Rambi

Okay, actually reading your link which you obviously failed to do.

Read the whole quote and you get.

"I don't rule out the possibility of legislating a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, a market-based mechanism," she said of the next parliament. "I rule out a carbon tax."

And also.
While any carbon price would not be triggered until after the 2013 election, Ms Gillard would have two potential legislative partners next term - the Coalition or the Greens. She would legislate the carbon price next term if sufficient consensus existed.


She was obviously being subtle.

PS: And more pre-election stuff saying she'll put a price on carbon.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/poli...-1225884127606

Maybe someone at the time should have asked what's the difference between a tax and a price on carbon.

GarryP

It's in China, India and the Far East economies.

Nobody seriously manufactures in Oz, the overheads are already too high for that - since people want paying a living wage.

Mind, if you are pricing carbon you eventually have to price imports to account for dirty manufacture overseas. Only you can only do this once you have your own house in order - and Australia has a long way to go to meet that standard. Hence the need for a price on carbon pollution - and for it to be explicitly revenue neutral.

Vash the Stampede

With a minority government, Gillard has little choice. The Greens and independents have forced this on her. Every party leader makes campaign promises on the assumption of majority government. If the election delivers a hung parliament, all bets are off and campaign promises become negotiable.

Some party leaders don't even keep their promises even when they do end up with a majority government; just look at John "We will never, ever introduce a GST" Howard, for example.

Deancm_MKII

Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is not the same as a Carbon Tax and she clearly, plain as day, ruled out a carbon tax.

Not relevant to this period of government.

Deancm_MKII

So Gillard really doesn't know whether she is coming or going?

Deancm_MKII

Time to go back to the polls then.

JoeBloggs80

Anyone who believes any politician's manifesto at election time is a fool. They will all say whatever it takes to get them the vote.

Deancm_MKII

Australia will be the laughing stock of the world, especially when no other country will go down this route. Especially considering global warming is a hoax.

Rambi

I think it's fair to say she promised both things and nobody picked her up on it.

Deancm_MKII

And what does that say about her being PM then?

Rambi

That she's a very skilled politician. Unlike Dumber.

Deancm_MKII

A skilled politician would get the story straight. She is not skilled at all.

JoeBloggs80

Wol

She lies. Period.

But in any case what's the point? The world's population is forecast to go up by some 40% by 2050 so you'd need at least that reduction to stay put. In fact you would need a hell of a lot more, since the majority of the planet's people live in countries that aspire to our standard of living, which equates to their emissions increasing far more than prorata.

The planet will sort itself out in its own way - the human population will crash to a sustainable level, perhaps a couple of billion.

roaringmouse

Except that in the 1998 election campaign John Howard announced the introduction of GST as a policy - so at the polling booths in 1998 it was a known policy.