Climate sense from Nick Minchin and Mitch Fifield


Nick Minchin

Nick Minchin

Nick Minchin has responded to his “fruit loop” critics with a dignity that some of them would do well to emulate:

“I get called lots of things as a politician, so being named after a breakfast cereal is pretty mild really,” he told The Weekend Australian.

“Over the past 30 years, I’ve got reasonably used to that type of stuff.

“I have very few attributes, but one of the few I have is a thick skin that’s been developed over many years in politics.

He stressed they were not off-the-cuff thoughts and they reflected what he had said previously in the Senate.

“I always consider my statements deliberately and, naturally, I stand by everything I said,” he said.

I stated my views clearly. I stand by the comments.

Mitch Fifield

Mitch Fifield

And some sensible words about the climate debate from Senator Fifield:

In a message to a conference on the economic consequences of climate change obtained by The Weekend Australian, Senator Fifield accused proponents of an ETS of “a theological approach to discussion more suited to an inquisition“.

To be a sceptic was once considered a good thing and to be at the heart of scientific inquiry and robust policy debate,” he said.

“Sadly, some have sought to demonise those who pose legitimate questions and to caricature them and their views.

Senator Fifield attacked the government’s ETS proposal and climate policy, claiming both would “hike prices, increase taxes and destroy jobs for doubtful environmental benefits“. [Actually zero environmental benefits – Ed]

And he warned that any treaty stemming from Copenhagen “risks committing Australia to unforseen consequences, and should be approached with the utmost caution“.

It’s difficult to argue with that. Yet the government portrays such comments as heresy against the great Climate Change Religion.

Read it here.

OT: Coalition claws back 14% in Newspoll


Probably due to Rudd’s disastrous policy on asylum seekers. Slightly less reason then to pander to Rudd’s demands on the ETS.

Read it here.

ETS amendments unaffordable


Well there’s a surprise. Because of the high dollar value and the low price of carbon, the government is making excuses in advance for rejecting many of the Opposition’s proposed amendments to the ETS – not that I’m bothered, however. It will then force the Opposition to do what they should have done from the start: vote the abysmal scheme down.

THE Government has flagged it may reject several Coalition amendments to its emissions trading scheme because it will now cost $2.5 billion by 2020.

The Government’s scheme was expected to make $208 million by 2020, but yesterday’s mid-year budget outlook from Treasurer Wayne Swan revealed a big turnaround because of lower likely carbon prices and a soaring Australian dollar.

The Government’s releasing of the figures is a message to the Opposition that not all the proposed amendments, including more free permits to heavy polluting industry and the coal industry, are affordable.

Climate Change Minister Penny Wong is believed to have conveyed this message to shadow resources minister Ian Macfarlane in talks last week.

Notes accompanying yesterday’s release state: ”This [the $2.5 billion black hole] underscores the need for caution in designing assistance measures, particularly those that lead to a permanent increase in scheme costs.”

Opposition spokesman Ian Macfarlane is not surprisingly pretty annoyed at having this dropped in at the last minute:

This really stretches the friendship … dropping these numbers at a minute to midnight,” said Mr Macfarlane, who has been charged with doing a deal with the government on the ETS before the vote scheduled for late this month.

It will certainly make the negotiation more difficult – there are areas we are working on where a lack of money could make a difference.

Read it here and here.

Strong Aussie dollar hits ETS bottom line


But you can guarantee that the Treasury modelling will massage the figures to make it look like everything is rosy in the ETS garden:

THE resurgent Australian dollar and strong commodity markets have slashed by more than $10 billion the expected revenue from the emissions trading scheme over the next decade, dramatically reducing the government’s scope to accept Malcolm Turnbull’s amendments.

Ten-year costings for the ETS, expected to be released with the government’s mid-year economic forecasts next week, are likely to show that instead of the $11bn surplus estimated by independent forecasters by 2020, the ETS could run at a loss in many of those years and require top-up funding from the budget.

A large or ongoing deficit would contradict government promises that the scheme will over time pay for itself, and jeopardise promised compensation to businesses and households from revenue raised from selling emissions permits.

And the good news is that this may prevent the Government from being able to negotiate with the Opposition, forcing them to vote it down:

The forecast estimates will dramatically lessen the chances of a deal in ETS negotiations between the government and the opposition, ahead of the second Senate vote late next month when the laws could become a double-dissolution trigger.

The Coalition could reject Kevin Rudd’s proposed carbon emissions trading scheme next month even if the Prime Minister accepts all of Malcolm Turnbull’s proposed amendments.

Senate leader Nick Minchin said yesterday there was no guarantee the Coalition partyroom would accept any agreed proposals, sparking government claims the opposition was acting in bad faith in negotiating with it over amendments.

Read it here.