The Liberal Party in Australia’s parliament has a new leader.
Herald Sun Blogger and Columnist, Andrew bolt writes to me in an email:
Anthony,
This may be a first: a major political party has dumped a global warming believer as leader and replaced him with sceptic who last month called AGW “crap”. Tony Abbott has tempered his public pronouncements since, but has today become the new Liberal leader, toppling warmist Malcolm Turnbull, specifically because he was the only one of the three contenders today to promise to delay the Government’s emissions trading scheme.
Bolt adds some background:
Following up with excerpts from new Liberal leader Tony Abbott’s memoir Battlelines, released in July.
On page 171 he quotes, with approval, Bjorn Lomborg:
“Natural science has undeniably shown us that global warming is man-made and real. But just as undeniable is the economic science, which makes it clear that a narrow focus on reducing carbon emissions could leave future generations lumbered with major costs, without major cuts in temperatures.”
Abbott then adds:
“Without binding universal arrangements, any effort by Australia (on emissions trading) could turn out to be a futile gesture, damaging local industry but making no appreciable dent in global emissions…. Another big problem with any Australian emissions reduction scheme is that it would not make a material difference to atmospheric carbon concentrations unless the big international polluters had similar schemes. Australia accounts for about 1 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions. At recent rates of growth, China’s increase in emissions in about a year could match Australia’s entire carbon dioxide output. Without binding universal arrangements, any effort by Australia could turn out to be a futile gesture, damaging local industry but making no appreciable dent in global emissions.”
He also questions what climate alarmists truly want:
“It’s hard to take climate alarmists all that seriously, though, when they’re as ferociously against the one proven technology that could reduce electricity emissions to zero, nuclear power, as they are in favour of urgent reduction in emissions. For many, reducing emissions is a means to achieving a political objective they could not otherwise gain.”
======
Lest you think that Climategate had nothing to do with this political shift, please read what Bolt had to say about its impact in my previous post:
The Australian ETS vote: a political litmus test for cap and trade
Several MPs have indeed mentioned the emails in their party room speeches, and your correspondents miss the way MPs actually pick up things.
Andrew Bolt has one of the most read blogs and columns in Australia and is helping to educate both people and politicians alike on the true costs of climatic induced cap and trade, please visit his blog to show some support. – Anthony
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
“Without binding universal arrangements, any effort by Australia (on emissions trading) could turn out to be a futile gesture, damaging local industry but making no appreciable dent in global emissions.… Another big problem with any Australian emissions reduction scheme is that it would not make a material difference to atmospheric carbon concentrations unless the big international polluters had similar schemes. Australia accounts for about 1 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions. At recent rates of growth, China’s increase in emissions in about a year could match Australia’s entire carbon dioxide output. Without binding universal arrangements, any effort by Australia could turn out to be a futile gesture, damaging local industry but making no appreciable dent in global emissions.”
He also questions what climate alarmists truly want:
“It’s hard to take climate alarmists all that seriously, though, when they’re as ferociously against the one proven technology that could reduce electricity emissions to zero, nuclear power, as they are in favour of urgent reduction in emissions. For many, reducing emissions is a means to achieving a political objective they could not otherwise gain.”
Opinion is changing on John Key too. Unless he mends his ways fast he wont survive the next election.
This is very exciting news from Australia. However, I doubt that Climategate had much to do with it. It looks to me that the tensions and entrenched positions were already well in place within the Liberal Party, and the leadership crisis probably would have happened with or without Climategate, which has not been referred to in any of the reported discussions. Nor have any of the Aussie bloggers (including Andrew Bolt as far as I know) who know what’s going on made any claim that Climategate had any influence on these events. The timing is coincidental.
Exactly. Because it isn’t *really* about CO2.
And that with China, India, Brazil and South Africa walking out if the West tighten the thumbscrews.
Wow, just wow!!
I expect there could be similar shake-ups in at least one opposition party in Canada. So far the conflict is being kept under wraps. (hush hush, deny deny if anyone asks Qs – you know the drill…)
Go read Joanne Nova @ http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/the-global-gravy-train-takes-a-major-political-hit/#more-4852
I have been visiting Andrew Bolt’s blog for months. Its one of the very few havens of reality in a world of spin and I’ve come to rely on it for encouragement, much like this site.
I am absolutely delighted by Tony Abbott’s win. None of the pundits predicted it and the media will, naturally, do their best to tear him down because he actually stands for something. Just his opening comments upon winning were enough to put the heart back in the Liberal Party which, under Malcolm Turnbull, had descended into little more than a pale imitation of the Rudd government. I think Turnbull’s problem was that he was in the wrong party.
I have real hope that, if the ETS can be stopped now, it will never again raise its ugly head because of the ramifications of the CRU scandal, which has hardly rated a mention here, what with all the breathless commentary on the Liberal leadership woes. The last thing the media would have wanted was to report on anything which might actually support the position taken by the sceptics!
I have feeling that both Rudd and Turnbull, who could well have been twins in this endeavour, realise that the situation is now or never. Otherwise, why the insistence on passing it right now? Rudd might want to show off in Copenhagen, but Turnbull was offered continued leadership, with no challenge, if he would agree to simply postponing it until early next year and he refused. For someone with his raging ambition, there must have been a pretty good reason for that and the only one I can think of is that he knows its junk and that its likely to be exposed as such by then.
Climategate aside, what has shifted the views of many MPs in how they should handle the ETS, has been the enormous flood of emails and telephone calls telling them they were on the wrong track. A number of these people no doubt are aware of Climategate.
I noticed on Bloomberg that the chairman of Australian Climate Exchange Ltd. is most unhappy as he encounters a probable delay before the trading commissions start flowing.
Climategate had very little to do with this – so far the mentions of CRU emails have been sporadic and low key in the Aussie media. I mentioned a couple of citations in a previous post (7:30 Report with Penny Wong, for instance).
As I mentioned in another thread, I think Abbott will be a useful tool for the Liberal Party to temporarily “unite” behind to dump the Aussie ETS for now. Once things get serious (i.e. another election) I would expect another leader will be put forward, unless the next election is to be written off…
The next Aussie federal election will be next year, either towards the end of the year (the end of the natural 3-year term) or by double dissolution election at an earlier date, should Rudd wish to push the political advantage. In the latter case the election could be as early as April/May.
Aussie Prime Ministers only get 3-year terms, but they can run indefinately.
As a long-time Labor voter (and branch secretary of the greenest Labor Party branch in the 80s), I will be voting for the Liberal Party for the first time at the next election. Had Turnbull not been ousted, I would have voted informal. [Hiya Informal!]
This has nothing to do with ClimateGate. Carbon Trading was always a crock. Sadly, Labor Party solidarity insists that all party members must vote for whatever the PLP decides. So it goes…
Maybe KRudd’s “government”* will be the first to lose power after one term.
* According to the Australian Consittution, the Queen of Australia is the Australian Government.
WAY TO GO, AUSTRALIA!!! The Joanne Nova article referenced above is awesome.
Iren: “there must have been a pretty good reason for that and the only one I can think of is that [Turnbull] knows its junk and that its likely to be exposed as such by then”
Exactly my thoughts.
Congrats, Aussies. A small but significant step in the right direction.
Despite the changing of the guard in Australia, after two days of listening to the ETS BIll discussion in the Senate, as far as I can tell, not a single person has yet talked about Climategate/ leaked emails/ corrupt and treasonous data, and the now glaringly obvious fact that this BIll is built entirely upon corruption and lies.
The closest anyone got was mentioning the papers that show that summer grasses and regrowth forests outstrip dry established mature forests as carbon sinks. A valuable point in itself, but hardly as devastating as the blow that Climategate should be.
mainstream media here in Asutralia is also extremely quiet on Climategate, instead it is full steam ahead, head in the sand , running with any story about Copenhagen, Dudd and Obomber.
Of course this GW agenda (first surfaced in Australia in 1999) is not about climate change. it is about global power and total world manipulation through TAX and levies via the UN/ WHO climate body. It would be a NWO wet dream, and once established, almost impossible to eliminate.
It’s starting. British general election has to be held by next June, with both main parties still with their head in the sand about the dodgy science. Minority parties have been claiming some notable scalps recently though and Cameron won’t want a hung parliament (even if it’s what they deserve..)
While Climategate would not have been the primary driver behind the spill I am fairly certain that the barrage of emails sent in (i know i was one) about Climategate would certainly have had an effect – possibly like the proverbial straw that broke the camels back.
I noted this in tips but for others interested, i was listening to the senate talks over the past few days and today one of the senators actually covered climategate – spoke about the absurdity of pushing the legislation in the face of the scandal and that the science was on shaky ground. Also went on about how many politicians in the room had scientific backgrounds and that the validity of the tax needs to be made on science. Also went on about having an investigation into the science.
I cannot recall word for word – there may be a written transcript somewhere but i have been unable to find it – but the fact that it was raised in session means that they are aware of it – to what extent I am unsure.
The ETS is finally being discussed as a the massive tax imposition that it really is rather than the saviour of the Great Barrier Reef and the world’s climate
@ Richard (top) – Key might not survive the next election, but thanks to his lack of conviction and the MSM in NZ squashing the whole thing we’re already saddled with our Emissions Trading Scheme. At least the Aussies have the chance to back out of theirs, while we carry our “clean green” millstone to Copenhagen.
Just heard on our radio here in New Zealand that the Aussie ETS bill failed in their Senate. K Rudd won’t be going to Copenhagen with a victory under his belt afterall!
As for our John Key, I think he is playing a very cagey game. He is avoiding appearing at Copenhagen despite some recent pressure from those countries set to benefit the most from any payouts via Copenhagen, at the recent C.H.O.G.M. (Commonwealth Heads Of Government Meeting). Key has stated that he doesn’t believe monetary handouts are the way to respond to any future crisis, whatever that might be. His idea is to provide a suitable technical response to any given situation as they arise.
See, things are heating up. Except of course the seas around New Zealand which remain profoundly cooler as they have for most of the year.
I’m with Abbot.Bring it on Rudd.He may lose,but I doubt Rudd will pick up extra seats,he is the pm,that has done nothing for Australia,except send us into debt.
to the writer of this blog:
that post u have here has a lot of spin, almost as bad as the warmist side.
something you should note
Abbot won the leadership by ONE vote when the leadership spill occurred
ONE vote
Turnbull may have won if one of his loyalist MPs wasnt in medical care (and his desire to vote by proxy refused)
This is nowhere a landslide that thsi post seem to imply – there is no seachange due to climate gate. There was already liberal internal dissent PRIOR to climategate, and most emails to these mps would have been out of a desire to either delay the ETS to AFTER Copenhagen to avoid having AU the only country in the world to be taxed like this if Copenhagen failed, or out of a desire to avoid taxes.
Climategate’s impact would have been minimal, because if you WERE familiar with AUS politics you would have known that Malcolm Turnbull was already walking wounded after Utegate, where Kevin Rudd kick his ass because Malcolm Turnbull tried to pin corruption allegations on Kevin Rudd BASED ON UNSUBSTANTIATED EMAILS THAT LATER TURNED OUT TO BE MADE UP. After UteGate, do you think any liberal would put their faith on leaked emails ? I bet you most of the grass roots opposition was not due to climategate.
If you are going to imply that Climategate was a catalyst, please do a bit of research on the ground rather then just relying on 1 man’s opinion as the gospel truth (just like many here accuse the warmist side of doing).
and no, I am not a warmist, just smell spin and BS when I see it.
@ Pompous Git (23:58:32) :
You say:
“As a long-time Labor voter (and branch secretary of the greenest Labor Party branch in the 80s), I will be voting for the Liberal Party for the first time at the next election.”
Pomp, I was once a member of the ALP, in the very early 1990’s. For one year only, if I recall correctly. My resignation (well, to be precise, my failure to renew) was as a result of a particular person turning up every meeting in a pristine, unblemished boiler suit, and steel-capped workboots.
This person would address everyone as “Comrade!”, and talk about “My Union” and how all the lawyers should be lined up and shot etc etc etc.
I eventually asked someone what union he was talking about, and was told “Don’t worry about that wanker – he represents the Commonwealth Bank Officers’ Association!”.
We all live and learn. This is called maturity.
Barnaby Joyce was well aware of climategate on the 23rd November
http://barnabyjoyce.com.au/Newsroom/MediaReleases/tabid/74/Default.aspx
Unfortunately Bjorn Lomborg is not a scientist himself but an economist and although his economic assessment of C&T is undoubtedly correct, his statements about the science are not. He is, like most politicians, dependent on what he is being told. The correct statement about “climate change” should have been:
“Natural science has shown us that global warming is probably real, but primarily natural while the man-made contribution to it is in the grand scheme of things unimportant”.
Just watching Sky News Australia and our radio got it a bit wrong. The vote was a secret ballot in the Liberal Party room that endorsed opposition to the ETS. It will still be up to the individual Liberal Senators as to how they vote, but they now know that their party at least is fully against it.
Spot On Steve – there has been next to nothing on Climategate here in the MSM. Abbott’s election has zero to do with Climategate. Let us hope that the demise of the Aussie ETS and Abbott’s survival does.
But it does reflect a growing awareness of the need for an effective opposition that is not just a rubber stamp for a government scheme that sends the country into hoc unless this is thoroughly examined and the public fully understands its implications.
The US can learn something from this. Partly thanks to lone voice Andrew Bolt there was a mass Email protest to the Opposition’s elected members stating that some-one has to stand up for the Party’s principles no matter that their political careers were on the line. See here for one of these Senator’s outstanding replies to her constituents which was also her response in the Senate to the proposed bill (some of your Republican Senators would do well to read this thoroughly and take note):
http://www.judithadams.com.au/news/default.asp?action=article&ID=214
At the seventh hour the majority of the party listened and voted for Abbott albeit by a hair’s breadth. I am sure that WUWT could inspire something similar.
You will hear a lot more about Abbott, he is a fighter and he will need to be. It took 5 minutes for the MSM to begin their character assassination. But do not worry he can handle himself and has a refreshing candour that has been lacking in this country for some time.
Australian Opposition Leader is Tony Abbott.
Deputy Leader is Julie Bishop.
An Abbott and a Bishop…..
While it is true that the CRU emails did not play a major part in the change of leadership, they were mentioned by some key players, including the leading dissident, Senate Opposition Leader Nick Minchin, so they were known. While the leadership was decided by a single vote, the rejection of the Emissions Trading Scheme was rejected by a 54-29 margin in a secret ballot – quite a significant margin, which indicates why Turnbull was in trouble for trying to force it through the party meeting without a vote. I gave an interview on ABC Radio National’s Counterpoint yesterday afternoon (recorded last Friday), which can heard at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2009/2757619.htm
I doubt, however, whether its was heard by any MPs, let alone influencing them!
This vote was not all anti-ETS. Remember that in the first round of voting, only 35 of the 84 opposition parliamentarians voted for Abbott. The third candidate, Hockey, was not opposed to the ETS. The fact that the remaining votes shifted to Abbott in the second round was anti-Turnbull, not anti-ETS.
The opposition will need to vote nearly unanimously to block ETS in the Senate,
Fwiw, it’s 9:53 am Uk time and have had BBC 24 on for the last hour and a half.
Not one word about this, not one, unlike the exposure it got when the news broke (in the wee small hours)
Guess that having a sceptical politician leading a major political party is less newsworthy than Tiger Woods scratching!
Not Climategate but a very revealing column in The Weekend Australian November28-29 by Terry McCrann
Well worth a read
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/emissions-trading-scheme-attacks-australias-national-foundations/story-e6frg9if-1225804745331
I think climate realism and Barnaby Joyce, Steve Fielding, Andrew Bolt, Joanne Nova, Alan Jones etc had a huge amount to do with it as politicians said they had never seen such intense avalanche of public reaction to climate skepticism as their emails went into overload and phones rang off the hook. Blogs also went off online in the MSM. The grassroots of people getting off their backsides and demanding political representatives do the right thing and ignore the alarmist lies is what changed politics here and they had the likes of WUWT, Christopher Monkton, Climate Audit, CLimategate etc as backup proof. This has only just begun! Senators now know the public has an opinion, has the facts and must be listened to.
“Steve Schapel :This is very exciting news from Australia. However, I doubt that
Climategate had much to do with it.”
I disagree Steve, and Professor Kellow is being much too modest. ( Aynsley Kellow (01:31:49))
Senator Simon Birmingham said that he and his fellow senators had been inundated with phone calls and emails over the weekend from party members demanding opposition to the ETS. Activists like the Climate Sceptics Party were spreading the Climategate news together with a mailing list of warmenist senators. The link to Professor Kellows’ interview was widely disseminated. Although the MSM ignored it, I’m sure Climategate was significant in the whole episode, showing the political power of the internet in counteracting media bias.
The effects of the hacked CRU emails on the Australian Liberal Party leadership spill must bot be underestimated. The defeated leader, Malcolm Turnbull, put his leadership on the line months ago saying words to the effect that if his leadership meant anything then the Liberal Party would vote for the government’s Emission Trading Scheme (ETS). The new leader, Tony Abbott, however, fell out with Turnbull and expressed his objections to the ETS openly on the national TV. Here is an excerpt:
“TONY JONES: …Let me ask you this, do you agree with [Senator] Nick Minchin when he says “the whole climate change issue is a left wing conspiracy to deindustrialise the western world”.
TONY ABBOTT: Well, you’ve got to understand just how far reaching an emissions trading scheme will ultimately be. It was Ken Henry himself who said that this was the biggest piece of financial restructuring that we have ever seen. I mean, what the advocates, what the Government wants to do, over time, is basically change the whole way we generate power – the whole way we transport ourselves. I mean this is a massive sweeping change that will affect the very way people live. It’s not just like the GST. It’s much bigger than that.
TONY JONES: Is it a left-wing conspiracy? The climate change debate, the linking of climate change and global warming – is it a left wing conspiracy as Nick Minchin says to deindustrialise the western world?
TONY ABBOTT: I think certainly there are some people whose agenda is not just environmental who’ve leapt on this particular bandwagon, and I don’t like the theological tone that so often creeps into this debate.
I particularly dislike the way Kevin Rudd in Parliament was running around like Torquemada, looking for heresy, trying to create his own version of the Salem witch hunts against people that don’t share his particular view on this.
TONY JONES: Senator Minchin also says since the collapse of communism, the left has embraced environmentalism as their new religion. You seem to be hinting you think something similar – you’ve talked already about the evangelical fervour of scientists. You’ve warned this whole thing might be just a fad.
You’ve also poked fun at the idea of sea-level rises – you’ve suggested the world is cooling, not warming. You don’t sound that far away from the Minchin brand of scepticism.
TONY ABBOTT: Well Tony, I’m on the record on all of these things and I refuse to be terrified of the future. I think that humankind has been pretty good at coping with the challenges that we’ve been given.
If you look at Roman times, grapes grew up against Hadrian’s Wall – medieval times they grew crops in Greenland. In the 1700s they had ice fairs on the Thames. So the world has been significantly hotter, significantly colder than it is now. We’ve coped.
I don’t say there aren’t problems, haven’t been problems, might not be problems, but I refuse to be terrified of the court.
TONY JONES: Do you think it’s a conspiracy.
TONY ABBOTT: I’m not saying that. I’m just saying that I refuse to be terrified of the future.”
The transcript of the entire interview can be found here: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2748161.htm
It is worth mentioning that the interview took place on November 19, at approx 10:30 PM Sydney time. This puts it just before the CRU hack was made it to the news.
As the climategate scandal grew in the blogosphere (Aussie mainstream media has been deafeneningly quiet about the issue), the problems regarding the ETS legislation also grew within the Liberal Party with the leadership of Malcolm Turnbull began attracting questions. Late last week, Tony Abbott and the lead ETS opponents resigned from their positions in the opposition front bench, and this morning “the Mad Monk” Abbott won the leadership spill with the smallest of the margins, 42-41.
Tonight, the new Liberal Party was interviewed again on the 7.30 Report and most of the interview was about the ETS legislation. The transcript is not available yet, but I remember him quoting someone who said, “In politics, one vote is a landslide”. You can watch the interview on this page: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2759022.htm
or download it here:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/vodcast.htm
Tony Abbott is a true right-wing intellectual. He is very intelligent and can be quite funny too. Now that he is the leader of the opposition in Australia, the pressure is on him to moderate his normally very conservative political views. If he manages to move towards the centre, -something he won’t do on the particular issue of AGW and policy responses. Hell, he became the leader on this issue!-, then he will be a real threat to the Labor Party government.
Much that I like the guy on the basis of his intelligence and sense of humour, I have a particular grudge against him since he led the No campaign on the constitutional referandum on whether Australia should become a republic, in 1999. On the issue of AGW theory, I am fully in agreement with him. But as an Australian Greens voter for the last decade, and a Labor supporter prior to that, I simply cannot bring myself to vote for the Liberal Party. Should the AGW ever become an election issue next year, I will be voting “Informal” with a message scribbled on my vote paper. My loyalty to scientific method and ethics trumps my loyalty to the Left politics. I urge every left-wing Aussie AGW sceptic to vote ‘Informal” also. It is better than voting for the Liberals.
Tony Hansen (01:26:33) :
Australian Opposition Leader is Tony Abbott.
Deputy Leader is Julie Bishop.
An Abbott and a Bishop…..
could be the start of a new religion!!!!
aoosie (00:58:34)
I think your mathematics/arguments need some (adjustments ? ) when 3 people vote the result will be 2 to 1 pray tell me what is the difference, winning is about winning, to contest this is political, be it by 1 or 1million it is still winning.
“History will record December 1, 2009 as the day of the first major political damage to the momentum of the Global Warming Scam.
For the first time anywhere in a major western democracy, a mainstream party is ready to face an election on “climate change” and face the bullies. The Australian Liberal Party have elected a new leader, held a secret ballot and voted 55 : 29 to defer the Emissions Trading Legislation.
Abbott said: “he was not afraid to fight an election on climate change policy. And I am not frightened of an election on this issue.”
This will reverberate around the world in the lead up to Copenhagen.
The finale of one of the hottest weeks in Australian politics came down to a nail-biting 42:41 finish, but the earlier three-way split had Abbott a clear winner, and the secret ballot leaves no doubt the party doesn’t want to rush into this massive emissions trading legislation. The recent galaxy poll showed 80% of coalition voters don’t want it either.”
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/the-global-gravy-train-takes-a-major-political-hit/#more-4852
Please excuse my verbose comment above as it had also a number spelling and grammatical errors. I have a habit of not reading the whole message before clicking the submit button.
Briefly, what I was trying to say is that if it hadn’t been for climategate Tony “the Mad Monk” Abbott would never have landed on the Liberal Party leadership. Similarly, had the Climategate scandal broken out months earlier, then Malcolm Turnbull would never have put his leadership on the line on the ETS legislation.
But I guess I was clear enough calling for Aussie voters to vote “Informal” instead of voting for the Liberals. 🙂
I wish we could do the same in the UK, unfortunately on this, our darkest day, the day that the Lisbon Treaty finally becomes EU law, this day when an unelected federalist and committed climate alarmist is appointed as President of the whole EU, we are faced with the three main parliamentary parties in complete agreement that we should remain IN the EU to “tackle climate change” (why don’t they tackle sun-spots, or the direction of the earth’s orbit whilst they are at it?), They are all committed alarmists.
Note that tackling climate change involves the privatisation of social provision, as in the bureaucracy makes the rules and private corporations are employed (and subsidised by the tax-payer) to enforce those rules. This merger of corporation and state to control and provide for the people to a high degree of specificity, under a state bureaucracy that is run by unelected appointees has a name. This kind of control can also be described as fascism.
As our ancient sovereignty is treasonously erased further than ever today, we appear to be stuck with this thieving and lying bunch of charlatans in power, with the total and complete complicity of the mainstream media who push the warmist agenda with untiring zeal.
This same media still ridicules people who warn of a new world order, as tin-hat conspiracy theorists and kooks, even as the newly unelected President himself states that we NOW have global government established under G20, and that we are requiring more global management through what should be agreed at Copenhagen.
All I can say is come back David Icke! If you actually read Icke’s books, more and more of what he was predicting, in terms of global governance, is coming true all the time.
“Tony Hansen (01:26:33) :
Australian Opposition Leader is Tony Abbott.
Deputy Leader is Julie Bishop.
An Abbott and a Bishop…..”
Ha ha! I knew that Julie Bishop remained as the deputy leader of the opposition but didn’t catch what the duo meant until now.
A few years back, everyone thought Tony Abbott would be the deputy to the next Liberal leader whose name was Peter Costello.
Aussie cartoonists had already sharpened their pencils but the Abbott and Costello show never eventuated after Peter Costello quit politics 🙂
well done Tony Abbott
At last some sense in Australian politics.
The only thing that worries me is that Tony Abbot looks too much like Tony Blair!
As an LP member I have been calling various members and agitating for a more vigorous response to Climategate. All I can say is the people I spoke to didn’t have a bloody clue as to what I was on about. They couldn’t see the opportunity to drag KRudd & Wong into the glare of media questioning. pathetic.
Most of you would not know that Mal was the Member for Goldman Sachs.
Look him up in Google. No wonder he was on board the fraud.
regards
For me, Climategate was the straw that broke the camel’s back. For the last few months, if you tried to contact Turnbull to complain about the ETS, he would brush you off. Turnbull was utterly uninterested in listening to anyone with an opinion different to his own.
I contacted a couple of Senators, and whilst I didn’t mention Climategate, I probably wouldn’t have contacted them if not for the scandal. I think you could say that they know about it now.
Abbott is a breathe of fresh air and a bare knuckle fighter. I hope he kicks the cr*p out of the ETS.
Great news. Other politicians around the world will certainly take note.
New PM Abbott faces an uphill battle in educating the media on climate issues. Abbott at a press conference was bombarded by media questions about ‘denying climate change’. Aside from the overtones of holocaust denial, ‘climate change’ happens naturally all the time. Greenhousers have to demonstrate not only climate change, but human agency and severe consequences from it. The journalists obviously did not know that global temperature had not risen for a dozen years. They asked no questions on the expense of an ETS or its poor performance in the EU or the cautions of its creators about trying to use it in a complex global economy with an emission in carbon dioxide whose harmfulness is not settled, making it hard to set the cap. The journalists also failed to address the recent attempts by the UN to exploit the greenhouse issue to gain control of economies on a global basis. And of course the media generally failed to ask questions on Climategate. However, some media outlets like Melbourne-based journalist Andrew Bolt have kept us informed on these matters, and talkback radio often gives them better coverage than the regular media.
The problem with David Icke is that he said he was Christ on live TV – for a man who started life as a snooker commentator that’s one helluva promotion.
Meanwhile back at beeb it’s business as usual – “Sea levels are likely to rise by about 1.4m (4ft 6in) globally by 2100 as polar ice melts, according to a major review of climate change in Antarctica.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8387137.stm
“Conducted by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), it says that warming seas are accelerating melting in the west of the continent. Ozone loss has cooled the region, it says, shielding it from global warming.”
Do they do science in the same way as the CRU??
It’s not just the beeb, commercial TV is at it as well
http://news.itn.co.uk/f13eebb9e03ecda06d4241cb0fe1f78a.html
And Rupert Murdoch’s Sky is in the Himalayas
http://video.news.sky.com/skynews/video?videoSourceID=2121338&flashURL=feeds/skynews/latest/flash/ACT-BB-TU-P20281-GLACIER-011209.flv
Apart from a few articles hidden away in the depths of our news papers, climategate is yesterdays news as far as the UK’s MSM is concerned.
I very much afraid that this is anything but good news for the Australian people. Abbott may think the right way about CC but he’s a critically unlovable fellow. He’s not all that bright and has a horrible tendency to put his foot in his mouth. He’s very religious which doesn’t go over all that well in Aus and for some reason it seems a large percentage of our female population find him instantly loathsome. I’ve heard wives of senior liberal party members stating openly that they won’t vote for an Abbott lead liberal party.
Add to that his unfortunate persistent support for a failed industrial relations policy that lost the liberal party the last election and you end up with a perfect storm. The liberal party was doing badly in the poles all ready but this is going shatter them. I would bet my last cent that they will be massively defeated in the next election reducing the party to a near powerless rump and handing the senate balance of power to the greens on a plate. Take one guess what their climate change policy is like!
Trust me , this is not good news.
aoosie (00:58:34) :
“This is nowhere a landslide that thsi post seem to imply – there is no seachange due to climate gate.”
Let me remind you of Labor warrior ex-senator Pat Kenneally who said that one vote is a landslide.
* According to the Australian Consittution, the Queen of Australia is the Australian Government.
Pompous Git, don’t you mean the Queen of England?
And curtsey when you speak about her.
Joking apart, I sympathise. I used to be Labour here in the UK, but that’s all over now. Trouble is, ‘Conservative’ Dave is just as bad as Turnbull, so we’re still stuck.
In my opinion Climategate has certainly spurred on a new confidence that was not present beforehand, it may not be all over the MSM here, but if you listen to senate speeches and parliamentary jibes, the effect is clear. The Libs have been waiting for something like this, like we all have, to establish our well researched view.
This is a dawning of a new age.
sHx, thanks for your comments. I found them extremely interesting.
I, too, am very happy Abbot won. I was worried there for a bit that Hockey may get it. I agree with you (and Bolt) when you say that Climategate DID have something to do with his win.
I’ve been a Bolt reader/commentor for years.
Ken Hall, I really feel for you. Your wonderful country is being ruined from enemies both outside and in. What you need are more people like Daniel Hannan. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/danielhannan/
Andrew Bolt is doing a great job, but struggles to get his point across in our left wing media, last Sunday morning he managed to get 30 seconds in about climategate in the closing moments of “Insiders” which is an ABC political program . Some time back a friend and myself interviewed Andrew and wrote a column in a student newspaper in an attempt to spread the word in other areas. Its time for an update, we discussed a follow up article today. Keep it up Andrew.
Napoleon was once asked whether he preferred courageous generals or brilliant generals.
He replied neither — he preferred his generals to be lucky.
I’m Canadian vacationing in Australia and have followed the run-up to the leadership spill that saw Tony Abott do exactly what I wanted him to do and achieve exactly the milestone he achieved.
I believe so far as Climategate timing goes he was “lucky”… and he was lucky in this instance because his core beliefs matched the facts on the ground.
Nothing wrong with that.
Would love to see the New Zealand government flipping over to an anti-AGW stance, as they (the Nationals) are the natural allies of the Australian Liberals — i.e. they are both the alternative to Labor. However, the Nationals are not terribly bright. As an example, they are foisting a raise in rates to pay for our no-fault insurance scheme (ACC), when they could actually cut rates if they simply reverted to the pay-as-you-go ACC scheme in place before 1999. So I don’t expect a breakthrough from them on AGW either. Indeed, their “Ministry of the Environment” has just commenced tendering for ETS programme resources.
You have to be kidding if you don’t think this is about climategate. Liberal politicians have been absolutely bombarded with phone calls and emails from irate members of the public threatening to vote for the Climate Sceptics.
The Nationals are already considering running against the Liberals in some seats. Ian McFarlane is certain to be targeted by the Nationals. He is an easy target having sold his soul as chief Liberal negotiator on the ETS.
No no no no. It’s losing your religion.
Life is bigger.
It’s bigger then you
And you are not me
The lengths I will go to,
The distance in your eyes.
Oh no I’ve said too much.
I set it up.
The above link by King of Cool to the statement by Down Under Senator Judith Adams was indeed worth the trip.
I especially liked where the Senator astutely pointed out a revealing statement from outside of Oz, that encapsulates where many of the lemmings in the AGW crowd are coming from; i.e.:
”No matter if the science of global warming is all phoney … climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
IOW: Not equal opportunity: Equal OUTCOMES.
Above also reminded me of a recent great comment on this side of the Big Pond by George Will:
To a large degree environmentalism has become a program of minimizing and reducing everything EXCEPT government.
If the above definition of environmentalism succeeds, Jared Diamond may need to add another chapter to his book ”Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed”. . . .
“Australian opposition dumps its leader over carbon trading bill”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/01/carbon-trading-australia#start-of-comments
Two comments so far
“More evil Australian Liberal senators to join the evil Republican senators. Do they really have no brains and only be driven by greed?”
“How very Un-liberal of them. Remind me, who chose the party name?”
Abott has a double “t” for your caption… Just to be squeeky clean 😉
Now I am convinced the warming alarmism is falling apart. The next 7 days will tell for sure. If we get beyond Copenhagen without a signature of even two or three major developed countries I believe it will fail. Abbots position is in lock step with that of PM Harper here in Canada. This will encourage our PM to stick to his guns. A wise position.
I’m from Perth Western Australia. I think climategate was pivotal in getting a sceptic to lead the Liberal Party. Though there was not much news in the MSM, all sceptics read Bolt and Allan Jones a popular Sydney broadcaster was very good on climategate. I heard Jones on the internet probably from a link on Bolt’s site. My experience with argueing with warmist is they wont accept data from Bolt’s site “he’s not a scientist”.
The leak happened with perfect timing. It gave us sceptics confidence in our convictions. I have followed this evolving drama since early 2007, watched Steve McIntyre carefully and politely seek data and question dubious results. Then suddenly what was happening on the other side of the “debate” was exposed by the leaked emails. It wasn’t science. Rank manipulation and spin, almost fraud. I was so angry that the Senate would pass the ETS(Emmissions Trading Scheme) even though the scientific basis was a nonsense. So Angry.
I rang Nic Minchins office (Liberal leader in the Senate (a skeptic)) and whom I spoke to said he already knew about the leaks from the CRU and I offered encouragement to keep fighting the ETS. I made more calls as well to other politicians. Don’t think I have ever rang a politican before. After that day the Liberals had several days of confusion, when it was hard to keep uptodate with who was actually in charge of the party. The bulk of the main political hierarchy resigned from their leadership roles , leaving Turnbull (warmist leader) fairly isolated.
I was shocked by the turnaround, I thought the passing of the ETS (cap and trade legislation) was certain to happen. But I wasn’t the only person to phone and email. Liberal party members where cancelling their memberships and threatening to withdraw their support, unprecidented flood of public anger. Sure the Taxes involved and all the beaurocratic nonsense that would go with it offended Liberal (sort of Aussie Republicans) party members. But I think climategate gave the politicians in the Liberal Party a spine for the first time in ages.
It is so 1984 (George Orwell etc) to have our dear leader announce “that we must act now to stop climate change” the “the time to act is now” , “we must act now for our children and their children”. Our Prime Minister says stuff like this, do you laugh or do you cry. Especially when the action he is speaking of (Tony Abbott’s words) “is a big green tax on everthing”.
The opinion polls in Australia say that the majority want the government to act on AGW. If you believe in AGW it is easy, you go with the flow and take action. Climategate arrived in the nick of time.
My opinion, hope this helps Northern Hemisphere readers.
On mysterious invisible press coverage – I notice that the regional newspaper for the UAE [Eastern Daily Press] has no coverage of Climategate on its website that I can find – only a report about the poice investigating the theft of data.
As it’s the biggest regional paper in the UK, and the story is on it’s home patch that says a lot about vested interests. I found a forum thread that mentions it but that’s it.
This is something to be proud of Anthony. I changed my firm views on AGW by visiting this blog, then Mr. McIntyre’s. A huge shift in understanding is occurring thanks to your fine efforts. The whole world owes you a tremendous debt of gratitude whether they know it yet or not!
DogB
On one level I agree with you and you would know given your location. But we Canadians see this as a hopeful event because it means there will be one more country going to Cope with out legislation in place. This translates into less pressure on other developed nations. I think once Copenhagen is over, cooler heads will prevail, even in Australia. Time is of the essence here and climategate has yet to take hold among the populace. Once it does I think the lefties will be equally hobbled and less politically powerful. The power will return to the people where it belongs. I trust the Ausies will hold what ever leader accountable in this respect, in time.
If I were an Australian resident I would email/write/call Mr Abbot’s office and remind him that his support came from people who reject the transfer of wealth and loss of sovereignty that AGW proponents and the UN want.
Abbot will get plenty of criticism from the losing side. We can’t rest on our laurels in this situation. Mr A needs to hear from his supporters that his skeptical position is right — and that he needs to stand by it without wavering.
Don’t underestimate the effect of ClimateGate in Australia. It was transformative. No it hasn’t been in our media much, but it was talked about in Parliament.
Openly and behind the scenes in contacts with four or five elected representatives, I and other skeptics have been personally sending material, updating them, answering questions on the phone, and providing cartoons like the one on this page
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/11/the-cliff-of-political-oblivion-laws-based-on-fraud/ which are directly aimed at supporting the skeptical or borderline members, and perhaps taking the confidence out of those who are fans of AGW. I know that cartoon, and many other posts and ones of Andrew Bolts were emailled by readers to every member of parliament. I understand elected members themselves email things like that around between them – especially when it suits their purposes.
There were 600 copies of skeptics handbooks there too, including the new version of which talks about bullying, fraud, & missing data.
ClimateGate gave the skeptics the edge, the confidence to pull off a transformation that I’m almost certain wouldn’t have happened. (Crikey – it was so close!)
Importantly ClimateGate transformed any illusions people had that this was just about a “waste of money”. The issue is now fraud and criminal collusion. That’s a much darker force that ignites an anger in people I haven’t seen before. Senators here reported that people were furious. “Incendiary”. No one wants to be taken advantage of.
Politicians don’t have to see it in the big name media to understand that when this story does get out (and it is) the public will not just dislike an ETS, they will detest it and resent the people who foisted it on them.
We Australians owe a big debt to that hacker or leaker. (Thank you!)
Thank goodness for the internet. Without it, we would have been sold to Goldman sachs and JP Morgan, and we would have had no idea.
Environmentalist Geoffrey Lean reports:
Climate e-mails topple Australian opposition leader The Telegraph
“Geoffrey Lean is Britain’s longest-serving environmental correspondent, having pioneered reporting on the subject over 40 years ago.”
It’s actually funny from my point of view. I was delighted. Turnbull was ousted, and this guy was in.
But, hang on, it’s just the opposition! Why should it matter?
I figure it’s because Rudd is a twat, after consideration. (He’s not a twat after consideration – he’s always been a twat, just my consideration led me to the comclusion that he is a twat. (Do I get some record for the number of times ‘twat’ is used in a paragraph, yet?)).
There is no ‘real’ government, so we only have an opposition to believe in, I guess.
Smokey (07:00:53) :
If I were an Australian resident I would email/write/call Mr Abbot’s office and remind him that his support came from people who reject the transfer of wealth and loss of sovereignty that AGW proponents and the UN want.
Abbot will get plenty of criticism from the losing side. We can’t rest on our laurels in this situation. Mr A needs to hear from his supporters that his skeptical position is right — and that he needs to stand by it without wavering.
Dead on. I’m in – looking for paper, envelope pen etc now (well, in the morning at any rate).
Let’s explain to him why he is in, and make sure he sticks to his guns.
The great enthusiasm Australian voters have for ETS (~”cap and tax”) is shown by the Nov 28th
AAP Poll
Cited by JoNova
The Courier Mail projects: ETS doomed as new leader Tony Abbott starts a fight
“You have to be kidding if you don’t think this is about climategate.”
Having been in Australia and observed the coverage here, I don’t think it was about Climategate as such. Rather, I think it’s about general AGW skepticism among much of the public and profound confusion over Kevin Rudd’s ETS in an outright majority of the public.
JoNova reports: The Global Gravy Train Takes A Major Political Hit
Oops – think I may have posted the wrong link – here’s the right one – it’s headlined “Warming more than expected”.
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://derstandard.at/1259280934139/Wichtige-Klimadaten-im-Muell-entsorgt&ei=RDIVS9apEo6j4QafwuXSBg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA4Q7gEwAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dderstandard.at%2Bclimategate%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ACAW_enGB352GB352
🙂
The BBC have just posted an article about the review process and whether average citizens should be involved [diversionary nonsense piece IMHO but they are at least inching towards mentioning Climategate]
Tell them what you think here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8388485.stm
He also questions what climate alarmists truly want:
“It’s hard to take climate alarmists all that seriously, though, when they’re as ferociously against the one proven technology that could reduce electricity emissions to zero, nuclear power, as they are in favour of urgent reduction in emissions. For many, reducing emissions is a means to achieving a political objective they could not otherwise gain.”
From my study, the green koolaid drinkers want hydroelectric dams removed. For some neurotic reason Joe Romm and others think there is novelty and opportunity in harnessing tides and currents. Then the sierra club will fight that also. Of course they wan’t hydroelectric removed so it is no longer an option for irrigation or power.
DOGb Tony Abbott is dumb and ugly right? (You read the Sydney Morning Herald and you believe them?)
The man is a Rhodes Scholar with an MA from Oxford.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/biography.asp?id=EZ5
What’s counts against Abbott is that a lot of the media here are left or lefter. He won’t get any extra gloss.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8387653.stm
Not front page, but at least the BBC is covering it.
Re: Paul Vaughan (23:41:59) :
I expect there could be similar shake-ups in at least one opposition party in Canada. So far the conflict is being kept under wraps. (hush hush, deny deny if anyone asks Qs – you know the drill…)
You can’t be serious. The Conservatives are in power with a minority government. I hope they only reason they are giving the appearances of caring about AGW is because they have been dragged kicking and screaming toward the center by the Liberals (center left) and NDP (left). There is no way in hell that the Liberals, who campaigned under their “Green Shift”, or the NDP would back down on AGW. Neither would the Greens. Thankfully they hold no seats. The Bloc Québécois are remain, but they are also far left only thing they are concerned with is pissing off the rest of the country. So which opposition party would be shaken up by climategate?
I am disappointed that Harper and the Conservatives have not availed themselves of the climategate opportunity to call for a moratorium on climate related legislations. However, Harper is not stupid. It could be he is giving the appearances of going along, but he will back down if the USA backs down, which will hopefully be the result if Senator Inhofe gets his way.
Robert of Canada (03:38:25) :
Great news. Other politicians around the world will certainly take note.
I agree. If you’re up for election anywhere and you’re running on the AGW plank, ….be afraid, be very afraid.
Nice, shall we start keeping track of how many impeachments/coup detats/etc happen as a result of climategate?
@ DogB (04:21:42) :
“I very much afraid that this is anything but good news for the Australian people. Abbott may think the right way about CC but he’s a critically unlovable fellow. He’s not all that bright”
He has a Masters Degree and was a Rhodes Scholar. He’s very bright indeed!
@ Steve Fox (04:41:07) : “Pompous Git, don’t you mean the Queen of England?
And curtsey when you speak about her.”
The Queen of England and the Queen of Australia are titles held by Elizabeth Windsor. Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth I were Queens of England, but neither were ever Queen of Australia.
[Tugs vibrating forelock and bows ominously in the direction of Enland’s green, unpleasant land]
@ Aynsley Kellow (01:31:49) :
“I gave an interview on ABC Radio National’s Counterpoint yesterday afternoon (recorded last Friday), which can heard at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2009/2757619.htm
I doubt, however, whether its was heard by any MPs, let alone influencing them!”
Aynsley, that was a damn fine interview. A downloaded MP3 went to several shakers/movers in Labor Party politics.
Global Warming Revolt Down Under, “Finally, the Liberal Party finds its voice on climate change.” WSJ, DECEMBER 1, 2009, 1:06 P.M. ET
How about Jennifer Marohasy for Senate?
To take Penny Wong’s seat?
She’s got the edge on environmental matters. And she actually knows a thing or two about the Murray Darling.
You don’t want to gamble the bread basket of Australia on an amatuer.
Professor Kellow, thank you very much for that link. This is the first time I have heard you speak. I like your calm and measured style which will be listened to by the people who automatically turn off commentators like Glen Beck and Alan Jones.
More please – on prime time TV.
The Hon Tony Abbott MP, Leader of the Opposition, Press Conference
sHx (02:44:42) :
“But I guess I was clear enough calling for Aussie voters to vote “Informal” instead of voting for the Liberals. :)”
I think you just broke the law, mate, by inciting people to vote informal.
bananbender (05:27:30) :
“You have to be kidding if you don’t think this is about climategate. Liberal politicians have been absolutely bombarded with phone calls and emails from irate members of the public threatening to vote for the Climate Sceptics.
The Nationals are already considering running against the Liberals in some seats. Ian McFarlane is certain to be targeted by the Nationals. He is an easy target having sold his soul as chief Liberal negotiator on the ETS.”
MacFarlane is my local member. I’ve been sending him emails and phoning his office. I’m torn between joining the Liberal Party and working to have the useless waste of space disendorsed for the next election or helping the nationals if they run a candidate here. I think they’d win. This is a very conservative electorate.
Joanne Nova (08:02:16) :
DOGb Tony Abbott is dumb and ugly right? (You read the Sydney Morning Herald and you believe them?)
The man is a Rhodes Scholar with an MA from Oxford.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/biography.asp?id=EZ5
What’s counts against Abbott is that a lot of the media here are left or lefter. He won’t get any extra gloss.
My son (a marathon runner) emailed me to say that Tony Abbott is a runner and a cyclist, he is also extremely fit and is a former boxer. Couple all of that with high intelligence, a measured speaking tone and a remarkable ability to handle interviews shows he has a unique leadership style.
It is going to be an interesting 2010, with an opposition party at last ! providing some opposition. The concentration will be on the tax impost, as that is the political weak spot, the climate fluff is more politically debatable and therefore confusing and may play a secondary role in the campaign.
Focus on taxation pain and the rest will follow.
First of all, Andrew Bolt had been doing an excellent job for months over the issue of AGW and the ETS that KRUDD was trying to foist upon us. He really did a great job in keeping us informed. The past week, since Climategate broke has been quite a giddy experience. Prior to the breaking of this scandal, we thought we were going to be stuck with an unwanted tax, and as soon as word reached politicians such as Sophie Mirabella, Nick Minchin, Tony Abbott etc. suddenly the gloves were off, and we knew we had a fighting chance to stop the madness.
Second, whoever says that Tony Abbott is dumb has absolutely no idea about the man. His credentials, as a Rhode Scholar are equal to the credentials of Bob Hawke who was also a Rhodes Scholar. They are also superior credentials to the Bozo in the White House. Abbott is a seasoned politician. It is true that he has made mistakes in the past, but he has at least learned how to be a leader.
With regard to the debate over Australia becoming a Republic, that was answered by Referendum when it was defeated – at least for the time being. The point I want to make here is that most of us are content with the Constitutional Monarchy that defines Australia. We have already broken a number of the ties such that our legal system has indeed had an overhaul. For the time being the Constitutional Monarchy is a protection. However, the attitude of many Australians might change in the future if Prince Charles becomes king.
It is necessary to ask why it is that the LSM and the ALP wanted Malcolm Turnbull to remain as leader of the Opposition, and why it was imperative to remove Peter Costello from the Parliament. The answer here seems to be that Turnbull is ALP lite, and the same goes for Joe Hockey. When I learned that there would be a leadership spill this week I was worried that Joe Hockey might become leader, which would have been more of the same, and to me Hockey seemed spineless. The only person that seemed equipped to do the job getting the Liberals-Nationals to be a real Opposition is Tony Abbott.
Someone claimed that Howard’s industrial relations policy has been a failure – um wrong there too. It is the present industrial relations changes that are the true failure. Under the Howard scheme most workers got a real boost. The Gillard scheme is useless.
Maybe Australia will get a chance to lead the world… an election based around the ETS issue would be refreshing… let’s expose the science and the economics to the light of day:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/abbotts-climate-poll-dare/story-e6frg6n6-1225805940182
Interesting times ahead.
Spenc BC
I hope so man but I doubt it. Our PM has directly used this issue as a wedge to attack a critically divided opposition and it has worked.
If you’re imagining in the likelihood of a conservative victory in Australia, this site will set you straight. He’s one of our best political analysts.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/
Joanne Nova and Pompous Git
I don’t think I described him as ugly. His problem with women appears to personality rather than physical. One of his first acts as leader was to call his deputy a ‘loyal girl’. I’m fairly sure she’s earned the title ‘woman’ or even ‘colleague’ wouldn’t you say? That’s Abbott all over I’m afraid.
As far as his smarts. I doubt he has a low IQ but his political intelligence is somewhat lacking. He’s a fairly straight shooter and says what he thinks, often without imagining the consequences. Unfortunately that doesn’t make you a good politician.
The wiki site is a fairly good summary of the man.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Abbott
Oh and BTW. Anybody that thinks the conservatives can win the next election. I’ve got this bridge to sell you.
Aynsley Kellow (01:31:49) :
While it is true that the CRU emails did not play a major part in the change of leadership, they were mentioned by some key players, including the leading dissident, Senate Opposition Leader Nick Minchin, so they were known. While the leadership was decided by a single vote, the rejection of the Emissions Trading Scheme was rejected by a 54-29 margin in a secret ballot – quite a significant margin, which indicates why Turnbull was in trouble for trying to force it through the party meeting without a vote. I gave an interview on ABC Radio National’s Counterpoint yesterday afternoon (recorded last Friday), which can heard at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2009/2757619.htm
I doubt, however, whether its was heard by any MPs, let alone influencing them!
Professor Kellow, I heard your interview and excellent it was, I posted the link to ‘Tips and Notes’ as soon as possible after the interview.
If the Pollies do not listen, then (I know) that their minders and well paid staffers do. They do it to gauge public opinion more than for information as they are paranoid about their popularity. You were heard but how much did they absorb ?.
I look forward to more media Aynsley Kellow interviews.
A paper by Tony Abbot on climate change:
“A REALIST’S APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE”
http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/Pages/Article.aspx?ID=3762
“We can’t conclusively say whether man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to climate change.”
Mike Borgelt (12:54:22) :
“I think you just broke the law, mate, by inciting people to vote informal.”
Mike, ha ha! Yes, the Albert Langer case. How could I forget?
Not exactly ‘incite’ though, but a cheeky invite. A momentary lapse of judgement 😉 I am not holding my breath for the police to come smashing my door at any moment. Should they decide to make a martyr out of me, however, by dragging me before a magistrate, what would be my excuse? Well, it would be exactly the same excuse that a former government leader in the Senate, Gareth Evans, QC, offered to the Senate, when it emerged that, contrary to the Constitution, the Labor government ordered a RAAF recon over Tasmania during the Franklin Dam River controversy: “It sounded like a good idea at the time, your worship” 🙂
Nevertheless, in the interests of good, law-abiding citizenship, I shall henceforth restrict myself to saying how I shall be voting, without putting devious ideas into my fellow Australians’ mind: Informal, with a message scribbled over the vote paper. This is perfectly legit. Although Albert Langer case is a somewhat significant matter in Public Law, I wouldn’t want to raise its triviality any further in our criminal laws with my martyrdom, even if the alleged unlawful activity took place on a server outside the jurisdiction and under a moniker.
Back to Tony Abbott. Whoever said he is not bright should get a brain scan. You don’t need to read Abbott’s credentials to figure out the guy is a very intelligent, very skilful politician. He proved his qualities to me ten years ago as the chief architect of the succesful No campaign din the republic referandum ten years ago. Until now, he could afford to play a role as one of the leaders the conservative faction in his party. As to whether Tony Abbott is a superb politician depends on whether he can shed his conservetive credentials and embrace the more moderate factions in the Liberal Party. This is what party leadership demands. A party leader must embrace all of the party, not just the faction that brought him to the leadership. Less than 24 hours is gone, and Abbott has already signalled his intentions to do just that by offering Joe Hockey, one of his rivals, the shadow treasury portfolio and by modifying his rhetoric on the Emmissions Trading Scheme, the issue that brought him the leadership.
I have always considered Peter Costello, Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and Joe Hockey as too soft, too moderate for the Liberal Party. The LP, especially in coalition with the National Party, is too conservative to have a moderate as its leader. The LP needed an intelligent, skilled conservative who could take many punches as a leader, someone who could rise above the narrof interests of his own faction, and move to the center of his party. The only people other than John Howard who could do that were Peter Reith and Tony Abbott. With Reith long out of politics, it was only a matter of time for Tony Abbott to step in. In my view, if it weren’t for the embarrassing saga of his supposedly illegitimate child, Tony Abbott would have been a serious contender for the leadership, ahead of Peter Costello. I always suspected that John Howard was grooming him as the next leader for the LP.
Labor Party will be wrong to underestimate him. Tony Abbott won’t win the next election, but he will make a serious dent to Labor’s lead. He is the leader the right-wing spectrum of the Australian politics are craving for. And now that such an AGW sceptic is the leader of the opposition, there will be fiercer public debates in Australia on the merits of the AGW science. Such an opposition will be good for the Australian politics in general, and the climate science and policy-making in particular.
Anyway, who am I to advise my political rivals? I am a Leftie and, should the AGW become a major election issue next year, I shall be voting ‘Informal’ with a message scribbled on my paper. That’s what I’ll do. By law, I am not allowed to tell others to follow my example.
The ETS bill has just been defeated in the Senate this morning. Only two back-bench opposition members crossed the floor. Its all over for now. Rudd will not go to Copenhagen with his prize. If the government does want to push this through now it will be by calling an election on the basis of this defeat.
Interview (before the vote this am) with Penny Wong minister for climate change:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/breakfast/stories/2009/2759211.htm
Oh happy days! *SMILE* Now I can go to bed (I was on night shift) and not think about this for a while. I will be looking up who crossed the floor however. They’ve lost my vote if they were NSW Senators. To sleep, perchance to dream of a public enquiry into AGW and the merits of the theory… Bigger *SMILE* 😀
sHx (16:36:15) : ,
I have been a scrutineer at the ACT booths and an informal voting is a waste of time. Your vote is simply put aside and does not play any further part in the electoral process. Nobody will know you voted informal or care except you !. Cast a formal vote and let the proportional system (in the Senate at least) work your vote through to achieve the end that you want, and don’t, don’t, waste a vote.
If public opinion can be changed as quickly as it has in the last 2 weeks, then Tony Abbott has a chance of winning the next election.
It would have been interesting if after the pics of Turnbull and Abbot you had asked the reader to pick which of them looks like someone you might trust and which like a fanatic before they read on.
I live in Australia.
Turnbull is a good man.
sHx (16:36:15) :
Mike Borgelt (12:54:22) :
“I think you just broke the law, mate, by inciting people to vote informal.”
Mike, ha ha! Yes, the Albert Langer case. How could I forget?
No, I don’t think you’re breaking a law. The Langer story is here. He wasn’t jailed for breaking a law, but a court injunction (contempt of court). He was advocating some numerical voting scheme (which I never saw the point of), and the court ordered him not to. There was a law passed, which might have this effect, but has since been rescinded.
Politicians aren’t “people”?
Well, I’ve always had my suspicions….
Once can cast an informal vote which is still valid, by writing on your ballot paper but still numbering the boxes properly. Back when I could vote at State and Federal elections I often wrote on my ballot papers giving my reasons for voting as I did and, sometimes, applying choice epithets. Scrutineers have reported to me that they would ensure that such ballot papers (when supporting their own candidates, at least), whilst not formal, were counted, rightly, as valid. Polling staff, too, like the occasional laugh from reading strongly worded opinions.
Inciting people to cast invalid votes was certainly against the law when I kept up with such things; it is not a crime to explain to voters that they can ensure that the parties, through their scrutineers, understand wherefore they voted as they did with explicit explanations.
Brian (00:13:50) :
I did, however, hear Sen. Barnaby Joyce explicitly mention the leaked e-mails in several questions to Sen. Wong in question time last week. Each time, as is usually the case with Government ministers, instead of answering the question, she just launched into her usual rant—reneging on a deal, settled science, think of our children, deniers and sceptics are stupid and wicked and devious, settled science, act now or seas will rise, deserts will expand, we’ll all choke to death, the science is settled …
I joined the climate sceptics some weeks back in rage at whats been happening, and I have been calling and writing and sending masses of info to a few of them,
I never ever use bumper stickers but my sceptics one is proudly displayed.:-)
andrew Bolts done a great job too.
so has Barnaby Joyce.
I will be voting Liberal for the first time ever, unless we manage a sceptics candidate here.
heres fieldings speech link
http://www.stevefielding.com.au/news/details/carbon_pollution_reduction_scheme_speech1/
and senator Chris back also sent me a pdf of his speech and he DOES mention the climategate issues.
I am a rural resident and believe me, the mood amongst the farmers and community re carbon fraud is not happy.Jan!
Murdoch owns so many media sources no one should be surprised that the info is supressed.
ABC got a few stinging mails from me regarding their amazing BIAS and the reminder that it is against their rules to disallow balance in reporting.
they still are waffling the climate stories though.Kinimonths interview was ignored in film clip, and only after complaints did they add the audio track. bastards.
they also avoid Plimer, cos he wipes the floor with them.!
Robin williams has made himself a fool and is no longer credible at all.
On Fora radio this arvo I heard Mc Gauran? a glorified accountant? talking of the carbon trades etc, I almost passed out.. this mans a complete stuffed shirt and so out of touch he may live on another plantet! I wish!
It all ASSUMES Carbon( Fraud) as a real thing.
hope he is out of a job soon too. idiot.
Re: Daryl M (09:28:44)
The issue does not split along party lines. I ASSURE you people are being silenced. At some point in time, it can become too costly to sustain the illusion of unity. The truth is that Canada is at risk as long as there is only one nonalarmist party. I am certain that you are correct that Harper is thinking strategically about this. The problem is that many of his followers do not think as well as he does.
Mr. Abbott is (unfortunately) NOT an AGW skeptic. He just opposes the cap-and-trade proposal as a massive and destructive tax. Well, half-right is at least a start.
Thank someone for that. It could be the political move that saved the globe from nuclear power proliferation under the pretence of being “green” and anti-carbon.
“Nuclear News: Copenhagen’s failure may leave plans for new nuclear power stations high and dry”
http://weblog.greenpeace.org/nuclear-reaction/2009/12/nuclear_news_copenhagens_failu.html#more
Alternative headline:
“Nuclear news: Copenhagen’s success paves the way for clean nuclear power for all developing nations. Green groups stunned.”