Hooray for Julia, Finally we have some real action on climate change. The Gillard government has lain to rest any doubt that we need to cut poisonous CO2 emissions from our atmosphere, penalize emitters and to enter the brave new world of carbon trading with the rest of the world.

Industry will at last get the certainty they need to invest, financiers will get the certainty they need to finance our industries, we can avoid the backlash from the rest of the developed world for not cutting as much carbon as them and more importantly, we can avoid the huge future costs of climate change by investing at a much smaller cost now.

Whilst noted for well endowed posterior proportions, is our PM actually trying to ride two horses with one rear end?

spindoc,
Yeah, what else did you expect. Hit the workers again because they're the ones in industry. The bureaucrates & academics don't apparently contribute to pollution. They'r just innocently using transport & buy commodities the production of which caused pollution by the manufacturers.
I'm sure the executive jets don't cause pollution neither do the armed forces. Why have this selective penalty when indeed everyone's a polluter ? Does pollution reduce with the amount of penalty one can afford ?

Pollution will decrease with the amount one can afford. Thats about the most sensible thing i have seen you write.
We need the tax to push the no carbon age along.
manufactured without carbon will be a gigantic sales pitch. There will be a race on to get the claim first, and not have to pay the pollution tax.

a597,
So, if a tax, Penalty , levy or deposit if you like, reduces pollution then South australia is the only State that has taken a step towards pollution with their plastic bottle deposit.
Am I wrong in saying then that most of Australia is way behind in doing something about pollution ? Will Air transport only fly with full planes, or will people buy slightly damaged fruit to reduce transport emission ? Will the armed forces reduce their emission rich exercises ? Will the sport of motor racing be phased out ? Will mobile phone chargers become combaitble to reduce the senseless multiple production of the same appliance ? That, a597 is where the pollution is.

Everybody is a polluter, is it necessary to have a TV in every room.
This is exactly what we want, to inspire innovation, to come up with alternate fuels, and get of the oil based products.
We need. A tv license for tv's in excess of one. A carbon fuel tax.
A tax for every kw of power in excess of 12kw / day. People need to be taxed to stop the greed. We have a consumer mentality, which needs to be changed. Most of these consumables are imported so it will not hurt AU. Julia is doing very well, under a coalition that wants to bring the country down.

Pensioners will freeze as the academic left fly off to meetings to slap each other on the back. What a con.

People need to be taxed to stop the greed.
a597,
There'll always be those who can afford a penalty. What is really needed is sensible education with an emphasis on responsibility. We need international agreement to stop the duplication of products flooding the market. We should look at manufacturing certain items in certain countries & we'll see a reduction in pollution. We have to look at environmental suitability for production. Just look at cotton growing in Australia. What an illogical situation.
I'm fully aware of the complexity of economics but we'll never get it to a sustainable level if we allow greed to keep on snowballing. How much money do some people need for crying out loud. Educate youngsters on the effects of greed & a better society will emerge.

Stick to ya utube Runner you might miss some important BS.

Before the last election Julia promised that "there will be no carbon tax."

In moving forward she has junked just about every reform promised, and is proceeding with one she specifically promised not to.

Moving forward, or circling the drain?

Shadow Minister,

Isn't politics fun!

BTW, I was under the impression that implementing a policy that you had specifically ruled out at one time was the hallmark of a successful PM....like no GST, for instance.

Howard at least had the gumption to go back to the polls with the GST on the ticket.

Julia simply breaks her promises left right and centre, often within weeks of making them.

Gillard, like Abbott told us what they would do if they won the election.
I think we all understand the back down was bought about by a hung Parliament.
Gillard is a flop,but at least on this issue has been forced to do, just what her party told us they would do in the first term.
One day, maybe after another year of massive weather out comes,even the deniers may wish their petty thoughts could be hidden.

Shadow Minister this mornings leak, Andrew Rob in saying he wants Hockeys job, seems to be saying you have Abbott's I want yours.

Shadow Minister,

Of course, I expected you to come back with that...and 'tis true that Howard did seek a mandate. Nevertheless, he did seem adamant at the time.
Somehow the lines, "Never, ever. It's dead." and "No, there's no way a GST will ever be part of our policy." leave one with the impression that the Liberals were not intending to introduce a GST at any time during their tenure.

My point being that both sides of politics indulge in similar practices, so it's pointless to spend so much time drawing attention to their inadequacies on a party political basis

Poirot,

So you admit that Howard had the mandate to do this, and Julia did not.

So it is not the same at all. Howard admitted he made a mistake, and took an unpopular policy to the polls. Julia simply lied.

If you say so, Shadow Minister,

Talking about honesty and truth.....
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/17/1092508474312.html

Actually Poirot, You said so.

Quoting an ex speech writer for the Labor party is hardly going to be unbiased, and does not contradict what I said before. Howard may have done an about face, but he had the balls to admit his error and take it to the public.

What I said still stands.

It's been a slow Sunday afternoon with nothing to do but swap jibes with Shadow Minister....

Peter Costello accused Mr Howard of "tricky gymnastics" in his rebuttal to Howard's explanation of the leadership issue.
In hindsight I believe that term is highly appropriate - and Mr Howard's proficiency in that particular art probably explains his lengthy tenure as Prime Minister.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/howard-failed-country-and-party-costello-20101026-172d4.html

Poirot you should be pleased in the game of verbal tennis it is always good to have some one you can bank on to constantly hit the ball in to the net.

Interesting stuff but the thread is really about whether or not Julia is signaling genuine attempts to mitigate carbon emissions or is this just politicking with the Greens heads?

By removing most of the green initiatives yet pushing for a carbon tax, is this a contradiction? If the price on carbon is somehow rejected, what does that leave us with?

Nothing at all?

We know she is often described as “pragmatic” but how does this translate in policy decisions like this. Whilst not noted for my support of the ALP in general, why am I feeling a little embryonic admiration for our PM?

This lady has got substance. Julia said all promises were off as a condition of a hung parliament. So i don't know who the liars are.
A carbon tax will be good for the country. It is needed to push innovation along and get off the oil cycle. Julia has got the substance to do it.

I think Julia is very much in survival mode she at last is taking it up to the greens and she must.
Better not to be in government than to be a tool used by 12% to rule us all.
Roll on DD election.

Belly,

Hear hear, roll on DD election.

Yes 597, the lady has substance. Pity she carries it all below the hips.