Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

fruit loops + talking shops « Previous | |Next »
November 16, 2009

I watched Question Time in the Senate today on the ABC. It was dominated by questions about refugees and climate change, with the background wall of noise and interjections from the Coalition loudest on the issue of climate change. Their strategy is one of obstruction.

I have to admit I'm utterly sick of the "know nothingness" of the National Party--denialists one and all--give the decline of the agricultural economy. There is the slow destruction of irrigated agriculture in the southern Murray-Darling Basin from lack of water-- so similar to the decline in Central Valley, the thin, fertile band running down the middle of California. and the negative impact on cropping( wheat) agriculture. The Nationals looked and acted like fruit loops. They are in hock to the nation’s coal industry in NSW and Queensland.


Senate leader Nick Minchin warned that the Rudd Government's backdown on including agriculture in the scheme was “necessary but insufficient” and a long way from delivering enough concessions for the Coalition to support the legislation in its current form. He also warned that Labor could agree to all of the Coalition's amendments and the Coalition could still vote against the government's legislation.

According to Nick Minchin's Liberals it's all a left wing conspiracy and a fraud cooked up by communist greenies intent on destroying the Australian way of life. Or something crazy like that.This economic ruin talking point indicates that truth and science is of no concern to them. So that leaves political advantage.

They reckon that their advantage lies in opposing the government’s emissions trading scheme, even though the Riverland in SA is experiencing the long term impact of farming a region that cannot sustain the current irrigated agricultural practices. It's future is a dust bowl. Just wait for Copenhagen Minchin's Liberals say.

The time has run out to secure a ‘grand global bargain’:--- a legally binding climate deal at the Copenhagen summit in December that was meant to lock in place a global action plan to replace the Kyoto protocol. As there has been lack of progress in recent preparatory talk Copenhagen becomes talks about talks to secure binding emissions targets and overcome the divisions between the developed and developing world. There has been failure to agree on the big issues: what carbon cuts rich countries should make, how much money the poor should get to help them adapt to climate change, and where that money should come from.

The US, Australia and Europe are playing hardball to split the developing countries (G77) in order to weaken their political positions and isolate them before they make them offers (promises of cash soon and greater reward later) and get their way.

There is no Copenhagen deal because of the hold-up of the climate legislation in the dysfunctional US Senate. There the Republican minority has taken obstruction to a new level in that their strategy is to insure that Democrats fail to accomplish anything.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 2:34 PM | | Comments (11)


"necessary but insufficient" hints at uncontrolled Thomism as to the bearer.
Gary, what you've really omitted from your equation is the "hidden divisions" of Soviet tanks and paratroopers hidden in the Rockies for the last generation.
You have been deceived.
The Evil Empire never really fell, at all and those perverts and traitors with secret wireless receiver transmitters hidden under the bed, have had their riding instructions from The Jews in Russia and Communists running Wall St,or was that the other way around .
All there, with the "birth", probably by goat and/or she-wolf, of Obama (two places at once: Shrodinger, where are you?).
What more could you want?
Never mind, all sorted when the Rapture comes (pokes tongue).

Tony Kevin says in Crikey that:

This ETS will pass, but is worth little unless Rudd moves to real 25% - 40% targets and supports them with an active government-led decarbonisation strategy: starting with serious and unbiased R&D into how the different forms of alternative energy might be rapidly integrated into a dependable, emissions-free national grid, using all available off-the-shelf technologies.

He adds that to drive such a decarbonisation process, the government could give coal-power owners an economic stake in renewable energy by giving them government-funded alternative energy grid bonds, as compensation for asset values of closed-down coal-power stations.

It’s a Minchin and the Liberal partyroom versus Malcolm and his shadow cabinet showdown according to Samantha Maiden in The Australian

Tuesdays Question Time in the House of Representatives on the ABC wasn't much better. The Opposition asks about refugees, Oceanic Viking, and Rudd's special deal for the Sri Lankan asylum seekers. The Government uses Dorothy Dixers to pound the divided Opposition over its obstruction re climate change.

I get the impression that in spite of all the heady rhetoric about Coalition obstruction in the Senate Rudd + Co would actually love the Coalition to block its emissions trading scheme (GPRS) bill. They could then fight the next election on it and cement Labor's dominance over the Liberals.

The Liberals would then have to wear the blame for Australia not doing anything about global warming,whilst the Rudd Government goes to the next election as the having done everything they reasonably could to get a deal on climate change.

Minchin, meanwhile, is encouraging the partyroom to reject any deal with the Government, in effect destroying Turnbull’s authority and, most likely, his leadership.

I'm lost as to why the Rudd Government continues to insist that no special or preferential deal for the Oceanic Viking asylum was cut.

It's very clear that such a deal was cut. So why try and deceive the electorate over this? Why not come clean and deflate the Opposition? Deception and hiding behind the bureaucracy makes them lose credibility.

It's the tactics of the old Howard Government.

no processing on Christmas Island and no special deals for Ocean Viking asylum seekers from Sri Lanka because the Rudd Government needs to look tough and strong on border protection.

If you are not tough its the floodgates being opened and we will be swamped by Asians. So the talking point is that there has been no cave in or capitulation.

Nan's comments really confirm what I was thinking after watching the news tonight, with Bishop, Turnbull, Ruddock etc, yapping at the heels of the government.
The buttons are still there, from 2001, the opposition still knows how to push them and Labor still has the yips, as to this complex issue.
Hopefully, Rudd won't be panicked into disallowing the refugees at the centre of this current episode access to Australia.
But with the opposition slyly aiming a version of the "queue-jumper" line, the simple and straightforward answer is blocked off.
Lovely people, the opposition.
And they are getting away with it again.
Personally, I hope this lot of boat people get through, because there is so much about refugees that says such a lot, about how deficient the West where the world's comfortably-off live are, as regards to empathy for the miserable global masses.

other fruit loops include those who assert that global warming is a natural cycle and we are going into a cooling period, not a warming period. Globally the planet is cooling and within the next 100 years we may have a mini ice age.

Minchin has bought his defiance of Turnbull out into the open with his emissions trading legislation rejection speech in the Senate. 17 Coalition Senators (five Nationals and 12 Liberals) supported his rejection of any deal that Turnbull and McFarlane may strike with the Rudd Government. The Liberal Senators were Eric Abetz, Matthias Cormann, Michaela Cash, Scott Ryan, Mitch Fifield, Alan Eggleston, Cory Bernardi, Alan Ferguson, David Bushby and Chris Back.

Looks like factional warfare to me.

I see that Tony Abbott is arguing internally that the "politics have changed", that the Coalition is now in a "pre-election phase" where it is wise to differentiate itself from the government and that the vehemence of the Coalition climate sceptics means a "no" vote is the only way to avoid a wide and damaging split in the Liberal Party.

Abbott says that the Coalition's only hope of retaining bedrock support and being competitive at the next election is to oppose the ETS and campaign anti-GST-style, citing the costs to consumers and the job losses.

and with that remark Abbott positions himself as the leader of the conservatives and backing Turnbull into a corner. You cannot ignore us Minchin says--there are too many of us. We want to wage war on climate change. So lTurnbull's options are to support a flawed scheme and risk a huge split or to oppose the scheme and risk losing his environmental credentials.