I think it's a blessing that the Liberals held things back for another stint. Two reasons:
1. The ETS had been watered down so much it resembled a homoeopathic remedy. It would prove to be not only ineffectual, but dangerous. Maybe it would have been nice to go to Copenhagen with something. On the other hand, it would have been an example of how you could get some cuddly legislation passed with a hotlink posted in wiktionary's definition for compromise (transitive). Look it up.
2. It means that if Labor are at all serious about getting something up and running, they get a better hit at the ball providing the Greens can capitalise on this debacle. But I really can't see the former happenning, considering the seriously negligent way in which Rudd and his team have promoted the scheme. Rudd has been having fun using the ETS to let the Libs tear themselves apart. ... See More
There is very little in the scheme that allows Garnaut to be happy about (c.f. exemption of Agriculture?!!! Massive concessions to intensive producers?!!) Seriously, the only thing that will come out of a scheme like that is that once it is passed, the heavy emitters will claim that they're price hikes are due to the ETS, whilst not actually having to pay any real compensation, resulting in record profits? Who are these people in bed with?!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree. There isn't much point in having an ETS, when the biggest and least efficient polluters are given subsidies so that they continue to operate like they do. Its like putting better brakes in a car, but removing the seat belts and airbags. The end result? The occupents still end up in intensive care.
ReplyDeleteClarification though on my previous comment; I doubt very much the lib's would change the ETS for the better. I can't see for the life of me them putting agriculture into it, and from what I could tell they were fighting severely to increase the subsidies to major polluters such as coal-fired power generaters. Putting it off to beyond Copenhagen might create the chance for those things to be amended, but I don't know; hopefully this is the positive to come out of it.
ReplyDeleteBut hopefully the libs refusing to pass the ETS will cause the Govt to call a double dissolution. If that happens, the Greens will probably end up with controll of the senate. Under that scenario we might see the Govt's crappy proposed ETS actually being strengthened by negotiation, due to the Green's predelection for evidence based environmental policies.
ReplyDeleteThe Government's Emissions Trading Scheme was deaply flawed. It would have handed out 'permits to pollute' and if some future gov't wanted to tighten up the scheme they probably would have had to give the polluters yet more compensation. Is a deaply flawed scheme better than no scheme at all?
ReplyDelete