Wall St was down 94 overnight, its biggest fall in a month, while the local market is down 66.
Coalition’s a muddle, but that doesn’t make Wong right
|
The reality of the Coalition’s muddle on climate change is starting to set in as MPs returned to Canberra after the long break. The idea was that Malcolm Turnbull could switch attention 1. away from Godwin Grech and 2. to something positive on climate change, by releasing a report showing a better alternative to the CPRS. Turnbull denied he had “constrained” Frontier Economics in their modelling, which is probably correct, bearing in mind Nick Xenophon was involved in commissioning it as well. But as Frontier principal Danny Price said yesterday, they only had six weeks and there were a large number of scenarios they could have modelled, and settled on one based on 10%. Clearly a “cleaner, greener, cheaper” option was the one selected by an Opposition leader keen to present modelling that didn’t just show the flaws of the Government’s proposal. But just to show that when you’re out of form all the breaks go against you, the modelling has only served to highlight that the Coalition as yet has no policy on what sort of ETS it wants to see. This morning Opposition MPs were trying to cobble together a line from the nine principles enunciated by Malcolm Turnbull a couple of weeks ago, the need for consultation by the Government, and the Frontier Economics Report. “We’re not the Government,” Tony Abbott pointed out when challenged about the lack of a policy. “You can’t run the country from Opposition.” Abbott stuck to his talking points, suggesting the sort of self-discipline that has been absent from his performance for most of the last 18 months. It’s marvellous what the prospect of leadership can do. “Malcolm Turnbull has always taken on difficult tasks,” said Greg Hunt, who is emerging as Turnbull’s most enthusiastic spruiker. One of those difficult tasks, Wilson Tuckey, held court at the Reps doors this morning for an extended period. Ian Macfarlane wandered past and glanced over. “Surprise surprise,” he said, and kept going. Tuckey savaged Turnbull for releasing the Frontier Economics material without consulting the party room and repeated his claim that Turnbull was arrogant and inexperienced. “Shadow Cabinet decided on a position to delay considering the ETS, and they couldn’t even stick to it,” Tuckey mocked. Tuckey gets a lot of airtime because the media loves a loudmouth, but his views are not widely supported in the partyroom, partly because of the public manner in which he insists on putting them. But on the other side of the building, Barnaby Joyce was declaring that neither the CPRS nor the Frontier Economics model was going make any difference to the climate, an unexpectedly sensible analysis. The most dogmatic politician of the lot, however, spoke at the National Press Club yesterday. It’s hardly unusual for Opposition politicians to use National Press Club addresses to attack governments. What is much rarer is for a Government minister to spend most of her address attacking the Opposition, and directing many of her key lines direct to camera. “The Liberal Party can do this the easy way, or the hard way,” Wong said. She seemed on the verge of threatening to send some boofy blokes round to sort the Liberals out. Wong’s address was poorly attended, particularly by the Press Gallery. Admittedly many of the latter were in the Opposition partyroom talking about the Frontier Modelling until midday. But Wong’s unwillingness, or perhaps inability, to ever engage on issues beyond the strict parameters of her highly-political talking points, or to address the substance of questions, means she not merely makes for poor copy but shows the Government’s deep inflexibility and obsession with messaging. The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, Lindsay Tanner and, very occasionally, Wayne Swan, have a capacity to stay on-message while conveying the sense, whether false or not, that a rational human being capable of debate lurks within. Stephen Conroy, naturally argumentative, actually appears to enjoy answering tricky questions. But Wong’s relentless insistence that the real question is always Mr Turnbull’s leadership is doing the government no favours in its so-far successful campaign to use climate change as a political weapon. |
|
|
22 Comments
“…But Wong’s unwillingness, or perhaps inability, to ever engage on issues beyond the strict parameters of her highly-political talking points, or to address the substance of questions, means she not merely makes for poor copy…”
Unlike Bernard Keane of course.
“…its so-far successful campaign to use climate change as a political weapon…”
I’m sorry can you direct me to evidence of this “successful campaign”.
All I see is capitulation, conciliation and endless 12th-hour rewrites.
Looks more like Flubber than policy.
Enlighten.
Bernard according to the leader in todays edition, the Morgan poll reveals 55% of Australians are happy with the Govts stance. Perhaps in view of that and the Govts own polling of which they do extensively, perhaps Minister Wong knows what her audience wants and is delivering accordingly. I sense a sour taste in your mouth re Ms Wong. Perhaps it is not her your critical remarks should be directed but the party machine. I suspect the Minister sticks to singing the Party songbook, it has proved to be a popular melody so far.Even if the Opposition and the drongo Feilding are tone deaf.
“Barnaby Joyce was declaring that neither the CPRS nor the Frontier Economics model was going make any difference to the climate, an unexpectedly sensible analysis.”
I think he got lucky there. Isn’t Joyce a AGW denialist? Surely he would believe that nothing would make a difference in that case?
Both the government’s CPRS and the Frontier modelling assume vast amounts of carbon offsets will be bought from overseas but if George Monbiot’s article
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/07/14/pulling-yourself-off-the-ground-by-your-whiskers/
is even half right, then this approach is completely pointless.
If I were the leader of the Opposition with absolutely nothing to lose I would call the Government’s bluff and use the next 3 months pre dounble dissolution to prove my case . Singularity of purpose is always seductive! At worst I could then demonstrate that I/the Opposition stood for something which is considered judgment rather than steamrolling and committee stacking. Except I don’t think the Govt would actually bite.
A few decades ago, it was simple- the problem was air pollution, it was caused by big industry, but they were not going to do anything about it.
Then it was the hole in the ozone layer (where did THAT go, by the way?) which was sort of caused by big industry, but it was because they were supplying us with car air-conditioners and fridges, so we were partly to blame.
More recently it seems to be completely my fault, according to the note that comes on my electricity bill which tells me how much carbon dioxide I have put into the air from leaving the TV on standby and letting my poor old rheumatic dog sleep on an electric heating pad.
And my punishment is to have some of my money given to big industry.
The only argument now seems to be how this will be done. It appears to have something to do with accountancy, but at the risk of being labelled a codswallop denialist, I still don’t understand how EITHER lot are planning to do it, or what the outcome is supposed to be.
The fact that Senator Penny Wong continually buckets Malcolm Turnbull worries me not at all. If anyone on this planet deserves to be bucketed then Malcolm the Mad is your man, and the more she does it the happier I will be.
Senator Wong is one of less than lively members of the Labor Party, I’m not sure what she has achieved at all- if anything. Her comments, speeches, off-the-cuff spats at other people, all suffer from a complete lack of chiaroscuro. It’s as if her school acting classes taught her that a monotonous tone of voice would pass for a moderate sounding comment.
So there she is imitating a deep mysterious pool, one covered with Autumn leaves, while every now and then there emerges a quite angry frog. A frog which yarps with a toneless croak.
No it doesn’t make wong right.
It makes a magic pudding!
“We’re not the Government,” Tony Abbott pointed out when challenged about the lack of a policy. “You can’t run the country from Opposition.”
This is a breakthrough statement and needs to be sent to his colleagues in the Senate so that they can learn it by rote.
The bigger question is why did our PM force all his key ministers to see the same PR doctor. It would be nice to hear an MP from the Labour government not talk to us like we are idiots “(monotone voice)all…right…people….working families this……rudd government…climate change that…”
and what is it with the women of the Labour party, why are they all trying to look like men. Wong=Rudd, Gillard=Red Simons, Roxen=Gordon Talis…please women could you clean up a bit???
but really who cares, Labours high level of social engineering will be their downfall…if i hear one more minister float legislation that tells me how to live my life im going to scream. Australians dont want your centre left government, we just want to be left alone. Piss of back to China Rudd where people tell you how to live your life.
Oh and while were at it, all your China connections Mr PM have done sweet FA in getting our citizens out of hot water. Im all for letting drug dealers die in a thai prison for smuggling heroin up their bums, but this is an individual who was dealing with Chinese interests that have historically required you to be corrupt. Rio knows that money moves interest in China, why doesnt Rudd. China is inherently corrupt, of course Mr Hu is guilty of corruption. But thats how you have had to previously do business in China. China have randomly cracked the wip and Kevin and his team seem surprised. hmm WHY DONT YOU KNOW HOW CHINA WORKS KEV…YOU SEEM TO LOVE YOU…THEY DONT LOVE YOU LONG TIME KEV.
wont
P.S global warming is bull shit so i wont even dignify this usless debate, instead i will talk about nothing, like Sinfield. Global warming is a show about nothing.
I am with you Jean!
It seems like we the people have been designated as responsible for evrything by both sides of the Laboral Party and therefore must pay more - whether bailing out banks, energy companies or some other political party benefactor.
Just look at that Green Power scandal where people trying to do the right thing by paying a premium for “green” energy had their saved carbon quota sold off to industry for cheap.
Vote Independent!
I’m surprised some Konspiracist hasn’t postulated that climate change is a plot by BigBiz to get us to beg for “the only emission free (sic! or SICK!) power generation”.
After all, the RWDBs reckon it’s a commie plot to destroy capitalism (“not that there;s anything wrong with that”) so bring on the tin-foil hats for all comers.
I seem to recall this was quite an issue at the 2007 election. Indeed one could almost call it an election promise. That the coalition now believes the best approach to global warming is to continually obfuscate and endeavor to delay doing anything is the reason they will lament in opposition for many years.
We can all get our head around the concept that Australia by itself will not fix a global problem. I think we can also get our head around the fact that every country can also make that claim, and if we wait until all countries are ready to act together, nothing will happen.
What we are looking for is leadership and this is what the coalition is not willing or able to provide. That others are willing to lead on this issue also seems to bother them.
I recognise that the CPRS scheme put up by the govt is far from what is needed for Australia to make a significant reduction in emissions. But it is a start and I believe has been put up in order to get business and the population used to the concept with little pain. The targets and caps can be tweeked in coming years as other countries start to introduce their own schemes.
I think more people recognise this than is given credit for and the polling reflects this attitude.
So back to my original point, this was an election issue and has never been far from the front pages since the election. So why is the opposition claiming the govt is trying to rush this through.
To quote Roy & HG their argument is nude of logic.
JWSYMONS, thanks for the link. The more I read about the mechanics and mathematics behind proposed carbon markets, the more it seems that this is economic/foreign policy disguised as environmental policy.
In relation to the comment by Penny Wong “The Liberal Party can do this the easy way, or the hard way,” I agree with Bernard that it sounds like she was on the verge of threatening to send some boofy blokes round to sort the Liberals out.
I think that attitude towards Malcolm Turnbull is uncalled for, as he genuinely wants to address climate change in a serious way. Malcolm’s constructive approach to climate change is in distinct contrast to the attitude of the Labor Party on the issue of the GST which was a responsible policy they should have supported when they were in opposition.
I agree Wong is a cynical machine operator. The history of the real outcomes of the 1990ies forest ‘conservation’ decision(s) in NSW are a strong historical indicator.
I won’t bore people with details suffice to quote Dailan Pugh conservationist on the NSW RACAC who said only 1/4 of the forest required by science to provide a Comprehensive Adequate and Representative reserve system was legislated.
Meanwhile 5 or more icon green laws were REPEALED to ensure resource security for private interest in public estate forests. Socialise the cost, privatise the profit.
That’s the history of the ALP for real on environmental issues. And John Connor of the Climate Institue was a facilitator of that policy outcome … hence his suitability for the next ALP friendly gig as a figleaf. Who indeed is the dinosaur John? Penny?
AM show today nailed it: Newcastle coal loader in biggest coal port in the world, only expanding it’s output. Kerry Obrien tonight also notes the blatant lack of sincerity.
The Coalition or the Liberal Party commission a report from Frontier Economics six weeks ago. WTF were they doing for the last 18 months?
So we are all getting closer to accepting this is nothing more than a cynical tax grab ultimately paid for by you and me which is to be collected and adminstered by the banks.
does that make wong right or right wong?
malcom, malcolm, malcolm. you can’t make policy on the run and expect to have the bunch of cranks, deniers and occassionally intelligent parlimentary party members just tow the line because you say so. Don’t worry about leading the country sunshine, get your own house in order first
Gail, The Coalition had a detailed policy on ETS when Malcolm was the Environment Minister in government. Another detailed policy is being developed now based on current knowledge. The opposition is not under an obligation to be able to present a detailed policy just after losing an election. I’m getting sick of everyone attacking the opposition when the responsibility for government is with the government that was elected - and not by me, I didn’t want Kevin Rudd but we’re stuck with him.
I tend to agree with you Jillian although I voted Greens after being disillusioned by both parties. I think Wong is playing the gamesmanship card and being very sneaky with this whole ETS debacle.
I actually feel a bit sorry for Turnbull as he really appears to be trying hard but the ALP’s preference is to play politics and use the media to full effect (which makes me think that this will also be the downfall of the ALP at some stage!).
I think Turnbull summed it up beautifully with Kerry O’Brien the other night when he said that it is useless presenting a detailed policy when the ALP has not even formalised their policy. At the moment there is a coat hanger but there is nothing hanging on it!
BTW - I am a little disappointed with Wongs performances of late. I thought she was quite articulate at the begininning however am starting to think that she is all bluff and no substance. She is becoming quite boring actually.