round 1 to the good guys by 20 to 1

from the SMH

Carbon tax protesters rally Victoria
Belinda Merhab
March 12, 2011 - 2:34PM

AAP

A carbon tax battle has spilt onto the streets of Melbourne with those in support of a price on carbon claiming victory.

Outside Prime Minister Julia Gillard's electorate office in Werribee on Saturday, 400 protesters gathered with Liberal Victorian senators Mitch Fifield and Scott Ryan to protest against the federal government's plan to put a price on carbon.

Meanwhile, at Treasury Place in Melbourne's CBD, an estimated 8000 protesters gathered to support the prime minister's carbon tax plan and call for action on climate change.
Advertisement: Story continues below

Paul Mackay, a spokesman for political advocacy group GetUp, an organiser of the pro-tax rally, said supporters for the carbon price plan had won the battle.

"We were overwhelmed with the amount of people that came out - the entirety of Treasury Place was packed," he said.

"It certainly eclipsed that of the anti-carbon tax rally.

"The message was loud and clear that there are plenty of Melburnians who are happy to, on their Saturday morning, come out and rally for swift and effective measures to reduce our greenhouse pollution."

Mark Dreyfus, Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, said the numbers at the pro-carbon tax rally showed the majority of Australians wanted action on climate change.

"The big numbers at the rally demonstrate strong support for action on climate change," he told AAP.

"It's confirmation that most Australians do want action on climate change and they're looking to the government to take that action."

But Tony Hooper, who organised the rally against the tax, said the plan should be scrapped because Australians had been lied to.

"Julia (Gillard) said there would be no carbon tax and then six months later, we're seriously looking at one, right at a time when the Australian economy is doing it tough," he said.

Senator Fifield, who addressed protesters at the rally outside Ms Gillard's office, said pricing carbon would be a tax on everything that achieved nothing.

"The several hundred people rallying in front of Julia Gillard's office on a Melbourne long weekend demonstrates the anger and betrayal felt by the community over the Prime Minister's carbon tax lie," he said.

The federal government wants to introduce a fixed price on carbon from July 2012, followed by a emissions trading scheme (ETS), with a floating price, three to five years later.

i hear Chris Smith is predicting 50,000 on the 23rd - if you get that, we'll double it without trouble

i hear Chris Smith is predicting 50,000 on the 23rd - if you get that, we'll double it without trouble

Hilarious.  Think I'll email that comment through to Chris Smith himself.  The sort of thing that really spurs on everyday Australian's - you know, those without the ideological agenda of GETUP! - such as yourself wombleoz.

Can I say my heart goes out to all those involved in the devastating Japanese Earthquakes.  It is truly heartbreaking to watch.

But let it be clear.  This has nothing to do with climate change.

Heard someone on the radio today linking up the two.

Earthquakes have been around for along time and will continue to be - this is not the end of the world - its just a horrific time for us all as mother nature unleashes her fury.

Fury thats been around for millions of years and will continue for millions of years.

i hope that nuclear plant doesn't get worse, doesn't sound good

2.5 years is plenty of time to turn around public opinion - it'll happen, and in some ways it'll be thanks to the anti-tax brigade, you will motivate the pro action crowds and we will win the argument because we have the common good on our side

One last point:

I think this is being managed in a similar style to the Coalition's handling of WorkChoices before the Howard Government's demise.

Casting our minds back further than that, when Howard moved to introduce the GST - and went to an election, the Howard Government in the end, lost seats.  A new tax will do that.

Another reason why this government must be outstanding in its message and the way it sells and plans to introduce this carbon tax (that it said it wouldn't) to the public.

Well I believe in greening up our environment.  I may question the climate change THEORY.  But I believe in a cleaner environment.

The Coalition has a Direct Action Plan, comprised of a vast array of incentives, investments and importantly REAL outcomes - sure its paid for out of existing revenue -  but lets be clear.

The Direct Action Plan is NOT, I repeat, NOT a great big new tax on everything that will attack our way of life, increase the cost of living and attack our economy.

A carbon tax guarantee's not a single outcome for our environment - not only single outcome can be guaranteed with the introduction of this great big tax - but it guarantee's pain for working Australian's.

A great big new tax on everything, and you, me and every other Australia will pay for it.  Electricity, food, petrol and on and on.

There is a clear choice.  A stark choice.
A Direct Action Plan with real outcomes.
Or a Carbon Tax that attacks working Australians.

One other thing regarding the government policy:

WHERES THE DETAIL?   

It's a circus.  IT IS Gillard Labor.

So to waste/spend a Liberal 8 billion is a fictional 8 billion ? But a Labor spent/wasted 8 billion is a real 8 billion?

Keep underestimating the public anger and the Abbott Coalition boys - keep digging - I'm loving it

  Surprise surprise, semantics from Comrade AFL.

Labor is introducing a NEW TAX on all Australian's via a carbon tax - the one that is promised not too - it will impact heavily on working Australian's;

From the grocery aisle, to the petrol pump to your home electricity bill.

The Coalition's policy is direct action.  Direct action would cost $3.2 billion over the first four years, out of budget savings, and $10.5 billion over 10 years.  We're talking about real action with real outcomes - NOT a new tax on everything.

From the amount of CO2 that can be stored in soil, to a massive tree-planting campaign, to real incentives for business to cut pollution, to serious investment and a commitment to greener energy initiatives (all we've see from JuLIAR is axed green programs).

Labor is endeavouring to punish working Australian's with a great big new tax on everything - Australian's can't cop another tax. 

The salt rubbing comes from the outcomes from a carbon tax.  The outcomes are UNKNOWN.  Fingers crossed.  Meanwhile Pensioners spend all winter in bed trying to stay warm, because they can't afford heating.

Spot on Womble........A scare campaign from a bunch of sore losers. They do not believe in Climate Change otherwise Malcom would be leader.

Once again the Libs trying to play both sides of the fence. Just the same as they do on immmigration, racism, Climate Change. A party bereft of any real policies. Do not stand for anything only against everything.

So to waste/spend a Liberal 8 billion is not our taxes, thus a fictional 8 billion ? But a Labor spent/wasted 8 billion is our taxes, thus a real 8 billion?

wombleoz, do you understand what existing revenue means?  And what budget savings are?

Clearly not.  Your playing the same game Labor MP's are desperately playing - and the public aren't buying it.

The Direct Action Plan from the Coalition is not a great big NEW tax on everything.  It is funded by existing revenue.  Its not a new tax plan.

A carbon tax IS a great big new tax that will be felt by working families as another added pressure to the cost of living.  It's fundamentally flawed.

The Direct Action Plan is a policy from the Opposition that actually has detail - thats just a start - and guess what - it has REAL OUTCOMES!

Keep digging boys, its not me you need to convince, its the public and as I say:

They are not buying it.

The Liberal way is to sneakily stab the people in the back, so they wont see the TAX coming.

The Labor way is to be upfront and admit it is a tax, and protect those that can least afford it.

Which is the honest way?

Upfront and honest about a tax, AFL?

Upfront and honest?

UPFRONT AND HONEST? 

Climate change cage match: Abbott debates Abbott
by Bernard Keane

As the Gillard government’s plan for a carbon prices sends Coalition stocks soaring, attention is increasingly focusing on what opposition leader Tony Abbott believes in about climate change and how to deal with it. Today in Crikey, Tony Abbott debates one of his most formidable opponents on the issue — Tony Abbott.

Tony Abbott: Climate change is a relatively new political issue, but it’s been happening since the earth’s beginning. The extinction of the dinosaurs is thought to have been associated with climate change.

Tony Abbott: I’ve always thought that climate change was real because I’ve always known about the ice age and other things which indicate that over time climate does change.

Tony Abbott: I am, as you know, hugely unconvinced by the so-called settled science on climate change. Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have significantly increased since the spread of industrialisation, but it seems that noticeable warming has only taken place between the 1970s and 1990s.

Tony Abbott: We have a clear policy on climate change. Climate change is real.

Tony Abbott: I mean in the end this whole thing is a question of fact, not faith, or it should be a question of fact not faith and we can discover whether the planet is warming or not by measurement. And it seems that notwithstanding the dramatic increases in man-made CO2 emissions over the last decade, the world’s warming has stopped. Now admittedly we are still pretty warm by recent historical standards but there doesn’t appear to have been any appreciable warming since the late 1990s.

Tony Abbott: It’s quite likely that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has had some effect on climate, but debate rages among scientists over its extent and relative impact given all the other factors at work.

Tony Abbott: We can’t conclusively say whether man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to climate change. If they are, we don’t know whether they are exacerbating or counteracting what might otherwise be happening to global climate. Even if they are adding to climatic extremes, humanity may be able to cope with only modest adjustments.

Tony Abbott: What we can say, though, is that we should try to make as little difference as possible to the natural world. As well, prudent people take reasonable precautions against foreseeable contingencies. It’s the insurance principle.

Tony Abbott: OK, so the climate has changed over the eons and we know from history, at the time of Julius Caesar and Jesus of Nazareth,  the climate was considerably warmer than it is now. And then during what they called the Dark Ages it was colder. Then there was the medieval warm period. Climate change happens all the time and it is not man that drives those climate changes back in history. It is an open question how much the climate changes today and what role man plays.

Tony Abbott: I am confident, based on the science we have, that mankind does make a difference to climate, almost certainly the impact of humans on the planet extends to climate.

Tony Abbott: The argument is absolute crap.

Tony Abbott. We believe climate change is real, yes, we believe humans make a contribution towards climate change.

Tony Abbott: There may even have been a slight decrease in global temperatures (the measurement data differs on this point) over the past decade despite continued large increases in emissions associated with the rapid economic growth of China and India.

Tony Abbott: I think that the science is far from settled but on the insurance principle you are prepared to take reasonable precautions against significant potential risks, and that’s I think why it makes sense to have an ETS.

Tony Abbott: I think there are all sorts of ways of paying for this that don’t involve a great big new tax that we will live with forever.

Tony Abbott: There is much to be said for an emissions trading scheme. It was, after all, the mechanism for emission reduction ultimately chosen by the Howard government.

Tony Abbott: What we need is environmental direct action. We need action which is actually going to make a difference. What we don’t need is a whopping great new tax masquerading as a green measure.

Tony Abbott: The Howard government proposed an emissions trading scheme because this seemed the best way to obtain the highest emission reduction at the lowest cost… On the other hand, artificially created markets could be especially open to manipulation… For this reason, many now think that a carbon charge scheme directed at the least environmentally efficient producers would be simpler and fairer than an emissions trading scheme.

Tony Abbott: We have a policy to reduce emissions, not just to make them more expensive.

Tony Abbott: In the absence of wind that never stops blowing, sun that never stops shining and tides that never stop turning; in the absence of hydrogen cars; and in the absence of nuclear power stations to supply most base-load electricity, big reductions in emissions are impossible without a big increase in people’s cost of living or a significant change in their lifestyles.

Tony Abbott: The important thing is what will it do to people’s cost of living and if it drives up your cost of living it is a tax. It’s effectively an increase in the rate of GST — that’s what it is.

Tony Abbott: If Australia is greatly to reduce its carbon emissions, the price of carbon intensive products should rise.

The Coalition has always been instinctively cautious about new or increased taxes. That’s one of the reasons why the former government opted for an emissions trading scheme over a straight-forward carbon tax. Still, a new tax would be the intelligent skeptic’s way to deal with minimising emissions because it would be much easier than a property right to reduce or to abolish should the justification for it change.

*Taken from Tony Abbott’s biography Battlelines and speeches, media transcripts and articles since mid-2009. Additional research by Crikey intern Nikki Bricknell.

i agree AP

trouble is no govt wants to take a GST rise to the public saying we that they have to ...

its better to lie and cheat and blame something that the public will feel GUILTY about (co2 lol) ... and then to SCARE the children into believing the adults are to blame

why not blame (ie tax) the south americans for chopping all the amazonian tree basin ... that massive area of trees that soaked up co2 like it was lolly water

so yes the planet SURFACE has warmed (about 0.8C of a degree since 1880 LOLOLOL)

NO we have not warmed the atmosphere ... the scientists KNOW what they are looking for and the greenhouse effect ... it is a HOT SPOT 10kmh high that would be 'shutting us in' like in a greenhouse ...

and despite all attempts with temperature balloons etc they CANNOT FIND any hot spot up there ... so they cannot prove CO2 is warming the global atmosphere (and the head honcho at the IPCC UN group admitted this after an email of his was 'leaked')

when they couldn't prove that ... they dropped the phrase GLOBAL WARMING instantly ... and started called it climate change (cause the wetsern world wants/needs to tax its hard working taxpaying citizens MORE and they need a reason)

a filthy tax equals a filthy money grubbing govt ...  give me strength

That's right Thebas :  No one mentions OZone layer  anymore....massive hole in it above Tasmania I think ....haven't researched it though last couple of years ...(incr/decr)

And Yes : Amazon as described " lungs of the earth"   keep chopping it down for wood now lads ...smart thinking.

Or , how about every country " sling them" every year not to allow it[;)]

But hey ...what do I know

miserable 400 turn up for today's protest on the Carbon Tax Issue in Melbourne.  Average Australians on the street don't care.