Dear Mr Tapp,

You claim that money has not been spent on
maintenance but wasted on the "political
agenda." Could you show some evidence of this?
What specifically are you referring to?
And what are you Sir, proposing as an alternative
solution to the problem?

You then refer to the PM's policy on climate change.
If by that you mean the Emissions Trading Scheme.
That will be paid for by the polluters, the large
corporations. What then is your alternative solution?

By the way the highest office refurbishments it may
interest you to know were done for the Liberal Party,
especially Mr Howard's offices in retirement. He is
the highest user of the retirement PM benefit, costing
taxpayers over $4 million to date.

And the Labor Government's spending was a result of the
global financial crisis created by the Bush Administration
in the US. Of whom the previous PM was the greatest
supporter.

As for my making better comments in the future.
I'm not running for office as you are, so may I
humbly suggest that you lead by example - instead of
simply consistently condeming the Labor Government.
Which is all that the current Opposition seems capable
of doing. Perhaps you may have greater success by
joining like-minded people in the Liberal Party?

Tony Abbott would be delighted to have you.
He needs people with your contribution on the front bench!

I am sorry i didnt uhderstand when you said plan.
this of course would be rudds emmission trading scheme.

Also regarding to big poluters this would include the state government who do own the electricity.

So the costs from the ets will then be passed down.

for joining the liberal party you still dont get it.

McKay and Combet have said yes to privitisation, hang on a minute

are they not there to represent the people of their electrol districts and the call has been no to privitisation.

This is what you get from party people, representing what the party says not what the people say.

So as i have said before no to the parties and i am not for sale.
I am here to represnt the people not a party.

*If by that you mean the Emissions Trading Scheme.
That will be paid for by the polluters, the large
corporations*

I've got news for you there Foxy, for the big
corporations will have to pass their costs on to
the consumer, who ultimately pays.

Business Spectator had quite some discussion about
what will happen in Victoria, which has the worst
problem with brown coal, so would face the highest
co2 costs. Most of those power stations are mortgaged
to the roof to the banks. The owners arn't going to
operate at a loss, which they would if they could
not pass on their co2 costs. So the first thing they
would do is cut maintenance, making the Victorian
grid increasingly unreliable and more prone to blackouts.

The next step would be to simply hand the keys to the
banks, rather then lose money constantly. Meantime
as there is no certainty about all this, there is also
a lack of new investment in new power generation.

Companies like Origin are happy to build power stations
based on gas, but electricity will cost quite a bit more,
so consumers have to face it, corporations arn't going
to pay it.

The whole idea of an ETS is that faced with higher power
charges, consumers figure out how to use less. From insulation
to solar hot water, consumers have many choices.

Dear Mr Tapp,

What people do you represent exactly?
Being able to say that "you're not for
sale," is very commendable, but who's
buying?

If you keep doing what you're doing,
you'll keep getting what you've got!

Good Luck with that!

Dear Yabby,

My understanding of the ETS proposal is that
the polluters will pay and the Government will
compensate the users in reduced taxes.

The added question is now will the government really compensate the people.
They say they will now but just like the sell off of the electricity they said no to that ,then changed their minds and still trying to sell it off.

So does the public really trust these governments,
the answer is no

I also have to wonder why when there is a concern about the health and well being of the people ,there are those who instead of voicing their opinion they run to mummy and protect a political party.

Also to issue is what is 20% of 384 million that one contractor has got with the state government.
Now this is only one contractor and 20% is 76,800,000.00 for fees, now to me i am wondering how much of this will go back as donations to labor and the unions, as this is a very good payday from the BER.

Now we the taxpayer have to pay this back ,but that is ok, also it is invisaged that interest rates will be climbing to 10%, so we will have to see what happens there.

When i say i am not for sale this is in regards to selling out ones reasons and morals, and the people that one stands up for.

Stuart Ulrich
Independent for Charlton