy to be truely autonomous.