Who's moving back to the UK?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...en-energy.html

We are. I cant say I'm too bothered about the fact that electricity is going to rise here or there really, it's just going to rise.

They should just dissolve it in a local river .

"See environmental officer no pollution, just the pH of the river is about 3 thanks to the carbonic and sulphuric acid and the fishes died weeks ago."

Tony Abbott thinks that if you have to have any scheme that a carbon tax is a good way to do it as well. He said so before he knew labor was proposing one.

Even if he was thinking of introducing one, I'm sure he wouldn't do it now when the economy is in such an "iffy" state.

Gillard was asked if it was ok to lie to the populace (in regard her pre-election promise that the Carbon Tax would not happen)

Her reply was - 'If circumstances change'

The next question should have been:

"What circumstances have changed?"!!!!

She promised that her Labor government wouldn't introduce a Carbon Tax. What changed is that her "Labor" government is not a "Labor" government - its a "Coalition" governemtn between Labor, Greens and a bunch of independents.

As such I dont see this as anywhere near as much of a barefaced lie as the popular press would like us to believe - more a sensible working of 'consensus and compromise'. If the people of Australia dont like it they only have themselves to blame - they voted for this mixed bag of politicians.

I believe that she said, " No government I lead...." She is the leader of the present motley crew.

oh well - in that case by all means string her up by the balls for having the temerity to be pragmatic and try to do the right thing.

If it's just taxing the polluters (coal companies) and giving the money to the people, isn't this just the Mining Tax (great big new tax) with another name?

No because the more the big companies work out how to do what they do with less pollution, the less tax they pay.

My point wasn't whether he was thinking of introducing one, but that he has stated in the recent past that a carbon tax was the best way of doing it, now that labor have proposed a carbon tax it is suddenly a bad way. He who is without lie cast the first stone.

If it was at all credible the tax collected would be used to work on and find solutions to help minimise emissions.

Taking a tax from just some so called high polluters and giving that money to "ordinary" Joe Public is nothing more than wealth distribution.....and an attempt to win sufficient votes to retain power.

The tax is being used to work on and find solutions to help minimise emissions:

1. By taxing companies less if they pollute less it puts huge incentive to reduce emissions. Joe Public will only be wealthier if they use their tax credit wisely to purchase from lower emission companies rather than companies that do not reduce emissions.

2. A lot of the revenue raised is also going towards "work on and find solutions to help minimise emissions.":

- $300 million has set aside help the steel industry move to a clean energy future.

- $1.3 billion has been set aside for a Coal Sector Jobs Package, targeted at mines that are most affected by the carbon price.

- A $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation will be established to invest in new technology.

- $3.2 billion has been allocated to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.

(Source: announcement of package)


"and an attempt to win sufficient votes to retain power" - I totally disagree that any govt would think this would win them votes.

They big companies will probably work out that the cheapest way to do what they do is do it somewhere else.