No we don't, we peddle self-serving propaganda
Gee, there’s a real surprise, ain’t it? An alarmist organisation whose sole existence is thanks to the overblown “climate crisis” comes up with a report that justifies its own existence and reassures everyone that the massive, unnecessary new tax will have far less of an effect on food prices than the evils of “global warming”. And as usual, the ABC fails to see the conflict and publishes it all unquestioningly, and timed perfectly to coincide with the return of parliament tomorrow, undermining the Coalition’s opposition to the ETS (of course, the ABC is stuffed to the gills with Lefties from Kerry O’Brien down [or is it up?], so any opportunity to bolster Rudd and Labor at the expense of the other parties is welcomed with open arms):
A new report has found failing to tackle climate change will have a greater impact on supermarket prices than an emissions trading scheme (ETS).
The report from independent [Ha ha! My aching sides – Ed] think-tank the Climate Institute found extreme weather events, caused by climate change, will lead to food price rises in the future.
The report says these increases will be far greater than the 1 per cent weekly price rise, or $1.30 a week, expected to flow from an ETS.
It predicts extreme weather events, like drought, will become more common as the Earth’s temperature rises. [Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong. By the way, did I mention that’s wrong? – Ed
Climate Institute chief executive John Connor says tackling climate change, through an ETS, will save money in the long run.
“What this report shows is that food prices are far more at risk from extremes in the weather and the climate, extremes that will increase with climate change, than they are with any ETS or a system which puts a price on carbon pollution,” Mr Connor said.
And then we have the usual outright L-words:
He says climate change is already having an effect on supermarket prices.
“Climate change is not just about warmer weather, it’s about wilder weather,” he said.
“And the drought, cyclones, extreme weather events will increase over time. [That’s a big fat L-word – Ed]
“We’ve had that experience in Australia, of course. We’ve had the tripling of the price of bananas from Cyclone Larry. We’ve had the drought raise lamb prices around 60 per cent.” (source)
I get tired of writing this: there is no link between “global warming” and increased hurricanes, floods or other extreme weather. And there isn’t a climate scientist on the planet that would link Cyclone Larry with global warming. But who cares about the facts? Certainly not the Climate Institute, which is feathering its own nest, and certainly not the ABC which will publish any old rubbish as long as it fits its pre-conceived warm-mongering agenda.
Australian Climate Madness 
Do they think we are bunch of idiots? Who in their right mind would believe that there wouldn’t be an increase in food costs when transport and production costs will increase?
Anyway, didn’t Woolworths wind back prices to lower levels than 12 months ago? So what does thos mean?
I can’t stand this stupid propagandam if they want us to believe it then they need to publish a detailed report as to when there prediction will come true. My guess is that they are talking 30-50 years from now. What happens in the meantime?
Given the revelations of scandals such as Climategate, Glaciergate, Catastrophegate, and Amazongate, one has to wonder whether the Climate Institute has been holidaying on another planet in the past two months. But on the other hand, one has to allow for its close links with the greens, who have shown adeptness at using exaggeration and speculation in place of proven science. The Climate Institute is speculating again, as the IPCC has had to admit that there is no proved link between the incidence of weather disasters and global warming. Conversely, there is evidence that tackling climate change by using agricultural crops to produce biofuels, has raised the price of food to such an extent as to cause poor people to starve. Faithful souls that they are, the non-discerning ABC continue to do their best to disseminate any alarmist climate change propaganda.
I wonder if the ABC would run a story put out by an oil or coal-aligned institute which said the opposite to this report : ie, “Energy Research Think Tank xyz has published a paper saying that electricity will cost less if climate change occurs than if an ETS is implemented’.
Somehow, I think not.
You just cannot expect something that owes it’s existence to a particular movement to release anything but information supporting that movement. It’s just not newsworthy, except maybe to point out the clear bias and discredit the report.