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.