Penny Wong’s Greek Gift

The report that Finance Minister Penny Wong has plans to withdraw hundreds of millions of dollars from the Future Fund is most disturbing. There appears to be no reason for such plans safe to keep intact Labor promise for a surplus budget in 2012. This appears to be wanton and reckless behaviour that tells us our worries that Labor Governments are more fiscally irresponsible are not astray.

When Peter Costello set up the fund, the understanding was that no withdrawal can be made unless actuarial advice is that the liability arising from public sector superannuation obligations would be fully funded. This advice has yet to be given in fact the current advice is that for the 2012 budget, the liability would not be funded.

So why is Penny Wong and her boss the discredited and unwanted Julia Gillard, so hell bent on this course of action? Australians should be up in arms and say to this government to stop messing with our future. First the carbon tax to wreak uncertainty on the economy, now this banditry of a raid on our future fund.

While not every one of us has a direct interest in this fund, undermining the future fund would do serious damage to the government’s sovereign financial rating which would in turn send our country down the Grecian path with similar tragic outcomes. Hands off the future fund!


Costello on Carbon Tax and National Income

For the first time that I can remember, an Australian government is introducing a policy – the carbon tax – which is consciously designed to cut national income rather than boost it.

Sometimes I think that this government needs a responsible adult – someone who can walk into the cabinet much like a parent would walk into a child’s bedroom and say: ”Enough is enough. It is time to clean up the mess. And there will be no more nonsense until that is done.”

– Peter Costello

See the rest of this  including the AWU rubbish Paul Howe manages to dish out.

Global Warming and the Carbon Tax … Nuts.

Want to know what a recent expert study on climate change says? See the following excerpts, and you’d think the whole thing is uncertain enough to avoid implementing the carbon tax scheme, but then again we’re dealing with Gaia land maniacs here.

The report: Dr Robert Lindzen and YS Choi, as published in the Asia Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences

The excerpts:

  • Doubling of CO2 will only result in a 1 deg increase in warming (as opposed to at least 1.5 – 5.0 deg in other reports);
  • Simple regression methods used by several existing papers generally exaggerate positive feedbacks and even show positive feedbacks when actual feedbacks are negative;
  • The foregoing imply that the existing models are exaggerating climate sensitivity;
  • The current models have serious coupling issues, where warming may have been wrongly associated with other factors; and
  • The study was a follow-up on a previous one, addressing some feedback and criticisms on its previous approach.

It’s a serious, normal scientific endeavour, which shows if nothing else, climate change is a an issue on which the jury is still well and truly out. Given this uncertainty, why is the Gillard Government and her mob especially Bob Brown, Christine Milne and the Greens in general so hell bent on wrecking our economy, especially since even if the science is a settled issue, what Australia does in addressing emission will ever only have a totally negligible effect? Whatever Australia does, if it does it alone, will not change anything one bit.

In a way, this Labor Government is very similar to the UMNO government in Malaysia. Sick.

If Will Steffen is right, will $100 a tonne cut it?

Will Steffen heads up the Climate Commission. He – the Commission – has issued a report demanding urgent action to deal with the human caused climate change. Or else – sea level would rise and we’d all have to live like Kevin Costner in water world.

Julia Gillard has pointed to the report and sort of said – I told you so. But if that were the case, and given the urgency to bring emission down straight away or else, the carbon price she touted – $20 a tonne – would be like introducing Norhafiz Zamani into the Birmingham City attack to solve the Blues’ woes in front of goal. It would be toothless, a complete waste of time and may well be counter-productive. [I confess I have just only googled the current Malaysian football team striker. I also confess this is the first time in God knows how long I took an interest in NEP infected football in Malaysia]

To be responding to Will Steffen’s Climate Commission doomsday report, the carbon tax should be so prohibitive – say $100 a tonne just like the Greens said – to be of any effect unless of course, Julia is lying again.

If Julia Gillard could not be trusted and lied in saying there would be no carbon tax under a government she leads, why would we trust her to keep carbon tax to $20 a tonne, especially if she endorses the Will Steffen Climate Commission – we must act now or perish – report? The Greens are looking at a minimum of $100 per tonne and they will want to include petrol in their target. If Will Steffen and his Climate Commission report is to be taken seriously that is the bare minimum step. But that would send most of us back to the caves, wouldn’t it?

Will 23 March Speak?

How many votes and how many seats do you think Labor would have lost or not received in the last elections, had voters knew Gillard was going to go with the Greens and introduce the carbon tax?

How many voters who voted for Labor would have voted someone else – either the Coalition or an independent – had Gillard campaigned saying, at least in so far as the carbon tax is concerned and leaving aside other issues like giving Territories outright law passing rights, that she would team up with Bob Brown and his Greens? That would have set off a whole chain of activities which would likely shift the mood and results in a different direction, or not?

Will we have a whiff of the hypothetical outcome on 23 March, when the conservatives plan to hold rallies against the carbon tax?