They are calling it “Carbon Sunday”.
This is a collection of links and excerpts regarding PM Julia Gillard’s speech announcing the tax. In a nutshell, from what I can see, the majority of Australians are pissed, and she’s toast, partly because she lied about it before taking office, partly due to the fact it is being implemented as a deficit from the get-go. Oh and then there’s the fact that it won’t make a bit of difference to the temperature, and will be nullified by China.
Apparently, the way it is structured, it looks “Almost bordering on a bribe” (-Andrew Bolt, see his interview with Lindzen below) .
You can download the new climate policy here (PDF).
=============================================================
Carbon tax backlash in national plebiscite hosted by News Ltd websites | Courier Mail
ANGRY Australians have vowed to vote Prime Minister Julia Gillard from office at the next election after the controversial carbon tax announcement.
Scores of voters rejected the plan soon after details of the $24.5 billion package to tackle climate change were revealed, with more than 80 per cent who voted in a national online poll saying Australia shouldn’t have a carbon tax.
…
“They’re calling it ‘Carbon Sunday’ but I like to refer to today as ‘Suicide Sunday’ for a PM and three independents,” one reader wrote.
…
Just eight per cent of voters said they were confident it wouldn’t affect their hip pocket.
An anti-carbon tax group said its website crashed after being overwhelmed with people trying to sign up to a campaign rejecting the tax.
The organisers of the site, no-carbon-tax.org, said the site crashed because of the “sheer numbers of people signing up.”
In the Queensland polls hosted by couriermail.com.au, about 7000 readers voted on four questions, with about 90 per cent believing we should not have a carbon tax, over 60 per cent saying climate change was a myth, and 75 per cent saying they were now more likely to vote for the Coalition.
===============================
My editorial on the carbon tax fraud. I then interview Professor Richard Lindzen, who says Gillard’s tax wouldn’t work, even if man really was warming the globe. Which he doubts.
Carbon Sunday
Andrew Bolt – Sunday, July 10, 11 (11:36 am)
Vent here while venting is still legal.
The Climate Change Committee deal here.
UPDATE
Some initial, quick thoughts:
– $4.3 billion over four years is going to be spent above what the tax raises to buy off the public with tax cuts and handouts. That’s one wild way to sell a tax, spending more than it raises.
– the compensation must soon run out if the Government doesn’t want to broke. The deal says that after three years, companies can buy offsets overseas for up to half their emissions. This means that costs here will rise, but the revenue to compensate for these rises is sent overseas.
– The Government claims this package will reduce emissions by 160 millions tonnes by 2020. But the immediate tax and spending levels cannot do that. This target can be achieved only with a dramatic raising of the tax. No figure is given for how much of our emissions will be cut by the tax as it.
– The Government refuses to nominate employment effects on the specific industries involved.
– No figure is given for what effect this will have on the world’s temperature.
– Julia Gillard cites in her support Margaret Thatcher, who indeed did warn in 1988 that we should worry about global warming. What Gillard fails to add was that by 2002, Thatcher had developed second thoughts about the alarmists, writing that global warming “provides a marvelous excuse for worldwide, supra-national socialism”.
– The Government is spending $2.7 billion extra over the next financial year alone – before the tax even gets imposed – to buy support throught tax cuts and handouts.
– It’s a magic tax:
Cost increases: <a title=”Households to see average cost increases of $9.90 a week. However, they will also receive assistance of $10.10 a week on average.Households to see average cost increases of $9.90 a week. However, they will also receive assistance of $10.10 a week on average.
– Gillard announces also she’ll buy out a 2000 Megawatt power station over the next decade at a price not revealed. That’s billions to actually reduce our power supplies, not increase them.
===========================================================
Australian Climate Madness Blog:
Just to put all this nonsense in perspective, the policy is due to reduce Australia’s emissions by 160 million tonnes of CO2 by 2020. Sounds impressive right? Well, China’s emissions rose in just one year by 750 million tonnes, nearly five times Australia’s planned reduction by 2020 – in just one year. Climate Madness.
=============================================================
Gillard’s tax on “carbon pollution”: the facts « JoNova: Science, carbon, climate and tax
Forestalling all of the 0.24 C° global warming predicted by 2020 would demand almost $60,000 from every man, woman and child on the planet.
==============================================================
Many Australians to be better off under tax deal: Gillard | The Australian
According to a recent Newspoll, just 30 per cent of people support the tax.
“The presumption in the Newspoll that the majority of Australians don’t want action on climate change will change,” Senator Brown told reporters in Brisbane yesterday.
Ms Gillard warned the government would not be cowed by opposition to the tax and accused the Coalition of “lies and distortion” and “attacks on our economists and scientists.
“After all that, I simply say to our opponents: is that the best you can do,” she said.
“Because if you think that’s enough to knock us off course, you’ve got another think coming.”
==============================================================
Climate change: Gillard or Abbott | thetelegraph.com.au
[Piers Akerman] The carbon dioxide tax has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with raising an extra $11 billion in revenue.
The tax is not a reform, it is economic suicide.
==============================================================
READ the full text of Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s address to the nation following the carbon tax plan:
I WANT to talk to you tonight about why the Government is putting a price on carbon and what this means for you.
The decisions I announced today mean:
AROUND five hundred big polluters will pay for every tonne of carbon pollution they put into our atmosphere.
BY 2020 this will cut carbon pollution by 160 million tonnes a year.
AND because some businesses will put prices up, there will be tax cuts, increased pensions and increased family payments.
We have had a long debate about climate change in this country.
Most Australians now agree our climate is changing, this is caused by carbon pollution, this has harmful effects on our environment and on the economy – and the Government should act.
Economists and experts agree that the best way is to make polluters pay by putting a price on carbon.
The first Australian Government to announce a plan for a carbon price was John Howard’s back in 2007.
A lot has happened since then; the debate has been difficult and divisive.
And no government – no political party or leader – can claim to have got everything right during this time.
But we have now had the debate, 2011 is the year we decide that as a nation we want a clean energy future.
Now is the time to move from words to deeds.
That’s why I announced today how Australia’s carbon price will work.
From 1 July next year, big polluters will pay $23 for every tonne of carbon they put into our atmosphere.
They now know how much they will pay unless they cut their pollution.
And they can start planning to cut pollution now.
By 2020 our carbon price will take 160 million tonnes of pollution out of the atmosphere every year.
That’s the equivalent of taking forty five million cars off the road.
Some of the cost paid by big polluters will be passed through to the prices of the goods you buy.
The price impact will be modest but I know family budgets are always tight.
So I have decided most of the money raised from the carbon price will be used to fund tax cuts, pension increases and higher family payments.
These will be permanent, matching the carbon price over time.
Not everyone will be financially better off – there is no money tree. The budget has to add up. But I want people who need help most to get the help they need.
That’s why 9 in 10 households will get a combination of tax cuts and payment increases.
For almost six million households this will fully meet your average extra costs.
And of these, four million Australian households – including every older Australian who relies solely on the pension – will get a “buffer” for your budget, with the extra payments being 20 per cent higher than your average extra costs.
When you have some time, you should have a look at the cleanenergyfuture.gov.au website.
It’ll help you find out what you’re entitled to.
And it will link you to ideas for how to cut power bills and cut pollution without cutting back on life’s essentials.
I also understand that there is nothing more important to families than having a job.
So I have decided we will take special measures to support jobs and keep Australia competitive internationally. And some of the money paid by polluters will also fund billions of dollars of investments in clean technologies like solar, wind and geothermal.
All up, the carbon price will support $100 billion worth of investment in renewables in the next forty years.
Putting a price on carbon is a big change for our country.
I know we can do it together.
Our economy is the envy of the world.
We have world-leading renewable technology, a coal industry determined to cut pollution among the world’s richest reserves of natural gas.
And we are a confident, creative people.
I see a great clean energy future for our great country.
I know we can get there together.
================================================================
Now look at the polling from the Herald Sun:
You can weigh in here
Finally, keep your eye on the prize.
h/t to Tom Nelson for collecting many of these
===============================================================
UPDATE: Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. points out the absurdity of a basic claim.
Australia has released its much awaited carbon tax proposal (here in PDF). I am just now browsing through it. This analogy in the document strikes me as particularly unfortunate:
The Government has committed to reduce carbon pollution by 5 per cent from 2000 levels by 2020 irrespective of what other countries do, and by up to 15 or 25 per cent depending on the scale of global action.
Meeting the 5 per cent target will require abatement of at least 159 Mt CO2-e, or 23 per cent, in 2020 (Figure 2.4).1 This is equivalent to taking over 45 million cars off the road by 2020.
Why do I say an unfortunate analogy?
Well, Australia has only about 12 million cars (and 16 million total vehicles), so using a reduction of 45 million cars “off the road” to illustrate the unilateral emissions reduction goal simply illustrates the impossibility of the task.
===============================================================
This new policy was of such national importance that Gillard had to pre-empt regular TV programming on Sunday to announce it….and they couldn’t even get the basic math right.
what you gonna do in 2 years time when everything in Australia is going just fine? Hard to argue carbon tax will destroy the economy if Australia is living it and doing fine.
“…Who knows, it might even be a positive outcome. Economies regularly adapt to new markets and its not as if Australians were any more enlightened as a consumer populace before. They have always been driven by corporate advertising and personal gain, like Americans. ” – SamG
Given the choice between leaving well enough alons, Disasterous consequences, or SamG’s conjecture that there might even be a positive outcome a rational person would probably select the first option.
I don’t see any viable “new markets” in the offing based on this legislation. Please elaborate. I just see an artificial attempt at manipulation of an existing market through govt. intervention, which usually results in at best mixed results. I’m also curious if the rubes are motivated by “corporate advertising and personal gain” what is your motivation since your lifestyle is likely indistinguishable from that of the rubes.
The new tax comes with a new entitlement.
The tax will be repealed, the entitlement wont.
Only Canada’s British Columbia is as stupid an government….
Fresh from The Telegraph (UK)!
The UK is sending in the down payment for their contribution:
And the Julliard is making certain Australia donates her fair share as well, per the “wishes” of the UN, despite what the nigh-illiterate anti-science Outback yokels incorrectly think they want.
Oh well, at least the UK is giving special mention to nuclear. Carry on chaps!
I am just as annoyed with the AGW hysteria as the rest of you. We should understand that all this is coming from governments. It is just another tax to them. After taxing the income you make and taxing everything you buy, want else can they do?
If the government can get the people to welcome the tax because it is saving the planet, even better. The problem is how to make the average citizen read, understand and think and how to elect honest members of government.
Wow!
Such a lot has already been said about the absolute stupidity of Julia’s Carbon Tax that I can’t comment any further on it, other than to say that I have never seen a politician commit such an act of public suicide.
What I can comment on, however, is the crassness of Buff Huhne, our Minister for Energy here in the UK, and his amazing idea of putting up energy prices to save us (the poor bloody infantry, tax-paying workers) more of our own money!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/8627719/Power-bills-to-soar-by-30-in-green-reforms.html
My wife and I, both retired and on fixed incomes, simply cannot afford what this fool is advocating with regard to our energy prices. Already, I rely on fire-wood which I have taken from nearby woodland for my heat (and tonight, 10th July 2011 it’s cold enough for us to have a small fire burning). I’m talking about the money needed to have lights on during the dark Winter nights. A 30% increase in the cost of keeping a couple of rooms illuminated is beyond my financial ability with this sort of price rise.
Thank goodness that both my wife and I grew up in rural Africa and that we are well-aware of the lower standards of living to which we are going to forced to adapt here, in what was once the world’s technological and industrial leader.
Socialism has got a great deal to answer for.
I find it very difficult to understand the thinking behind this, their religious belief in AGW must be incredibly strong. Did they really think the electorate was going to welcome this with open arms? Surely not so they must have some kind of death wish, a desire to lose power. I cannot understand it at all – they must really think the people are fools.
onion2 says:
July 10, 2011 at 12:07 pm
what you gonna do in 2 years time when everything in Australia is going just fine? Hard to argue carbon tax will destroy the economy if Australia is living it and doing fine.
Just keep telling yourself that, onion2. Judging by your ‘logic’, it seems to be about all you can do about the imminent loss of your sub-species’ parasitic habitat – unless perhaps your parents will still be able to afford to house you in their basement regardless?
Did he use the word ‘merely’ – or are you constructing a strawman argument?
The statement by Bolt: “Carbon Dioxide is not only what we breathe out, it’s also plant food.” was preceded by several politicians calling CO2 “Carbon Pollution” so I think you have to grant him the literary license for the contrast with those pols … but yet you find NO problem with the pols using the term “carbon pollution?”
Are you perchance a silicon-based ‘life form’? Or simply bent on busting Bolt for benignly contrasting bellicose pols over blatantly mistaken terms?
.
Once the tax is in place any successful party in the next elections will be unable to ‘undo’ the damage. Reliance on the income will have become ‘the norm’ – no politician would ever voluntarily give up a tax-take. Blaming it on the previous government is far easier.
Is it A$23 per ton of carbon dioxide (page 3 of the report) or $A 23 per ton of carbon (page 6 onwards) ? There is a big difference between the two something like 3.7 times. The modeling of the price impacts seems to be based on $23/ton of carbon which showed minimal impacts.
observa says:
July 10, 2011 at 8:50 am
observa, the Australian Labor Party has form on kiddie fiddling. A number of their politicians are doing time for just that.
ANH – they must really think the people are fools.
BINGO!
‘Some of the cost paid by big polluters will be passed through to the prices of the goods you buy.’
Huh? Some? Is she a complete retard? Any increase in costs will be passed on and then, if they are in a sector where there is competition from outside Australia, they will go bust reducing income from taxes, including the carbon tax, while increasing government expenditure due to increased unemployment. No wonder politicians never work in business as they haven’t a clue on economics. Still, the UK is just as stupid as we embark on a programme of building windmills….and one of power stations to provide the same amount of energy capacity as the windmills…..
Has anybody noticed how much PM Julia Gillard looks like a slightly younger Nancy Pelosi of the US House of Representatives.
They both spout lies and also make totally clueless statements, often not connected with reality. They both have agendas which have nothing to do with saving anything, just growing government and revenue while crippling their economies.
ANH says:
July 10, 2011 at 2:04 pm
“I cannot understand it at all – they must really think the people are fools.”
Of course we’re fools, we in the western world. We’re the most heavily armed people in the world (where even .50 calibre sniper canons are quiet alright as long as you have the correct license for it), yet for decades anyone has yet to make any sort of armed rebellion. This is what democracy bought europe, remember, peace, stability and prosperity, that was the goal, and apparently that is very bad now, since the communists couldn’t keep up, so they think we all need to redistribute the “riches” because they couldn’t get a job way back when . . . still, the rest of us, just go about being all decent about it, so yes we’re probably fools (since they wouldn’t treat us the same.)
kramer says: July 10, 2011 at 9:11 am
“Doesn’t anybody see what I see here? What I see is that this (AGW) is more about equalizing the economies of the world (lowering developed economies while raising developing countries economies), redistributing wealth within and among nations, control of the world’s natural resources by the UN (or some other supranational agency) and hence by proxy control of the economies of all nations than it is about reducing global warming.”
You are totally correct, except for the fact that they do not want undeveloped countries to develop. By shipping the wealth from developed countries, they can bleed their economies and bring down their standard of living, and by delivering wealth to undeveloped countries, they will be funding dictators and corrupt governments who will then never have to worry about their country’s development and can afford to keep them oppressed and under control—they will be made into nanny states, forever under UN control or the allowance gets cut off.
bring on global warming in australia 160 cm of snow in 3 days best snow fall in 20 years log onto snow cam see for yourself
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. describes the government’s “45 million cars off the road” example as unfortunate. When you consider that the government’s carbon dioxide tax will not even apply to petrol (gasoline) used by private motorists I’d say the example is downright absurd.
1DandyTroll said:
. . . yet for decades anyone has yet to make any sort of armed rebellion.
That is for self defense . . . the castle principle? . . .
“Armed rebellion” only results in the suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus . . . you must pay attention . . . The wheels of justice (right judgment) turn slowly . . . . and sometimes not at all!
Oh say can you see . . . . Dred Scott v Sanderson . . . . took many generations to change that injustice . . . back then “property rights” was code for? . . . . .
“Redress” is in the First Amendment for good cause and reason!
Gilliard has simply made a Faustian bargain with the Greens in order to stay in power. She is calculating that her political opposition in weak and divided and that her payment scheme will buy off enough voters so that she has a shot of winning the next election. These are the calculations of one cunning and cynical, but also the calculations of a mediocrity. Should popular opposition to the tax remain strong, as I suspect it will, she will also be revealed to be a fool.
The big problem is that the biggest Australian political parties are revolting.
The Lib/Nat coalition is full of traitors who want to reduce the Australian workers to serfs of the rich, to sell the country to the Chinese, to suck up to Israel, and to send Diggers to die in America’s Israel-inspired wars.
The ALP is full of traitors who want to reduce the Australian workers to serfs of the Greens, to sell the country to the Chinese, to suck up to Israel, and to send Diggers to die in America’s Israel-inspired wars.
The balance of power is held by the Greens, who have pretty good ideas about almost everything except the environment. On that they are religious fanatics.
We’re doomed.
The only way to stop this is to shake up the Federal ALP members – if they realise that this will kill their careers stone dead come 2012 elections and consign them to political obscurity for the rest of their lives, then they might start to question the proposals. All it takes is one or two to cross the floor against the ALP at vote time and the bill is toast.
Start your writing campaign to your local Federal ALP MP now.
Wil says:
July 10, 2011 at 11:02 am
Personally speaking, I’d like to congratulate PM Gillard and her carbon tax on industry and other carbon users. One less competitor on the global stage to worry about. We (Canada) need all the breaks we can get trading on the open market. No doubt starting this summer Australian temperatures will drop allowing us to sell winter clothes to this market as we are experts in this field, no more flooding ever again, cyclones will disappear and never again ravage Australia, the hinterlands, previously hot and dry, will turn green and droughts will be a thing of the distant past. All in all a win/win for Australia – and on top of that – feed the little people. What’s not to love?
Problem is ours,I agree Wil. l I would expect our world trade competitors to take advantage and it is already underway. The Gillard and greens have allowed large tracts of farming land to be sold off to Chinese government backed coal mining interests in the Northern parts of Australia and China is also quietly buying up other farming land in the Southern Parts of Australia for securing their future food supplies from what will be Chinese land located in Australia. All of our “clean” coal is being exported to China and other destinations to burn in coal fired power plants(under multi year forward contract) and with that Chinese wealth generated with what was our coal, they will eventually sell/lease (rent) technology back to Australia while our main cheap brown coal burning Hazelwood power station is dismantled under the Mantra of the Hansen Greens who are hell bent on crippling both our industrial potential and economic vitality. While China will build and use huge coal burning power stations and develop “Clean” (with other peoples money) coal power generation, The greens have declared (Adam Bandt) “there will be NO further coal power generating plants built in Australia”!! Such is the “left power” they wield over our economy, and while we export tons of uranium to other countries for power generation, both Labour and the Greens abhor any suggestion of nuclear power generation. The only hope we have is squandering liquid petroleum gas to short term fuel power generation (electricity) supplies instead of using that gas for transport use to take over from diesel fuel across the vast and remote areas of continental Australia.
Also as a warning to others, look closely at the way this carbon dioxide tax is being introduced and be aware that the devil is in the detail, Like Obamacare that your legislators were not allowed to read closely, much is proposed to be done in the future by regulation, in the legislation that will be rammed through parliament with the slim Greens/Labor/independents majority. Once the bill is passed in Parliament the regulations will be used to extend the nasty side of the wealth and power redistribution and gerrymandering of the voter districts. Repeated calls that its being done because of science and saving the world – “We Have to do it” lies and misrepresentation is the name of the leftist game.