Gillard on the 7.30 Report
As we would expect, the climate change "committee" that Julia Gillard will set up in agreement with the Greens will be stacked with warmists, and there won't be a sceptic within 20 miles. From the ABC's 7.30 Report last night (thanks to Laurie W for the link):
KERRY O'BRIEN: OK. If we can look at your early priorities in this Gillard Government. Climate change has had a very chequered career within Labor's first term, and even during the campaign. When your climate change committee that you've agreed to with the Greens has been set up - which it will be done as - I think by late this month - what timeframe would you want to see for that committee? And are you committed to seeing legislation come into the Parliament within this term of office?
JULIA GILLARD: Well, in the spirit of including people, Kerry, it's not for me to dictate. But what I would like to see from that committee is that we can genuinely include, across the Parliament, people who believe climate change is real and who believe we will only reduce carbon pollution and meet our 2020 targets if we price carbon. And then with all of those people in the room, we'd work through to look for the points of agreement. (source)
Just read that sentence again: The committee will be formed from "people who believe climate change is real and who believe we will only reduce carbon pollution and meet our 2020 targets if we price carbon." So what on earth is the point of this committee other than to rubber stamp a decision already made?
You can already detect the stench of Green influence on this government, and it will only get more putrid...
Gillard's glamorous new look
Even the journalists are getting sick of it. I'm talking about the "WorkChoices Refrain". If this is what Joolya is reduced to, she must be running scared. The Age (amazingly) has all the gory details:
IF PROOF were needed that Julia Gillard is getting rattled about the possibility she could be in opposition tomorrow, her last media conference before polling day provided it.
It was, it turned out, one of the shortest media conferences of the five-week campaign.
The reason? The media turned nasty, accusing the PM of becoming so desperate she had deliberately ''verballed'' her opponent, Tony Abbott.
…
''Prime Minister, what does it say about your level of confidence in your positive plan for the future that you've just outlined that you've spent the day wandering around verbalising Tony Abbott?'' she was asked.
The PM returned to the safety of re-outlining her plan for the future and utterly avoiding the question, to protests from the media.
She was then asked whether she was embarking on a fear campaign because she was panicking about the polls.
It got worse. Before long, a reporter demanded to know whether the claim that WorkChoices would be back on Monday was ''an outright lie''.
It was getting harder to avoid answering such questions, but Ms Gillard did her valiant best, which simply drew the accusation that she was doing what she accused Tony Abbott of doing: not giving straight answers. (source)
She can't give straight answers because she has to defend the indefensible - Labor's disastrous record in government - so she lies and spins and shamelessly tries to scare voters with the non-existent bogeyman of the campaign, WorkChoices. And as we reported yesterday, she brings up the subject of a price on carbon at the 11th hour so that there can't be any proper debate.
You all know what to do today - vote out Labor.
Blown about like a fart in a hurricane
Does Labor want an ETS or not? Flip a coin - the answer you get will be about as reliable as asking Joolya, who also doesn't want to admit to wanting a carbon tax or ETS. Labor are in disarray on climate, on the one hand having to appease the Greens, but on the other not wanting to let Abbott scare everybody with the "great big new tax on everything" line.
Let's look back at what a certain Gillard, J said after the defeat of the ETS in the Senate back in late 2009:
''Today the climate change extremists and deniers in the Liberal Party have stopped this nation from taking decisive action on climate change,'' the Deputy Prime Minister said, deadpan, into a thicket of cameras and recorders.
Extremists and deniers. In case anyone had missed the point, she repeated the phrase five times. ''Now [we] have been stopped by the Liberal Party extremists and the climate change deniers. This nation has been stopped from taking a major step in the nation's interests by Liberal Party extremists and climate change deniers.''
So in her mind back then, clearly delay is denial. Then, having realised she had been outmanoeuvred by Tony Abbott after the defeat of the ETS, and the effectiveness of the Coalition's "great big new tax" line, she came up with this pointless "citizen's assembly" on climate, in other words an excuse for doing nothing whilst appearing to do something, which was hammered mercilessly from all sides.
But then came the shady, murky backroom deal for preferences with the Greens. When it didn't look like Labor would need them, it was happy to continue along the no-ETS path, but now, with the polls split 50-50 and Labor desperate for Green preferences to stay in power, guess what she does: she raises again the possibility of a price on carbon in the next parliament. So transparent.
And now the messages are all over the place, and Labor is in chaos on climate:
Less than 24 hours before voters head to the polls, there is confusion around whether Labor wants to legislate for a carbon price next term.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard is sending mixed messages around whether she would try to pass an ETS next term, or wait until two elections away, after 2013.
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott accused Labor of being "all over the place" on climate change.
Ms Gillard told a News Ltd newspaper she would not rule out legislating a carbon price next term.
But when pressed in other interviews, she declined to repeat the statement or clarify her timeline.
She told ABC Radio that Labor would consider the matter in late 2012 and would move to legislate at some stage if the conditions were right.
"Obviously that takes some time, as does the implementation date," Ms Gillard said.
An interviewer on ABC Radio's Triple J asked Ms Gillard if she would legislate next term; her response was "we will work to get a community consensus".
Mr Abbott said: "Labor's policy is all over the place ... they've got to make up their minds what they want".
He told reporters in Sydney that Labor was torn between subcontracting climate change to "some kind of nebulous citizens' assembly", and bringing in a carbon price which would force up electricity prices.
Coalition campaign spokesman Andrew Robb said Ms Gillard would use a Labor election victory as a mandate for a carbon tax. (source)
And I would have to agree with that. The Greens, if they hold the balance of power in the Senate, will blackmail Labor into legislating a price on carbon whether Joolya wants it or not.
Please, people of Australia, vote this incompetent bunch of no-hopers out of government tomorrow.
Carbon tax in action
There's a surprise - not. Finally climate crawls back onto the electoral agenda again, as Joolya reveals her desire for an ETS or carbon tax:
Prime Minister Julia Gillard has left open the door for a future carbon price or emissions trading scheme.
Emissions would be abated through policies Labor already had announced, for renewable energy, greener buildings and cars, Ms Gillard told the National Press Club on Thursday.
She said Australians frustrated that Labor had not achieved an emissions trading scheme in its first term should give the government another chance.
"People are making a decision whether they will have a prime minister who believes in climate change, who is committed to leading a national debate to get a carbon pollution reduction scheme and the market mechanism we need to price carbon, whilst delivering on the policies I've outlined," she said. (source)
So all this horseshit about a citizens assembly is a smokescreen, as we knew all along. Joolya and Labor want an ETS or a carbon tax, and with the Greens twisting their arms in the Senate, we will surely get one.
Summary: A vote for Labor is a vote for a carbon tax.
Quote of the Day
Drum roll please for Joolya Gillard's contribution to the climate change debate in her campaign launch yesterday:
Yes we will work together and tackle the challenge of climate change. (source)
Er, that's it. That's how highly Labor, the party that was so desperate to push through the ETS before the Copenhagen climate conference in December 2009, now regards the "greatest moral challenge since the dawn of time (or something)". And where is the Labor-loving media on this shameless backflip? Nowhere to be seen, of course.
UPDATE: Tom Switzer at ABC Unleashed skewers the hypocrisy here. And one of the comments is priceless - wailing that he thinks he's been "redirected to Liberal HQ", when of course he's accustomed to being "redirected straight to Labor HQ" thanks to the ABC's blatant pro-Labor bias.
Nightmare for Julia
From the "You Could Not Make It Up" department. Just weeks after savagely knifing Kevin Rudd in the back and stealing the prime ministership, Julia Gillard is now relying on Rudd to rescue her disintegrating campaign:
THERE are now three leaders in this election campaign.
The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard; the alternative prime minister, Tony Abbott; and the former prime minister-in-exile, Kevin Rudd.
In his intervention, Rudd presents himself as the saviour of Labor's fortunes - an event of far-reaching and unpredictable consequences.
There has never been an election like it. With each day it's more about Kevin.
Gillard, who assassinated Rudd as prime minister six weeks ago, has been reduced to asking him to salvage her prime ministership. It is a huge risk and reversal, but Gillard had no choice.
Rudd, the recently detested and vanquished former PM, now returns to centre stage as potential saviour. Indeed, it seems only Rudd might resurrect Labor in Queensland and that he is dictating terms to the party. Labor MPs do not know whether to laugh, cry or cheer.
Read it here.
See also: "It takes two to tango but one to lead" and The Australian's editorial on the subject.
What a terrier!
"When are the other two again, Julia?"
The leaders' debate last night was a bit disappointing. Neither side landed any serious blows, but what came across more than anything was the stark contrast between the hyper-rehearsed sound-bite friendly spin of Julia Gillard and the more authentic, but less assured, honesty of Tony Abbott. Gillard is so like Rudd in the way she can speak for five minutes and not say anything - it's quite uncanny. Her responses to questions on boat people showed she hasn't a clue what she's doing, and the climate issue didn't get as much traction for Abbott as it should. But he made the very important point that the Coalition at least has a policy whereas Labor are just putting off announcing anything in the hope that the electorate will just vote her in anyway.
Are the Australian people that stupid? Maybe, if the Channel 9 worm is anything to go by. The debate was very close, with most of the commentators giving it to Abbott, yet the worm showed a huge advantage to Gillard - WTF? Just goes to show how easily swung the average voter is by gloss and spin, a new hairdo and nail job.
But there are encouraging signs that things are turning Abbott's way. The latest NewsPoll shows a move to the Coalition:
THE election campaign has become a tight contest, with the Coalition back in front on primary votes.
Furthermore, Tony Abbott has narrowed the leadership gap on Julia Gillard.
The latest Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian, reveals voters have turned against Labor's proposal for a citizens assembly on climate change and that the women's vote advantage for Australia's first female Prime Minister has disappeared.
Labor's 10-point lead on a two-party-preferred basis at the start of the election campaign has been reduced to a knife-edge 52 per cent to 48 per cent over the weekend, while the Coalition's primary vote jumped four points to 42 per cent, compared with Labor's 40 per cent, down from 42 per cent.
And even more dramatic is Gillard's personal rating, plummeting like a stone:
Satisfaction with the new Prime Minister has also dropped dramatically, from 48 per cent to 41 per cent; dissatisfaction with the job she is doing leapt from 29 per cent to 37 per cent last weekend. (source)
Maybe the Australian people aren't so stupid after all. We can only hope.
Vote Labor and this is what you will get
100% out of touch with reality. 100% deluded. 100% on another planet. 100% dangerous for the future of Australia. That just about sums up the Greens, who, as we must keep reminding everyone, will have the balance of power in the Senate after their shady back-room deal with Labor (which Jooolia Gillard doesn't want to talk about for obvious reasons). To propose 100% renewables by 2030 is pure madness - let's just think for a moment what that actually means: no coal-fired power stations at all (and no nuclear, of course, no, no, no, we can't have that), no petrol or diesel driven vehicles at all, no natural gas at all, and all within the next 20 years! Not only that, but they plan to rely on fart power and sunbeams instead! Words cannot begin to describe the utter lunacy of this. But this is precisely what they want, and what they will demand when they hold the balance of power in the Senate. As the Sydney Morning Herald reports:
The Greens want to completely replace Australia's reliance on coal with renewable energy sources such as wind and solar.
Greens Senator Christine Milne said yesterday: “Australia can harness our tremendous resources of the sun, wind, ocean, Earth and human ingenuity to replace our reliance on coal with 100 per cent renewable energy within decades."
Senator Milne said this could be achieved by 2030 with the right preparation and infrastructure. (source)
And Miranda Devine, also in the Herald yesterday, spelt out exactly what life under the Greens would be like:
There's a lot more Brown and the Greens want if Labor wins: mandated zero net greenhouse gas emissions, the effective end of coal-fired power generation, phasing out of coal exports, a ban on new coalmines or power stations, removal of GM crops, and active discouragement of cars. They want a ban on the exploration, mining and export of uranium, and closure of the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, which produces medical isotopes used for cancer treatment. They want to restrict funding of private schools. They want to abolish mandatory detention of asylum seekers, and to expand the definition of refugee to include ''environmental'' or ''sexuality'' refugees. They want to legislate for same-sex marriage, tinker with age of consent laws, establish ''intersex'' as a legal gender, fund gender reassignment, require government to consult lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex people on policy, and provide easier access to abortion. On drugs, they are harm minimisation all the way, with more needle exchange programs and injecting rooms. And be prepared for a barrage of nanny-statism, starting with a ban on junk food advertising [which ACM commented on here].
The Greens' published policies are carefully couched in escape clauses, to avoid the scare campaigns of past elections, when their extreme social agenda cost them votes. But the effect will be the same. And of course, their big-ticket policy, the one with the most nation-changing consequences, is an ETS or carbon tax, with householders paying the price in soaring energy costs. (source)
I have written to Tony Abbott this morning encouraging him to expose the Greens for the extremist, far-Left, hysterical environmental advocacy group that they are, who are not fit to participate in politics full stop, let alone determining the future of Australia under a Labor government. I encourage all Australians to do the same.
UPDATE: To contact Tony Abbott, go to: http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/ContactTony.aspx, or email: tony.abbott@liberal.org.au (Liberals) or Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au (Parliamentary). Thanks to Sean for the suggestion.
A horse designed by a committee
When in doubt, set up a committee - or in this case, two committees. Julia Gillard and Labor don't have a clue how to address the climate change policy issue, especially with the Coalition stealing the thunder with their direct action plan [even though this blog believes that no policy on climate change is required at all; it's like having a policy on "the sun rising in the morning" - it will happen anyway, so why bother having a policy on it?] so they plan to set up a brace of committees, one of scientists and one of the general public:
The ABC understands Ms Gillard will outline plans to set up a committee of scientists to advise the Government on climate change.
The committee will be paired with a citizens' assembly, consisting of 100-200 volunteers who will gauge feeling of the community on its attitude towards putting a price on carbon, and feed it back to the Government.
And we can all imagine who will be on the scientists committee - usual suspect alarmists like David "Asteroid" Karoly and Will Steffen, maybe headed up by someone independent like Penny Wong, perhaps? Hang on a minute, I wonder if they'll ask Ian Plimer or Bob Carter? Yeah, right. If they did, this author would fall off his perch. And we can guess the "volunteers" will all be paid up Labor/Green warmists who have all been brainwashed by government propaganda and a compliant media to give the answers the government want to hear.
The Coalition have already, and rightly, rubbished the proposal:
Shadow Environment Spokesman Greg Hunt says Julia Gillard's proposed "citizens assembly" will fail to produce action.
He says the Opposition is promising a $2.5 billion fund to battle emissions.
"It's a recipe for endless Rudd-type talks," he said.
"Kevin Rudd himself would be proud of the 2020 summit meets Copenhagen."
I disagree that it will fail to produce action, it probably will produce action - an ETS or a carbon tax, both of which would trash Australia's already weakened economy for no benefit to the climate, locally or globally, whatsoever.
Read it here.