lies about her own lie by claiming she never said that.
Instread our PM tried to say that the tax was referred to in her pre-election speeches.
Listening to Alan Jones interview Julia Gillard over Gillards lie about carbon tax.
The interview was live, will have to wait until the podcast gets put onto 2gb site.


Hypocrisy and deceit is what Gillard has done.
To justify her lie Gillard diverts this tax as being that Australia would be left behind as every other country is imposing a carbon tax. Further that this tax will help Australian jobs and households.
Then Gillard is trying to divert even more by saying ask these questions to Tony Abbott.

Alan Jones then played Gillards speech: "There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led"
Now Gillards response is saying that using those words is simply playing semantics.
Jones asks Gillard again why she said that and Gillard says Ive answered that with saying that it isnt a carbon tax.
What was that about semantics again Gillard?

Even Wayne Swan said thered be no carbon tax, "Not possible".

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 6:42am:

lies about her own lie by claiming she never said that. Instread our PM tried to say that the tax was referred to in her pre-election speeches. Listening to Alan Jones interview Julia Gillard over Gillards lie about carbon tax. The interview was live, will have to wait until the podcast gets put onto 2gb site. Hypocrisy and deceit is what Gillard has done. To justify her lie Gillard diverts this tax as being that Australia would be left behind as every other country is imposing a carbon tax. Further that this tax will help Australian jobs and households. Then Gillard is trying to divert even more by saying ask these questions to Tony Abbott. Alan Jones then played Gillards speech: "There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led" Now Gillards response is saying that using those words is simply playing semantics. Jones asks Gillard again why she said that and Gillard says Ive answered that with saying that it isnt a carbon tax. What was that about semantics again Gillard? Even Wayne Swan said thered be no carbon tax, "Not possible".

its entertaining watching the labor faithful desperately trying to weasel out of this one. Gillards promise was clear and unequivocal. She lied. Plain and simple. She is possibly the worst PM we have ever had. She is certainly the most deceitful.

I also predict that quite soon, Aussie will come in and declare frenchyjen to be one of Mellie's 'socks'.

Did you gullible idiots really think I was going to keep my word?

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2010/11/17/1225955/220629-julia-gillard.jpg

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:20am:

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 6:42am: lies about her own lie by claiming she never said that. Instread our PM tried to say that the tax was referred to in her pre-election speeches. Listening to Alan Jones interview Julia Gillard over Gillards lie about carbon tax. The interview was live, will have to wait until the podcast gets put onto 2gb site. Hypocrisy and deceit is what Gillard has done. To justify her lie Gillard diverts this tax as being that Australia would be left behind as every other country is imposing a carbon tax. Further that this tax will help Australian jobs and households. Then Gillard is trying to divert even more by saying ask these questions to Tony Abbott. Alan Jones then played Gillards speech: "There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led" Now Gillards response is saying that using those words is simply playing semantics. Jones asks Gillard again why she said that and Gillard says Ive answered that with saying that it isnt a carbon tax. What was that about semantics again Gillard? Even Wayne Swan said thered be no carbon tax, "Not possible". its entertaining watching the labor faithful desperately trying to weasel out of this one. Gillards promise was clear and unequivocal. She lied. Plain and simple. She is possibly the worst PM we have ever had. She is certainly the most deceitful.

of course she did.. and guess what she didnt blink an eye or squirm, when Abbott berrated her on QT..she couldnt have cared less.

she already had it in her notes how to squirm off this hook..she was madly looking for it.  no shame as they say.

lies go with the hardleft territory by the looks of the boards.. point the finger at the other fellow.. take their eye off the ball at all costs then lie your way out of it..and then.and then.. sweep it under the carpet as if it never happened.

we have sunk to new depths in this country no doubt about it..

Julia Gillard will be judged at the next election for her back flip on a carbon tax.....Tony Abbott and the Coalition can argue against the carbon tax and propose there own policy on climate change.....Labor were wrong to drop the tax before the last election because of the fear campaign run by the Opposition......Now they must wear voter backlash for being weak and failing to stand by there principles.....Labor cannot blame the Coalition from running away from a carbon tax when this is what they in fact did themselves in the face of perceived lack of voter support!!!

Once again we see political parties treating the voter like a fool by not doing what is right and doing what is popular......Julia Gillard and Labor need to do a lot of soul searching before the public will trust them again.....Julia Gillard and Labor should have gone to the next election proposing a carbon tax and not introduced one in this term of government.....they have no mandate and were voted in on a policy of no carbon tax.....Julia Gillard and Labor deserve to be condemned for there lack of honesty and conviction.....It is not good enough!!!

>:(

We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. This is less about the carbon tax itself, than it is about the willingness of this third-rate PM top lie with such ease. Nothing she says on any topic is worth anything.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:31am:

Julia Gillard will be judged at the next election for her back flip on a carbon tax.....Tony Abbott and the Coalition can argue against the carbon tax and propose there own policy on climate change.....Labor were wrong to drop the tax before the last election because of the fear campaign run by the Opposition......Now they must wear voter backlash for being weak and failing to stand by there principles.....Labor cannot blame the Coalition from running away from a carbon tax when this is what they in fact did themselves in the face of perceived lack of voter support!!! Once again we see political parties treating the voter like a fool by not doing what is right and doing what is popular......Julia Gillard and Labor need to do a lot of soul searching before the public will trust them again.....Julia Gillard and Labor should have gone to the next election proposing a carbon tax and not introduced one in this term of government.....they have no mandate and were voted in on a policy of no carbon tax.....Julia Gillard and Labor deserve to be condemned for there lack of honesty and conviction.....It is not good enough!!! >:(

When it all boils down to it, integrity is what we are really looking for in leadership. Honesty, integrity and conviction. These three are the components of a leader that we wil follow and support. Gillard has none of them. She lies without hesitation and apparently believes in absolutely nothing besides her own survival. She is an utter disgrace to the office.

Quote:

We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse.

LOL never ever,LOL. ;D ;D ;D

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:31am:

Julia Gillard will be judged at the next election for her back flip on a carbon tax.....Tony Abbott and the Coalition can argue against the carbon tax and propose there own policy on climate change.....Labor were wrong to drop the tax before the last election because of the fear campaign run by the Opposition......Now they must wear voter backlash for being weak and failing to stand by there principles.....Labor cannot blame the Coalition from running away from a carbon tax when this is what they in fact did themselves in the face of perceived lack of voter support!!! Once again we see political parties treating the voter like a fool by not doing what is right and doing what is popular......Julia Gillard and Labor need to do a lot of soul searching before the public will trust them again.....Julia Gillard and Labor should have gone to the next election proposing a carbon tax and not introduced one in this term of government.....they have no mandate and were voted in on a policy of no carbon tax.....Julia Gillard and Labor deserve to be condemned for there lack of honesty and conviction.....It is not good enough!!!

Unfortunatly all true

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:31am:

We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse.

How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:26am:

I also predict that quite soon, Aussie will come in and declare frenchyjen to be one of Mellie's 'socks'.

Mel would have had at least 3 posts on the topic and provided a responce to most of the comments. This is nothing like her style even if it makes any difference to anyone.

The style is more like Cods and I have no idea if she even wears socks - certainly not suggesting that it is her either.

I have little doubt that frenchyjen is herself if not himself.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:07am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:26am: I also predict that quite soon, Aussie will come in and declare frenchyjen to be one of Mellie's 'socks'. Mel would have had at least 3 posts on the topic and provided a responce to most of the comments. This is nothing like her style even if it makes any difference to anyone. The style is more like Cods and I have no idea if she even wears socks - certainly not suggesting that it is her either. I have little doubt that frenchyjen is herself if not himself.

you had better not dnare if you have to cast aspersions on peoples integrity and honesty would you mind leaving me out of it.. I have been banned on one topic that I have never been into because of lies..so please dont go there.. if you wish to blacken others names thats up to them to shoot you down..

take it from me thats what I will be doing.

I get very very hostile.about lies that are broadcast about my ID.. the only other ID you have seen me use is codswal..and due to all sorts of problems I created for myself I had to re register.. and thought as I am always called cods that would do.

feel free to insult me like others do because you dont like me.. but dont tell lies..

btw your style is also like a lot from the hardleft.. or havent you noticed..

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:26am:

I also predict that quite soon, Aussie will come in and declare frenchyjen to be one of Mellie's 'socks'.

lol just seen this... almost spot on longy.well done.boring but honest.

isnt it a shame we have to travel down this road every time things get sticky for the hardleft.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:41am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard.

forget about what? 12 years of being PM or Gillard who lied thru her teeth to become PM and has lied and every turn since? There is a massive difference between a person who might lie occasionally (like all of us) and soemone who appears to lie at every turn.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:31am:

Julia Gillard will be judged at the next election for her back flip on a carbon tax.....Tony Abbott and the Coalition can argue against the carbon tax and propose there own policy on climate change.....Labor were wrong to drop the tax before the last election because of the fear campaign run by the Opposition......Now they must wear voter backlash for being weak and failing to stand by there principles.....Labor cannot blame the Coalition from running away from a carbon tax when this is what they in fact did themselves in the face of perceived lack of voter support!!! Once again we see political parties treating the voter like a fool by not doing what is right and doing what is popular......Julia Gillard and Labor need to do a lot of soul searching before the public will trust them again.....Julia Gillard and Labor should have gone to the next election proposing a carbon tax and not introduced one in this term of government.....they have no mandate and were voted in on a policy of no carbon tax.....Julia Gillard and Labor deserve to be condemned for there lack of honesty and conviction.....It is not good enough!!! >:(

Well said Phil.  I have just seen Ms Gillard referred to as JuLIAR and that seems very appropriate as she did say pre-election "Under my government there will be NO Carbon Tax",  and I cannot for the life of me see how anyone can say that she did not say that.

Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time.

Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right.

cods wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:22am:

you had better not dnare if you have to cast aspersions on peoples integrity and honesty would you mind leaving me out of it.. I have been banned on one topic that I have never been into because of lies..so please dont go there.. if you wish to blacken others names thats up to them to shoot you down.. take it from me thats what I will be doing.

I am happy to apologise for your perception Cods but I feel that I insulted nobody.

All I said was that the style of the post was more similar to your style than to Melli.

Considering that the style was well written polite and competent I do not see why you would have a problem, I also said that I believe that you do not use fake id’s and that the poster is exactly who he or she is claiming to be.

I thought I was doing the opposite to casting aspersions on your character. While I often do not agree with you I do respect your right to your opinion and have no doubt that you are honest and have integrity.

mantra wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:33am:

Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right.

Which might give Gillard some leeway if she actually acknowledged that she made a promise in the election campaign. But she is so BLATANTLY DISHONEST that she refuses to evene acknowledge that. And labor might be a minority government but the carbon tax is the input of ONE SEAT out of 76. The Greens have gotten Gillard beaten.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

cods wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:22am: you had better not dnare if you have to cast aspersions on peoples integrity and honesty would you mind leaving me out of it.. I have been banned on one topic that I have never been into because of lies..so please dont go there.. if you wish to blacken others names thats up to them to shoot you down.. take it from me thats what I will be doing. I am happy to apologise for your perception Cods but I feel that I insulted nobody. All I said was that the style of the post was more similar to your style than to Melli. Considering that the style was well written polite and competent I do not see why you would have a problem, I also said that I believe that you do not use fake id’s and that the poster is exactly who he or she is claiming to be. I thought I was doing the opposite to casting aspersions on your character. While I often do not agree with you I do respect your right to your opinion and have no doubt that you are honest and have integrity.

Frenchyjen is along-time poster form yahoo days who is generally a well-written and rational poster.

mantra wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:33am:

Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right.

Bob Brown didnt 'tell the truth'. He expressed his own point of view and has since tried to impose it on the rest of the country.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:30am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. forget about what? 12 years of being PM or Gillard who lied thru her teeth to become PM and has lied and every turn since? There is a massive difference between a person who might lie occasionally (like all of us) and soemone who appears to lie at every turn.

Exactly right.

The never ever GST lie was while he was opposition leader in order to get elected, then we had Children O/B, Iraq, Abu Prison, AWB, WMD's, Waterfront dispute,low interest rates, etc at ever tern in a neverending 12 year stream.

Gillard would need to do this several times a year on important issues for another decade to just break even with Mr Howard.
.

Bob Brown said it how he saw it. he was open and honest in his comments. While i disagree with his thoughts, I agree with his honesty.

Unlike judas
http://www.thepunch.com.au/images/uploads/Carbonmain.jpg

Well said philperth. I didn't know you had it in you. Unfortunately due to many factors, 24/7 media and its influence on voters being one, we are unlikely to see leaders again with the qualities you have outlined.
The utter failure of Julia Gillard is only further higlighted by the fact that she cannot even lie convincingly.
The weakness of our voting system is demonstrated by the comments above of those who are prepared to tolerate it, even admire it.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:49am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:30am: Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. forget about what? 12 years of being PM or Gillard who lied thru her teeth to become PM and has lied and every turn since? There is a massive difference between a person who might lie occasionally (like all of us) and soemone who appears to lie at every turn. Exactly right. The never ever GST lie was while he was opposition leader in order to get elected, then we had Children O/B, Iraq, Abu Prison, AWB, WMD's, Waterfront dispute,low interest rates, etc at ever tern in a neverending 12 year stream. Gillard would need to do this several times a year on important issues for another decade to just break even with Mr Howard. .

You know you are desperate when you ahve to troll thru history and misinterpret it.

A) The 'never ever' GST was a change of opinion that was put to the people. Thats not a lie.  A lie would be sayign there will be no GST under my government and then immediately implementing one.

B) Children Overboard. The fact that Howard was merely repeating in good faith what was told to him does not make him a liar. I hope I dont have to explain why.

C) Iraq. Once again Howard went on information he received in good faith. The fact that it was later shown to be wrong doesnt make him a liar. it makes him ill-informed.

D) Abu Prison? You mean a prison that no one in australia had anything to do with?

E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? Poor diddums... this is the kind of courageous action that only a conviction politican can acheive.

F) Gillard blatantly lied when saying she would not oppose Rudd and then did so 24 hours later

G) Gillard blatantly lied when saying there would be no carbon tax and then said there would less than a month after the elction

H) Gillard had more lies than Howard did within a month of becoming PM. SHe lies more often than tell the truth. IM not sure she even knows the difference.

bogarde73 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:49am:

Well said philperth. I didn't know you had it in you. Unfortunately due to many factors, 24/7 media and its influence on voters being one, we are unlikely to see leaders again with the qualities you have outlined. The utter failure of Julia Gillard is only further higlighted by the fact that she cannot even lie convincingly. The weakness of our voting system is demonstrated by the comments above of those who are prepared to tolerate it, even admire it.

Your last sentence says it all. We are condemned to a procession of lying PMs if we are not willing to complain about it and say enough is enough. It is not unfair to expect conviction integrity and honesty from our leaders. They will make mistakes; they will do dumb things and yes they will sometimes lie. But if we let the bad things sail thru un-condemned then we get what we deserve - bad leadership.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:45am:

mantra wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:33am: Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right. Which might give Gillard some leeway if she actually acknowledged that she made a promise in the election campaign. But she is so BLATANTLY DISHONEST that she refuses to evene acknowledge that. And labor might be a minority government but the carbon tax is the input of ONE SEAT out of 76. The Greens have gotten Gillard beaten.

That I agree with. She has a feasible explanation and she should have used it.

It's still not enough to warrant a change of government, which is why we have the opposition screaming from the rooftops about this "lie".

Hey Guys, if it was a Tony Abbott promise, you'd have no problem with him 'backflipping' today, now would you!?

After all, he's allowed to stay stuff in the heat of the moment or the dead of a boozy night and he only provides guarantees of rock solid gospel truth if it's in writing, eh!?

Being a Catholic, he also has the usual out of making a confession in secret to a priest - and Turnbull was a traitor so this holier-than-thou failed clergyman and family bloke has got the whole bald-faced lie, assassinate and conquer thing happening...with no serious backlash to fear...

Poor Gillard the barren atheist with a mop of red hair is a woman - so she's not allowed to play by the ol' political boys' selective rules and she certainly can't get away with 'assassinating a popularly-elected leader' as her male counterparts have repeatedly done before her...

Not to worry, whilst ever we're focusing on myths and lies and double-standards, there's no need to consider the harsh and pressing socio-economic and environmental realities of failure to act on climate change...

A) The 'never ever' GST was a change of opinion that was put to the people. Thats not a lie.
__________________________________________________________
Gillard lied about a carbon price...admitted (hard not too)

But come on...Howard didnt lie about the GST?

I cant stop laughing. "Never ever" ah no wait...I changed my mind............ ;D.

nemesis, surely the fact that Gillard stood up in the House & said "I believe in climate change . . .and I believe that it is caused by man", surely that's enough to convince you that it's all a lie.

bogarde73 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:42am:

nemesis, surely the fact that Gillard stood up in the House & said "I believe in climate change . . .and I believe that it is caused by man", surely that's enough to convince you that it's all a lie.

When somebody says "I believe in doG...and that he created man in his own image", that they are automatically lying!?

Anyway, Bogey, what are you convinced of!?

Pray tell...

Equitist wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:47am:

I believe in doG

Just so she can get in a jibe and offend Christian people this afternoon I see.....

mantra wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:21am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:45am: mantra wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:33am: Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right. Which might give Gillard some leeway if she actually acknowledged that she made a promise in the election campaign. But she is so BLATANTLY DISHONEST that she refuses to evene acknowledge that. And labor might be a minority government but the carbon tax is the input of ONE SEAT out of 76. The Greens have gotten Gillard beaten. That I agree with. She has a feasible explanation and she should have used it. It's still not enough to warrant a change of government, which is why we have the opposition screaming from the rooftops about this "lie".

What 'feasible explanation'?

Tara wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:41am:

A) The 'never ever' GST was a change of opinion that was put to the people. Thats not a lie. __________________________________________________________ Gillard lied about a carbon price...admitted (hard not too) But come on...Howard didnt lie about the GST? I cant stop laughing. "Never ever" ah no wait...I changed my mind............ ;D.

You clearly dont understand either the history or what a LIE is.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:49am:

Equitist wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 9:47am: I believe in doG Just so she can get in a jibe and offend Christian people this afternoon I see.....

One thing about nemesis is that there really is no offensive statement she will not make. She has made some truly insulting and blasphemous statements with no regard to others while getting antsy if someone decides to talk about her own family drama. See, this is where i COULD make disparaging comments about her family past. But I dont. I have some respect and integrity. It is a pity she cannot do the same.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:30am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. forget about what? 12 years of being PM or Gillard who lied thru her teeth to become PM and has lied and every turn since? There is a massive difference between a person who might lie occasionally (like all of us) and soemone who appears to lie at every turn.

Will Tony Abbott promise to repeal the Carbon Tax if Bob Brown and Juliar Gillard manage to slide it through?  The people demand an answer to this question. :)

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:41am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard.

Howard changed his position and took it to the people at an election.

Six months are promising not to do it, here we are.

Big difference mate, the people didnt get a choice in this did they

Its a simple point - Tony Abbott, if he is genuine - must ask the Australian people to give him the mandate at the next election in the Senate and HR to repeal the Carbon Tax. :)

This is one of very few sentiments from Prevailing that I can agree with: -


Prevailing wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:37am:

Its a simple point - Tony Abbott, if he is genuine - must ask the Australian people to give him the mandate at the next election in the Senate and HR to repeal the Carbon Tax. :)

So, will Abbott give a 'Gospel truth' in writing guarantee that the Liberal Party, when next elected Federally, will promptly and fully repeal any Carbon Tax or Carbon Price legislation that the Labs pass during the current term!?

Well, will Abbott have the guts and integrity promise this!?

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:03am:

A) The 'never ever' GST was a change of opinion that was put to the people. Thats not a lie.  A lie would be sayign there will be no GST under my government and then immediately implementing one..

No point going through it all again as it would be a significant diversion from the topic at hand though I believe it is easily demonstraited that Mr Howard would have never been PM had he not told this one. Very similar the the Gillard statment except without the election but also may not be a tax.


Quote:

B) Children Overboard. The fact that Howard was merely repeating in good faith what was told to him does not make him a liar. I hope I dont have to explain why.you are probably right about when he first said it but he continued to hold that line well after he was aware it was not correct.

You are probably right about when he first said it but he continued to hold that line well after he was aware it was not correct.



Quote:

C) Iraq. Once again Howard went on information he received in good faith. The fact that it was later shown to be wrong doesnt make him a liar. it makes him ill-informed.

On Iraq he gave false and misleading information about many aspects including the statment that he had seem definitive proof that WMD's existed which he could not share because it was too sensitive - it turned out that the proof he had seen did not in fact exist.


Quote:

D) Abu Prison? You mean a prison that no one in australia had anything to do with?

Australians were present at the sessions - when asked about the interrogations in Parliament the Liberal line was they knew nothing about it, eventually we find out they were playing semantics and they knew all about the questioning but defined that as different to interrogation.


Quote:

E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? Poor diddums... this is the kind of courageous action that only a conviction politican can acheive.

This was a disgrace everything which was achieved a competent management team could have got with no disruption but that would not have had the same impact in the lead up to an election.

Remember that this was planned and staged to occur on the cusp of a federal election just like Children overboard the Tampa the intervention in the NT etc.

Attack dogs and a security force wearing balaclavas in the middle of the night invading a workplace in Australia - you have to be kidding.

A company structuring its employment arm away from their assets and deliberately setting up that division to fail financially in order to trigger the removal of employees is disgraceful and worse that the government of the day were involved with the planning.

Mr Howard said in parliament that he was being briefed weekly if not daily on the event and was across all aspects of what was happening yet as soon as a Judge found the government had a case to answer all of a sudden he knew nothing and it was all Peter Reith’s doing.

We obviously have a different view on honesty and courage, I have no idea how anyone could support this type of behaviour by a government.

Verge wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:36am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. Howard changed his position and took it to the people at an election. Six months are promising not to do it, here we are. Big difference mate, the people didnt get a choice in this did they

On the contrary, Verge, the clever little whining Lib proagandists gave the Labs and effective-mandate by pointing out that the Labs would bring in a Carbon Price - even a Carbon Tax...

The best they can claim now is a resoundingly-hollow "I told you so"...



As I posted elsewhere: -


Equitist wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:32am:

Note this particular extract from the Lib web-site: - http://www.liberal.org.au/Latest-News/2010/08/15/Gillard-and-Swan-at-odds-on-carbon-tax.aspx Quote: Gillard and Swan at odds on carbon tax 15/08/10 Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan are at odds over Labor’s plans to tax carbon pollution. This morning on Meet the Press, Wayne Swan tried to rule out Labor imposing a price on carbon:    SWAN: Well certainly what we rejected is this hysterical allegation that somehow we are moving towards a carbon tax from the Liberals in their advertising. We certainly reject that. What we’ve said is that we will go back and seek to reconstruct a community consensus about how we deal with climate change. We have, we have said that we will review where we are with that in 2012. Ah, we have said that we will have a comprehensive re-evaluation of all our ... of, of, of our approaches. As you know, ah, the Liberals are responsible for defeating the carbon pollution reduction scheme. They voted it down, not once, but twice, but three times. We’ll have a look at where we’re going in 2012. But just half an hour later on Channel 9, Ms Gillard confirmed that her Citizens’ Assembly is nothing more than a smoke-screen for the coming carbon tax:    GILLARD: Our climate change policy comes from someone who believes in climate change, comes from someone who wants to lead a national debate to make sure that we’ve got the community consensus we need for a carbon pollution reduction scheme and a cap on carbon pollution and a price mechanism to get there. Mr Swan is deceiving the Australian public with his claims that Labor won’t implement a carbon tax. Clearly, according to the Prime Minister herself, they will. They are trying to have a bet each. But the reality is they are ducking and weaving and twisting and turning to try to avoid admitting their plans for a big new electricity tax. Today's performances by Wayne Swan and Julia Gillard point to Labor’s dishonest plan to try to hide their carbon tax. So, good on the Libs, for making sure that we all went to the polls in August in the full knowledge that Julia Gillard had informed us that there would be a price on carbon - even a carbon tax! In effect, they've ensured that the Labs have a MANDATE!

http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Attachments/Lib_site_-_12Aug10_-_Swan_walks_both_sides_of_the_street_on_carbon_tax.jpg



http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Attachments/Lib_site_-_15Aug10_-_Gillard_and_Swan_at_odds_on_carbon_tax.jpg

Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate.

Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads.

Why couldnt she have just been honest

Verge wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:20am:

Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest

In the lying cow's defence though, she's not really leading this government- the green's are...:p

Prevailing wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:37am:

Its a simple point - Tony Abbott, if he is genuine - must ask the Australian people to give him the mandate at the next election in the Senate and HR to repeal the Carbon Tax. :)

He will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5pzSvSCUZo

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 9:03am:

E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? .

Just a bit of info on just how much of a success this was.

One of the major waterfront inititives was improving the technology used, automated processes.

About 1/2 of a billion dollers was spent on automated systems.

The figures were released showing these systems were a great success, today the multiple crains involved look terribly impressive but the fact is they sit stationary out of the way of the real operation.

The increased number of containers moved were attributed to this improvement. the fact is that the number of movements were borrowed from the same old staff doing their work in the same old semi manual manner.

The new system needed more employees to move less containers and took longer to do it and got a high failure rate as well, loading onto the incorrect trucks or missing.

The improvement came when management set targets for the shift and started to pay a bonus to crews which met the targets.

This system would have worked with no dispute required at all and no need to waste hundreds of million dollars or to dishonestly represent the results to the public, the board or their shareholders.

HC wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:22am:

Verge wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:20am: Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest she's not really leading this government-

It's all these people:

http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/ourleaders.jpg

HC wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:22am:

Verge wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:20am: Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest In the lying cow's defence though, she's not really leading this government- the green's are...:p

She lives in the lodge and calls herself the PM.  That makes her in charge.

Soren wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:30am:

HC wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:22am: Verge wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:20am: Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest she's not really leading this government- It's all these people:

http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/ourleaders.jpg




Viva la democracy!

Verge wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:32am:

HC wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:22am: Verge wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:20am: Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest In the lying cow's defence though, she's not really leading this government- the green's are...:p She lives in the lodge and calls herself the PM.  That makes her in charge.

Nah - not according to Tony Abbott: I just saw a clip of him on TV saying that Bob Brown was!

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:44am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 9:03am: A) The 'never ever' GST was a change of opinion that was put to the people. Thats not a lie.  A lie would be sayign there will be no GST under my government and then immediately implementing one.. No point going through it all again as it would be a significant diversion from the topic at hand though I believe it is easily demonstraited that Mr Howard would have never been PM had he not told this one. Very similar the the Gillard statment except without the election but also may not be a tax. Quote: B) Children Overboard. The fact that Howard was merely repeating in good faith what was told to him does not make him a liar. I hope I dont have to explain why.you are probably right about when he first said it but he continued to hold that line well after he was aware it was not correct. You are probably right about when he first said it but he continued to hold that line well after he was aware it was not correct. [quote]C) Iraq. Once again Howard went on information he received in good faith. The fact that it was later shown to be wrong doesnt make him a liar. it makes him ill-informed.

On Iraq he gave false and misleading information about many aspects including the statment that he had seem definitive proof that WMD's existed which he could not share because it was too sensitive - it turned out that the proof he had seen did not in fact exist.


Quote:

D) Abu Prison? You mean a prison that no one in australia had anything to do with?

Australians were present at the sessions - when asked about the interrogations in Parliament the Liberal line was they knew nothing about it, eventually we find out they were playing semantics and they knew all about the questioning but defined that as different to interrogation.


Quote:

E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? Poor diddums... this is the kind of courageous action that only a conviction politican can acheive.

This was a disgrace everything which was achieved a competent management team could have got with no disruption but that would not have had the same impact in the lead up to an election.

Remember that this was planned and staged to occur on the cusp of a federal election just like Children overboard the Tampa the intervention in the NT etc.

Attack dogs and a security force wearing balaclavas in the middle of the night invading a workplace in Australia - you have to be kidding.

A company structuring its employment arm away from their assets and deliberately setting up that division to fail financially in order to trigger the removal of employees is disgraceful and worse that the government of the day were involved with the planning.

Mr Howard said in parliament that he was being briefed weekly if not daily on the event and was across all aspects of what was happening yet as soon as a Judge found the government had a case to answer all of a sudden he knew nothing and it was all Peter Reith’s doing.

We obviously have a different view on honesty and courage, I have no idea how anyone could support this type of behaviour by a government.

[/quote]

do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union. Their bully tactics, intimidation and threats etc demanded a strong approach. Or would you prefer that a country like ours that has 20% of the worlds ship traffic should have the most inefficent ports in the world?

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:27am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 9:03am: E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? . Just a bit of info on just how much of a success this was. One of the major waterfront inititives was improving the technology used, automated processes. About 1/2 of a billion dollers was spent on automated systems. The figures were released showing these systems were a great success, today the multiple crains involved look terribly impressive but the fact is they sit stationary out of the way of the real operation. The increased number of containers moved were attributed to this improvement. the fact is that the number of movements were borrowed from the same old staff doing their work in the same old semi manual manner. The new system needed more employees to move less containers and took longer to do it and got a high failure rate as well, loading onto the incorrect trucks or missing. The improvement came when management set targets for the shift and started to pay a bonus to crews which met the targets. This system would have worked with no dispute required at all and no need to waste hundreds of million dollars or to dishonestly represent the results to the public, the board or their shareholders.

Where did u pick up that info from? the MWU website? the MWU refused ANY changes to the way the ports were run including higher productivity. THAT was why the conflict developed. And Howard won the battle.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:47am:

do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union.

Now THERE is a set of lovely blokes, with a real attitude for compromise.

A reason why Julia may have back-tracked:

'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing.
Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.'

For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973

wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:19pm:

A reason why Julia may have back-tracked: 'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing. Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.' For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973

Even you acknowledge that there has been a 'back-track'. the rest of us call it a lie, buyt 'back-track' is at least part way to the truth.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:23pm:

wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:19pm: A reason why Julia may have back-tracked: 'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing. Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.' For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973 Even you acknowledge that there has been a 'back-track'. the rest of us call it a lie, buyt 'back-track' is at least part way to the truth.

Talking about lies and back tracks. Tony Abbott himself once agreed with a Carbon Tax.
 
So, who's also betraying their earlier position?  

wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:23pm: wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:19pm: A reason why Julia may have back-tracked: 'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing. Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.' For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973 Even you acknowledge that there has been a 'back-track'. the rest of us call it a lie, buyt 'back-track' is at least part way to the truth. Talking about lies and back tracks. Tony Abbott himself once agreed with a Carbon Tax.   So, who's also betraying their earlier position?

The person who was PM standing for re-election as PM. The person who didnt express an opinion but made a formal election promise on behalf of her party.

Big Difference.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:30pm:

wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:23pm: wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:19pm: A reason why Julia may have back-tracked: 'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing. Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.' For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973 Even you acknowledge that there has been a 'back-track'. the rest of us call it a lie, buyt 'back-track' is at least part way to the truth. Talking about lies and back tracks. Tony Abbott himself once agreed with a Carbon Tax.   So, who's also betraying their earlier position?   The person who was PM standing for re-election as PM. The person who didnt express an opinion but made a formal election promise on behalf of her party. Big Difference.

So now with Abbott standing firm that he will oppose this 'new great big tax with all his will'. Its safe to say the PrimeMinister in waiting will never introduce one then?


I quote ~ 'The price of electricity will rise anyway. Best we attract new investment into renewable energy…diversify our energy generating systems.
Particularly with all the instability in the Arab & Persian state(s) at present.
It’s time to get off the fossil fuel rollercoaster."

Do you not agree ?

'

Soren wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:30am:

HC wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:22am: Verge wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:20am: Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest she's not really leading this government- It's all these people: http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/ourleaders.jpg

Thanks for highlighting in a picture why Australia is such a shambles right now.

I am happy to be out of there.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:04pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:47am: do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union. Now THERE is a set of lovely blokes, with a real attitude for compromise.

Now Now Andrei don't bag the unions a week ago you were on their side.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 1:12pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:04pm: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:47am: do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union. Now THERE is a set of lovely blokes, with a real attitude for compromise. Now Now Andrei don't bag the unions a week ago you were on their side.

I don't discriminate and give a blanket "Unions" view.
Rather i take the situation and the leadership individually.

In my own person experience when I was working on the re-structure project back at my old company, the AMWU were a pack of inbred bogan bully-boys who tried to halt every single suggestion the management put to them.
On our side there was considerable compromise on offer, on their side none.

As regards what I have read about the Maritime Union, they are basically inbred wharfie thugs. Nothing more.

Now on the other side (and what I spoke of last week) the Federation of Pilots - of which my dad was a key member - sought justified pay increases for the long hours they worked and to keep them up with their counterparts.
They compromised down from a demand of 40% to 21% and worked continuously to find a solution.
The public also saw the need for this gross injustice to be rectified.

Totally different horses my friend.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 1:16pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 1:12pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:04pm: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:47am: do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union. Now THERE is a set of lovely blokes, with a real attitude for compromise. Now Now Andrei don't bag the unions a week ago you were on their side. I don't discriminate and give a blanket "Unions" view. Rather i take the situation and the leadership individually. In my own person experience when I was working on the re-structure project back at my old company, the AMWU were a pack of inbred bogan bully-boys who tried to halt every single suggestion the management put to them. On our side there was considerable compromise on offer, on their side none. As regards what I have read about the Maritime Union, they are basically inbred wharfie thugs. Nothing more. Now on the other side (and what I spoke of last week) the Federation of Pilots - of which my dad was a key member - sought justified pay increases for the long hours they worked and to keep them up with their counterparts. They compromised down from a demand of 40% to 21% and worked continuously to find a solution. The public also saw the need for this gross injustice to be rectified. Totally different horses my friend.

Just having a dig I couldn't pass up mate :)
Of course I know the difference between thug unions & professional collectives.

Ju-liar will tax the air, then give some of the air tax to the poor to help them pay for said tax.


the left

Smithy - I would have been massively concerned if you were linking a professional group of people like the Federation of Pilots, with Union thugs and reprobates like the Maritime Union.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:20am:

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 6:42am: lies about her own lie by claiming she never said that. Instread our PM tried to say that the tax was referred to in her pre-election speeches. Listening to Alan Jones interview Julia Gillard over Gillards lie about carbon tax. The interview was live, will have to wait until the podcast gets put onto 2gb site. Hypocrisy and deceit is what Gillard has done. To justify her lie Gillard diverts this tax as being that Australia would be left behind as every other country is imposing a carbon tax. Further that this tax will help Australian jobs and households. Then Gillard is trying to divert even more by saying ask these questions to Tony Abbott. Alan Jones then played Gillards speech: "There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led" Now Gillards response is saying that using those words is simply playing semantics. Jones asks Gillard again why she said that and Gillard says Ive answered that with saying that it isnt a carbon tax. What was that about semantics again Gillard? Even Wayne Swan said thered be no carbon tax, "Not possible". its entertaining watching the labor faithful desperately trying to weasel out of this one. Gillards promise was clear and unequivocal. She lied. Plain and simple. She is possibly the worst PM we have ever had. She is certainly the most deceitful.

THIS WILL BE AN ENTERTAINING READ IN THE HISTORY BOOKS!

cods wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:28am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:20am: frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 6:42am: lies about her own lie by claiming she never said that. Instread our PM tried to say that the tax was referred to in her pre-election speeches. Listening to Alan Jones interview Julia Gillard over Gillards lie about carbon tax. The interview was live, will have to wait until the podcast gets put onto 2gb site. Hypocrisy and deceit is what Gillard has done. To justify her lie Gillard diverts this tax as being that Australia would be left behind as every other country is imposing a carbon tax. Further that this tax will help Australian jobs and households. Then Gillard is trying to divert even more by saying ask these questions to Tony Abbott. Alan Jones then played Gillards speech: "There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led" Now Gillards response is saying that using those words is simply playing semantics. Jones asks Gillard again why she said that and Gillard says Ive answered that with saying that it isnt a carbon tax. What was that about semantics again Gillard? Even Wayne Swan said thered be no carbon tax, "Not possible". its entertaining watching the labor faithful desperately trying to weasel out of this one. Gillards promise was clear and unequivocal. She lied. Plain and simple. She is possibly the worst PM we have ever had. She is certainly the most deceitful. of course she did.. and guess what she didnt blink an eye or squirm, when Abbott berrated her on QT..she couldnt have cared less. she already had it in her notes how to squirm off this hook..she was madly looking for it.  no shame as they say. lies go with the hardleft territory by the looks of the boards.. point the finger at the other fellow.. take their eye off the ball at all costs then lie your way out of it..and then.and then.. sweep it under the carpet as if it never happened. we have sunk to new depths in this country no doubt about it..

THIS WILL BE AN ENTERTAINING READ IN THE HISTORY BOOKS!

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:31am:

Julia Gillard will be judged at the next election for her back flip on a carbon tax.....Tony Abbott and the Coalition can argue against the carbon tax and propose there own policy on climate change.....Labor were wrong to drop the tax before the last election because of the fear campaign run by the Opposition......Now they must wear voter backlash for being weak and failing to stand by there principles.....Labor cannot blame the Coalition from running away from a carbon tax when this is what they in fact did themselves in the face of perceived lack of voter support!!! Once again we see political parties treating the voter like a fool by not doing what is right and doing what is popular......Julia Gillard and Labor need to do a lot of soul searching before the public will trust them again.....Julia Gillard and Labor should have gone to the next election proposing a carbon tax and not introduced one in this term of government.....they have no mandate and were voted in on a policy of no carbon tax.....Julia Gillard and Labor deserve to be condemned for there lack of honesty and conviction.....It is not good enough!!! >:(

YOU FORGET THE BUYING DEMOCRACY PRINCIPLE HIGHLIGHTED BY BOB BROWN!

WE ALL KNEW DEMOCRACY COULD BE BOUGHT BUT IT TOOK BOB BROWN TO COME OUT AND SAY IT AND PEOPLE TO GO, HE'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!

THAT'S POWER!

LOOKING FORWARD TO THE GREEN VOTE INCREASING IN THE POLLS! THIS WILL PUSH TONY TO NEW HEIGHTS/DEPTHS!!!  :D :D :D :D :D

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:31am:

We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. This is less about the carbon tax itself, than it is about the willingness of this third-rate PM top lie with such ease. Nothing she says on any topic is worth anything.

...omg, this will be ONE HELLUVA very interesting read in THE HISTORY BOOKS!

;)

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:41am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard.

THE ONLY THING HE IS REMEMBERED FOR IS THE SHAME SHAME SHAME !!!

 ;D ;D

Who was his full of himself psuedo-mate again?!!?

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:30am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. forget about what? 12 years of being PM or Gillard who lied thru her teeth to become PM and has lied and every turn since? There is a massive difference between a person who might lie occasionally (like all of us) and soemone who appears to lie at every turn.

FMDrunk!!!

The Howard lovers cannot get over the fact that all those years will be remembered for nought!

How big was the economy again?!!?

The bloke who used to tell us is talked about how often now?!!?

THE HOWARD LOVERS HATE THE NBN.... NO ONE ELSE!!!!  :D ;)

THE HOWARD LOVERS HATE THE NBN.... NO ONE ELSE!!!!  :D ;)

THE HOWARD LOVERS HATE THE NBN.... NO ONE ELSE!!!!  :D ;)

THE HOWARD LOVERS HATE THE NBN.... NO ONE ELSE!!!!  :D ;)

!

mantra wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:33am:

Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right.

You have succesfully predicted what the history books will say!

 ;D ;D

SIMPLE AS THAT BUT THE HOWARD LOVERS CANNOT BEAR TO SEE THE SIMPLICITY OF IT ALL BECAUSE IT IS ALL DOWN HILL FOR THEIR MANS REPUTATION WHEN PUT NEXT TO THE RUDD/GILLARD ERA!

 :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D  :o :o ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:45am:

mantra wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:33am: Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right. Which might give Gillard some leeway if she actually acknowledged that she made a promise in the election campaign. But she is so BLATANTLY DISHONEST that she refuses to evene acknowledge that. And labor might be a minority government but the carbon tax is the input of ONE SEAT out of 76. The Greens have gotten Gillard beaten.

yOU'RE LOSING A LITTLE MOMENTUM, BUDDY!  :D :D :D :D :D ;)

Prevailing wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:25am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:30am: Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. forget about what? 12 years of being PM or Gillard who lied thru her teeth to become PM and has lied and every turn since? There is a massive difference between a person who might lie occasionally (like all of us) and soemone who appears to lie at every turn. Will Tony Abbott promise to repeal the Carbon Tax if Bob Brown and Juliar Gillard manage to slide it through?  The people demand an answer to this question. :)

CORRECT: THE PEOPLE DO DEMAND AN ANSWER TO THIS RELEVANT QUESTION!

Equitist wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:44am:

This is one of very few sentiments from Prevailing that I can agree with: - Prevailing wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 10:37am: Its a simple point - Tony Abbott, if he is genuine - must ask the Australian people to give him the mandate at the next election in the Senate and HR to repeal the Carbon Tax. :) So, will Abbott give a 'Gospel truth' in writing guarantee that the Liberal Party, when next elected Federally, will promptly and fully repeal any Carbon Tax or Carbon Price legislation that the Labs pass during the current term!? Well, will Abbott have the guts and integrity promise this!?

GOING ON WHAT HE'S SAID SO FAR HE HAS TO OFFER THIS....  :-?

Hello everyone

I see Ju-LIAR is at it again. I told you so back in 2007 and I told you so in 2010.

A carbon tax essentially a government placing a limit on your carbon emission. If you go over it you pay!

A carbon tax will affect almost EVERY product and services you use

And why do we need a carbon tax? To pay for the KYOTO penalty that Rudd/Gillard has ratified (wanna have a go at this buzz?)

A mining tax will increase the price on almost EVERY product we use as well.

Maqqa wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 2:52pm:

Hello everyone I see Ju-LIAR is at it again. I told you so back in 2007 and I told you so in 2010. A carbon tax essentially a government placing a limit on your carbon emission. If you go over it you pay! A carbon tax will affect almost EVERY product and services you use And why do we need a carbon tax? To pay for the KYOTO penalty that Rudd/Gillard has ratified (wanna have a go at this buzz?) A mining tax will increase the price on almost EVERY product we use as well.

nice to see you back
still in form
staying or just passing thru

Hi dsmithy

Staying for awhile.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 10:44am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 9:03am: A) The 'never ever' GST was a change of opinion that was put to the people. Thats not a lie.  A lie would be sayign there will be no GST under my government and then immediately implementing one.. No point going through it all again as it would be a significant diversion from the topic at hand though I believe it is easily demonstraited that Mr Howard would have never been PM had he not told this one. Very similar the the Gillard statment except without the election but also may not be a tax.

The point is deflection.

That is the only point!

Tony does not have the punching power to take on Julia and so can only play a weak game of fear!

This is failing and he will be gone very soon! The public demand Tony stops playing turtle and presents his best punch by way of stating his alternative, vote-worthy, plans!  :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

The art of deflection involves throwing a punch! TONY CAN'T DO IT AND JULIA CAN!   ;D ;D THE METROSEXUALS KNOW THIS AND ARE GETTING WORRIED AS IT'S ALL TOO VISIBLE TO THE OTHER VOTERS WHO REALLY MATTER!  8-) :-? ;)

Verge wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:20am:

Bull Thy, oppositions dont give you a mandate. Spin it what ever way you want, she said no carbon tax under any government she leads. Why couldnt she have just been honest

HARDEN UP: THE WORLD TURNS AND TONY CAN'T KEEP UP!

HARDEN UP: THE WORLD TURNS AND TONY CAN'T KEEP UP!

HARDEN UP: THE WORLD TURNS AND TONY CAN'T KEEP UP!

HARDEN UP: THE WORLD TURNS AND TONY CAN'T KEEP UP!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)

Even the Greens admit that Ju-LIAR lied

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/gillard-was-wrong-on-carbon-price-before-the-last-election-say-greens/story-e6frg6xf-1226012092911

THE Greens say the Prime Minister's decision to impose a carbon tax is an admission she was wrong on the issue before the last election.

wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:23pm: wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:19pm: A reason why Julia may have back-tracked: 'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing. Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.' For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973 Even you acknowledge that there has been a 'back-track'. the rest of us call it a lie, buyt 'back-track' is at least part way to the truth. Talking about lies and back tracks. Tony Abbott himself once agreed with a Carbon Tax.   So, who's also betraying their earlier position?

The history books will make interesting reading....

ESPECIALLY THE BIT WHERE THEY MENTION HOW EASILY, AND CHEAPLY, DEMOCRACY COULD BE BOUGHT!

The history books will make interesting reading....

ESPECIALLY THE BIT WHERE THEY MENTION HOW EASILY, AND CHEAPLY, DEMOCRACY COULD BE BOUGHT!

The history books will make interesting reading....

ESPECIALLY THE BIT WHERE THEY MENTION HOW EASILY, AND CHEAPLY, DEMOCRACY COULD BE BOUGHT!

The history books will make interesting reading....

ESPECIALLY THE BIT WHERE THEY MENTION HOW EASILY, AND CHEAPLY, DEMOCRACY COULD BE BOUGHT!

:-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-[

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Labor-climate-policy-Gillard-energy-Australia-chan-pd20100723-7LV3X?OpenDocument&src=hp1

Ms Gillard did not indicate whether the government would shift from its timeline of reviewing the need for a carbon price in 2012, to start some time from 2013.

wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:53pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:30pm: wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:27pm: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:23pm: wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 12:19pm: A reason why Julia may have back-tracked: 'OUR economy is craving certainty on carbon pricing. Impasse over climate change policy has been the one constant in federal politics for the past four years. Yesterday the issue triggered loud and profuse emissions of carbon dioxide from the lungs of our MPs into the parliament. These are the emissions we have to have because this crucial policy debate has been forestalled too long.' For more - Go to your Australian right wing paper @ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labors-poll-omission-sparks-mps-emissions/story-e6frg71x-1226011590973 Even you acknowledge that there has been a 'back-track'. the rest of us call it a lie, buyt 'back-track' is at least part way to the truth. Talking about lies and back tracks. Tony Abbott himself once agreed with a Carbon Tax.   So, who's also betraying their earlier position?   The person who was PM standing for re-election as PM. The person who didnt express an opinion but made a formal election promise on behalf of her party. Big Difference. So now with Abbott standing firm that he will oppose this 'new great big tax with all his will'. Its safe to say the PrimeMinister in waiting will never introduce one then? I quote ~ 'The price of electricity will rise anyway. Best we attract new investment into renewable energy…diversify our energy generating systems. Particularly with all the instability in the Arab & Persian state(s) at present. It’s time to get off the fossil fuel rollercoaster." Do you not agree ? '

JULIA IS PLAYING THE GAME OF HER LIFE AND IT WILL MAKE OR BREAK HER!

THE WORLD IS WATCHING THIS ONE YOU CAN BE ASSURED!  :D

JULIA IS PLAYING THE GAME OF HER LIFE AND IT WILL MAKE OR BREAK HER!

THE WORLD IS WATCHING THIS ONE YOU CAN BE ASSURED!  ;D

JULIA IS PLAYING THE GAME OF HER LIFE AND IT WILL MAKE OR BREAK HER!

THE WORLD IS WATCHING THIS ONE YOU CAN BE ASSURED!  ;) ;) ;)

This will be very interesting stuff, and Julia will be at her best!

An absolute treat, I say!  :) :) :)

Maqqa wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 2:52pm:

Hello everyone I see Ju-LIAR is at it again. I told you so back in 2007 and I told you so in 2010. A carbon tax essentially a government placing a limit on your carbon emission. If you go over it you pay! A carbon tax will affect almost EVERY product and services you use And why do we need a carbon tax? To pay for the KYOTO penalty that Rudd/Gillard has ratified (wanna have a go at this buzz?) A mining tax will increase the price on almost EVERY product we use as well.

THIS BLOKE IS A BIT SCARY!

LET US NOT CHANGE THE STATUS QUO BECAUSE......................... THIS BLOKE IS SCARY???????????????????????????????????  :D ;D ;)

So Maqqa whats your opinion on good old Tone?
Good for the party, leading it to the next election or just seat warming?
Julia lied as has every politician I've known, you'll bag her, Labor followers will point to Howard, Whatever.
She done what she had to, to be percieved as doing something & taking a stand rather than the useless bungler that was taking hold.
This decision I think will re-invigorate Labor(it going to have to) & probably will get them over the line in 2013 independent of others.
Remember she has actually really promised anything other than something will happen July 1 next year.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:50am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:27am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 9:03am: E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? . Just a bit of info on just how much of a success this was. One of the major waterfront inititives was improving the technology used, automated processes. About 1/2 of a billion dollers was spent on automated systems. The figures were released showing these systems were a great success, today the multiple crains involved look terribly impressive but the fact is they sit stationary out of the way of the real operation. The increased number of containers moved were attributed to this improvement. the fact is that the number of movements were borrowed from the same old staff doing their work in the same old semi manual manner. The new system needed more employees to move less containers and took longer to do it and got a high failure rate as well, loading onto the incorrect trucks or missing. The improvement came when management set targets for the shift and started to pay a bonus to crews which met the targets. This system would have worked with no dispute required at all and no need to waste hundreds of million dollars or to dishonestly represent the results to the public, the board or their shareholders. Where did u pick up that info from? the MWU website? the MWU refused ANY changes to the way the ports were run including higher productivity. THAT was why the conflict developed. And Howard won the battle.

Have family members working there in both management and employee roles. This is fairly common knowledge on the sites.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 3:17pm:

So Maqqa whats your opinion on good old Tone? Good for the party, leading it to the next election or just seat warming? Julia lied as has every politician I've known, you'll bag her, Labor followers will point to Howard, Whatever. She done what she had to, to be percieved as doing something & taking a stand rather than the useless bungler that was taking hold. This decision I think will re-invigorate Labor(it going to have to) & probably will get them over the line in 2013 independent of others. Remember she has actually really promised anything other than something will happen July 1 next year.

dsmithy
"Tone" has done very well and continues to do well. The ALP has nothing on him because he will speak his mind. What you see is what you get. Did anyone really care about the Budgie smugglers or the Mad Monk moniker?

Ju-LIAR's "I'll show you the real" me" will come back and haunt her in 2013 because that no one knows who she is. What is the real Ju-LIAR? And if she's showing us the real Ju-LIAR then was she lying before by showing the FALSE Ju-LIAR?

All they've seen are lies and more lies from Gillard. I think Swan will get a swing of the bat before 2013 is out.

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:47am:

do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union. Their bully tactics, intimidation and threats etc demanded a strong approach. Or would you prefer that a country like ours that has 20% of the worlds ship traffic should have the most inefficent ports in the world?

The information to support that statment was about 20 years out of date by the time of the waterfront dispute.

By the time of this dispute the bully tactics and intimidation were owned by the Employer and government lock stock and Ftty O.

for the forgetful left



Quote:

.........We will also remember that Gillard also announced a citizen’s assembly on climate change – a broken idea that was quickly dropped after the election. The clincher is her pre-election interview with The Australian’s Paul Kelly where Gillard stated, “I don’t rule out the possibility of legislating a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, a market-based mechanism. I rule out a carbon tax.” She also said it on national television, on the Ten Network on August 16 last year..............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jncV6gRtIvw&rel=0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jncV6gRtIvw&rel=0

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/jacktheinsider/index.php

http://www.1degree.com.au/node/1228

Julia Gillard's carbon price promise
Friday, 20 August 2010

The Australian
By: Paul Kelly and Dennis Shanahan F

In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step.

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.

Earlier this year, then prime minister Kevin Rudd ditched Labor's plans to introduce a carbon price for the next term after the bills failed to pass the Senate.

Ms Gillard's proposal for a citizens' assembly to discuss climate change, announced after she replaced Mr Rudd as leader, has been heavily criticised.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 12:04pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:47am: do a bit of research on the action of the Maritime Workers Union. Now THERE is a set of lovely blokes, with a real attitude for compromise.

What the Howard government and employers done in the waterfront makes Hawks action with the pilots look like he was playing Santa Clause.

A jugde determined that the Howard government had a case to answer - the Union should have taken them to the cleaners instead of doing a deal.

If a court makes a finding like that against a government it should be compulsory to get a conclusion.

.

Maqqa wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 3:26pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 3:17pm: So Maqqa whats your opinion on good old Tone? Good for the party, leading it to the next election or just seat warming? Julia lied as has every politician I've known, you'll bag her, Labor followers will point to Howard, Whatever. She done what she had to, to be percieved as doing something & taking a stand rather than the useless bungler that was taking hold. This decision I think will re-invigorate Labor(it going to have to) & probably will get them over the line in 2013 independent of others. Remember she has actually really promised anything other than something will happen July 1 next year. dsmithy "Tone" has done very well and continues to do well. The ALP has nothing on him because he will speak his mind. What you see is what you get. Did anyone really care about the Budgie smugglers or the Mad Monk moniker? Ju-LIAR's "I'll show you the real" me" will come back and haunt her in 2013 because that no one knows who she is. What is the real Ju-LIAR? And if she's showing us the real Ju-LIAR then was she lying before by showing the FALSE Ju-LIAR? All they've seen are lies and more lies from Gillard. I think Swan will get a swing of the bat before 2013 is out.

You've got to be kidding
Shorten,Combet,Smith,Burke,Bowen,Wong hell they'd even give Rudd another run before him.
Gillard V Turnbull/Hockey in 2013
Personally I'd like to see Brandis move to the lower house & have a crack.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 3:17pm:

You've got to be kidding Shorten,Combet,Smith,Burke,Bowen,Wong hell they'd even give Rudd another run before him. Gillard V Turnbull/Hockey in 2013 Personally I'd like to see Brandis move to the lower house & have a crack.

It's the factions dsmithy

Shorten is probably the only feasible one on that list - but the baggage maybe too much.

Can't see Turnbull back any time soon. Hockey could be the dark horse

Maqqa wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 2:52pm:

Hello everyone I see Ju-LIAR is at it again. I told you so back in 2007 and I told you so in 2010. A carbon tax essentially a government placing a limit on your carbon emission. If you go over it you pay! A carbon tax will affect almost EVERY product and services you use And why do we need a carbon tax? To pay for the KYOTO penalty that Rudd/Gillard has ratified (wanna have a go at this buzz?) A mining tax will increase the price on almost EVERY product we use as well.

Welcome back, Macca - why you been hiding!?

:-*

This tax is communism in action - tax the country and bring it to its knees under the guise of caring for the environment.When busines is buckling under economic pressure and individuals are desperate, the communist government comes along like the proverbial cavalry and "saves" us all by giving handouts and making us all dependent on the government. Look at the past history of communist governments like Russia and Germany and see that this form of government does not work. Don't be fooled by this Green/Labor government - wake up before it is too late.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:41am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard.

The differenc ebetween howard and gillard is that howard went to teh election with his promises and didnt change them, whereas gillard goes to an election then lies about them
the public deserve to know what was the secret deal that gillard did with the three indies and the turd burgular

tickfen wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:48pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:41am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:31am: We've had PMs who have lied before, but none with such speed, frequency or lack of remorse. How easy it is to forget about Mr Howard. The differenc ebetween howard and gillard is that howard went to teh election with his promises and didnt change them, whereas gillard goes to an election then lies about them the public deserve to know what was the secret deal that gillard did with the three indies and the turd burgular

Yes I particularly liked how they layed out their plans for workchoices for us in their 2004 campaign, where Mr Howards stated position on IR was for no changes in the term. Of course that was before he had control of the senate.

Uriah Hunt and Penny Wong - on Lateline here now...

Let us re-visit a previous Lateline interview with Uriah Hunt...

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2761497.htm


Quote:

Greg Hunt discusses shadow climate policy Broadcast: 03/12/2009 Coalition frontbencher Greg Hunt joins Lateline to outline the Opposition's approach to climate change, now it has withdrawn support for an emissions trading scheme. Transcript LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: Joining us now in our Melbourne studio is the shadow environment minister, Greg Hunt. [...] LEIGH SALES: Given that you've advocated action on climate change for about 20 years, are you going to be comfortable selling a climate change policy that doesn't include carbon trading or a carbon tax? GREG HUNT: The heart of what I have argued for for many years, including in a speech to the Centre for Independent Studies, I think it was three years and three days ago, is direct action on climate change. And that means whether it is looking at cleaning up the power stations, green carbon, which is the work that we have looked at as a Coalition. And I pay tribute to Malcolm Turnbull, with regards to fixing up our farms and sequestering carbon in our soil and trees. And thirdly energy efficiency, they are all forms of direct action on climate change, which you can achieve without a carbon tax; without an emissions trading scheme. LEIGH SALES: OK, you mentioned your CIS speech, which I had a look at and I also looked at a speech that you gave in Western Australia as recently as March this year. And I quote, "We proposed a balanced and careful national carbon emissions trading scheme that supports direct action rather than replaces it." So in March you wanted both those thinks. GREG HUNT: Look, I've always believed in direct action. LEIGH SALES: But you've apparently also believed in an emissions trading scheme at some point. GREG HUNT: I'll go to the heart of that matter. What we have always said and what I have said is that to do this in a way which is in discord with the rest of the world won't be effective, because you will simply export emissions overseas. That's the fundamental problem here - that you have a great big tax. $120 billion. And I think Mr Rudd needs to be upfront about this - $1,100 per family per annum in Western Sydney, in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, in the outer areas of Adelaide or Brisbane. And that system will simply export jobs and emissions if it's unilateral. That's the problem here; that's why we're looking at direct action now, to do real things. LEIGH SALES: But is that direct action going to be enough on its own to meet the carbon reduction goals that Tony Abbott has said he's committed to? GREG HUNT: We are committed to climate change action and earlier this year we set out a case that we could save 150 million tonnes per annum of emissions, or CO2 or equivalent gases, in Australia through green carbon. The New South Wales and Victorian governments put out a paper, which talked about up to 1,000 million, or a billion, tonnes. The Queensland Government a similar figure. We know Professor Garnaut was talking about 800 million tonnes of potential green carbon or fixing carbon in our soils. So of course this is possible. We want to pursue an incentives-based program rather than a punitive program. That's what we can do now. We'll take real action immediately. That's quite exciting. LEIGH SALES: But Malcolm Turnbull, as we heard in that story, has said today that it's not possible to cut emissions without having a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme. I'll read you his quote: "Whether carbon abatement measures are driven by an ETS, a tax, regulation or massive government subsidies, they all have a cost and we will have to pay for it." GREG HUNT: Well there's a distinction there, with great respect, as to what you've said. It is quite possible to do this without a carbon tax or an emissions trading scheme - renewable energy target. The Prime Minister made much of the fact that we led and they joined us in a renewable energy target this year. That wasn't a carbon tax - that wasn't an emissions trading scheme. There's nothing that's cost free. That's absolutely true - there's nothing that's cost free. There's a better way than $120 billion, which to your listeners translates to $1,100 a year and will simply push jobs and emissions to China. The other thing, the critical thing here, is that if you take direct action with incentives in the three big areas - green carbon, energy efficiency, clean energy - whether in the form of greater use of gas in Australia or renewable - solar, geothermal, wave, tidal - these are real, not just a great big cycle of money. And it's important to note, out of $120 billion, Mr Rudd must say how much of that goes to renewable or clean energy. Not one dollar goes to abatement. Most of it goes to big polluters. LEIGH SALES: You won an award for your university thesis 20 years ago on precisely this topic: on the merits of regulation versus emissions trading, versus carbon taxes to deal with climate change. What did you conclude was the best approach? GREG HUNT: The best approach is this: that for each particular problem you can use any of the above tools. My view in many cases is that direct action is the case. If you have a global market, if you have a genuine global market, then you could use some form of trading scheme.  But...

/contd.


Quote:

GREG HUNT: The best approach is this: that for each particular problem you can use any of the above tools. My view in many cases is that direct action is the case. If you have a global market, if you have a genuine global market, then you could use some form of trading scheme. But unless you have that genuine global market, then you have a real issue here with carbon leakage overseas, job destruction in Australia, and the impact on grocery prices on electricity prices, on basic goods for mums and dads and pensioners and farmers. LEIGH SALES: To come up with the policy that you took to the last election, the Coalition had a very high-powered taskforce which came up with a considered report. How is the Coalition going to formulate its new policy? GREG HUNT: Well, the key themes are already in place: green carbon or using ... LEIGH SALES: What do you mean by green carbon? What are you talking about - carbon capture and storage? GREG HUNT: Green carbon is carbon capture and storage in our soils, in our trees, in our revegetation ... The second thing is energy efficiency, and the third is the idea of clean energy, and that also includes smart grids. Now the other thing we'll be doing - having set down those themes for clear, direct immediate action - is this: we'll work on the mechanisms over the course of the summer. And I think it's fair and reasonable to ask for a little time on the mechanisms. But the themes for direct action are clear and were part of Tony's first speech. LEIGH SALES: OK. The taskforce I referred to, the Shergold taskforce, it included heads of the department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Environment, Resources, Foreign Affairs, Treasury, plus top executives from BHP Billiton, Qantas, Xstrata and the National Australia Bank. Why do you think that the policy you come up with will be superior to the policy that that group came up with that you took to the last election? GREG HUNT: It's very important to understand, with respect, that when you look around the world, what are the real things which have actually reduced emissions to date, whether it's in China or in particular in the United States or in Europe. Europe's had a very very thin trading scheme which has basically been a disaster. LEIGH SALES: Ok, sorry to cut you off. Mr Hunt, sorry to cut you off there. But I really do want you to answer that question. Why is what you are going to come up to better than the high level taskforce - what they came up with after months of investigation? GREG HUNT: The key thing here is about timing, integration with the rest of the world. The problem we have got here is we are going to act, not just before Copenhagen, but in a way which is completely out of synchronisation with the United States. And if you are out of synchronisation with the big developing markets, then what you see is that you'll have the migration of jobs and emissions overseas and no change in global emissions, that is a consistent argument. LEIGH SALES: But we are not talking about the timing of the policy. We're talking about the actual content of the policy at this point, and why what you can come up with in a matter of a couple of months or a couple of weeks is going to be superior to what you have come up with in the past after lengthy consideration involving very high level and experienced people? GREG HUNT: We have actually done considerable work. And it's not just us - if you look at the work of McKinsey and Company. If you think of Australia as 600 million tonnes of CO2, McKinsey talks of 50 million tonnes of energy efficiency savings per annum by 2020. There's also 150 million tonnes of savings through the work of our farmers, protection of our forests, regrowth of our forests, and then the great task of cleaning up our power stations. And these are real things which the rest of the world has largely been pursuing, which Australia has been pursuing, and that's why we have been effective. And now the question is this: while there is no trading scheme in the United States, and it will cost $1,100 for mums and dads, Mr Rudd needs to say to Australians, "We'll be doing this alone". Nothing's going to come out of Copenhagen which will be a sea change in real action, and he needs to say, "Well, why will be doing this alone," and be upfront to pensioners and farmers about the $1,100. LEIGH SALES: Alright. The Shergold report that you based your policy on at the last election said Australia should take action straightaway regardless of what the rest of the world was doing - to create certainty for business and also create a positive investment environment. But also, let me quote to you from that report, page 6: "The taskforce is firmly of the view that the most efficient and effective way to manage risk of climate change is through market mechanisms. An Australian emissions trading scheme would allow our nation to respond to future carbon constraints at least cost. Other forms of the Government intervention would impose a far heavier burden on economic activity." So is the Coalition now going to ignore that advice that it commissioned before the last election? GREG HUNT: Look - that informs how everybody goes forward. But let me be clear. There's a question for Mr Rudd in this. Why would he support an expanded renewable energy target this year? LEIGH SALES: Mr Hunt, I'm actually asking about your policy. GREG HUNT: Sure...

/contd.


Quote:

LEIGH SALES: Mr Hunt, I'm actually asking about your policy. GREG HUNT: Sure and I will, but the Prime Minister today attacked the very thing which we jointly put through the Parliament this year, which we led and they resisted for a while but which we agreed upon, and he attacked that very approach. So the answer is simple. There are a series of different options. But to act now at this moment in history, where there's no comparable scheme around the world. My view, which I have argued in writing for for many years, has been that you can have real and effective direct action; things that people can understand. Who understands an emissions trading scheme, or the time it will take to deal with it, let alone the cost, when you are the only ones going there? LEIGH SALES: Alright. Based on Mr Abbott's remarks of the past couple of days, it's possible that the Coalition may go to the next election advocating an open discussion on nuclear power, individual work agreements and an anti-ETS position on climate change. Do you think those policies are vote winners? GREG HUNT: I think Australians want to see that we are not mortgaging the future. There's a big mountain of debt. You referred to the New South Wales Labor Party: there's that same mountain of debt which is piling up, and that's going to have an impact on families. So that will be extremely important. In terms of nuclear energy, what we want to do is this: we want to deal with clean-energy sources. we want to raise the question for the Prime Minister: why would you sell uranium overseas, although not to a democracy in India, so they can reduce their emissions but then say it's immoral to even raise the question in Australia? So I think it's fair and reasonable to ask the Prime Minister: why is he willing to sell uranium overseas, not to India, but say it's immoral to even ask the question? On WorkChoices: WorkChoices is dead. A dead duck. No question about that. But individual contracts have been in place in Australia for more than a decade, and so we see that individual contracts have had a role. And what the Labor Party has done now is they have gone back more than a decade and said that it's illegal for an employer to have an individual arrangement with an employee in most circumstances, and that seems a little odd. LEIGH SALES: Greg Hunt, we are out of time. Thank you very much for joining us tonight.

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 6:42am:

lies about her own lie by claiming she never said that. Instread our PM tried to say that the tax was referred to in her pre-election speeches. Listening to Alan Jones interview Julia Gillard over Gillards lie about carbon tax. The interview was live, will have to wait until the podcast gets put onto 2gb site. Hypocrisy and deceit is what Gillard has done. To justify her lie Gillard diverts this tax as being that Australia would be left behind as every other country is imposing a carbon tax. Further that this tax will help Australian jobs and households. Then Gillard is trying to divert even more by saying ask these questions to Tony Abbott. Alan Jones then played Gillards speech: "There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led" Now Gillards response is saying that using those words is simply playing semantics. Jones asks Gillard again why she said that and Gillard says Ive answered that with saying that it isnt a carbon tax. What was that about semantics again Gillard? Even Wayne Swan said thered be no carbon tax, "Not possible".

Yess, I heard a snipit of the interview on ABC News Radio today and it was very interesting. He was giving her some today and she is right to be questioned. Talk about kicking a country when they are down, talking about putting a new tax on carbon, that she said that she wouldn't before the last election. A gentleman called in during the interview, that Alan Jones played, and the guy was furious and he went off his nut, and I say good on him!
;)

The real question, is which party will tackle the question of climate change.....We have been on the verge of a carbon trading scheme when the sane members of the Coalition were honest with the electorate and negotiated a carbon tax that all concerned agreed on!!!

The majority opinion is that an emissions trading scheme is the best way to pay for the future prosperity of our planet and the economic stability of my children and grandchildren.....Doing nothing has never achieved anything!!!

The real distinction is between those who adapt their purposes to reality and those who seek to mold reality in the light of their purposes.
Henry Kissinger (1923 - )


:)

beware wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:12pm:

This tax is communism in action - tax the country and bring it to its knees under the guise of caring for the environment.When busines is buckling under economic pressure and individuals are desperate, the communist government comes along like the proverbial cavalry and "saves" us all by giving handouts and making us all dependent on the government. Look at the past history of communist governments like Russia and Germany and see that this form of government does not work. Don't be fooled by this Green/Labor government - wake up before it is too late.

My sentiments exactly!!!  I just hope the rest of the public is not asleep!! ;)

MAHeading wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:26pm:

beware wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:12pm: This tax is communism in action - tax the country and bring it to its knees under the guise of caring for the environment.When busines is buckling under economic pressure and individuals are desperate, the communist government comes along like the proverbial cavalry and "saves" us all by giving handouts and making us all dependent on the government. Look at the past history of communist governments like Russia and Germany and see that this form of government does not work. Don't be fooled by this Green/Labor government - wake up before it is too late. My sentiments exactly!!!  I just hope the rest of the public is not asleep!! ;)

Most people would accept that the economy is doing very well and business is being far from brought to its knees.....The reality is Australia is facing a boom of economic proportions and we need to direct that revenue where it can do the greatest good......The gravy train needs to be derailed and good economic rational needs to determine where the revenue can do the greatest good for the entire nation!!!

:)

The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900), The Gay Science, section 191

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:21pm:

The real question, is which party will tackle the question of climate change.....We have been on the verge of a carbon trading scheme when the sane members of the Coalition were honest with the electorate and negotiated a carbon tax that all concerned agreed on!!! The majority opinion is that an emissions trading scheme is the best way to pay for the future prosperity of our planet and the economic stability of my children and grandchildren.....Doing nothing has never achieved anything!!! The real distinction is between those who adapt their purposes to reality and those who seek to mold reality in the light of their purposes. Henry Kissinger (1923 - ) :)

I just hope there has got to be a better way than the way they are going about it. I think that most people would agree that we have to do something to try an, at least slow down the effects of what has taken a 100 years to build up. I think that it's going to take more than just slugging the hard working tax payers like you and I in the hip pocket and thinking that, that will reduce the carbon pollution.

If the heavest polluters are anything like the mines in queensland, they will just pay the tax so they can polute all they want. These big mines, so i'm told, if they come up on a road block where a fine is involved if they do it, then they will just pay the fine to get the job done. It's the same with the tax. It is entirely possible that they may pollute more with the tax, than if they don't have it.
:o :D

MAHeading wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 11:37pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:21pm: The real question, is which party will tackle the question of climate change.....We have been on the verge of a carbon trading scheme when the sane members of the Coalition were honest with the electorate and negotiated a carbon tax that all concerned agreed on!!! The majority opinion is that an emissions trading scheme is the best way to pay for the future prosperity of our planet and the economic stability of my children and grandchildren.....Doing nothing has never achieved anything!!! The real distinction is between those who adapt their purposes to reality and those who seek to mold reality in the light of their purposes. Henry Kissinger (1923 - ) :) I just hope there has got to be a better way than the way they are going about it. I think that most people would agree that we have to do something to try an, at least slow down the effects of what has taken a 100 years to build up. I think that it's going to take more than just slugging the hard working tax payers like you and I in the hip pocket and thinking that, that will reduce the carbon pollution. If the heavest polluters are anything like the mines in queensland, they will just pay the tax so they can polute all they want. These big mines, so i'm told, if they come up on a road block where a fine is involved if they do it, then they will just pay the fine to get the job done. It's the same with the tax. It is entirely possible that they may pollute more with the tax, than if they don't have it. :o :D

Then the taxes will make alternative energy cheaper and more attractive to good business people....This is the whole point of an emissions trading scheme….the government has already stated that low and middle income earners will be compensated  to ease the burden…..The whole argument as I can see is that Australia cannot afford to harm our lucrative exports in carbon fuel….hence the push for nuclear energy and the sale of uranium…..We will need an alternative to coal and the big miners are aware where there best chance to continue polluting….Is to support the bloke who thinks ”Climate change is crap”…..A man who thinks taxpayers should pay polluters for the privilege to do so….and if they feel obliged they can but shares in a wind farm…I see no benefit in the Coalitions refusal to accept a carbon tax is the best way to pay for change…..We all pay in the long run….the question is how much will it cost to do nothing???


A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.
George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

;)

In all reality Julia Gillard was forced to introduce a carbon tax when she negotiated with the Greens and some Independents to form Government.....When faced with the challenge of doing what she knew was right and was in the best interest of the Nation she had no alternative than to accept she must pursue a price on carbon and reform our economy.....The blind alternative is to do.........................................................................................................................................................................................................nothing!!!



For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else.
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), speech at the Lord Mayor's banquet, London, November 9, 1954



;)

Gee, all this fuss over what appears to be the simple omission of an 'i' and a full stop.

"There will be no carbon tax in the govt I led"

should really read:

"There will be no carbon tax in the govt. I lied"

Fixed. :)

Well done, Carl.

And I couldn't agree more. [smiley=laugh.gif]

I am not sure that Julia agrees that putting a price on carbon is the same as putting a tax on carbon?

I think her main problem is that she never explained what she meant when she said no tax on carbon.

I am not necessarily against a carbon tax but Julia lied.

The people voted based on a lie
That is usurping our democracy.
It destroys out political system when the highest position
is held by a bare faced unashamed liar.
Perhaps she has done a John Howard & it was a non core promise?
Either way it seems that every Prime Minister we get is a liar.

The message is:
if you want to get ahead in life - then tell lies.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 5:15am:

I am not sure that Julia agrees that putting a price on carbon is the same as putting a tax on carbon? I think her main problem is that she never explained what she meant when she said no tax on carbon.

lol now I have heard everything..

got a better one.. she did actually have her fingers crossed when she made that statement... simple it was'nt a true blue honest  lie..

it was a phoney one..

as has been noted she already had a done deal with booby..

would he have sat there like the little mini emperor he has become, if he didnt know she had her fingers crossed all the time..

as we know now it isnt what we are told by the hardleft.. its what we cant see..

remember the speech she didnt read..lol.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 3:23pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:50am: Dnarever wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 11:27am: longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 9:03am: E) waterfront. You mean the waterfront reforms that took australia from the worst in the world to a bit above average? . Just a bit of info on just how much of a success this was. One of the major waterfront inititives was improving the technology used, automated processes. About 1/2 of a billion dollers was spent on automated systems. The figures were released showing these systems were a great success, today the multiple crains involved look terribly impressive but the fact is they sit stationary out of the way of the real operation. The increased number of containers moved were attributed to this improvement. the fact is that the number of movements were borrowed from the same old staff doing their work in the same old semi manual manner. The new system needed more employees to move less containers and took longer to do it and got a high failure rate as well, loading onto the incorrect trucks or missing. The improvement came when management set targets for the shift and started to pay a bonus to crews which met the targets. This system would have worked with no dispute required at all and no need to waste hundreds of million dollars or to dishonestly represent the results to the public, the board or their shareholders. Where did u pick up that info from? the MWU website? the MWU refused ANY changes to the way the ports were run including higher productivity. THAT was why the conflict developed. And Howard won the battle. Have family members working there in both management and employee roles. This is fairly common knowledge on the sites.

LOL yes you get your official MWU version of history and expect us to take that as gospel? Honestly, did it ever occur to you that the info you get is just a tad BIASED????

Bobby. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 5:41am:

I am not necessarily against a carbon tax but Julia lied. The people voted based on a lie That is usurping our democracy. It destroys out political system when the highest position is held by a bare faced unashamed liar. Perhaps she has done a John Howard & it was a non core promise? Either way it seems that every Prime Minister we get is a liar. The message is: if you want to get ahead in life - then tell lies.

well done bobby.pity you had to bring John Howard into it it would have had more courage...but none the less you are a first to pick up she told a lie.. and then she lied about the lie..

was Howards noncore promise a Huge New Tax?.. I cant remember what the promise was sorry.

my head literally has been spinning since 2007.for me I have never been so interested in politics..or disgusted not sure which it it yet

what makes this even worse I think is the fact she has backflipped so soon.she takes us for bunnies and I dont like that.

when it came to the "Greatest Moral Challenge of our Times".. gillard in fact said very little!!!

now suddenly we MUST do something and do it now..

I will watch with interest to see our new mini emperor put his foot down about the price...I believe he wants $40.. if as has been pointed out by quite a few she puts $20 /$25 we can look forward to an increase of $300 per year for electricity alone.

maybe this is a bigger can of worms than she ever bet on..

for someone that hasnt got anything right so far..she has taken one HUGE bite

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 7:34am:

LOL yes you get your official MWU version of history and expect us to take that as gospel? Honestly, did it ever occur to you that the info you get is just a tad BIASED????

I have no idea what the MWU version is.

If you drop down to the major port in NSW you will see the 5 biggest crains lined up at the end of the site side by side.

Bet you never see one of them move. They have just been sitting there for years now. This is the heart of the automated system implimented by Corrigan which supposidly led to efficiency improvement, it is that efficient they spent hundreds of millions and do not use it at all.

Sorry if the facts do not fit your fairy tail.

cods wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 7:22am:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 26th, 2011 at 5:15am: I am not sure that Julia agrees that putting a price on carbon is the same as putting a tax on carbon? I think her main problem is that she never explained what she meant when she said no tax on carbon. lol now I have heard everything.. got a better one.. she did actually have her fingers crossed when she made that statement... simple it was'nt a true blue honest  lie.. it was a phoney one.. as has been noted she already had a done deal with booby.. would he have sat there like the little mini emperor he has become, if he didnt know she had her fingers crossed all the time.. as we know now it isnt what we are told by the hardleft.. its what we cant see.. remember the speech she didnt read..lol.

Like it or not the price being put on carbon is not a tax.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 5:15am:

I am not sure that Julia agrees that putting a price on carbon is the same as putting a tax on carbon? I think her main problem is that she never explained what she meant when she said no tax on carbon.

http://truepolitik.blogspot.com/2011/02/climate-change-compromised.html

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Climate Change Compromised

Compromise usually means that no one gets what they want, and the compromise is accepted by all because they realise that no one is completely happy, but everybody got something.

So it is with today's announcement that, from July 2012, there will be a fixed price on carbon (pollution), with an eventual move to an Emissions Trading Scheme in about 3 years. (2015) Business, especially big business, wanted, and lobbied both Coalition & Labor Governments for it. Then Labor PM Kevin Rudd acceded to this, and former Coalition Minister and then Leader of the Opposition, Malcolm Turnbull, supported it. The right wing of the Liberal Party shafted him, and installed Tony Abbott as Leader of the Opposition. Abbott promptly labelled climate change as 'crap', in direct opposition to Australia's Chief Scientist, and the CSIRO.

wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 12:33pm:

http://truepolitik.blogspot.com/2011/02/climate-change-compromised.html Thursday, February 24, 2011 Climate Change Compromised Compromise usually means that no one gets what they want, and the compromise is accepted by all because they realise that no one is completely happy, but everybody got something. So it is with today's announcement that, from July 2012, there will be a fixed price on carbon (pollution), with an eventual move to an Emissions Trading Scheme in about 3 years. (2015) Business, especially big business, wanted, and lobbied both Coalition & Labor Governments for it. Then Labor PM Kevin Rudd acceded to this, and former Coalition Minister and then Leader of the Opposition, Malcolm Turnbull, supported it. The right wing of the Liberal Party shafted him, and installed Tony Abbott as Leader of the Opposition. Abbott promptly labelled climate change as 'crap', in direct opposition to Australia's Chief Scientist, and the CSIRO.

It's an opinion. It's not a direct quote

http://www.la.org.au/files/LibertyAustralia/images/Capture_1.jpg

mantra wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:33am:

Senator Brown told the truth from the very beginning. We all knew that a carbon tax was inevitable - it was just a matter of time. Gillard has had to make compromises. Labor doesn't govern in it's own right.

Thanks Christ, could you imagine the crazy poo we'd have to put up with if they did.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 26^th, 2011 at 5:41am:

I am not necessarily against a carbon tax but Julia lied. The people voted based on a lie That is usurping our democracy. It destroys out political system when the highest position is held by a bare faced unashamed liar. Perhaps she has done a John Howard & it was a non core promise? Either way it seems that every Prime Minister we get is a liar. The message is: if you want to get ahead in life - then tell lies.

Julia = Jewel / liar - the best liar in Australia.
She shall wear that crown upon her head as queen of liars.

Of course the grand champ lie is that which promotes human caused global warming in the first place! These proponents parrot the stock line "the science is in...."
Well, the science is certainly not "in" and this position has been riddled with lies and deceptions from the start.
Just as an example, none of these kooks will now go anywhere near a serious discussion about the famous "hockey stick" graph upon which so many of their hats were hung, and which has since been totally debunked.
Further, try to get them to defend the notorious global warming "email-gate" fiasco.... To any thinking person this was the signal that if we have to be coerced by lies and deceit, this thing's not based on science but rather on spin and scare-mongering!
And the lies and deceit and scare-mongering continue unabated....
And we're all going to pay for it right up the wazoo!!!

Australia and the globe are experiencing rapid climate change. Since the middle of the 20th century, Australian temperatures have, on average, risen by about 1°C with an increase in the frequency of heatwaves and a decrease in the numbers of frosts and cold days. Rainfall patterns have also changed - the northwest has seen an increase in rainfall over the last 50 years while much of eastern Australia and the far southwest have experienced a decline.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/

:)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/yes-i-vowed-no-carbon-tax-julia-gillard/story-fn3dxity-1226012679003

The lying snake is trying to wriggle her way out of it. Face it Gillard- you LIED, were CAUGHT OUT, and now need to be accountable. Only took you 6 months for us to see what a deceitful self interested pleb you are. Go away!

Climate change in a nutshell

Our climate is changing, largely due to the observed increases in human produced greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases absorb heat from the sun in the atmosphere and reduce the amount of heat escaping into space. This extra heat has been found to be the primary cause of observed changes in the climate system over the 20th century. These changes include increases in global average air and ocean temperature, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global sea levels. The extra heat in the climate system has other impacts, such as affecting atmospheric and ocean circulation, which influences rainfall and wind patterns.

Another serious impact of increases in the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide is ocean acidification. Around a quarter of human-produced carbon dioxide is absorbed by the oceans. As the carbon dioxide dissolves in sea water it forms a weak carbonic acid, making the ocean more acidic. There are early indications that some marine organisms are already being affected by ocean acidification.

Global warming and climate change

The terms 'global warming' and 'climate change' are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference.

Global warming is the gradual increase of the Earth’s average surface temperature, due to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Climate change is a broader term. It refers to long-term changes in climate, including average temperature and rainfall.
Greenhouse gases
Greenhouse gases have always been a natural part of the atmosphere. The chemical properties of greenhouse gases mean that they strongly absorb and re-radiate the sun’s warmth in the atmosphere. This process maintains the Earth’s temperature at 33°C warmer than it would otherwise be, allowing life on Earth to exist.

Water vapour is the most abundant greenhouse gas. Its concentration is highly variable and human activities have little direct impact on its amount in the atmosphere. The main greenhouse gases generated by human activity are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane and nitrous oxide. There are also manufactured gases such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halocarbons and some of their replacements that make a small contribution to global warming.

Over the last 800,000 years, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has varied between approximately 172 and 300 parts per million (ppm). Since industrialisation, carbon dioxide levels have risen sharply to about 386 ppm. Even in these amounts, the extra carbon dioxide is largely responsible for the increase in global temperatures of about 0.7oC.

Greenhouse gases and human activity
Greenhouse gases are produced by human activities, including:

burning fossil fuels, such as coal, oil or gas
using energy generated by burning fossil fuels
some aspects of farming, such as raising cattle and sheep, using fertilisers and growing some crops
clearing land, including logging
the breakdown of food and plant wastes and sewerage
some industrial processes, such as making cement and aluminum.

http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change.aspx

http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-julia-gillard-really-said-about.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FUtodS+%28North+Coast+Voices%29

What did Julia really say

Yes, she did say that there would not be a carbon tax and, despite Abbott and Jones trying to rewrite history, a stand alone, permanent carbon tax is not what is being planned for now.

However, Gillard did go to some pains to let us all know that carbon pricing was going to occur if Labor was re-elected.

In June 2010 The Australian reported:
Julia Gillard will pursue a carbon price if she wins the next election…

In July 2010 The Herald Sun also reported the Prime Minister’s position:
"We will have that price on carbon when we have a deep community consensus."
Today, Ms Gillard emphatically ruled out a price on carbon before 2012 as she prepares to release a new policy on climate change.
That means no ETS, no carbon tax and no interim carbon levy until then.

The Business Spectator in July 2010:
The federal government has agreed new policies on climate change, including a commitment to set an interim price on carbon, the Australian Financial Review reports.

On the day before we all went to the polls Gillard was reported at news.com.au:
Julia Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term as part of a bold series of reforms


In The Australian on the same day:
In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step.

Even Tony Abbott was aware of Gillard’s commitment to pricing carbon. His own website contained this post almost two months before the last federal election:
'If she is serious about putting a price on carbon she shouldn’t wait until after the election, she should sit down with Bob Brown now, come up with something, tell us now what she’s going to do rather than just fudge this until after the election. But it’s typical of the new Prime Minister that she wants to get credit for wanting to do something without getting the blame for actually doing something and this is a Prime Minister who will tell people what she thinks they want to hear but she won’t then put the policies in place to deliver on that.'

HC wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 8:50am:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/yes-i-vowed-no-carbon-tax-julia-gillard/story-fn3dxity-1226012679003 The lying snake is trying to wriggle her way out of it. Face it Gillard- you LIED, were CAUGHT OUT, and now need to be accountable. Only took you 6 months for us to see what a deceitful self interested pleb you are. Go away!

HC she wasnt caught out.... she lied in our faces simple as that...


she is a communist at heart therefore we the suckers are not important.. power is..and at any price as we now know..



she thinks this will be a distant memory by the time the next election arrives..in bed with booby.. OMG.

wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 9:14am:

http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-julia-gillard-really-said-about.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FUtodS+%28North+Coast+Voices%29 What did Julia really say Yes, she did say that there would not be a carbon tax and, despite Abbott and Jones trying to rewrite history, a stand alone, permanent carbon tax is not what is being planned for now. However, Gillard did go to some pains to let us all know that carbon pricing was going to occur if Labor was re-elected. In June 2010 The Australian reported: Julia Gillard will pursue a carbon price if she wins the next election… In July 2010 The Herald Sun also reported the Prime Minister’s position: "We will have that price on carbon when we have a deep community consensus." Today, Ms Gillard emphatically ruled out a price on carbon before 2012 as she prepares to release a new policy on climate change. That means no ETS, no carbon tax and no interim carbon levy until then. The Business Spectator in July 2010: The federal government has agreed new policies on climate change, including a commitment to set an interim price on carbon, the Australian Financial Review reports. On the day before we all went to the polls Gillard was reported at news.com.au: Julia Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term as part of a bold series of reforms In The Australian on the same day: In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step. Even Tony Abbott was aware of Gillard’s commitment to pricing carbon. His own website contained this post almost two months before the last federal election: 'If she is serious about putting a price on carbon she shouldn’t wait until after the election, she should sit down with Bob Brown now, come up with something, tell us now what she’s going to do rather than just fudge this until after the election. But it’s typical of the new Prime Minister that she wants to get credit for wanting to do something without getting the blame for actually doing something and this is a Prime Minister who will tell people what she thinks they want to hear but she won’t then put the policies in place to deliver on that.'

Abbott and the Coalition were running a scare campaign before the last election claiming Julia Gillard would introduce a Carbon Tax......they were correct....It will happen after the next election if the Australian people vote for it!!!

:)

The world is full of people whose notion of a satisfactory future is, in fact, a return to the idealised past.
Robertson Davies, "A Voice from the Attic", 1960

wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 9:14am:

http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-julia-gillard-really-said-about.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FUtodS+%28North+Coast+Voices%29 What did Julia really say Yes, she did say that there would not be a carbon tax and, despite Abbott and Jones trying to rewrite history, a stand alone, permanent carbon tax is not what is being planned for now. However, Gillard did go to some pains to let us all know that carbon pricing was going to occur if Labor was re-elected. In June 2010 The Australian reported: Julia Gillard will pursue a carbon price if she wins the next election… In July 2010 The Herald Sun also reported the Prime Minister’s position: "We will have that price on carbon when we have a deep community consensus." Today, Ms Gillard emphatically ruled out a price on carbon before 2012 as she prepares to release a new policy on climate change. That means no ETS, no carbon tax and no interim carbon levy until then. The Business Spectator in July 2010: The federal government has agreed new policies on climate change, including a commitment to set an interim price on carbon, the Australian Financial Review reports. On the day before we all went to the polls Gillard was reported at news.com.au: Julia Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term as part of a bold series of reforms In The Australian on the same day: In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step. Even Tony Abbott was aware of Gillard’s commitment to pricing carbon. His own website contained this post almost two months before the last federal election: 'If she is serious about putting a price on carbon she shouldn’t wait until after the election, she should sit down with Bob Brown now, come up with something, tell us now what she’s going to do rather than just fudge this until after the election. But it’s typical of the new Prime Minister that she wants to get credit for wanting to do something without getting the blame for actually doing something and this is a Prime Minister who will tell people what she thinks they want to hear but she won’t then put the policies in place to deliver on that.'

So why exactly did she say there would be no carbon tax under any government she leads?

Was she hoping it would influence the voters watching the show?

Was she hoping to play both sides of the fence

To all those who try & twist words - carbon pricing, or a levy or whatever you call it
-it's  a tax.
Julia lied - a bare faced lie.
I would call her a liar to her face.

Is Julia Gillard a liar?
Please vote in this poll.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 8:49am:

Australia and the globe are experiencing rapid climate change. Since the middle of the 20th century, Australian temperatures have, on average, risen by about 1°C with an increase in the frequency of heatwaves and a decrease in the numbers of frosts and cold days. Rainfall patterns have also changed - the northwest has seen an increase in rainfall over the last 50 years while much of eastern Australia and the far southwest have experienced a decline.

Dear philperth…

Your statistics comments and arguments are all noted; how very impressive they seem, and would perhaps have the reader believing you’re a scientist in the field….. Perhaps you are?

Unfortunately there’s no doubt that an equivalent conglomeration of argument and opinion could be readily brought to bear by those real scientists who oppose your view.

And more unfortunately for your situation, to my knowledge none of those in opposition have ever been caught out in the fraud of doctoring or falsifying any material in an attempt to bolster their case, nor have they loudly promoted any historical graphics in support of their position only to have them well and truly debunked as a work of fiction!

One of the great tragedies in all of this has been the stifling of any continuing open meaningful debate, and this can be sheeted right home in the first instance to that doyen of the global warming issue, Al Gore. The man has made millions from his involvement and has paid scant regard for his own responsibility to practice what he preaches. More disgracefully, he serially avoids interviews or other avenues whereby he might be questioned about the issue. On the rare occasions when he has been corralled by the press he has often demonstrated an obvious lack of substantive knowledge of the subject.

For mine, this ridiculous man is a living microcosmic representation of the whole pro-human-global-warming lobby, and I’ll say it again, for many, many people world-wide, the science is not “in” and we have to live with the reality that the other side of the debate has been shut out. So much for the democratic process.
 

GrandPaPa wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:03am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 8:49am: Australia and the globe are experiencing rapid climate change. Since the middle of the 20th century, Australian temperatures have, on average, risen by about 1°C with an increase in the frequency of heatwaves and a decrease in the numbers of frosts and cold days. Rainfall patterns have also changed - the northwest has seen an increase in rainfall over the last 50 years while much of eastern Australia and the far southwest have experienced a decline. Dear philperth… Your statistics comments and arguments are all noted; how very impressive they seem, and would perhaps have the reader believing you’re a scientist in the field….. Perhaps you are? Unfortunately there’s no doubt that an equivalent conglomeration of argument and opinion could be readily brought to bear by those real scientists who oppose your view. And more unfortunately for your situation, to my knowledge none of those in opposition have ever been caught out in the fraud of doctoring or falsifying any material in an attempt to bolster their case, nor have they loudly promoted any historical graphics in support of their position only to have them well and truly debunked as a work of fiction! One of the great tragedies in all of this has been the stifling of any continuing open meaningful debate, and this can be sheeted right home in the first instance to that doyen of the global warming issue, Al Gore. The man has made millions from his involvement and has paid scant regard for his own responsibility to practice what he preaches. More disgracefully, he serially avoids interviews or other avenues whereby he might be questioned about the issue. On the rare occasions when he has been corralled by the press he has often demonstrated an obvious lack of substantive knowledge of the subject. For mine, this ridiculous man is a living microcosmic representation of the whole pro-human-global-warming lobby, and I’ll say it again, for many, many people world-wide, the science is not “in” and we have to live with the reality that the other side of the debate has been shut out. So much for the democratic process.

Feel free to post anything you like to support your argument......opinions are free!!!

;)

viewpoint wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:27am:

Did you gullible idiots really think I was going to keep my word? http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2010/11/17/1225955/220629-julia-gillard.jpg

Not only that Gillard is unable to tell the time and keep media committments.
Didnt Gillard make a massive issue about missing media committments to Tony Abbott?



This sums up Gillard lying about herself and then straight away lies about her own lies!
That takes the cake.
http://podcasts.mrn.com.au.s3.amazonaws.com/alanjones/20110225-aj2-juliagillard.mp3

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 10:09am:

To all those who try & twist words - carbon pricing, or a levy or whatever you call it -it's  a tax. Julia lied - a bare faced lie. I would call her a liar to her face.

Gillard says its all semantics and playing with wordss
When it is quite blatant that she is the one who is lieing and playing with words trying to get out of her own lie.

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:16am:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 10:09am: To all those who try & twist words - carbon pricing, or a levy or whatever you call it -it's  a tax. Julia lied - a bare faced lie. I would call her a liar to her face. Gillard says its all semantics and playing with wordss When it is quite blatant that she is the one who is lieing and playing with words trying to get out of her own lie.

Julia is setting a bad example to all our young people.
She is saying that if you are a good liar -
you too can become the Prime Minister.

I,am amazed the number of words written about Gillard having told a lie, it is hard to believe anything what a politician says.

In a a book by the ex-politician L.Tanner, the title,which unfortunately I cannot remember, he wrote that the parliamentary debates are nothing but a "Circus"

Tanner is doing very well for himself, on some company board.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:20am:

Julia is setting a bad example to all our young people. She is saying that if you are a good liar - you too can become the Prime Minister.

Further you can lie about your own lies and deny that you even said what you said even when your lie is recorded and played back.
Alan Jones catches her out on this and it highlights how desperate and lieful Gillard is.

tickfen wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:48pm:

the public deserve to know what was the secret deal that gillard did with the three indies and the turd burgular

True, we need to know.
For all we know Gillard could have sold Australia to China to keep Kevin Rudd happy, quiet. and not to make a challenge to her leadership of the ALP

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:22am:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 11:20am: Julia is setting a bad example to all our young people. She is saying that if you are a good liar - you too can become the Prime Minister. Further you can lie about your own lies and deny that you even said what you said even when your lie is recorded and played back. Alan Jones catches her out on this and it highlights how desperate and lieful Gillard is.

I heard a playback of Alan Jones - what a laugh.
He really put Julia on the spot.
I don't think she'll appear on his show again.
Do we have a youtube clip of it? (audio)

yeah a good liar .. also mean a gambler or drug addict .. maybe she had a few smokes before telling lies in the last election ..

You can download the podcast from 2GB.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:33am:

I don't think she'll appear on his show again.

True, Gillard wont re-appear on any media outlet when she has been criticised or caught out lying so blatantly.


Even Wayne Swan confirms that Gillard has lied.


The best Gillard can do is play childish semantic word games.
What a great example to the rest of the world, they must be ROFLMAO

Lies are like children: they're hard work, but it's worth it because the future depends on them.
Pam Davis, House M.D., It's A Wonderful Lie, 2008


To do nothing about climate change would be a much bigger crime.....There needs to be a market mechanism to make alternative energy sources viable......The targets are very modest and can only be achieved by making binding targets.....The Coalition is very weak on climate change policy.....there position seams to be that of a reluctant sceptic with a disregard for the environment over corporate profits!!!


:)

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:40am:

You can download the podcast from 2GB.

Thanks Jen - I am listening to it now.

http://www.2gb.com/index.php?option=com_podcasting&task=view&id=2&Itemid=41

so how would anyones believe a word of this liar ?? probably there was some crocodile tears shed also lying as well ...

bridonta wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:48am:

so how would anyones believe a word of this liar ?? probably there was some crocodile tears shed also lying as well ...

Would depend on whether her personal assistant had some chopped onions ready.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:07am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 7:26am: I also predict that quite soon, Aussie will come in and declare frenchyjen to be one of Mellie's 'socks'. Mel would have had at least 3 posts on the topic and provided a responce to most of the comments. This is nothing like her style even if it makes any difference to anyone. The style is more like Cods and I have no idea if she even wears socks - certainly not suggesting that it is her either. I have little doubt that frenchyjen is herself if not himself.

dont go there dna.. I am......... no one but myself..

do you think we take you as being one of a kind..do you hardlefties think only the right would have more than one ID... really! proves how stupid you are..

what does it matter anyway it seems to be a lefty problem who cares if someone has to use more than one ID some times these pages get used up just discussing who youall think is who.. maybe its some kind of competion and I missed that bit..

you even sound like skippy from time to time..lol at least you have the same style... whatever that means

The USA dont have a carbon tax, neither does India or China.
The main perpetrators of any emission problem.

The Australian people voted for No Carbon Tax.
Gillard has "stolen" the 2010 election.

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:45am:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 11:33am: I don't think she'll appear on his show again. True, Gillard wont re-appear on any media outlet when she has been criticised or caught out lying so blatantly. Even Wayne Swan confirms that Gillard has lied. The best Gillard can do is play childish semantic word games. What a great example to the rest of the world, they must be ROFLMAO

have you noticed swanny is invisable at the moment..LOL..she must have dragged combet by his bootstraps to be in the big picture...

I see where Richo wasnt impressed either.he still carries a bit of weight around the trap like Hawke.

Didnt Gillard "knife" Kevin Rudd in the back due to him pushing for a Carbon Tax, and the Caucus realised that the ALP would then lose the election if they continued to pursuit a carbin tax.

New Delhi | Feb 26, 2011

Climate negotiators and experts today held separate discussions on how to approach the Kyoto Protocol in its second commitment period and action in emission reduction as the sixth meeting of the top officials from BASIC countries officially opened here today.

The crucial meeting of the Environment Ministers from Brazil, South Africa, India and China (BASIC) will be held tomorrow to assess the post-Cancun climate change policy and work out strategies for the next climate summit to be held in Durban in December this year, officials said.

The Ministers are expected to make an assessment of the Cancun Agreement and would discuss issues like global goal and equitable access to sustainable development, further commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol and enhanced reporting obligations and accountability of Annex I targets, officials said.

Annex I Parties are the industrialized nations which adopted emission cut targets for 2008-12 period under the Kyoto Protocol.

The ministers will also discuss the issue of phase-out of HydroFluoroCarbons (HFCs), which is a 'solution' from an ozone depletion perspective but a 'problem' from climate change perspective since they have high potential to cause global warming, officials said.

Representatives from Argentina, Algeria and the Maldives have also been invited to the meeting of the quartet formed in Beijing in November 2009.

In the run up to Durban summit, the countries are expected to finalize the rules and modalities for implementing the decisions taken in Cancun, Mexico.

This is the first major international meeting of any group of countries since December, 2010, when Cancun Agreements were reached under the leadership of Mexico as the Chair of 16th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol.

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?713238

Dnarever wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

cods wrote on Feb 25th, 2011 at 8:22am: you had better not dnare if you have to cast aspersions on peoples integrity and honesty would you mind leaving me out of it.. I have been banned on one topic that I have never been into because of lies..so please dont go there.. if you wish to blacken others names thats up to them to shoot you down.. take it from me thats what I will be doing. I am happy to apologise for your perception Cods but I feel that I insulted nobody. All I said was that the style of the post was more similar to your style than to Melli. Considering that the style was well written polite and competent I do not see why you would have a problem, I also said that I believe that you do not use fake id’s and that the poster is exactly who he or she is claiming to be. I thought I was doing the opposite to casting aspersions on your character. While I often do not agree with you I do respect your right to your opinion and have no doubt that you are honest and have integrity.

Cods this was my responce the other day to this, sorry if you feel I accused you of multiple ID's that was furthest from my mind.

Why did Gillard say that there would be no carbon tax before the election?
Gillard has refused to answer that.

cods wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:54am:

have you noticed swanny is invisable at the moment..LOL..she must have dragged combet by his bootstraps to be in the big picture...

Wonder when Gillard will allow Swan to make another public comment.

first ..

Giliar knife Kev

Now

Brown knife Gilliar ..

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:57am:

Why did Gillard say that there would be no carbon tax before the election? Gillard has refused to answer that.

Because Juliar is a...

http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/julia1.jpg 8-)

It is funny when Gillard makes a claim of deceiption to the interviewer.
But when Gillard lies and deceives she simply puts it down to semantics and playing with words.

so now people have known her for lying .. her mates also lying .. and probably the supporters here are the same .. as her servants ..

Prevailing wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 12:00pm:

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 11:57am: Why did Gillard say that there would be no carbon tax before the election? Gillard has refused to answer that. Because Julia is a... http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/julia1.jpg 8-)

lol, I'd forgotten that.
Maybe the media are able to see into the future

Bobby. wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 11:47am:

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 11:40am: You can download the podcast from 2GB. Thanks Jen - I am listening to it now. http://www.2gb.com/index.php?option=com_podcasting&task=view&id=2&Itemid=41

Just heard the whole 22 minutes  21 seconds.
This is a must hear audio clip.
Julia was able to call black - white.
It's amazing how she answered Alan Jones.
I don't know how she can sleep at night saying the opposite of
the audio feed she was given of her own statement.
I hate people like her.
I'd want to slap her face & I don't know how Alan Jones controlled himself.

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 12:02pm:

Prevailing wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 12:00pm: frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27th, 2011 at 11:57am: Why did Gillard say that there would be no carbon tax before the election? Gillard has refused to answer that. Because Julia is a... http://blogs.news.com.au/images/uploads/julia1.jpg 8-) lol, I'd forgotten that. Maybe the media are able to see into the future

Juliar is also showing the strain of trying to nail something - anything for her feeble oligarchy - note the clearly visible signs of political wear and tear on her face now.

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2011/02/24/1226011/436282-gillard-on-carbon-tax.jpg :)

Julia only had to be honest & tell the truth.

The truth is that Bob Brown forced her to change the policy
or he would support a vote of no confidence & bring down her government.
BLOCK SUPPLY.

We all know that is the truth & Julia won't admit it.
She thinks we're all stupid & don't see that.
She has insulted the people's intelligence.  

Bobby -  Dead Right !

we didn't vote for this regime controlled by those lunatic green .. why we have to bear more lies from such bad regime .. it's bad for this nation .. it will bring down standard of livings at large ..

frenchyjen70 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 12:00pm:

It is funny when Gillard makes a claim of deceiption to the interviewer. But when Gillard lies and deceives she simply puts it down to semantics and playing with words.

Isn't it interesting....the ONLY person indulging in semantics and word play in this issue is Jooya herself....!!!

bridonta wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 12:46pm:

we didn't vote for this regime controlled by those lunatic green .. why we have to bear more lies from such bad regime .. it's bad for this nation .. it will bring down standard of livings at large ..

We'll all get fitter and stronger as we learn to use those forgotten muscles by walking more and using public transport. We'll buy only what our body needs for sustenance and end up living another 20 or 30 years as a result.

Look for the positives not the negatives.

Just as a personal point, I thought John Howard was awesome.

He came along to my wedding you know.

Well he didn't come in, he was just there at the complex same day.

Shame he didn't pop in, I'd have given him a glass of champagne and he would have been a welcome guest.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:25am:

Just as a personal point, I thought John Howard was awesome. He came along to my wedding you know. Well he didn't come in, he was just there at the complex same day. Shame he didn't pop in, I'd have given him a glass of champagne and he would have been a welcome guest.

Doing a shopping center walkaround was he?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMVc0IbtyAQ&feature=player_detailpage

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 10:25am:

Just as a personal point, I thought John Howard was awesome. He came along to my wedding you know. Well he didn't come in, he was just there at the complex same day. Shame he didn't pop in, I'd have given him a glass of champagne and he would have been a welcome guest.

I PROMISE TO BUMP AND COPY THIS POST EVERYWHERE!  :o :D ;D

viewpoint wrote on Feb 25^th, 2011 at 7:27am:

Did you gullible idiots really think I was going to keep my word? http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2010/11/17/1225955/220629-julia-gillard.jpg

"Nobody in NSW politics, on either side, can figure out why Gillard chose the dying weeks of the state Labor government to announce a great big new tax designed to change the weather."

That's it - the Green/Labor view of the world summed up perfectly: a new tax to change the weather.

Bobbythebat1

Quote:

Julia only had to be honest & tell the truth. The truth is that Bob Brown forced her to change the policy or he would support a vote of no confidence & bring down her government. BLOCK SUPPLY. We all know that is the truth & Julia won't admit it. She thinks we're all stupid & don't see that. She has insulted the people's intelligence.

nichy wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 12:46pm:

Bobby -  Dead Right !

Thanks Nichy,
For all those who thought a vote for the Greens was a wasted vote -
welcome to our new Prime Minister -
Bob Brown -  ;D
He's now pulling all the strings of Julia the lying puppet.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 8:43pm:

Bob Brown -  ;D He's now pulling all the strings of Julia the lying puppet.

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/02/25/1226012/224143-bill-leak-26-feb.jpg

Prevailing wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 12:10pm:

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2011/02/24/1226011/436282-gillard-on-carbon-tax.jpg :)

Is one permitted to... er... notice the knockers? The look very angry, indeed.