Nopenhagen

Eric says:

05:36am | 21/12/09

Rudd needs to come home and fix his policy on boat people, instead of attending these international wankfests.

Do the numbers Joe! says:

05:49am | 21/12/09

At least we have a prime minister who was willing to do some of the hard yards.

What would have Tony Abbott done?

I don’t even know if Tony Abbott believes in Climate Change.

1. He vacillates in his book Battlelines and claims five positions in two pages. Read it… its great for a laugh.
2.He tells a country town hall that ‘climate change is crap’
3. He tells lateline that he has never once talked to scientists about climate change.
4. He tells Alan Jones the world is cooling.
5. He now tells us that he believes in climate change and wants direct action

Its time for the liberal party to get real. Get someone with credibility in the top job and stop this trainwreck now.

monkeytypist says:

05:57am | 21/12/09

One other possibility to the idea that Rudd saw political capital out of this was that global warming genuinely is a crisis event that threaten’s Australia’s long-term well being.

Sherlock says:

06:56am | 21/12/09

Just in case no one else has done so please allow me to announce the end of the climate change myth.

In the past month we’ve had
1. The CRU emails
2. Repeated revelations of temperature data being manipulated to reach a pre-conceived conclusion supporting the warming myth
3. The public disclosure that a single man controls the climate change topic on wikipedia and has single-handedly written or rewritten over 5,000 pages
4. The failure of the main-stream environmental press to report the truth on what been happening which is a bigger scandal than climategate itself.

Copenhagen exposed to the whole world the climate change story for what it truly is. It has nothing to do with cutting greenhouse emissions. It has nothing to do the environment. It’s all about money. As someone who has closely followed the climate change debate for longer than most, even I was deeply shocked at the level of carpetbagging in Copenhagen. After seeing nations refuse hundreds of billions of dollars in promised aid in the hope of even more money, the public has finally realised what this is really all about.

To see the representative of Al Gore’s poster nation of Tuvalu stating he wakes up crying for his nation when in reality he’s an Australian that lives in Queanbeyan only shows the world how they are trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

To see the world’s climate change alarmist lobby give mass murderers like Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe standing ovations will only fill the rest of the world with total disgust. These despots will be responsible for the death of far more people than climate change will ever be.

In my world climate change is a figment of people imaginations but Chavez and Mugabe are real. How I wish with all my heart it was the other way round.

Yes the climate change myth is officially dead. OK it will take some people a little while to realise it but climate change scepticism was already approaching the 50% level. Copenhagen will only send the number of sceptics through the roof

Ever the populist, Rudd will eventually realise this and his advocacy for climate change will disappear as the media loses interest

Sam of Sydney says:

07:01am | 21/12/09

@Do the numbers Joe!
Are you deluded?
It is probably good he has not talked to scientists about climatechange, because then of he asked any questions he would get contradictory answers. So, then he can say ‘Climate Change is Crap’ with some evidence. And, when he says the world is cooling, well, he must have recieved Steven Fielding’s favourite Graph.
And when speaking about the way he now believes in Climate Change and wants direct action, well I guess weather he believes or not, direct action would be better than a cosmetic CPRS, which would be used to pay off Labor’s ridiculous stimulus debt.

Wayne Hutchins says:

07:04am | 21/12/09

Here it comes! Get out my violin. Poor Kevy! Oh well least he tried. What would Abbott have done! Give me a break. This has been Krudds biggest disaster to date. He has stuffed it up big time. He found out the hard way that he is nothing more than an insignificant small bit player on the world stage. He was booed and jeered! Kevin Rudd, World leader..Ha ha ha ha ha somebody stop me..
Welcome back Kevy! Now how about you do something to meet your election commitments?

Saint says:

07:20am | 21/12/09

Karma can be a real bitch. Perhaps now the Prime Ponce might try some honesty and leadership - that would be a refreshing change.

The failure of the ETS and Carbonhagen brought Australia and the world back from the brink of complete disaster.

Happy Happy Days!

Diamantina Dick says:

07:21am | 21/12/09

“One other possibility to the idea that Rudd saw political capital out of this was that global warming genuinely is a crisis event that threaten’s Australia’s long-term well being.”

One should add that this is a very very slim “possibility”. K Rudd was and remains only interested in the Politics of climate change, not climate change itself. Virtually every stance he and his Government has is of cynthetic manufacture and that Monkeytypist is not a possibility, it is a fact.

Charles says:

07:23am | 21/12/09

Hopefully Rudd sees the futility of making a Wally of himself in public, and decides to come home where he can just be our embarassment rather than everyone else’s as well.  This bloke is giving Australia a bad name by being the worst materialisation of a try hard in Australian history.

Luke says:

07:31am | 21/12/09

There is more going on in this country than climate change and Rudds ETS. It’s time this Prime Minister and his ministers get home and start concentrating on domestic issues instead of trying to impress the world. Kevin Rudd you are supposed to be the Prime MInister of Australia not the world. Now stay home and do some work on other issues, and how about following through on some of your pre election promises and comittments.

Milly says:

07:35am | 21/12/09

Rudds speech in Copenhagen was an embarasment to Australia, using the Kid Card was cringe worthy. Listening to him go on about poor little Gracey in Canberra, oh dear me…....Even the US news networks picked up on it, stop making a fool of us Rudd.

Retired Soldier says:

07:39am | 21/12/09

This little trip with 114 staffers and observers was nothing short of a waste of taxpayer money. He took a bloody personal hairdresser and a dessert chef ; can you believe it ! All that money and effort to be told to sit outside and wait while the big boys made the final decision puts this bloke into proper perspective. He is a nothing on the world stage but apparently he and his entourage think or wish that he is a major player. Doesn’t look good for you Kev but i bet Tony is rubbing his hands together.

Old Clive says:

07:40am | 21/12/09

Rudd and Wong must apologise for calling all true unbelievers sceptics and naysayers and everyother derogatory term because they wouldn’t fall down and worship them. If they don’t then all of the participants at the great non-event of 2009 will be branded with the same names. If Tony Abbot is smart enough to get onto this one he will have a field day at the other non-event, I think it is called Questions without notice where evryone reads out the prepared questions followed by the pre-written answers, well back to the other mushrooms.

Nola James says:

07:59am | 21/12/09

Potentially the best headline I have seen in years. Well done.

Actions speak louder than words... says:

08:05am | 21/12/09

Who cares what Tony Abbot would have done? The opposition’s stance on CC now is a little futile to be focusing on. We have a PM and he is clearly not doing a very good job. THAT should be the focus.

I suspect that “world leaders’ these days are getting better at telling their people what they want to hear and worse at actually achieving anything (Obama and his peace prize is a case in point).

Regardless, did anyone actually think that the ‘world’ would be able to come to an acceptable agreement on this issue!? ‘World leaders’ aren’t interested in positive outcomes for the environment - it will cost them too much. They just want to be seen to be doing the ‘right thing’ to maintain their seat.

Spill Joe, Spill says:

08:06am | 21/12/09

I see the noisy minority has the day off today.

For those who don’t think the coalition are in trouble:
1. The latest Morgan Poll was 59% to 41% which means if an election was held tomorrow the ALP would win over 110 seats compared to the Libs mid-thirties.
2. Only 36% of people view Tony Abbott as trustworthy. The lowest level ever for an opposition leader.
3.  Only 34% of people approve of Tony Abbotts performance as opposition leader. The lowest level ever for any new oppostion leader.

Its time for the libs to regain some credibility. Joe must force a leadership spill now before the embarrassment gets any worse

Humbug says:

08:08am | 21/12/09

Sherlock is talking humbug. 

So world leaders went to Kyoto and again to Copenhagen just for a hoax, did they? They didn’t. Man-made global warming is real enough.

They may not have done well, but they did make a start. Left as things are, over the next 5 to 10 years, people like Sherlock will be asking why did’nt “They”  *do* something. 10 or 20 years after that, they’ll be clamouring in the queue for some sort of subsidy.

But given half a chance, “They” - we! - will do something. The more we delay, though, the more it’s going to cost and the harder it will be.

The CRU affair is just a beat-up over selective and poorly understood “chat”. As for the more popular hoax/myth yarns peddled so often here, suggest you try - really try - reading these:

A balanced, brief presentation on “The arguments made by climate change sceptics “:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8376286.stm

And a plain vanilla Oz view, with plenty attachments and references:
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/climate-change/science.aspx

Time to get across the facts a bit better. Start with these, before you come back peddling myths and sneering.

Bob H says:

08:09am | 21/12/09

Hands up all those who were stupid enough to believe Copenhagen would be any solution to anything, now write on the classroom board until it is full “I must not be so easily led”.
Also Wong should go on incoming blame alert as Rudd deflects the failure of his hope for Copenhagen, which was a world profile and a cosy UN job after all the spin catches up with him .

Peter says:

08:21am | 21/12/09

Spill Joe, Spill - well obviously Abbott has you worried mate, and I’m sure it’s not only you he has worried. Bring on a DD, and lets see a debate between Abbott and Rudd and then let Australia decide. I think Abbott will become alot more popular than your expecting, before that “unloseable” election is called.

Spill Joe, Spill says:

08:32am | 21/12/09

Yes Peter,

Abbott does have me worried.

He has me worried because I consider myself Liberal through and through and he is leading my party into a trainwreck of monumental proportions.

Muzz says:

08:43am | 21/12/09

Spill Joe, Spill, I think Tony Abbotts polls may look a whole lot different in 6 months from now, and so will your beloved leader Kevin Rudds. Live in hope my friend….............

Spill Joe, Spill says:

08:53am | 21/12/09

Muzz,

I actually hope Joe Hockey will be the Liberal leader come February and prevent all of our decent members being wiped off the electoral landscape.

Patrick says:

09:00am | 21/12/09

People have been saying similar things since the end of 2006, Muzz.

I think the last time the Coalition was actually in front federally in any poll was in 2005

Mr Pastry says:

09:06am | 21/12/09

The, first time in 10 years, Copenhagen snow during the Global Warming Office Jolly amused me.  Almost as much as the attempts to claim it was a success.

Geoff says:

09:13am | 21/12/09

There’s a wonderful opportunity with climate change for one of the political parties and that is to dumb it all down.  With the majority of Australians not really understanding what it’s all about, but believing they need to have a position, they are forcing themselves to form an opinion based on subjectivity rather than fact.

Copenhagen was a disaster for the Ruddster - it cost a bomb, achieved zip and Australia came out of it on the nose not only at home, but internationally.

Maybe fighting the next election on this issue will shake out the real issues and how to deal with them and finally give voters an opportunity to be informed rather than influenced.

Julie L says:

09:14am | 21/12/09

Spill Joe, did you see the interview Joe Hockey gave Kerry O’B the other night. He made a fool of himself, he really has no idea at all on anything He shouldn’t be on the front bench let alone shadow treasurer. Joe Hockey does I admitt seem like a nice man, but not for politics. Abbott needs to remove him, he’s a terrible performer, and definately not Leadership material. He was totally out of his depth in the interview, and at the end of it he was saying sorry to Kerry O’b?? Which Kerry couldn’t understand what he was saying sorry for? Nor did I….except a very poor performance. Hockey is the one who looks like a train wreck.

Garry says:

09:38am | 21/12/09

Julie L, I saw that interview with Hockey on 7.30 Report too, I felt sorry for him by the end of it. I don’t think he’s made for politics either.

Spill Joe, Spill says:

09:41am | 21/12/09

Julie L,

Yes I did see the 7.30 interview.

I thought Joe did well. He comes across as likeable and trustworthy (unlike Abbott). He also understands economic policy (again unlike Abbott). He also understands that Australians want to do something to reduce climate change.

He also is clearly not captive to the angry minority of Alan Jones listeners (unlike Tony Abbott- who confuses these folk with the majority).

Sherlock says:

09:43am | 21/12/09

@Humbug 09:08am

I call your links and raise mine.

Here’s my BBC link to match yours

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm

and here’s 500 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

You may be surprised to find that there is considerable material out there supporting both sides of the climate change argument. The science is not nearly as settled as the alarmists catchphrase would have us believe.

However the sceptics didn’t just have a big worldwide public conference where we demonstrated to all and sundry that our argument is all about money

BTW humbug, what did you think about the standing ovation for Chavez? Is your argument so weak that you you’re desperate for backing from despots and mass murderers?

Macon Paine says:

09:45am | 21/12/09

@ Do the numbers Joe!

Nice “Red Herring” there Joe attacking Abbott and the Liberals, but this article is about the absolutely epic failure of the Copenhagen “Nopenhagan” agreement. No matter what side of the AGW debate people are on this must be considered one of the greatest blunders in modern political history. They have the science and consensus yet these asshats who have been bleeting at us about the need to do something to save the world are still unable to come up with anything other than what amounts to a weak handshake. Absolutely pathetic the lot of them, they should hang their heads in shame.
This reminds me of a quote I once saw by Glenn Reynolds: “I’ll start acting as if it’s a crisis when the people who are telling me it’s a crisis start acting as if it’s a crisis.” I think this quote sums up the whole “Nopenhagen” debacle.

Jim says:

09:48am | 21/12/09

What the heck happend at Copenhagen?

Rudd has now played right into the hand of the extremists, The Greens and The Skeptics. Now both will have a strong political foot hold in politics. This was our big chance to stop climate change, this was it. But we got a agreement that is so weak it really means nothing. I noticed even Wong is saying that is was more a good political outcome more than a climate change outcome. So we agree that we should do some thing. thats just great.! We are looking towards the USA for a result or China and got nothing the smaller nations are pinning thier very existance on this forum and got a death sentence. We we look back and see that the nations or the world did ntohing and the shame, will be upon thier head. Kevin Rudd that PM of Australia who played with Climate Change like it was a political football and scored 5 own goals.

Abbott in doing nothing is smelling better and better, while Rudd is trying to start the work chioces debate again to go back to ground where he knows he can win the battle.  Rudd need to talk to Abbott and they need to work out idea forward, lock out the big busieness and let bash the idea out, suspend paliament and put political back ground aside. Create a war cabinet and stop using this as a points scoring exercise. Once you have a solid knock down idea. Start on the US and China and lobby hard. Get nation like NZ South American nations Japan. etc to have a similar and all start bashing away at China and the USA. We cannot stop climate change as a nation but we can certainly go down fighting.

D'oh says:

10:25am | 21/12/09

[face palm]

Humbug’s first Humbug:

“So world leaders went to Kyoto and again to Copenhagen just for a hoax, did they? They didn’t. Man-made global warming is real enough.”

Real enough for who exactly Humbug?  Besides, handing over our hard earned wealth to banana republics does not exactly tickle my fancy.

“They may not have done well, but they did make a start. Left as things are, over the next 5 to 10 years, people like Sherlock will be asking why did’nt “They”  *do* something. 10 or 20 years after that, they’ll be clamouring in the queue for some sort of subsidy.”

So long as they pass the government’s means test for compensation.

“The CRU affair is just a beat-up over selective and poorly understood “chat”.”

Subverting the peer review process, talk of censuring scientists because their research would effectively discredit the global warming “beat up” is more than just chat.  Besides, there is more to the UEA scandal than just the emails, there is the computer code as well.
More here:
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/climategate-hide-the-decline-codified/
http://en.rian.ru/papers/20091216/157260660.html
“A balanced, brief presentation on “The arguments made by climate change sceptics “:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8376286.stm
And a plain vanilla Oz view, with plenty attachments and references:
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/climate-change/science.aspx”
Neither site has a counter for the revelations of the UEA data leak.  The information contained in these sites is based on the results given by the likes of the UEA which at best should be taken with a metric tonne of salt.

Radical Chick says:

10:41am | 21/12/09

If Krudd continues to “deliver outcomes” such as this latest one…people won’t just vote for the Coalition they’ll stampede their way to vote for Abbott….
He put so much effort and in the end had to swallow the humiliation not to be invited to the party. Obama always knew what Krudd is about because of what he’s done to Bush and now nobody wants him around…and that’s just the truth….

James says:

10:47am | 21/12/09

Sceptics, have a look at this!

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/climate-change-deniers-vs-the-consensus/

Anthony says:

11:23am | 21/12/09

What do you expect, Kevin funded a talk fest at the start of his reign, he loves them, he will spin this into a great outcome for the world, difficult times blah blah blah. I wish he would shut up and do something effective. Much like his first stimulus package. For my mind this has been the only good thing he has done the rest (including subsequent stimulus) is window dressing and quite patronising.

BULMKT says:

11:26am | 21/12/09

America has “where’s Wally” and now Australia has “Where’s Kevin” cause he’s spent more time overseas than being our prime minister. But I dgress.

You know the Copenhagen Climate Summit (COP15) is a complete sham when the likes of Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez gets a standing ovation. I wonder how many people from the Australian COP15 delegation clapped him on? In fact, Chavez brought the house down after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ in his 25 minute address.  According to the video on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM-CzUvzk6w&feature=fvsr), Chavez said “there was a silent and terrible ghost in the room and that ghost was called capitalism” and the crowd went nuts – the applause was deafening. Chavez wound up by concluding “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s why the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell…let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” That’s when this twisted Marxist got a standing ovation so maybe our bench warmers at COP15 did after all applaud him?

Liberal Senator, Nick Minchin, was hammered by the Government and the left leaning media for suggesting that man made climate change is a leftist socialist conspiracy.
Back on NOV 20, Finance Minister, Lindsay Tanner said Senator Minchin was “out there in his fatigues . . . chasing all these conspiracies” and “incubating a kind of rural militia from backwoods Montana in the Senate”.
Even Opposition Leader, Malcolm Turnbull put the boot into his colleague on NOV 30 saying that “If we put the party back together in accordance with Nick Minchin’s wishes, then we will end up becoming a fringe party of the far right. John Howard’s broad church is being shattered by Nick Minchin.”

But you have to wonder when just about every country represented at COP15 gives a rat bag like Chavez a standing ovation, denouncing capitalism, our very way of life, and then maybe, just maybe, people like Nick Minchin are right. Be afraid, Australia. For if the Marxist poison should spread here, our unique Aussie way of life is what is really at risk. COP15 has finally been exposed for what it really is - A push for world socialism.

NCG says:

11:37am | 21/12/09

Mr Rudd is our leader, like it or not. But I think this sentence sums up why his parties policies seem never seem to come to fruition: “he was in the US when Tony Abbott nabbed the Liberal leadership and killed off a deal on the ETS”.

Rudd was the face of ETS; yet when the decisive moment came to back it he was once again off glad handing, no where to be seen. To me that’s like trying to sign a business merger, but not being in the boardroom due to a prior engagement. Priorities were obviously a little skewed in this case.

I will be interested to see what happens next year, but a “leader” who delegates and ceases to front key policy is not a leader but a figurehead. I think many Australians are starting to catch on to this aspect, I just wonder if it will result in a turn around at the polls next year….

James Peterson says:

11:42am | 21/12/09

This is Labors fault - they tried for a money making socialist ETS style tax and it failed and beleive me they are gonna pay for it next election. I think where gonna see some good leadership from Abbot. Joe hockey is a nice enough fellow but not hardened enough and doesnt do the homework but together with Abbot and others i think they could be a great team and remember its the team not just the individual that counts. The sooner we rid ourselve of that Prima Donna Rudd the better.

Steve of Cornubia says:

11:55am | 21/12/09

Apparently, the pilot of Kevin747’s plane got a bit mixed up yesterday, trying to find a meeting attended by Important People somewhere (anywhere!) for his boss to show up at. He inadvertently ended up back in Australia. A thorough search of Canberra failed to locate Obama, and there were no photographers outside a church anywhere (denomination not important), so after a short break while Kevin had his daily Hissy Fit, it was back on the plane, albeit with a new pilot.

6clegs says:

12:03pm | 21/12/09

“Nopenhagen” sums it up beautifully for me, too. It was the exact same word my non-internet-connected friend used on Saturday during a phone conversation.

(Bloody glad I live where I do, & if ya think I’ll be inviting all the skeptics to join me/us when the sh%t hits the fan? No way Josie. They can stew in their own dumb juices!  :-x i’d rather look out for people that didn’t have a choice. )

Another good piece from the author, and why I keep looking for my Punch every morning.

claude says:

12:39pm | 21/12/09

The fact that countries were talking about reducing world temperatures by 2-3 degrees was evidence enough that Nophenhagen had unrealistic ideals. To think man can halt earth’s natural cycle is admirable but loonacy at best. If carbon emissions is the cause and Australia 1% contribution is reduce by 5% there wil be no difference to climate change what so ever, Kevin Rudd has a very hard sell if he expects Australians to be up to $5000 a year worse off.

jamie says:

01:15pm | 21/12/09

One could suggest Copenhagen was just like Rudd’s prime minstership, full of rhetoric and failed promises, all talk and no action, a case of spin over substance.

harquebus says:

01:33pm | 21/12/09

In less than a decade the “peak oil” crisis will solve the car pollution problem. The economies will collapse and industrial emissions will drop to near zero. End of problem? Not likely. Deforestation causes more climate change than CO2 emissions.

Humbug says:

01:41pm | 21/12/09

Sherlock is trying the old “put words in his mouth” trick. Unimpressed. 

Meanwhile, rather than leap at one counter piece, I’ll happily stick with the consolidated views at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8376286.stm
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/climate-change/science.aspx

If you can’t discuss without misrepresenting that with which you disagree, don’t bother. You only discredit yourself.

Sherlock says:

02:03pm | 21/12/09

@Humbug at 2.41pm

I never tried to put words into your mouth. I just pointed out that we could post links all day then asked you a question which we all noticed you failed to answer. For everyone’s benefit I’ll ask it again

BTW humbug, what did you think about the standing ovation for Chavez? Is your argument so weak that you you’re desperate for backing from despots and mass murderers?

Fairly straight-forward question if you ask me. Now hare’s another question for the climate change alarmists.

Has the globe cooled over the past 8 years?

Can’t ask any easier ones then that

Kippo says:

02:43pm | 21/12/09

Can anybody look at KEVIN and PENNY without a cringe, hopelessly out of depth and a total embarrasment to Australia, our national interest has been done significant damage with these clowns pretending to be something they are not, KEVIN even has to be his own cheer squad, a total humiliation. When…....will the labour party realise the problem.  Well, I have a big tip,  stick with KEVIN all the way the the next election because he is a winnner.

D'oh says:

02:54pm | 21/12/09

Looks like Rudd is going to continue to peddle his ETS scam, but the people are not happy about it!!

Check this out: http://www.news.com.au/national/rudd-government-will-try-again-for-ets-tax/comments-e6frfkvr-1225812266157

Uncle Buck says:

03:01pm | 21/12/09

Rudd and Wong done good. We’ll watch tin hatters and Rudd haters explode with Anger when Chimerica stitches up it’s “Carbon Compact”.
1) Carbon emmissions paid for at the source and erecting carbon trade barriers.
2) Offset allowance(s) and an enhanced CDP for poor nations in exchange for offsetting their emissions.
3) Australia can plead it’s “special relationship” after lining up with Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Canada, Indonesia et alia.
So without an international price on carbon and the free and fair means to pursue it Australia will be left with it’s ar*e swinging in the breeze.

Anthony Bellve says:

03:04pm | 21/12/09

Bash the ETS & all your other planned taxes up your a$$. We are sick of being either being taxed or banned because of the incompetence of your govt & your Labor state counterparts. Instead of taxing us why not plant more trees & stop logging old growth forests, the trees will then absorb & convert our CO2 pollution to O2. If you need more money to fund your incompetence, why not reduce the amount of money we give out in welfare, why not reduce the politicians outrageous perks & benefits, why not do something about over population. I am sick of our rights, freedom & liberty being stripped from us under the guise of being for our “own good”. I will do my best to oppose this ETS, as it is nothing more then a money grab for the govt and the UN. Why should we, a country 221 years old have to pay money to countries like China & India who have been around for centuries more. Why should we have to pay compensation to countries who we borrow money from, who we sell our resource companies to. This is not about Climate change, but worldwide socialism & wealth distribution. If this is Kevin’s grand plan, it is a grand failure & the little children are doomed to massive debt for generations.

kippo says:

03:22pm | 21/12/09

The thing about KEVIN’s conceit is that it increases the height of his fall. A joy to watch over the coming months.

Brian says:

03:35pm | 21/12/09

We always hear “at least he did something”!

“Something”?

ok - your car breaks down and you decide to wash it and try to start it again - nope still broke - but hey at least you did “SOMETHING”.

The tide has turned - lets have the election now and let it be a referendum on the ETS tax. Then we can have it settled once and for all and get on with some real issues like Debt Reduction, Hospitals etc…

Enough of this GW circus and a big tax to pay for the fraud and con.

Zeta says:

03:36pm | 21/12/09

I’d believe Hugo Chavez over the G8 members of the Coppenhagen conferrence. Here is the actual phrase that got him the standing ovation:

“[the Coppenhagen talks are] not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really an imperial dictatorship.”

It’s not exactly an overstatement. The world’s elite economies, getting together at a conferrence and deciding what the rest of the world should do? And we call him a dictator. Totalitarianism by consensus is still totalitarianism.

He went on to say that the elephant in the room wasn’t really climate change skepticism, but communism, which Chavez maintains is the only way to save us all from climate change annihilation. Might be drawing a bit of a bow there, but can we blame him? He’s Hugo Chavez. Currently the world’s third most successful socialist dictator.

What does Chavez stand to gain from Coppenhagen? Nothing. He can do whatever he wants in Venezuala. He can ban cars if he really wanted too. He can ban carbon. He can build solar panels on the backs of poor people and they love him so much they’d let him. He could pay poor people to stand in stadiums and blow really hard on giant fans to generate wind power. This is the guy who banned television, and when Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) conducted a survey of Venezualans about the decision, they found more people were pissed off about losing their favourite soap operas than losing unbiased media coverage. So what did Chavez do? Soap Opera Station. 24 hours a day. Have you ever seen a Venezualan soap opera? Imagine you’re a fly on the wall in John Della Bosca’s house, only imagine John Della Bosca is a drug lord with an AK 47. That’s an aside.

When it comes to deciding who to believe and who to trust, vested interests are everything. Even Kevin Rudd, with his poor maligned ETS still has vested interests. The same as the other Western democracies. We live on a knifes edge, the slightest nudges to our economies can result in depressive recessions. The great thing about being a tin pot dictator is that things can very rarely get worse. So if you’re looking for someone to cut through the rhetoric, someone like Chavez is probably your guy.

Also the smear that Chavez is some kind of Saddam-esque mass murderer is the kind of ridiculous value statement that comes from BOTH sides of the climate change debate.

Yes, Chavez killed people. As a former counter insurgency officer, and later as a military dictator. He also staged two coups, the first of which killed only 14 people. That’s less people than Nelson Mandela’s bombing campaign killed. Chavez is no better and no worse than any other leader. If anything, he’s more honest than our own.

Now Mugabe is a despot, that much is for certain. But again, not really a mass murderer. He’s corrupt and repressive, and has presided over a pattern of human rights abuses. But he’s not a mass murderer.

Presiding over a corrupt regime is just corruption, and being a dictator is just being a dictator. We live in a ‘free’ society that puts a certain value on elections, so we make a moral judgement on guys like Chavez.

But standing around and doing nothing when the scientific consensus says you should do something… I don’t know what side of the values fence you have to be on to find that reprehensible. Even if the scientific consensus is wrong, we stand to lose too much if they’re right.

What kind of a Bizarro World do you live in where Hugo Chavez can see that, but our leaders can’t? Hugo Chavez believes the CIA are spying on his underpants drawer. He’s probably certifiably mad in the way dictators are. But Kevin Rudd should know better. Barrack Obama should know better.

Bizarro World. Seriously.

Brian says:

03:45pm | 21/12/09

Good to see a website that posts all comments even if you do appear to have a Labor bias in content. Clearly there is something going wrong for Rudd with this ETS issue as although I would expect comments at “The Australian” to be anti-ETS it is actually very surprising to read the scorn against the ETS and this junket at other places that would normally support Labor.

Bring on the election, I just want this issue dealt with. If people are silly enough to vote for an ETS then fine, lets have it and then move on to real issues.

Not only is the ETS a con, but the debate over this is a distraction to real issues for people. Lets have the election and bury Rudd or give him the green light to tax us all.

TC says:

04:06pm | 21/12/09

The focus is not what Abbott would have done but should be on what he did. With 1 day in opposition he has done more good for Australia than the current government has done in 2 years. I might add that the job of opposition is not to propose strategy for the government. Ive no doubt that when the time comes Abbott will produce his plans. In the meantime; thank you Sir for standing up, using a level head and talking straight. I look forward to you bringing the fight to our current glory boy

Sherlock says:

04:21pm | 21/12/09

@zeta at 4.36pm

If people like you who defend the like of Mugabe and Chavez are on the climate change alarmists side then I can’t express how glad I am to be a sceptic.

Keep making posts like that it will help the sceptic cause far more than anything we could dream up

Daniel says:

05:41pm | 21/12/09

The whole thing was a farce and Rudd should stop wasting tax dollars and come home and start talking and negotiating with the Greens now.

Peter says:

06:08pm | 21/12/09

The Australian people expected them to return with something?
A does of swine flu would be good? Too nasty?
But I’ll settle for a kick in the goolies each which they seem to have got. So all is good.

B S Goh says:

06:44pm | 21/12/09

The Delegates at Copenhagen and I cannot understand what the hell we are talking about this global warming stuff. Europe and NE USA are having extreme snow and cold weather. Where I am I wish the Earth is 20C warmer.
They should have held the Conference in South Africa or Angola or Namibia in order to have any chance of success. Anyway it is over..the Conference.
Lets get serious. If there is any ETS the money should be used in Australia to fix up the environment, save the Blue whales by culling the Minke whales, cull the camels and goats..and many other environmental problems. Please do not send it to another country and give it to a rich company who will do something that seems like getting CO2 from the atmosphere. We need to look after ourselves. Merry Xmas

Derk says:

08:04pm | 21/12/09

Lets explain it in simple terms,,,,
KRudd’s report card:
Education - F    
Lots of money thrown around but where are the results? Where is the investment in univesities, research, tech, medical training?
Environment - F
Why the ETS? What is the ETS? What are the alternatives to the ETS?
Economy - C
Sure we avoided recession but did we really have to spend so much money? Now interest rates are going up, what has Swany got to say other then switching banks?
Health - F
Didn’t he promise to take over in July? What was that about the buck stops with me? More hot air which the climate doesn’t need…....
State Labor - F
C’mon Rudd pull your State party into line and back into shape….....

After Copenhagen has left him with enough egg on his face to make a decent like omelette, krudd needs to wake up and realise he isn’t an effective leader and he never will be one.

Peter says:

08:50pm | 21/12/09

harquebus says: 02:33pm | 21/12/09

What peak oil? Chavez is sitting on more oil than the middle east. Guess who’s making all the profit on that? His family business disguised as PDVSA the state owned oil company.

peter says:

08:58pm | 21/12/09

When is Krudd visiting Australia next

Steve says:

09:57pm | 21/12/09

I read the stuff “humbug” linked to. The BBC article is really setting up a straw man. The classic was point 9, where they get the sceptic to say “water vapour concentrations are rising” and the counter explains that it is a positive feedback that is included in all the climate models.

This is exactly why the alarmists are wrong. The IPCC assume that global relative humidity remains constant as the earth warms, so absolute humidity increases resulting in further warming. But data from the NOAA (which the BBC article quoted previously at point 3) show that global relative humidity has in fact been falling steadily since the current warming cycle began, particularly at the key altitude of about 9km.

So the IPCC’s constant relative humidity assumption has proved wrong so far, and their basis for alarming claims about accelerating future warming is equally wrong. Indeed, one wonders how they can claim that all their models passed historical back testing when there is such a glaring error. The assumption is superficially plausible, but the historical data shows that it is plainly wrong and must be rejected.

Back to the links. Link swapping is cool, but readers need to be careful. Some authors get the facts wrong. Some introduce key assumptions as though they were fact. Others, particularly the IPCC, jump straight to conclusions as though they are self-evident and need no supporting data or analysis. This is why we need some proper debates between the leading scientists on each side.

Davy says:

11:38pm | 21/12/09

Heard an interesting comment the other day on a dvd that likens large corporations to psychopaths.(The Corporation). One commentator believed that all we needed to do was make environmental issues able to be bought and sold and that would solve our environmental problems.( What you would expect from a share trader).

Now I suspect this is what copenhagen and ets type measures are all about. An atempt to make the preservation of the environment a commodity.
In order to make this happen it would be marketed just like any other product.
The scientists(tame or otherwise) telling why its so good for us.
Case studies.
Brand loyalty.

I’m not at all surprised that these measures are failing.
Just as most thinking people can see that things dont really go better with cola, they can also see that corporatising the environment feeds somebodies pocket, and doesn’t address the real issues at all.

Please lets watch the money flows, because this is the key to understanding what is really going on.

D'oh says:

11:49pm | 21/12/09

Zeta I am gobsmacked….

“Yes, Chavez killed people. As a former counter insurgency officer, and later as a military dictator. He also staged two coups, the first of which killed only 14 people. That’s less people than Nelson Mandela’s bombing campaign killed.”

Only 14 people hey?  Sucks to be those 14….And why the comparison to Nelson Mandela, it hardly makes Chavez a saint.

“Chavez is no better and no worse than any other leader. If anything, he’s more honest than our own.”

Key difference here is we have the opportunity to vote ours out.  Sucks to not hold the same view as Chavez…..

“Now Mugabe is a despot, that much is for certain. But again, not really a mass murderer.”

“Not really a mass murderer”...you have got to be joking.

“But standing around and doing nothing when the scientific consensus says you should do something”

Scientific consensus has said to do a lot of things, trouble is consensus does not equal truth.  There are too many examples to try and quote here, but the short of it is that it only takes one scientist to be right.  The other obvious point here is the leaked UEA data.

Toid! says:

12:52am | 22/12/09

More like Copenfailin’

Humbug says:

06:51am | 22/12/09

“Some introduce key assumptions as though they were fact.” Steve advises.
Indeed. Like this:
“the IPCC, jump straight to conclusions as though they are self-evident and need no supporting data or analysis”
This is simply an assertion, and flat wrong at that.

The analyses underlying the successive IPCC reports have worked at successively finer levels of resolution.  The IPCC reports themselves repay careful reading by scientist or non-scientist alike.

The Reports are consistently rich in analysis, supporting data, and sourcing. Steve’s remarks only suggest that he’s not visited the IPCC material in any depth, if at all. But anyone who cares to do so can find them readily enough.

Try here, where the long history of Assessment Reports is laid out
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.htm.
The latest AR4 Summary for Policy Makers
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_synthesis_report.htm
is a useful starting point.  Even shorthand phrases like “Very high confidence” are carefully defined, as the summary explains.

If you should want to avoid leaping to conclusions, expect to spend some time following through some or all of the other current and earlier reports,  and among the many other references and guidelines.

You can choose to inform yourselves, or splash about here with the sort of cheap, dirty tricks used by posters like Sherlock and D’oh, with their sneer, smear, diversion, assertion, assumption, misrepresentation, and words put in mouth. None of these is worth a bumper. They won’t alter the fact that man-made climate change is a real risk for us all.

In the end, a cool analysis of the IPCC case will win out.  A better understanding of the material will help us all. Even Copenhagen, as big a compromise as it was, represents an advance.

Steve says:

08:16am | 22/12/09

I note that “humbug” has made no attempt in his/her most recent comment to support the IPCC myth that water vapour is a positive feedback.

The other area where you can drive a truck through the IPCC reports is in their treatment of solar forcing. The IPCC know very little about it.

“The effects of forcing uncertainties, which can be considerable for some forcing agents such as solar ... remain difficult to evaluate despite advances in research.” (p669)

“[T]he physics of the response to solar forcing and some feedbacks are still poorly understood.” (p679)

Truth is that they’ve scarcely bothered to investigate solar forcing because they think they already got the culprit (namely, carbon dioxide). We’ve only been measuring solar radiation for about 30 years, and the IPCC “estimate” of solar forcing is just a matter of projecting the measured positive forcing of recent sunspot activity back historically to their starting point in the little ice age.

There are two reasons why this procedure is not valid. Firstly, although sunspots only cause a minor increase in total solar radiation, they cause a big change in the composition of that radiation. Different types of radiation affect our climate in different ways, but the IPCC has not bothered to model that.

Secondly, the IPCC invalidly assume that solar radiation is largely stable with just minor fluctuations due to sunspots. But isotope histories such as carbon-14 show major trends with some changes of trend, together with various cyclical variations. This data shows at least that the composition of solar radiation changes significantly, and probably that there are trends in the total as well. There is also evidence that the climate can take centuries to respond to changes in solar forcing. The recent warming fits the patterns of past solar cycles and there are plausible explanations that scientists have advanced as to how that has worked recently. The IPCC report does not address any of this. They just assume that base solar radiation is constant as though it is self-evident, despite evidence to the contrary.

I repeat, we need debates so that the IPCC can be held to account for their shonky “science”.

kim at allconsuming says:

08:39am | 22/12/09

If only they’d all watched The Girl in the Cafe before going. There would have been awesome outcomes.

D'oh says:

09:21am | 22/12/09

“The Reports are consistently rich in analysis, supporting data, and sourcing. Steve’s remarks only suggest that he’s not visited the IPCC material in any depth, if at all. But anyone who cares to do so can find them readily enough.
Try here, where the long history of Assessment Reports is laid out
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.htm.”
It is interesting to note that the identification of the sea level rise contribution error in the 2007 report is not mentioned in the link you have provided.  Notwithstanding the fact that the UEA scandal has cast a shadow over the validity of the results of these reports.
“In the end, a cool analysis of the IPCC case will win out.  A better understanding of the material will help us all.”
A cool analysis of the IPCC should involve a complete investigation with respect to the leaked data for UEA in conjunction with the raw data.
[face palm]
That’s right, UEA lost the raw data.
“Even Copenhagen, as big a compromise as it was, represents an advance.”
Copenhagen’s compromise means that we get to hold onto the wealth previous generation worked so hard for.  It will also allow people who previously naively took the IPCC predictions as gospel to look at the alternative.
Bring on the debate, the one that should have taken place over the last 10 years but was stifled by the vested interests of the climate scientists as revealed in the UEA emails.

Big Phil says:

10:08am | 22/12/09

Chamberlin and peace in our time comes to mind

Dave says:

10:53am | 22/12/09

Nopenhagen! Its just plain Wong I tell you.

Maybe now Kevvy and Co have been put back in their box we might be able to have a serious discussion about human influence on global climatic conditions. Notice I didnt say climate change? That because the climate has, always has and will continue to change whether we are here or not.

Climate modelling is not an exact science, recent events have clearly indicated that even the so called experts can’t agree on what going on. Flashy sensationsationalist headlines only sell papers, not truth.

James says:

11:55am | 22/12/09

Where is Kevin Rudd anyway?

David says:

12:43pm | 22/12/09

Sherlock, Adolf Hitler was perhaps one of the most evil men to live in the 20th century. Of course there are plenty of others, but Hitler is a great example for my following point.
Hitler had a policy of free education for all children in Germany. Put aside the fact he was also full of terrible, evil ideas, does the fact that this good idea came from Hitler mean we should instantly discount it?
Just because Chavez and Mugabe are evil, mass-murdering dictators doesn’t necessarily mean all their ideas are bad.
Another example for you… if charities looked at where all their money came from and refused to accept donations from anybody who wasn’t of good character, how much money do you think they’d end up with? Charities are happy to accept the money because money is money regardless of where it came from. If it gets used for a good cause, then that’s all that matters.
Lets say the money comes from a drug lord. That’s bad, dirty money. Should the drug lord keep it and spend it on himself, or is he doing a good thing when he diverts some of that bad money to a good cause. Something that could have been 100% bad can be turned into a little good.

The most important point is to listen to the opinions and words and not focus on the individual who is presenting them. Even bad, evil people come up with good ideas sometimes. So if Chavez and Mugabe come up with good ideas, that’s at least one small thing to make up for all the bad stuff they’ve done. I’m not suggesting you praise them or give them credit, but don’t ignore the message just because you don’t like the messenger.

Suzuki says:

01:07pm | 22/12/09

50,000 taxpayer funded global deadbeats, academic mainchancers and political opportunists, and we’re surprised that the only Dopenhagen outcome was to say “We must do it all again and again, as soon as possible”?

Wayne Hutchins says:

01:27pm | 22/12/09

But what about little Gracie, sob sob sob and the rest of the children sob sob sob! She and they may just have to learn a new word. Adaptation, come on Gracie, say it after me A D A P T A T I O N…..But seriously people, that was a lame speech Krudd made. What does a 6 year old know about supposed “global warming” other than the brain washing done at school. If it is to be the most serious thing that we as a species have to face then why would you listen to a child? 80 people died in Europe due to severe cold snap! Bloody global warming…

jamie says:

01:37pm | 22/12/09

Yes, where is Rudd?

Strangely quiet at the moment. One would suggest he’s cooking up some spin or hoping that the xmas season buries his avbsolute and total failure to achieve anything in Copenhagen.

Sherlock says:

01:53pm | 22/12/09

@David at 1.43pm

You know I asked about Chavez and Mugabe as a joke. I seriously didn’t think for a second that anyone would be dumb enough to defend them. Seeing you’re the second to do so it appears I overestimated the intelligence of the climate change alarmists.

No ethical charity will accept tainted money. Certainly not publicly anyway. Theer have been numerous instances of charities refusing to accept money where the source is suspect.

You comment is so evil it makes me want to barf.

C A says:

02:23pm | 22/12/09

Krudd set himself up for a big fall when he decided to let his ego take over and show the world what a big shot he was even if from a small insignificant country in the scheme of things.
What ever this Country does it will mean nothing if the biggest Polluters are not prepared to make any effort . If we had went ahead and committed to reducing our emissions by say 20% whilst the rest did nothing this Copuntry would have went broke even quicker then it doing under Krudd and Krew.
Krudd would be much better off staying at home instead of trying to be the Prime Minister of the world.

pft says:

03:07pm | 22/12/09

And now Bob Brown is calling the 2010 Federal Election a “referendum on climate change.”
No the next election will not be a referendum on climate change at all, it will be a vote between a religious moron and the current moron.

Krudd please don’t go to global events spouting your garbage, you are embarrassing yourself to the world.

South Aussie says:

03:26pm | 22/12/09

pft lets get one thing straight. Rudd is just as religous as Abott.

Tom says:

03:31pm | 22/12/09

Maybe we’ll end up an ETS anyway. The US are currently looking at legislation so I guess we’ll have to follow along as usual. We keep hearing Ferguson & others from business, AIG included, saying we must put a price on Carbon before anything meaningful can happen. Imagine the “Finance Report” that has Oil Price, Gold Price, Value of our Dollar, Stock market Indices and along side ” Carbon/Tonne”. Billions of dollars changing hands, despots and others around the world lining their pockets and we’re supposed to understand that this is a “must” in order to tackle Global Warming. Can somebody help me please understand!

john says:

03:44pm | 22/12/09

It was a pure wedge from the beginning.

If Rudd really wanted the ETS through, he could have negotiated with the Greens and independents and got 90% of what they wanted.
The govt went out of their way to go against the Greens, because they wanted to cause the longest disruption to the Liberals, knowing Turnbull was such a fool he would panic all the way.

Couldahagen says:

03:57pm | 22/12/09

I don’t know why anyone bothers to debate any point with Sherlock - the one-eyed monster. He only wears you down with his repetitious second grade bilge. There that’s out of the way.

Attacking Zeta for seeing the sense in someone else’s words, no matter if they are a dictator or not, makes the attackers come across as petty and small-minded. That’s the second thing out of the way.

Now:
Please stop and think before running off at the mouth about alarmism and ETS is tax yada yada yada, and think for a few minutes; without political bias.  If we do not fine the big polluters in some way, no amount of sustainable energy measures such as solar, wind, tidal etc will do much good if the same amount of pollution is allowed to be poured into air, and and sea. It would always be a game of catch up, and I doubt we could catch up. Especially if the big polluters such as America are the ones to set the rules, because America thinks only of how America can come out the BIG winner in any deal. The FTA with the US was a huge mistake that tied us too tightly to them, they won big time on that as they did with Canada.
Those who don’t care what happens to the future of the planet, or whose only interest is their hip pocket, please get out of the way and let those who do care get to work.

Australia by its situation needs the world to find a solution that will not mean we are drowning in refugees while our rivers dry up and we become a dust bowl.

This is not, or should not be, a political debate. It is a life or death debate. And a few smart-mouthed people are just that, they talk without studying for more than a couple of seconds, or repeat what the flavour-of-the-month politician is spouting. Do your homework yourself, don’t rely on what anyone says until you know what you, and they, are talking about. Educate yourselves, please.

D'oh says:

04:04pm | 22/12/09

“Seeing you’re the second to do so it appears I overestimated the intelligence of the climate change alarmists.”

Not only that, they also appear to be Labor fans as well.

Tyranny is okay so long as it is a socialist dictator didn’t you know…

Sherlock says:

04:21pm | 22/12/09

@ Couldahagen at 4.57pm

I’m really starting to like alarmists. Just keep supporting despots and mass murderers. It will do far more for supporting the cause of climate change scepticism than anything we could ever dream up.

I think you might find that right minded people want nothing to do with these monsters. The fact that a number of alarmists seem to want to defend them makes me ill.

Ric Sprie says:

07:55pm | 22/12/09

Climate Change…...... Bah Humbug…...... As Sherlock has said…. It’s all about the Money…
As Jerry Mcguire said “Show me the Money”

Reading between the lines, cheack out Al, Gores web page. http://www.generationim.com/sustainability/challenges/climate-change.html.
Background

Today there is broad international scientific consensus on climate change and its link to human activity. Climatic developments over the past six months—such as the devastation of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the discovery that the Greenland ice sheet is melting at twice the anticipated rate, and confirmation of 2005 as the hottest year on record—have shown that the pace of climate change is accelerating and with it the risks of severe climate disruption. Indeed, climate change has crept up the corporate agenda to become one of the most important factors affecting the long-term operating environment for business. Increasingly, investors are beginning to price this into their investment decisions and allocate capital to companies that are fully integrating climate change considerations into their strategies, cultures and operations as a means of risk management, cost cutting and revenue maximization.

Conclusions

Climate change is an urgent challenge that affects long-term corporate profitability, and therefore must be systematically integrated into investment analysis. The pace of climate change is accelerating and will have material effects on equity markets in the short, medium, and long term.

Ross says:

08:47am | 23/12/09

If climat echange is real, and i have serious doubts about that, then if the leaders of the world are serious about fixing the problem, the first thing they must do is limit the population growth.  No ifs, buts, exceptions, etc., Two kids per couple maximum for a start, and enforce it by abortion, culling, or whatever method is felt necessary.  If it’s as serious as we’re led to believe, those measures aren’t draconian but absolutely necessary.
Next, limit the use of fossil fuel, manufacture of plastics, number of jets an airline can operate, number of cars a family can own, etc, etc. 
All too hard!!  Introduce a dubious tax, and produce the illusion of progress, chipping away at the edges, and appear to be doing something.  That’s the easy solution and appeals to a few punters, and from Rudd’s position hopefully enough to get this lot elected again.
Give it away Kev, you’re not the great statesman on the international stage, but just a small player from a country that contributes less than 1% to emissions, and whose opinion rates about the same as its emissions.
I commend any measures that will reduce a waste of resources, any and all resources, but if politicians are going to get involved, at least make them serious measures, not window dressing.

Perth Perspective says:

01:12pm | 23/12/09

Given that the KRudd has reclarified the Australian Governments position that they will do no more /no less than other governments around the world.It would be fair to assume that they will now do nothing, given their desire to do an equal share now equates to that. References to white papers back in May and now curiously being a follower rather than a leader on the greatest moral challenge of our time is quite a step back for the emperor who clearly caught a glimpse of himself in the mirror bereft of clothing.

DT says:

06:25am | 24/12/09

Has Australia ever had such a self-serving dill as politcal leader?

notsurprised says:

07:54am | 24/12/09

“It seems that no other leader…  ...went to Copenhagen with such a great domestic investment in the outcome than Mr Rudd.” That is because our Prime Ministers’ intention of lining up a role at the UN for himself greatly influenced the importance of this opportunity for him. As many others have said he should get back to running his own country.

Joe says:

04:52pm | 24/12/09

Love the comments here both for and against. At least the people here take the time to put some thought(however little) into trying to make their opinions known, it’s a real pity that more people don’t take an active interest in who they elect and what those elected representatives do.
As a lifelong Labour voter but an anti ETS supporter, I hope that Rudd and Wong are given the heave-ho at the next election for trying to slip this unworkable and finalcially diasterous tax past the Australian people.
Yes something has to be done to reduce pollution and increase alternative energy but the ETS is not the answer. What ever the solution, the funding for the R&D should be spent here in Australia and the resulting technologies used to create employment here.
Finally, I would like to thank Tony Abbott for ousting Red Malcolm and putting in place an opposition which at least is trying to act as a check to the government. With Turnbull as opposition leader it was getting really hard to tell where Labour ended and the Liberals began and a one party government usually only serves the party.
Maybe it’s just time to do away with party politics and go back to voting for individuals who represent the people not the party.

Ross says:

07:24pm | 24/12/09

DT says:
07:25am | 24/12/09

Has Australia ever had such a self-serving dill as political leader?

The short answer DT is,  NO!!

This is a super stroker if ever there was one.

Kippo says:

04:20pm | 26/12/09

Now that the northern hemisphere has frozen over, what does it mean for the polar bears?  Is is better or worse than warmer summers?  I am really confused.  I really would like Mr Rudd to come and explain all this to me.  If he is unable to fit all this into the latest spin cycle, may be he could roll up his sleeves and get to work.  Our great leader, what a waste of space.

Shaun says:

09:31am | 28/12/09

Sherlock’s been at this for years, since the days of the Blogocracy. Same old, same old Sherlock. Standard mantra - left baaaaaad. Right goooooood. Got it folks? Yawn.

Shaun says:

09:42am | 28/12/09

Joe says:

“As a lifelong Labour voter”.

I love this angle, when people make such claims yet the can’t even spell Labor the way the party spells it.

Also why on earth would a lifelong “Labour” voter call Malcolm “Red Malcolm”? This “Red” thing is a smear used by the Liberal party against Labor to say “they are all just communists”.

So I read stuff like this and I think, “hmmmmm, I wonder if this is a lifelong Liberal supporter claiming to be a lifelong Labor supporter. Then they say, ‘but the job Labor is doing is so bad that even I have to switch’ “.  Wow. Maybe I’ve got it.

Joe says:

10:44pm | 28/12/09

Sorry about the spelling mistake Shaun.
I notice that you have one in your first sentence, does that make us even?
But lets not quibble over trivia.
I have been a Labor voter all my life but I find that the direction the party is taking us is a long way from the fair go for all workers and their families and the welfare of the Australia.
I do see international communism as being the driving force behind the current mob leading the Labor party, where the people of this country are increasingly being assigned the role of minor players in a greater international state and Australias sovereignty is being eroded in favour of the UN and the mutinationals who run it. As far as I could discern, Turnbull was in bed with Rudd and as such deserved the the tag “Red”. 
I am thankful to Abbott and his colleagues for saving us, however temporarily, from the Copenhagen treaty and the ETS.
I was delighted to see Howard being booted out of govenment because he was hell bent on taking us down the same road under a different banner.
With a media which creates a clamour over trivial things and is disturbingly silent when it should be clarmouring, it behoves us all to to look beyond the old party lines and see where we and our nation are being taken.

Niki says:

12:55pm | 05/02/10

Joe ,

I , for one am glad Malcolm Turnbull has gone as Leader . He was just an extension of Kevin Rudd anyway . He sat in the Opposing seat not to give Opposition to the Government but to help the Rudd Government whilst breaking down the Coalition Party by slowly destroying them .
Kevin and Mal may as well be on the same side .
This Rudd /Labor Government is all about changing everything about Australia . Censoring our freedom of speech and totally controlling our lives .
Communism ???  probably so !
This ETS Tax that Rudd wants so badly I wonder why , it’s not to save the planet , one would be a real thick head to believe that and now he’s doing policy on the run ,offering Compensation to their old saying “Working Families “but still wont tell the Public how much it will cost . Penny Wong on Lateline last night 4th February would not tell Tony Jones anything and today we hear that no details will be released UNTIL after the Elections . Should anyone trust the Labor Government ?? NO WAY ! they have deceived the people and continue to deceive us all .