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.

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Meanwhile 5 or more icon green laws were REPEALED to ensure resource security for private interest in public estate forests.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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

This is a breakthrough statement and needs to be sent to his colleagues in the Senate so that they can learn it by rote.

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.

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.

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?

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.