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.”
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?
@ur momisugly 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!
@ur momisugly 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]
@ur momisugly 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.