Looking at the "carbon tax" regimes in Europe and the rest of the world, no one charges a tax on the entire emissions of an emitter. Rather the emitter is given free permits to emit 95% of existing rates and have to pay taxes / trade permits for the other 5%.

This means that the industries pay far less tax, but retain the same incentive for emission reduction. The difference is that only a fraction of the costs are passed downstream, and consumers and manufacturing industries are far less disadvantaged.

This is why Australia will pay more carbon tax in 6 months than Europe has paid in 5 years, and far more than the rest of the world combined. The blunt instrument forced upon Gillard by the greens will do far more damage to the economy with very little difference in incentive.

good question shadow

why?
""Why is Australia going to pay more carbon tax
than the rest of the world combined?""

because maggie thatcher wanted to kill unions..
so came up with the concept of global cooling..CAUSED BY burning coal
[that makes c02]...but then maggie was refuted..cause the science said were in a warming CYCLE

but she got the unions

now others have got the unions too
IN fact took over the whole union movement globally

AND THEIR PARTY

so now the new tax on workers
to send the workers broke

its funny...a few decades ago..
you would have been on the opposite side
[selling the tory tax to bust the unions]

but heck now its the unions fukkking the unionists

it could be so funny..if it wasnt labratters party policy
to kill the working man..with this new big tax

sold by a moralising athiest non union pm

lol

im so over posting
to a world gone insane

c02 tax is a fraud
we are MANDATING a price DOUBLE the 'free market rate'

got the worst of both a new tax
and a new subsidy to capitalists

too many pretenders
pretending to be for the worker
to give tax and subsidy..to big money

its a joke
well done maggie

you got the union party..to commit suicide

In the beginning!
Some one had to be first.
It was not us, we follow.
I would have thought
You could do better than chant the mantra of those adds.
And that, the fact.
We are one of many not yet, but about to, pay for polluting the planet.

Because we're being lied to for the good of the witch err... I mean party!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yMHuQthzeg

Belly,

Being first in doing something stupid is not a great achievement.

No one else in Europe, California is stupid enough to tax 100% of emissions, so why are we? Or should I say why is Labor?

why do we pay more c02 tax?
to subsidise the market

we are going to underwrite..the market rate
those too clever by half will be bying the eu/nz carbon credits..[for $13..then charging us the CONsumer 23

not bad eh
i buy for 13
sell it to you for 23

heck what a clever idea

that and indexation..that ensures
that the tax WE MUST PAY..will increase EVERY year

anyhow was watching insight on sbs
bobby carr made a clever point...that
'there is a real difference betwen the parties"

he egzemplified c02 tax and tax on mining
and the kiddies fell..for his obvious spin

[see how those in govt want the tax
[have the numbers..FOR installing..the new tax
and the opposition dont have the numbers to stop it]

it was howard that first thunk the tax
[when he was in power..and now the quasie union party if in powwer..they finnish the public service adgenda..JUST LIKE ALLWAYS GETS DONE]..ie a token opposition..opposing for opposion sake

and the true adgenda of capitalists..goes on
regardless of who the mug punters vote 'for'

the two parties take good cop bad cop
to a whole new reality

no choice
both parties serve the same corperate adgenda

big money
endebit the workers

make them pay gst compusory super toobaco taxes

[the rich get it duty free]..when they do their booze and smokes run..[vacation]..

its time to tax family trusts..at the highest rate
and force them to pay death duties..cause govt is just about killing workers..and bailing out the rich..issuing property rights

[then compensating those
colluding to win
everytime]

See you have your fan club here SM so this is my contribution, the last one here.
DO YOU? want us to take your thread as truth?
More tax than the rest of the world combined?
Say something controversial bloke, love a blue!
Have fun all!
20 million of us
how many Europeans
Chinese
Indians
British would be twice our total would it not?

Look it up Belly.

Ah belly, when are you going to grow up and stop threading to leave these threads time and time again.

When you have big business saying it will be very hurtful, I think we need to at the very least do more research to find whether this is just scare mongering or not.

Now unless you are brain washed you will realize just how uneasy our economy is right now because, if you take away newly created government jobs an contract, and mining, believe me there's nothing left.

Do we rearly want to mess with that.

Besides, what's the rush, as apparently we hav been polluting this continent for a hundred years, so what's two more years in the grand scale of things.

I say, let th people: decide, not Julia, not bob brown, the people, as it is they who will be paying the bills.

Now a Polly on 250 to 300k will. Not be bothered to much by a bit extra tax, but boy oh boy joe average will be.

Let it go and let th people have their say.

Otherwise,
What are you afraid of.

Rechtub I will stop leaving threads the day you and your mate have your first original thought.
The day either one of you open your mind to the idea others thoughts may have value.
So it may be a long while, enjoy.

Belly, life decisions are about gains V risks and, considering we emit less than 2% of the Co2 and, further considering that china and India are tipped to increase by 500 and 300%, even you and your die hard labor followers can see that the risks V gained are just to high, given the sensitive nature of th global economy at this point in time.

I say again, two years will make very very little difference and, considering your leader says that the vast majority are infavour of the tax. What is it your afraid of?

Why don't you want the people to have a vote on this?

It's not your fault mate, it's the typical one eyed union approach to most things.

For JG and her quest to get this tax through, it's almost as if there is some hidden agenda for getting this through right here, right now.

Finally, if you feel we are a democratic society, why then won't you lot allow for the process to flow.

After all, she has lied about it.

Now considering this has always been my position , I would consider that an original thought, wouldn't you?

We have representatives to make decisions for us. You cant have the people decide when something dosn't suit you. What is this going to cost you.

The following view is from a poster called Wombat on another forum in 2008:

"People under 30 understand the need to take action, and can't realistically expect cheap fossil fuels to be available to sustain the 50 year-olds lifestyles."

Amazingly this morning I awoke to a radio sound bite expressing the same sentiment from a Labor government acolyte, unfortunately I missed the spruikers name. It seems that Labor hates the over thirties for having common sense, and when you consider Gillard’s famous caucus line "give the pensioners nothing, they do not vote for us anyway" it seems that Labor supports Aussies under 30, and the rest can just drop dead.

BELLY, HOW OLD ARE YOU SPORT?

579,

We expect representatives to represent us, not horse trade policies to protect their own petty interests such as staying in power. When a "representative" promises one thing to get elected and does exactly the opposite, they are acting fraudulently, and failing in their duty to represent us.

The polls are clear, the carbon tax is deeply unpopular, so much so that the coalition is now the preferred party to represent the country with respect to carbon change.

Labor / green alliance clearly no longer represents Australia, only their own personal interests.

SM writes

'Labor / green alliance clearly no longer represents Australia, only their own personal interests.'

no longer. When did the Greens ever represent Australia. They are socialist at best full of faith filled idiotic idealogy.

RIP, the once-lucky-country.

The Labour/Green coalition has killed us.

The polls, are not everything. Polls can be made to represent anything. A clean energy future is what it is all about, Oil and coal is on the outer, so something has to be done about it. Even in the face of your polling, this govt; is not swayed in their efforts to bring about change. So you have no platform besides, rumor mongering, and bodgie polls to go on.

579 writes

'The polls, are not everything.' No but the clear will of the people is.' That is clearly why Ms Gillard promised before the election that their would be no carbon tax under her Government. You are being naive or deceitful not to acknowledge that. The polls are simply a reflection of people's rejection of the PM's lie.

The PM did say all promises were off, as soon as a hung parliament was apparent. So i think you are the selective one here.

579

"The PM did say all promises were off"

No she didn't. And besides that a promise is a promise. If the promise is off or reneged on, then it is broken. Try borrowing money from the bank and then telling them the promise to repay is off. Juliar Gillard Broke a promise, and however you try and rewrite history, the public won't forget.

Secondly, if polls mean nothing why did Labor execute Rudd, and why did the election results almost exactly reflect the polls year after year.

Comrade 579:>> The polls, are not everything. Polls can be made to represent anything. A clean energy future is what it is all about, Oil and coal is on the outer,<<

Oil and coal on the outer? What an imbecilic statement plainly meant to deceive. 579 have a look at projected energy usage for China and India, and then have a look at the forms of energy they are investing in. Each of those countries has a projection of spend on fossil fuels some two THOUSAND percent over other forms of energy that they will pay lip service to.

Don’t lie, if you don’t know the facts just don’t post, but stop the indoctrinated spin and lies, none of it is your anyway, you simply ingested it.

...The capture of Australia to the "Greens" agenda including the carbon tax, is a capture of Australians by the homosexual gay rights movement mascarading as environmentalists and leading those same beguiled Australians down the immoral road to an acceptance of gay marriage without a whimper, compliments of Julia Gillard and the Australian Labor Party! .

Whose talking about China or India, they will have to make their own solutions. This is all about Australia, Congratulations to Julia for bringing on the carbon tax, successfully. Why is it when you are in a corner, you refer to the rest of the world as if it were our problem. Wake up to yourself. Julia did say all promises were off, when it was apparent a hung parliament was the likely result, and it is on record.
SM recites what he thinks to be the best answer, for his cause.

579 perhaps you can not see that it's illegitimate for your Julia to declare that all of her promises were off, with a hung election, without allowing us the bill paying, voting public to do the same. Careful there, your morality is showing.

She can only lagitamitly change her promises, if we can change our vote. It is quite obvious that this declaration of mind changing is very one sided.

She & you are going to find that voters can have reasonably long memories. It may be best that you, her & the fellow travelers don't watch the coverage of the next election. If you are going to, do cover the room with a water proof drop sheet. I'm told that tears can be very damaging to furniture & carpets, when applied in sufficient volume.

Two of the last three Coalition leaders have broken promises. The other, Turnbull, today stood in parliament and voted against his own conviction of what he believes is right for Australia.

If it's okay for them, it's okay for Gillard. At least she is willing to do what she believes is the right course of action, even if it costs her politically. There is more integrity gained in that fact than is lost in the so-called broken promise.

In regards to why is the tax so significant?

Tell me, what is the point of doing it at all if it's not significant enough to motivate behavioral changes? It needs to actually make a difference, otherwise it truelly is a waste of time and effort.

PS I forgot about Brendon Nelson, but do you blame me?

Sigh!

9 Months to carbon tax, then probably 14 months to remove Labor, and another 6 months to remove the tax.

At least with a double dissolution we will dislodge Labor from the senate too.

It must be hard for you go through this. Congratulations to Julia for bringing the Carbon Tax to a successful vote. A major win for Australia's clean future . Another two opposing votes from the opposition, which have not contributed any thing at all to the well-being of Australia, since the beginning of the hung parliament.
Two Hundred bills passed and no contribution from the opposition.

It's not just me, it's every Australian either with less in their pocket, or without a job. Juliar lied to us, and now wants us to shut up. She is not getting back in the lodge.

Well, it will be only be about 2 years before the tax is gone.

Interestingly, that hot bed of global warming bull, the UK bureau of meteorology, yesterday forecast the probability of a "little ice age" in the UK, which would probably last decades. Something to do with the suns UV output. Looks like some are starting to think about covering their backs.

Simultaneously a new peer reviewed study of the effect of the Netherlands vast wind farm investment, on the production of CO2 in their power industry was announced. It's to be published in Nature. It found the same result as a similar study in Texas.

Sorry greenies, in fact no I'm not sorry, the findings are that in both cases, the introduction of wind generation for the main grids result in an increase in the total production of CO2 by the industry. As one paper put it, the more windmills, the more CO2.

Guess our wonderful Julie only got her knife into us just in time. A few more months & even our idiot independents would have had to vote it down.

Labor does not dislike pensioners, I am one of them, and I have had three or maybe four increases in my pension of late, too many people talk too much garbage regarding Carbon tax, as the Prime Minister Julia Gillard said on TV yesterday, Tony Abbott has both run a scare campaign regarding the carbon tax, and is economically illiterate, I didn't vote for either Major Parties, but I will go along with the above statement from our Prime Minister, most thinking people have been able to see through Tony Abbott, methinks he won't look too clever after the next election., He has turned me off the Liberal Party once and for all.
NSB

Toni is OK, he is making a mockery of coalition politics. More windmills more co2, You have been had. Who is worried about co2. Best you keep your eye on the ball. Pollution tax has got to do with getting of of fossil fuel, not co2. While you were distracted like Toni, big things are happening, and all for the betterment of Australia.

Tony Abbott today in question time swapped laughs and jokes with his team.
While protesters, some invited by coalition members, insulted the Parliament.
One day, a tragic event may take place from those public gallery's.
Never more than today, Tony Abbott was shown as unfit for his office/his party/Australian politics.
I have no doubt, not a bit,CONSERVATIVES can do, need to do, much better than him.

Hasbeen,

It may be that wind farms are inefficient at the moment, the papers you are referring to are sound of logic. They are comparing them with gas turbines, however, not coal plants. I suspect it's more a symptom of their infancy for now.

We will see how further study and engineering developments go, it's hardly a reason to call all bets off on them and other clean energy investments. The people working in those industries wouldn't be too impressed at you dancing and cheering, after all, it's their jobs.

Ultimately it points out why Abbott's direct action policy is so economically irresponsible. Evident also in the Californian debacle

Yes Trashcan, & 579, wind mills have proved to have a larger foot print than the current mix, including coal. The ramping up & down of the required gas back up plants, to carry the useless surging power coming from the windmills is costing more co2 & fuel, than just running what they've got now.

With the billions greenie vote buying governments have thrown at research & development of these things, don't hope for any technology breakthrough in our lifetimes.

That's 2 out of 2 greenie bull S stories done for, ethanol has proved to produce more CO2, & burn more petroleum than it replaces.

Add to that the huge Spanish investment in wave power, now rusting in the sand hills, where it was dragged ashore & you start to see a common thread here. When ever you get academics, greenies, & activists [Greenpeace, WWF], together you can bet we are about to waste even more money on some pie in the sky dreaming.

Might be a good thing if the pommy met bureau has finally got something right. A couple more years of the poms freezing their butts off each winter, & it will be open season on greenies. Hope they still have some fox hounds left, to help hunt the buggers down.

Don't wash the mark off your bath tub fellers. This is the high tide line, it's all down hill from here. That dirty line will be all you have left to dream over in the very near future.

Hasbeen an informative post.
Informative about you.
Not about climate change.
Australia has seen gas Turbo power stations built.
The last I know about,sure to be another, was at Munmorra south of Newcastle.
I worked on the construction of the conventional one, in about `1962 or 63.
The gas one, strangely enough was said to be turned on during peak load only, by remote control it was not to be manned.

That's right Belly, many of the GTs are unmanned. They are operated remotely, switching on and off based on the going price, which is usually in response to peak demand. The greenhouse gas emissions do peak a bit as they are switched on, but not for long.

Hasbeen,

You're missing the point. We don't have endless supplies of fossil fuels. We need to come up with alternatives. The pricing of carbon should provide enough incentive for that to take place in the private sector, withou government having to shell out taxpayers money to fund it. The sooner we implement it, the greater the competitive advantage out economy will have once oil and coal reserves start to run dry.

Why are Australians so unwilling to make a sacrifice for future generations? The Anzacs went to war, we just need to pay a bit more to power our flat screen TVs!

I don't get how this carbon tax can be a good thing and, I don't get how it will force those payig the tax to find an alternative.

They will simply pass. Costs on to us, th end user.

I may have warmed to an ETS, as to produce carbon one must first buy credits, but a tax on carbon.

In any case, with the global economy on it's knees and our own economy on shaky ground, now is not the time to play roulette with our economy.

Support this tax by all means, but don't cry foul if your world turns up side down because of it.

Of cause, if it does, you lot will no doubt find some excuse for it.

Another problem I have with this tax, is labor's dismal record when it comes to implementing anything and getting it right.

Surely, even those here in favor of the tax must be Praying to the gods that they don't make this just another lemon to add to the trophy case.

When the carbon tax was negotiated with the greens, we were told that it was what the people wanted, the polls said otherwise. Then we were told that once the details were released, that the voters would understand it and approve it. They understood it and hated it.

The rhetoric is now that once the tax starts, they will get used to it.

The reality is that the next election will be a referendum on the carbon tax, and the government of the day will need to act on it. So far, the tax is looking very temporary.

How can taxing the top 500 polluters be justified as a tax for every body. How is this tax going to effect you. Power will rise 10% but will be compensated. If your goods come from one of these 500 polluters, there will be some rises. Does anyone know who the top 500 polluters are. Someone put up on the liberal web site Julia Gillard is likened to Hitler, and should be shot. That has a distinct aroma of Abbott about it.

It should be pointed out that companies already pay to emit other pollutants into the atmosphere in most if not all Australian jurisdictions. This has pushed companies to spend huge amounts on reducing emissions through pollution control systems (thermal oxidisers, ESP's, scrubbers etc), and other means.

Forcing companies to pay to pollute is nothing new, it's just that CO2 hasnt been included previously. Why people are so defensive of CO2 emissions is beyond me except to protect their own financial interests.

Trashcan, what don't you get? Why can't you see there is no replacement available for transport fuel.

Yes we can produce electricity from gas. But why can't you learn from the Dutch. Running windmills backed up by gas produce more CO2, & burns more gas than just burning gas.

If you can't understand simple math, you have no chance of making sensible decisions. That's the simple fact, from 2 large studies, one on the leading windmill country.

Open your eyes sometime.

Hasbeen,

I can do math. Here's an example:

Total available fossil fuels = x
Annual consumption of fossil fuels = y
No. of years until fossil fuels depleted = x/y
The higher y is, the sooner we run out.

So, regardless of the effects on climate change etc, unless we really don't care about future generations of humans on this planet, we should be reducing fossil fuel consumption now.

ESPECIALLY if there is no replacement, as you claim. But it doesn't hurt to look for alternatives, which I think there are despite your no no no attitude.

A carbon tax will aid in both of these goals, reducing demand and motivating innovation.

I get it, hasbeen. You don't care about future generations, I do. That's where we differ.

Why is the alternative coalition policy far more expensive and why are they even considering spending anything on something that they now allege will have no effect - despite supporting the same scheme for many years (and even "a simple carbon tax" only about 12 months ago)?

Sounds like simple political opportunism to me.

TrashcanMan,
It is my understanding that the top 500 will simply pass on the costs, and some, no doubt.

And remember, one every important fact that everyone seems to be keen to dodge, is the fact that the only reason the top 500 pollute, is to service OUR needs, or the needs of the world.

It's a bit like puttin the cart before the horse if you ask me.

So please explain just how, by taxing the top 500, this will reduce emissions?

Now if you, or anyone for that matter, can explain this, then I may take a bit more notice of you and your supporters.

TCM:
There is little to be gained by having meaningful 'debate' with people who constantly think "windmills" generate power.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12685#219362

These same people call for others to "open their eyes" when they can't even open their own eyes.

For example: "please explain just how, by taxing the top 500, this will reduce emissions".

Ans: Stop relying on the 'lies' and deliberate distortions of Abbott, Bolt or Jones - for example

qanda
Ans: Stop relying on the 'lies' and deliberate distortions of Abbott, Bolt or Jones - for example

, that still doesn't answer my question,

For butcher: You could read the government’s ‘Clean Energy Plan’ - chapter 3 in particular;

http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energy-future/securing-a-clean-energy-future/#content04

For anyone else concerned about the imposition of a ‘carbon price’: perhaps they too could visit the government’s Clean Energy Future web site;

http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/

More credibility is gained in critique if you go to the primary source.

Most people don't - they prefer to get 'knowledge and wisdom' from media shock-jocks, bloggers and those pushing their own ideological agenda.

qanda, my agenda is to protect our way of life and, having been in business most of my working life, I can tell you that any cost to business going in, will be greatly increased going out, and that's my problem with this tax.

Why not simply tax the user and save all that mark up along the way.

After all, it is we who use the power that the emissions were generated in the process.

I can also tell you that small to medium business, our largest employers, are on their knees an, any further imposition may well spell the end for many. Then what!

What ever happened to user pays in this whole carbon debate.

Besides, business is already addressing polution without being taxed, so whybthe tax?

One of the most stupid facile arguments that Labor is putting forward is that they are only taxing the top 500 polluters.

As most of these polluters are in the energy supply business this tax is simply passed on to the tax payers. The reality is that the tax only has 500 points of collection and these companies are effectively subordinated into being tax collectors.

Another option would be to place a levy on energy, that way, the user of that energy pays the levy/tax and, apart from the costs associated with collecting and forwarding the tax, energy suppliers are not out of pocket.

This would force many to save energy and, the genuine needy could be subsidized.

Forcing companies to fund the tax is where the problem lies as it causes cash flow issues and, like any expense, a margin must be applied to get their money back.

It is simply another tax grab from a wasteful, cash strapped, incompitent government.

And it will hurt.

We told them the IR laws would hurt, they laughed. We told them copenhargen would be a waste of time and money, they laughed.

With a bit of luck they will have a trigger fo a DD election, couriousy of the malaysion scandal, I bet they are not game to go there.

You really are a naive little fellow, aren't you qanda?

I can't imagine how anyone could actually recommend we go & read lies.

We know those papers have been prepared by this government, to try to sell their great big tax. How you could expect any thinking person to waste their time on the type of drivel that we will find.

If they were even good liars, it might be entertaining looking at how they have twisted the facts. However it is not even good enough for that.

It is hard to know if they have given up trying to produce anything even vaguely convincing, knowing the bull they have to start with, or if they are merely going through the motions, so the useful idiots have something to wave about. What ever, you're welcome to it.

Happy waving.

It think that what is clear about this debate is that Abbott and equally other members of the Opposition front bench have managed to capture the attention of the australian voter with their brand of "panic button politics". No you cant do that because the wheels will fall off. No you cant do this because the sky will fall. No "you cant do that because everyone already knows that the earth is flat" , kind of stuff.

This seems to have rallied the climate skeptics, fringe right wingers, vested interests, closet racists, polluters etc all into a single gaggle of complainants. This media assisted campaign has been most successful in (as I say) capturing the attention of the voter, whilst focussing all the blame/negative attention on the Gov't. Particularly the PM.

The Gov't by it's own definition (being not just a PM), but a functioning Minority Govt, has managed to see a large part, (or more accurately) nearly all of it's agenda so far, pass through both houses of Parliament, culminating in the soon to be legislation Carbon Tax.

Abbott's solution is to threaten the Gov't , the business community, the general public etc with reversal of the decisions made by the both houses of Government. And threatened to reverse (clearly not just an arbitrary decision by a PM at all) but a set of decisions made by the Gov't.

Does the Opposition leader seek to rule in exile from the opposition benches ?!.

Claiming to be in front in the opinions polls and therefore logically should be in Gov't, is a furphy because every Gov't is entitled to run the its course or term and unless Abbott can find the numbers, no sausage. And one place he will ever have the the numbers is with the people who actually know him, his colleagues some of whom in his own party would shudder at the thought of an Abbott led Gov't.

Thinker2,

Juliar Gillard effectively provided the coalition with the ammunition it needs by promising solemnly not to impose a carbon tax and then doing so.

The facts that this is the largest carbon tax in the world, combined with modelling that is deliberately distorted (assuming that most other countries will have a carbon tax) indicates not that labor's figures with respect to damage to industry are optimistic at best, and that labor is not prepared to tell the voters the truth.

Australian voters are prepared to make sacrifices if the cause is worthwhile, and those asking are completely honest. The big lie combined with other small lies leaves Labor with no credibility, and the admission that the tax was introduced to secure the alliance with the greens, makes it clearly in the interest of Labor.

Shadow Minister,

First, learn to spell your Prime Minister's name properly. Respect for you takes a massive nose dive every time you regurgitate such shock-jockisms.

Secondly,

It's a bit rich supporters of Tony Abbott accusing the Government of telling lies. No-one in Parliament has been caught out more than him. Gillard had to compromise on her position because of the hung parliament. Abbott just went back on his because "it wasn't in writing".

The Coalition under Abbott is probably the most irresponsible Opposition this country has ever had. It's entire scaremongering campaign is based on made-up "facts" designed to undermine the government and drive down consumer and business confidence and create massive uncertainty about what is one of the OECD's most robust economies at the moment.

And here you are, parrotting Coalition made-up "facts":
"...modelling that is deliberately distorted (assuming that most other countries will have a carbon tax)..."

Very few countries are not moving towards ETS systems. What you are saying is a blatant lie. Modelling was not deliberately distorted, that is another blatant lie, unless you actually have evidence.

Australia is leading the way here for once and the leader of the opposition wants us to start heading backwards. He is, by his own hand, a detriment to the Australian economy. Consumer/business confidence is down because of his negative campaigning, and jobs are being lost as a result.

Trash,

"Very few countries are not moving towards ETS systems"

Perhaps you could name them. Particularly those likely to have an ETS by 2015/16. Certainly none of china, the USA, Canada, india, etc. Without our trading partners and competitors adopting a price on carbon, jobs will tend to move to lower cost producers, and total emissions will not change.

Julia Gillard looked us all in the eye and solemnly promised no carbon tax. She is a liar. Her nick name is thus Juliar, and is recognized by that moniker by most Australians.

Further fudging is that costs per house hold will increase by $9.90 and compensation will be about $10.20. Even if that is true, it is only valid for the first year, and then the price continues to rise.

SM,

You accuse Gillard of lying in the same post as lying yourself. Or would you rather consider yourself just misinformed? Pick your poison.

"Certainly none of china, the USA, Canada, india, etc."

More made-up "facts" from the Coalition camp. Both China and India are moving towards ETS, with pilot programs currently in place. Perhaps national schemes won't be in place by 2015, but that is not relevant. Japan is also heading in the same direction.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jul/10/carbon-tax-emissions-trading-international

http://www.environmental-finance.com/news/view/1678

So why are you lying to us Shadow Minister?

As for Gillard's so-called lie:

Do you know the difference between a lie and a broken promise? For Gillard to have lied, she would have to have known she was going to introduce a carbon tax (btw it's not a tax anyway).

Do you have evidence that Gillard knew she would have to negotiate with the Greens to circumvent the Hung Parliament when she made that statement, prior to the election? Can you prove she could see into the future? Or do you have evidence that she was planning a Carbon Tax when she said she wouldn't. Of course not.

Example of a broken promise: "never ever GST"

Example of a lie: Children Overboard

Trash, you are lying through your teeth.

My statements are correct, I just think you have a logic deficit, as you agree with my statements later that there will be nothing by 2015.

All we have is a few minuscule pilot schemes, with no plan or commitment to anything even this decade. The "movement" is at best glacial, and more likely window dressing.

It is no surprise that Rio Tinto is divesting itself of the Australian Aluminium smelters, which are doomed under the carbon tax.

Thanks Shadow Minister for further evidence of misinformation from your team.

The fact that Rio Tinto is divesting 13 aluminium assets globally, including in the US, was a bit inconvenient for you to mention wasn't it? Rio's aluminium arm has been unprofitable for many years and they've said it's got nothing to do with the carbon tax. I can't see how a carbon tax here would be causing them to sell up in the US.

"All we have is a few minuscule pilot schemes, with no plan or commitment to anything even this decade. The "movement" is at best glacial, and more likely window dressing."

So when you don't like certain facts, you just play them down and ridicule them do you? Excellent work.

Trash,

The smelters are being sold because of rising power costs. All but the one are in countries with a price on carbon.

That the largest chunk is in Australia, and announced just after the carbon tax passes is more than co incidence.

Steel will not be far behind.

The misinformation your espousing omits the countries already running very effective emissions trading schemes for some time, and at the same time are very successful functioning as a manufacturing and export based economy such as Germany.

This is a country is flourishing in manufacturing at the same time as allowing for for effective carbon pollution reduction, SM.

The misinformation here you seek to distribute is a denial of progress SM rather than a solution/recipe for the future. That's the sad fact of political debate in Australia is it is driven by an Abbott led opposition bent on destruction. Even more worrying are the behind the scenes work done by people like Cory Bernardi drumming up hysteria among the young in various shapes and forms of right wing politics, tub thumping and general propaganda.

The Minority Gov't from my assessment looks set to continue to deliver it's agenda in a reasonably settled coalition. The Greens will continue to hold the balance of power.

"The Abbott tactic of promising to reverse the carbon tax is the only way he could continue to make his opposition too the carbon tax relevant".

For Abbott to invent such a rank political tactic, hell bent on destruction, until he gains Gov't by stealth is a truly scary prospect in a PM, SM.

The Liberals have the problem of a much more palatable leader in Turnbull waiting for the opportunity to re-ascend to the leadership, throw out the scare mongering tactics and get on with being credible as an alternative Gov't.

When the carbon tax is a reality in law and the dust settles, Abbott's perceived future for us will be consigned to annuls of political history, or the dumpster appropriately shredded, as with the opposition's climate action policy.

I agree with Trash on this one SM.

T2,

German manufacturing flourishing? obviously you haven't been there recently.

Given that support for the carbon tax is at an all time low, with an almost 2:1 opposition in the public, this is not a losing platform.

Labor also has a lack of trust issue.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/families-to-get-more-cash-from-carbon-scheme-20111018-1lyt8.html
Such threads are not forums for open debate.
Like road kill the usual suspects come to feed.
And others to try to lift the level to something near truth.
This link independent,will be ignored by the U. S. why spoil a good mud bath with truth.
But in time after implementation.
I will remember the flights of fantasy seen here.

It will all be OK on the day?

I remember NSW saying that.

given tonies opposition
and the voters opposition
its only a matter of time till this cancer
to tripple the cost of energy..becomes void

it will take a double disolution
to dismantle the slush fund

milne today revealed 3 industries for which the slush fund was formed
virgin/some power company with brown coal?]..and others selling the green nightmare[she didnt mention ge..who does nicely out of making many windmills and alternate generation means

on windmills its funny how often
we wee only one working..in the back ground shots

also worth noting is in the background shot of the greenie bob promo
him sitting on a hill in front of his house?...with a smokey wood fire streaming from his chimminy[full of co2]..

noting the usual smoking chimminies
we see on the news are belching out steam[
but bobs is pure c02..

[we didnt see his compost bin..
belching out methane [another greenhouse gas]

why are we paying double the world market rate c02 tax?
heck with all the lies thats the only way the model worked out the numbers

its built on lies
if it was true..there would be no need for spin nor lies
but the double standards they speak volumes

this 12 billion slush fund
is collusion verging on treason

any fool BYING carbon permits..or paying the c02/tax on our bills
is a sukker...deduct it from your bill..[after you sue them for fraud]

of course that is what i should be saying
but to default alone..is a danger..but if we [the 2/3 rds default together...they cant jail us all

heck recall ghandi
one measly tax on salt
here we got rafts of taxes..and govt servants
looking to add on the next one..then the next one..and the next

its about taxing cheap energy into a cash cow..for those needing expensive energy.;.to sell their product..im sick of subsisdiing those who abuse their energy usage

the more you use
the more you should have to pay
regardless if you got free solar cells or wind

much too greedy energy users..
using up too much energy
thats the real problem

It's all very well to tout stats from unidentified sources as an argument SM, but it doesn't wash.

You haven't addressed my comments re Turnbull I note, nor have you addressed my proposition that the only way for Abbott's argument against carbon pricing too remain relevant, is too swear in blood to reverse it. Otherwise it will all go away, the scaremongering by itself, will not wash when the reality of carbon pricing is with us.

Must keep the public focussed on the negatives too remain relevant ole Tony. Just as you often do yourself SM. In fact ever since Tony Abbott this is the modus operandi of the Liberals and their cronies. Policy is a made up patchwork quilt of maybes and maybe nots. But consistently they doomsay with nasty inflammatory personal jibes and spears directed at various members of the Gov't to colour their argument.

Recently the intensity of remarks made by Julie Bishop "PM on death row" and Alan Jones's "put her in a chaff bag and throw her out to sea" and "lying scrag" actually broadcast on TV, is shameful if not dangerous and denigrating of the highest public office in our land. It also denigrates women in my view. As for Julie Bishop how would you like to have her as your countries front line diplomat ?. Perhaps she could give our trading partners the death stare.

To get back on topic SM in your opening post "by Australia you mean our polluters don't you ?, because Australia as whole is not paying this price on carbon, the polluters are. This policy is being implemented to encourage growth in new clean and sustainable energy production.

And, where do you get the figures that provide the basis for your opening question, some right wing think tank ?.

I also understand that Tony Abbott's carbon price reversal policy is a cause for concern for many economists and business leaders coming out in todays press, saying that the first thing that Abbott's written in blood oath will do, is cause the price of electricity to rise.

Imagine if a future opposition leader said he'll abolish abolish the GST, then ran a misinformed but populist campaign, gained ascendancy in the polls, then drummed fervour for the removal of a sitting Gov't. Even though the removal of the GST might have many un-thought about negative connotations for the economy of the day.

Would you support such a leader that would openly and outwardly trash economic responsibility in order to gain power SM ?.

I wouldn't, and I don't . And as this goes on, increasingly I won't, when the Gov't does have it's election.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-18/liberals-creating-uncertainty-over-carbon-pricing/3577392

Forget to provide this link in my last post sorry T2

"Would you support such a leader that would openly and outwardly trash economic responsibility in order to gain power SM ?."

T2 - you did.

Business almost universally considers this carbon tax a bad idea for the economy, and removing it in a relatively painless manner is required. Given that in 2 years the Coalition will be in power, business is genuinely worried that it may pay billions for permits that will be worthless in 2 years. Under a carbon tax the energy retailers simply pass the costs on to the consumers.

This huffing and puffing is to protect their investment, and what they want is for the coalition to remove the tax whilst not harming their bottom line, and their comments are the first salvos in a negotiation with the future government.

According to most economists, the 'Opposition' led by its current leader has not shown any substantive economic sense.

So yes, Abbott appears to openly and outwardly trash economic responsibility in order to gain power.

Quanda,

That is absolute drivel. Economists do agree that while a carbon price is the most efficient way of reducing emissions the assumption is that trade competitors are doing the same.

Business and economists agree that a carbon tax without our competitors doing the same will damage our competitiveness, that carbon intensive production will be replaced with similar production in low carbon price countries, and net reduction in global emissions will be close to zero.

The coalition platform is not no carbon price forever, just not before everyone else.

"That is absolute drivel".

I'm off to work - you stick around as much as you like, as you do.

A good summary of global activity on ETS's and where Australia fits in:

http://theconversation.edu.au/international-carbon-markets-what-are-the-implications-for-australia-3897

Note, the EU are expecting to pay 23Euro per tonne, a higher price than in Australia.

So Shadow Minister, you needn't worry about our trade competitors not doing the same. We're just getting the competitive advantage of getting in earlier than some (and later than others).

And a question for Shadow Minister, if the aluminium and metals industries are goin to collapse, as you say, why is it that Alcoa have just signed a 10 year rail transport deal in WA to feed the three aluminium refineries? Why is it that Alcoa has had an official position supporting putting a price on carbon since at least about 2001?

Trash,

What is also not mentioned, is that a carbon price is not paid on 100% of emissions but on only the margins. Most industries have been awarded free permits for 90% or more of their emissions. So while the price is presently E12 and predicted E23, it is not on all the emissions.

The average cost per unit of emission would be closer to E2.30.

My we do get exited mark this in your diary.
There will be no tax on Carbon in a government I lead.
Got it??
That is a blood oath.
From a man who has no intention, at all, of keeping his word.

Belly

You are mistaking Abbott for Juliar.

Dead thread - nothing new, moving on.

SM, that was phase 1.

They're more than halfway through phase 2.

Phase 3, at the beginning of 2013, will see a further substantial cut in free allowances.

Is Juliar the best denigrating remark you've got SM or the only policy statement you have in your repertoire.

I've just mentioned language in a previous post, and the importance of respect for the highest office in the land. Another issue you have failed to address SM, and true to form straight into the schoolyard banter you go with word playing without substance parroting your point that the PM lied. The PM's position was compromised by a hung election. Even if that was her position should her party gain Govt at the time she uttered that statement, that is obviously not a workable position now and compromise is one of the hallmarks of leadership.

In contrast, Tony Abbott has conducted a relenting campaign of intentional misinformation, laced with smear exaggeration and innuendo. All in order that we should hand him an opportunity to do whatever it is he want's to do with our country. This is so ill defined, made up and unclear that the the only thing we really know for sure, is that Abbott's climate action policy will amount too, the highest cost to the taxpayer and actually cause an increase in carbon pollution.

The people may have been convinced by a campaign of negativity at the moment, (this is what you would expect with the big end of town funding it), but this is not really support the Abbott opposition's fictional policies, but rejection of Labor for things like the adoption of Howard's offshore processing for example. People forget that Howard lost his seat for such internationally embarrassing policy positions. People got sick of the playing of politics as the sole occupation of public life in our country and punished Howard accordingly,

Abbott is extrapolating successfully on the Howard political model of making boat people a hot political potato for example , pressing the panic buttons, exaggerating situations, drumming up negativity and hysteria then having an election.

Trouble is (for Abbott) is that he can't have an election of his own making, only a Gov't can do that. Isn't democracy wonderful SM.

"Is Juliar the best denigrating remark you've got SM"

Yup! an insult tied to a nick name that was earned from a particular act of bastardry she committed is usually the most effective. From your reaction it is working.

The purpose of government is to govern, and the purpose of the opposition is to hold them to account. If the government acts well in the interest of its people, the opposition is irrelevant. What is clear from the polls is that the Labor / green alliance is not governing in the interest of the electorate, and that the coalition is doing a superb job of holding it to account.

The reason the government pursued the Malaysian solution is that the Rudd solution was an obvious disaster, and Juliar could not bring herself to reinstate the pacific solution that she had denounced for nearly a decade.

Folks! Gentlemen! Lady's!
It doesn't matter!
I have done verbal battle with Shadow Minister for years.
You can not win.
But you can not find your self out played.
In defeat he just says nah nah and sounds like a back drop to Tony's no no no , bit like the beach boys.
History rides with us,Tiny Tony is stepping in Julia's shoes, he is promising some thing he can not deliver.
Will not deliver.
He can/will not remove carbon tax, NBN.
Consider this,just as sure as Gillard is gone,Abbott is building a wall, around himself.
His party can and will push it over on him!
What better way to dump silly policy's than bury the man who made them.
SM have a great day, you make mine, truly my mind sees you As a complex composite of both Bishops and Chris Pyne.
I just love it so thanks.

Analysis by Bloomberg New Energy Finance predicts a $16-a-tonne carbon price in 2015. For which the Europeans pay on about 10% of their emissions.

Why will Australia pay nearly $30/t on 100% of emissions. This is pure lunacy. This moronic policy is why Australia will pay several times more for carbon emissions than the entire EU combined.

This is the coalition must ditch this stupid policy, and why they will.

Shadow minister,

You are incorrect, either through ignorance of facts or deliberate deception.

Yes, Europe's ETS currently issues free allowances for 90%, auctioning only 10%. This is up from 5% from phase 1 which you incorrectly stated yesterday (good to see you ar catching up a little).

However, from January 2013, it is planned for a minimum of 60% to be auctioned, with close to 100% of electricity suppliers permits to be auctioned, not free.

So your comparison is invalid.

The BNEF prediction is based on the assumption Europe will slump into recession (a fair assumption). However, global prices are anticipated to be much higher.

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/independent-ske.php
An interesting link.
Part funded by skeptics.
And truly independent.
The interesting part will not be its seeming proof.
But the interesting way it is blackened.

Trash,

The auctioning of 60% of carbon allocation has been proposed, not implemented. To get this all countries have to agree. Given the GFC this is not highly likely.