Julia having misled the electorate about not putting a price on carbon, partially justified it based on other OECD countries going ahead, and industry needing certainty.

Now that there are only a handful of countries putting a price on Carbon, Julia needs to tell her green colleagues that she can give industry certainty by keeping her word, and following the lead of the majority of industrialized countries.

SM....where is the 'Clinton says' bit of your opening post?

I see it got clipped off.

It was:

"As Obama ditches a carbon price, Clinton says "do as I say, not do as I do."

This won't stop the Communists (Greens) from yelling and screaming about how much WE need one. (Carbon Price)

At the rate things are going under Obama people won't be able to afford electricity or petrol in the US so a carbon tax would not raise to much revenue anyway. The Greens must be loving this hardship knowing that far less emissions mean less change in climate. Of course their own high priests who have become rich on this scam are incapable of living anything other than totally indulgent lives.

The question of carbon pricing is on the agenda for analysis by all political parties willing to participate and we cannot expect an
outcome until due process and evaluations by invited experts are concluded - before a practical and economical decision can be made.

It is not a question of putting things off or reneging on promises.
Its simply a work-in-progress and in due course a fair outcome shall be presented. In the meantime any progress made by other countries may influence the decision making. It would be good that the final method of controlling carbon was universal, where technologies, and scientific advancement can be shared.