And you want ME to shut up. See how it will affect you!

 

A speech a part of which is shown here.
You dont have to like what I or he says at times but its real enough.

_______________________________________________________________________

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Trood)—Senator Fielding, I think
you know the rules about the use of props.

Senator FIELDING—It is in Hansard. That is a chart that the Australian
public want to see. It is a chart that clearly the Rudd government does
not want people to see. It shows that carbon dioxide emissions have
skyrocketed, yet global temperatures have not increased the way the IPCC
predicted. To help people with the chart, imagine the black line is CPI
and the red line is your salary. You are going backwards. Quite clearly
you would be very unhappy if that was your salary. The government wants
to make you believe that the science is conclusive. I think we still
need to have this chart further debated. It is based on 15 years of
records. The global temperature chart may be an inconvenient fact to
those that refuse to have an open mind on climate change, but to many
Australians this global temperature chart is helpful and it allows them
to engage in a technical debate. For those people watching who find
charts hard to understand, as I said, think of the red line as if it was
your salary and the black line as if it was CPI.

Even if you put aside the science, the Rudd government does not seem to
acknowledge that its CPRS is a multibillion-dollar carbon tax. It is
economically reckless to agree to any CPRS before the Copenhagen climate
change conference, where the rest of the world will make up its mind on
how to deal with climate change. There are some estimates that the
government’s carbon reduction tax would be the equivalent of raising the
GST by 2½ per cent. But wait—it gets worse. Not only will we be paying
more tax; there will be more people without jobs. Frontier Economics
predicts 68,000 Australians will not be employed in rural and regional
Australia if the government’s plan goes through.

Who knows what the proposed amendments will do? According to the
government’s own numbers this new tax amounts to more than $12 billion
per year for industry. This is a cost which will be passed on to
ordinary Australians. It was reported in the Business Spectator recently
that the current legislation would have an $8 billion adverse impact on
four Latrobe Valley power generators which is offset by $2 billion in
current credits— a net enterprise value reduction of $6 billion. State
governments too will face a massive hole in their budgets as a result of
the scheme and will be $5.5 billion worse off by 2020. That means less
money for schools, less money for hospitals and less money for the
social services which so many Australians rely on.
Australian families will also be hard hit under the Rudd government’s
proposal. Electricity prices are still forecast—as I heard this morning
in Victoria—to double in Victoria. What will that do to households and
small businesses in Victoria? Council rates will also be affected and
will go up under the current plan. The Rudd government’s ETS has the
potential to cripple our economy and send families with their backs
already against the wall tipping over the edge. It is the sheer
arrogance of the Rudd government that is driving this debate at the
moment; it is not sensible public policy.

The Rudd government is playing politics with the lives of millions of
Australians by voting again on this issue now and trying maybe to force
an early election. Someone needs to tell the Prime Minister that there
are no prizes for going first on implementing an emissions trading
scheme—only losers! We are not playing a game here. We are talking about
a multibillion-dollar tax that will impact on real people’s lives and
jobs. There is a lot more at stake than the government seems to realise.
______________________________________________________________________

 

I don't want you to shut up, quite the reverse, all Australians should be
having this debate.  I want you to stop posting anti global warming
propaganda uncritically.  I want you to think instead of reacting to the
potential pain in your hip pocket nerve.


Jonthe Fly wrote:

What does Fielding know about climate science?  Who says that the graph of
CO2 level against time must be followed by the same shaped graph of
temperature against time?  It isn't the climate scientists.  This is another
strawman argument.

Of course he is carefully ignoring the fact that a number of ice sheets are
melting much _faster_ than the IPCC predicted.  If it aint waming up why are
they melting?



And this is not science but more politics about taxation.  A different
matter.  Changing the energy basis of the economy was never going to be
painless.

REGARDLESS of GW or no GW we have to do it.  Oil is going to run out.
Before it does it is going to become prohibitively expensive as demand
continues to grow, supply shrinks and the cost of extracting less accessible
reserves increases.


I find this insane.  The anti global warming crew saying there is more at
stake than we realise.  What planet is this bloke on.  What more could there
be aside from gambling with the future of the human race.

David

 

On 30/11/2009 6:13 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

Do you really think it will affect my "hip pocket nerve"?
It may not affect it at all, but it could, and achieve nothing.
I am on a pension.
I may not like Steve Fielding, but again, I've never met the man.
Someone once wrote, how can you hate someone who you have never met?
If you read what he said at this speech, you may understand a little
about what I am about in this matter. There is very little I disagree
about there.
Joe Hockey may not get up due to this issue.
Turnbull needed to have let an open vote on this.
He would have still been likly to stay in power.
It may also result in Tony Abbott being elected.
I dont like him either, but again I havent met him.
But he seems to have changed since JH lost power.
The issue on the table, is the ETS bill, and he knows it.

My opinion is, that this gardening area has become too complicated for
this issue.
I would suggest we find another forum....What do you suggest?
Its fast becoming off topic....

 

Jonthe Fly wrote:


I am happy to drop it.

D

 

On 1/12/2009 8:15 AM, David Hare-Scott wrote:

Not surprising.
As I expected. The issue with politics is intertwined with ETS.
Abbott did get up, by a very tiny margin.
Its enough for people to doubt and support him.
Its not even a green issue if you think about it.
It becomes one when it can be actually seen to do some good.
This one doesnt.
It allows a minor amount of man made gases (which dont appear to be
significant in the scheme of things) to be removed.
Where are the other amounts coming from? Stop those, and perhaps then
wel'l be doing something useful.

End of topic...................................................
Thanks for trying to argue the point.