Piers Akerman – Saturday, June 25, 11 (09:28 pm)
AUSTRALIANS of all persuasions are united in the view that, politically, things could not be worse—until they read the next set of headlines and find that things have indeed worsened.
Many politicians feign an interest in child abuse, but only if that does not clash with their political interests. A few weeks ago the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of NSW was found liable in the case of the electorate officer who reported the child sex crimes of her government minister boss.
This has been an issue where it was blatantly obvious from the start that someone for some reason had done the wrong thing - but would anyone address this, even for the sake of rescuing the shattered credentials of a party which used to be concerned about the treatment of employees, except for their own we should presume?
For years instead there were only energetic efforts on the part of the previous NSW government to prevent this story from being told, which, if it were, would certainly raise questions as to who knew and for how long that there was an accused paedophile in government and why nothing was done about that. Whilst some alarming facts were tendered to the Supreme Court, the crux of this matter lies in what was not addressed.
The action of the Speaker and Clerk in locking out this employee from her workplace was judged to have contributed to her psychological damage, but where are the answers as to why that was done by those who had been clearly informed that there was an ongoing covert police operation into child sex crimes in which the employee had become a police witness against her own boss? Why has no-one been concerned to address numerous other matters including the fate of documents which were relevant to the case? Am I the only person in NSW who thinks that this is screaming out for some answers - or should it just be left hanging for years on end like the Heiner affair?
Our carpets in our democratic institutions are getting very lumpy with all that has been swept beneath them! How powerless we are to make those who supposedly represent us give us the answers we demand on issues such as these which go to the safety of children, which should be our first not last concern!
Linda, I think you are referring to this woman:
I’ve been watching this case. It appalled me. Perhpas too many backs were being scratched?
I can understand any member hesitating. Most parties won’t accept being destroyed in a witch hunt. The others act in self preservation and isolate any member brave enough to be willing to discuss the issue. It isn’t good enough to merely lob the issue at the Libs and say “You deal with it, the ALP aren’t” when the ALP can launch an almighty scare campaign which will knock out all government for decades.
I am very careful not to scare those in the Libs who might be of help to me. I appreciate any who are willing to listen. At the end of the day, I have to accept that I don’t know everything and hope that a background process will allow something approximating justice.
Well DD -think of the who was Police Minister at the time an inquiry was first refused! I am not suggesting any wrongdoing - merely a person who wouldn’t want too much snooping around his private life. Mutual secrets are powerful tools amongst the powerful, and that’s the whole point - remember Franca Arena’s prediction that none of these allegations at high levels of government would ever come to light. She was wrong over this case, but it was a hard won process, which needs to be examined - I would hope an inquiry could deal with the facts of the matter and not be a witch hunt, but there might well be others running scared..
Justice delayed is justice denied. It isn’t solely Fielding who is acting corruptly. All it required was one decent, honest, honourable member of the ALP to stand up. Just one.
‘All it required was one decent, honest, honourable member of the ALP to stand up. Just one’.
That’s the problem DD Ball, there isn’t one. Not one. Currently Federal Labor stinks to high heaven. And Family First’s Steve Fielding is the biggest stinker of all. He’s certainly going to be remembered for going out with a bang. Or maybe it’s a bomb ..... a stink bomb!
Don’t hold your breath, there’s nobody in the Labor Party is with a grain of honesty and integrity, nobody, they are all corrupt to the bone, they were feeding their families with proceeds from very indecent means.
To coin Sony and Cher “and the beat goes on. lardee dardee dar.” We got more of this nonsence coming up when the greens hold the country to ransome come the next sitting of parliment, the real onus was with the Labor party to show some guts and back an inquiry, it’ll come with a change of government we hope!
The Labor party is the most dishonest and most corrupt organisation in Australia. They are guided by the corrupt and flawed Ideology of the Socialist/Marxist Progressives where everything becomes a lie. Political correctness means expediantly lying when telling the truth is not expediant although there was a rare moment of honesty when the incompetent fool Garrett said” Don’t worry about what we say we will change everything once elected. Thier policies are disastrous just like what like minded Progressive Governments have done to Europe and the US with massive debt and Nations about to collapse as well as initiating the GFC and the Global warming scam. Spain went down this so called Green energy path and now have an economy spiral out of control with 22 % unemployment. A decent, honest, honourable member of the Labor party no longer exist they are made up of S.C,U.M. (Socialist, Communist, Unionist and Marxist) and many of these Lunatics are now in bed with the lunatic Islamic extremist who have teamed up to fight thier enemies, Capitalism and Jews. They believe thier enemies enemy is thier friend. No honour, no decency, no honesty from these loony Left Labor party.
DD Ball - in my post a few down, the case I have written about concerned a long time employee of Labor Members - not one of them spoke up with even a word of disquiet about what was obvious from the arrest of the MInister was a wrongful act, or indeed in support for a woman who had been a friend. Not a single union spokesperson spoke up about an employee losing her job as a result of reporting child sex crimes, including the one she paid dues to. Not a Labor figure who had used the union movement to seek power - like the former head of the ACTU - Federal Member in the next electorate, or indeed the former senior MUA leader who inherited the seat of Swansea.
This for many people goes to the heart of the lack of any kind of morality or ethics in the Labor party and their union associates. The employee concerned stood for election as an independent and garnered thousands of votes from good people seeking to punish Labor for their behaviour over this. She was undoubtedly responsible for Labor losing that seat. I too am inclined to say that there is not one single decent honest or honourable member of the ALP - not one for whom their own conscience is worth more than their political power anyway.
That is a bit much to expect when this lot of ALP members ignore emails. None will stand up for the people of Australia.
Two more years and the Country will take decades to recover internationally, morally, ethically and financially.
I can see the workers queued up outside Centrelink Offices across the Nation as Gillard looks on while industry closes down.
The worst is yet to come when a young girl cannot get justice but it takes no time for illegal boat people to access our courts and successfully sue us for compensation for mistreatment.
“Don’t Cry For Me Argentina!” Cry for victims of Labor criminality and cry for the passing of democracy in this country, and cry for Australia.
Evil people create evil government.
Quote : Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate............Will Rogers.
You just wonder why we have a government when we the people are treated so badly. We work; we pay our taxes; we vote for those that then lie to us; we entrust them with our money, but what do they do? We watch regimes around the world treat their people with much hate, inflicting dreadful crimes on their people, starvation, killing etc.
In power we have a PM that calls us “extemists” if we rally against something that will bring hardship right across Australia. We have this person on the gov payroll - Jill Singer - who proposes that ‘On second thoughts, maybe you should be tattooed first, then gassed. All we need now are the sceptic death camps and we’d have a fully fledged Final Solution on our hands.”. This what she thinks of “deniers”.
We have young families sleeping in cars - farmers that have suffered the worst drought in 100 years now face ruin because their gov. has deemed their livelihood “unquestionalble” but I bet most of them sit down to dinner at the best restaurants with a steak on their plates. I could go on and on.
In 3 shorts years we have sunk into such a sad state of affairs. We don’t feel secure in our own country. We are being denied the basic right to vote. Our club and hotel industries that employee 1000’s are threatened because we are sliding into a nanny state as people will not take responsible for their own actions so millions who enjoy being part of a club will suffer - not to mention the money that is funnelled into charities.
I wonder if there was a turning point in those regimes that treat their people so bad. I sadly think we are on the turning point of something bad if we don’t get rid of this corrupt selected government immediately. WE DEMAND A VOTE NOW!!!
“The Australian Labor Party is a democratic
socialist party and has the objective of the
democratic socialisation of industry, production,
distribution and exchange”
It is often quoted that; all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing! I have noticed there is no main stream media / very public pursuit of Kevin Rudd for answers to questions asked way back in the nineties during the development of what has become part of a shameful history of denial, cover up and the clear lack of political will well reported by News Limited at the time and covered here http://www.heineraffair.info/ on a very instructive site. When a person lacks the guts to do the right thing we call them coward. What do we call a collective of politicians with no real evidence of any back bone at all? Brave hearts Hetty Johnson and the Aboriginal woman are not all which has been betrayed, there are all the people who believed they could put their trust in the Westminster system of democratic government. Departing Senator Fielding should have his betrayal hung figuratively and permanently around his neck like the stinking albatross such a gross betrayal is.I would love to read the names of all those elected representatives who voted this long needed inquiry into the motives and conduct of the Queensland Goss government and all that which flowed down from the destruction of documents all the way to the payment by Queensland government of $120.000.00 in shut up money. Edward James
The understandable question arises: if resources are not necessarily finite in economic terms, are resources therefore not scarce?
No. Resources will always be scarce. A thing is not scarce if and only if that thing is instantly and fully available without requiring of each and every consumer of that thing any choices or conscious actions directed at acquiring that thing. Some of the non-scarce things that are useful to human beings are breathable air and gravity.
Salt was once a precious commodity – so precious that salaries in ancient times were sometimes paid in salt. Today salt is much more abundant than it was in ancient times; the economic supplies of salt are today much greater than they were in the past. But salt remains scarce today, just as it was scarce in ancient times. Even today, salt is not immediately and costlessly available to each and every person who wants it in whatever quantities each and every person would want it if each and every person were freed from the necessity of expending any effort or resources to acquire salt.
One helpful economic heuristic devise is the production-possibilities curve. (You’ll find several images of this curve here.) The production-possibilities curve (or “frontier”) shows that, for an economy operating on the curve, to get more of good X in a given period of time requires producing fewer units of good Y – for producing more of X requires that more resources be devoted to the production ofX, resources that, in the framework of the production-possibilities curve, must be removed from the production of good Y. To produce more guns today means producing less butter today.
Guns and butter are scarce because to get more of one means giving up some of the other.
But over time the production-possibilities curve can (and, especially over the past 200 years in the capitalist world, does) shift outward. Combinations of quanties ofX and Y that were earlier impossible to produce become possible to produce.
A well-recognized cause for a ‘shifting-out’ of the production-possibilities curve is an increase in the supply of resources. The brilliant scientist in my earlier postwho figures out a low-cost way to quadruple the amount of energy extracted from each ounce of petroleum makes possible an increase in the quantities produced of both X and Y. Yet goods X and Y both remain scarce – to get more of one requires sacrificing some of the other. And petroleum, too, remains scarce: acquiring more of it requires sacrificing the production (and consumption) of other goods and services that could have been produced were not resources used instead to bring more petroleum to market.
Commenting on Mark Perry’s post that makes the same Simonesque point that I make here – namely, that humanity’s stock of ‘natural resources’ is not finiteeconomically over time – one morganovich writes:
this seems like sort of a tricky exercise in semantics.
there is only a certain amount of coal in the ground, no matter how good we get at extracting it. if you took the whole earth and broke it up into piles of it’s constituent components, there would be X amount of coal. the amount we can use will always be kX where k<1.
The point is not that the number of atoms (or molecules, or whatever other physical form or substance you wish to name) available on earth to human beings is not finite or unable to be enlarged. Of course these things are finite. Instead, the point is that “resources” is not, ultimately, a physical concept; it’s an economicconcept. And to be limited physically is not necessarily to be limited economically.
What is and isn’t a resource is determined by human ingenuity. Likewise, human ingenuity determines how much “utility” – satisfaction; gratification; pleasure; relief-of-felt-uneasiness (call it what you will) – can be gotten at any moment in time from any given unit of physical stuff. As long as human ingenuiity is free to create, there is no necessary practical limit to the amount of any ‘natural’ resource that is available for humans to use productively.
Consider petroleum. Is its stock strictly limited? For a physicist the answer is yes. But not so for an economist, who asks different questions than does the physicist. The economist asks: “How available is this particular substance – petroleum – for the continuing satisfaction of human desires?”
Suppose a brilliant physical scientist invents a very low-cost means of powering cars, airplanes, boats, and electricity-generating plants with seawater, and also a means to turn seawater into plastics and lubricants – indeed, a means to replace all uses of petroleum. The available economic supplies of petroleum would fall quickly to zero. Petroleum would become worthless; it would no longer be a resource. It’s physical presence in the earth – as measured by weight or volume – wouldn’t change. But its status as a resource would change.
Now consider a different scenario. The brilliant scientist invents not a means of turning seawater into a near-perfect and dirt-cheap substitute for petroleum, but, instead, a low-cost means of quadrupling the amount of energy that can be extracted from each ounce of petroleum. Economically the stock of the ‘natural resource’ we call petroleum is thus multiplied by four. Both history and some not-terribly far-fetched economic theorizing tell us that there is no reason to believe that petroleum (or any other resource) is finite in an economic sense.
Here’s a letter to the New York Times:
From the intro to Joe Nocera’s paean to G.M.’s new electric car we learn that “The thrill of driving the Chevrolet Volt comes from being in control of how much gasoline you use” (“Is This Our Future?” June 26).
Mr. Nocera rightly celebrates individual control. But what about the many thrills that G.M. and its subsidizing-happy cronies in Washington deny to American taxpayers by preventing us from being in control of how much money we spend on G.M. products? Why is that control and its attendant thrills unworthy of the same celebration?
More generally, why does the prospect of each individual being in greater control of how his or her money is spent elicit so often in your pages, not celebration, but scorn?
Donald J. Boudreaux
Tim Blair – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:12 am)
We’re in no mood for carbon shenanigans:
Support for climate action continues to erode and more Australians say they don’t want to pay anything to help reduce greenhouse emissions as the Gillard government prepares to unveil a carbon tax …
An annual poll by the Lowy Institute underlines how hard it will be to sell the new tax, with 39 per cent of Australians saying they are not prepared to pay anything to combat global warming, almost double the proportion who were prepared to pay nothing when the Rudd government was working on its first emissions trading scheme in 2008.
Missed your chance, taxers.
Tim Blair – Monday, June 27, 11 (05:54 am)
The warmies aren’t winning and it’s making them upset.
Tim Blair – Monday, June 27, 11 (05:49 am)
Andrew Denton didn’t care for my little quip:
Hello again and thanks for joining us on this special occasion: the one year anniversary of Kevin Rudd’s dramatic displacement from the Labor leadership. The Telegraph’s Tim Blair has named the day the ‘sackiversary’ which leaves one to wonder whether the Geneva Convention applies to cases of crimes against language.
Denton’s just lucky it’s near the end of the month and my quota of death threats is spent, otherwise he’d get such an emailing. Anyway, Barrie Cassidy, Jacqueline Maley, Annabel Crabb and Katharine Murphy all seemed to like it.
That’s a consensus, that is. The mainstream has spoken. Denton is a sackiversary denialist.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (09:47 am)
A great graphic on who’s with who in the Labor zoo - the factions, the alliances and the clout.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (09:31 am)
Pardon? Compensation to help people use more of the coal-fired power we’re supposed to be cutting?
JULIA Gillard has revealed more than three million low-income households will receive 100 per cent compensation for the proposed carbon tax - plus an extra 20 per cent buffer.
We’ve gone mad, you know.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (07:43 am)
After five years of hype about a warming apocalypse, a third of Austrralia’s warmists have checked the temperature and changed their minds:
According to the Lowy Institute poll, 75 per cent of Australians believe the federal government has done a poor job addressing climate change.
Australians are also much less willing to pay a price to tackle climate change, with 39 per cent not prepared to pay anything extra.
But the number of people paid to panic has soared:
Back in April, the ABC reported on a climate conference in Cairns attended by “600 of Australia’s top climate scientists”.
Just think about that for a second.
In Australia alone, there are 600 people employed to future-gaze about climate stuff and that’s just the top group, leaving out all the middle and lower-ranking climate wonks.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:58 am)
The world has shifted on its axis. The veil of the temple of green thought has been rent. The Age has published an oped by a sceptic - Professor Bob Carter:
Fact 1. A mild warming of about 0.5 degrees Celsius (well within previous natural temperature variations) occurred between 1979 and 1998, and has been followed by slight global cooling over the past 10 years. Ergo, dangerous global warming is not occurring.
Fact 2. Between 2001 and 2010 global average temperature decreased by 0.05 degrees, over the same time that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels increased by 5 per cent. Ergo, carbon dioxide emissions are not driving dangerous warming.
Fact 3. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is beneficial. In increasing quantity it causes mild though diminishing warming (useful at a time of a quiet sun and likely near-future planetary cooling) and acts as a valuable plant fertiliser. Extra carbon dioxide helps to shrink the Sahara Desert, green the planet and feed the world. Ergo, carbon dioxide is neither a pollutant nor dangerous, but an environmental benefit.
Fact 4. Closing down the whole Australian industrial economy might result in the prevention of about 0.02 degrees of warming. Reducing emissions by 5 per cent by 2020 (the government’s target) will avert an even smaller warming of about 0.002 degrees. Ergo, cutting Australian emissions will make no measurable difference to global climate.
Fact 5. For an assumed tax rate of $25 a tonne of carbon dioxide, the costs passed down to an average family of four will exceed $2000 a year.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:51 am)
The problem with so many warmists is that they have no idea what it takes to create wealth and jobs, and no interest in considering the consquences of destroying them:
Bob Brown yesterday on ABC1’s Insiders:I WOULD expect that in the future we are going to see some of the most polluting enterprises in the country have a struggle.
Barrie Cassidy: But it could close down some of these mines overnight?
Bob Brown: I would not figure that in because they are just so highly profitable. But that has to be the outcome. You know the coal industry has to be replaced by renewables.
It’s as easy as having your eyebrows waxed! Elizabeth Farrelly in Thursday’s The Sydney Morning Herald:
SHIFTING to renewables is like losing weight or stopping smoking or having your eyebrows waxed or the cellulite ironed out of your thighs. No pain, no gain.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:42 am)
Telstra plays down an absurd restriction on competition demanded by the Gillard Government:
TELSTRA chief executive David Thodey has vowed to aggressively promote its wireless network, arguing the telco’s agreement not to promote wireless internet as a substitute for the National Broadband Network is a minor constraint.
Mr Thodey said the “anti-sledging” clause was “very, very specific”.
The clause is contained in Telstra’s $11 billion deal with the NBN Co and the government to gradually disconnect its copper network and provide access to certain infrastructure for 30 years.
“The only constraint, and it’s a very, very minor constraint, is to directly put a little pamphlet into someone’s house that says ‘do not buy NBN fixed broadband, buy our wireless broadband instead’. That’s the only constraint,” Mr Thodey told the ABC’s Inside Business program yesterday.
“It is only a very limited constraint of a direct substitution for NBN fixed broadband, so I don’t think it’s an issue at all...”
The Government says wireless isn’t a real substitute for fixed broadband, which is why it’s spending $36 billion on its NBN. If it was confident of that argument, it would not need this restriction.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:34 am)
So much for those ludicrous claims that Julia Gillard wasn’t pushing us ahead of the rest of the world:
AUSTRALIA will be embracing “unilateral economic disarmament” if it adopts a carbon tax, says the key US Republican congressman on climate change.
In a devastating judgment for the Gillard government’s carbon tax plans, Jim Sensenbrenner told The Australian the US had turned its back on a carbon tax.
Mr Sensenbrenner said cap and trade - the US term for an emissions-trading scheme - was “dead in the US”....
He said the Republicans, who oppose an ETS, had won every coal seat in congress in last year’s election - seats the Democrats would need to win back if they were to regain a majority in the House of Representatives…
“A carbon tax is akin to unilateral economic disarmament,” he said. “It gives China and India and Brazil and Mexico and all your key competitors a licence for no reductions from business as usual.
“It increases the cost of your manufactured products. Price signals work, so as a result you don’t sell so many of your products.”
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:27 am)
Liberals should be extremely unforgiving of anyone indulging in a bit of self-indulgent infighting that would put at risk an election win:
FORMER federal Liberal Party treasurer Michael Yabsley has called for an independent inquiry into the way the party is run, warning there are “more bombshells than you can poke a stick at”.
Mr Yabsley’s comments - in an email last week to Peter Reith, and confirmed yesterday to The Australian - suggest that deep internal divisions within the Liberals have not been resolved by Saturday’s re-election of Alan Stockdale as party president…
Mr Stockdale, a former treasurer of Victoria, defeated Mr Reith, a workplace relations minister in the Howard government, by 57 votes to 56 on Saturday.
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott infuriated senior party figures by offering Mr Reith his implicit support and then voting for Mr Stockdale, with footage of Mr Abbott showing the president his ballot paper screened on Sky News yesterday…
Mr Stockdale’s win occurred in the face of a letter by the party’s four vice-presidents, including former foreign minister Alexander Downer, backing Mr Reith…
Mr Yabsley argued the job of fundraiser should be a paid position. He said yesterday: “I think there is a pretty good chance that if the Australian Securities & Investments Commission were to take a close look at the Liberal Party, there would be some serious questions.”..
Mr Stockdale said:… “Unfortunately, Michael is somewhat bitter about the fact that he was unsuccessful in an attempt, late last year, to persuade the party to put him on a lucrative contract to raise money.”
Since Peter van Onselen goes on to abuse Nick Minchin as “hard Right”, I think we understand the agenda in this complaint about Abbott:
IT turns out Tony Abbott isn’t just a weathervane when it comes to climate change: he is also a weathervane so far as who should be Liberal Party president.
After encouraging Howard government minister and close friend Peter Reith to stand for the position just weeks ago, on Saturday he voted for incumbent Alan Stockdale, who went on to win the ballot by a solitary vote.
Reith may not have put himself (or the party) through the bruising contest had he known the Opposition Leader’s true intentions from the start.
Abbott wasn’t shy about revealing his backflip. Putting the sanctity of the secret ballot to one side, he showed his ballot paper to Stockdale (to a healthy laugh) then to deputy leader Julie Bishop (who nodded approvingly).
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:21 am)
On the other hand, shouldn’t workers be entitled to appoint whoever they like to bargain for them?
EMPLOYERS claim unions have been handed a massive expansion of bargaining rights after Fair Work Australia ordered a company to negotiate with a senior union official whose organisation had no legal coverage of the workers.
Maritime Union of Australia official Will Tracey won the right to represent a group of oil and gas workers, whose work is outside the union’s coverage, after presenting himself as an individual bargaining agent…
Employers and academics said the decision could also encourage union turf wars where rival unions competed for coverage of employees in workplaces…
Technip had refused to bargain with Mr Tracey for an agreement covering remotely operated subsea vehicle operators in the offshore oil and gas industry on the grounds it would breach the Fair Work Act given the MUA had no right to cover or represent the ROV workers under its eligibility rules. Another union, the Australian Maritime Officers Union, has coverage of the workers but no ROV worker had sought to be represented by the AMOU in negotiations. Instead, several workers had appointed Mr Tracey as their individual bargaining agent.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (06:04 am)
The danger with a multicultural nation is that you end up just sharing the teriritory, although even “sharing” might not be the right word:
On a balmy early Saturday summer evening, the U.S soccer team played for a prestigious championship in a U.S. stadium … and was smothered in boos.
Its fans were vastly outnumbered. Its goalkeeper was bathed in a chanted obscenity. Even its national anthem was filled with the blowing of air horns and bouncing of beach balls.
Most of these hostile visitors didn’t live in another country. Most, in fact, were not visitors at all, many of them being U.S. residents whose lives are here but whose sporting souls remain elsewhere.
Welcome to another unveiling of that social portrait known as a U.S.-Mexico soccer match...
Amd just to make sure the US realised Mexico was reclaiming California:
Goalkeeper Tim Howard ...blasted CONCACAF officials for conducting the title ceremony in Spanish.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (05:49 am)
He promised to “bring Australia together”:
THERE was no love lost when Bob Hawke’s eldest daughter suddenly came face-to-face with her stepmother Blanche d’Alpuget in an airport lounge.
Witnesses said at least one of the women had slapped the other four times during the incident.
Sue Pieters-Hawke, 54, yesterday confirmed there had been a bust-up with her stepmother…
The pair previously has been involved in a public spat over Ms D’Alpuget’s latest biography of the former prime minister in which she portrayed his long-suffering first wife Hazel as an ambitious gold digger.
Upon the book’s release last year, Ms Pieters-Hawke angrily defended her mother, who is now suffering advanced dementia, saying “if only she could speak for herself”.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (12:02 am)
There’s one Sunday current affairs shows so shocking that AAP cannot bring itself to even tell what station it’s on…
The full details of the government’s carbon tax won’t be finalised for weeks, Australian Greens leader Bob Brown says.
“It’s a work still in progress,” Senator Brown told ABC 1 on Sunday.
Meet the Press:
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has accused Prime Minister Julia Gillard of using Treasury as a weapon after she offered up officials to cost his tax plans.
Ms Gillard threw down the gauntlet to Mr Abbott, offering Treasury officials to cost tax cuts he revealed at Saturday’s Liberal Party federal council.
“Today I do want to make an offer to Tony Abbott. I do believe Australians should be able to judge this on the basis of all the facts and figures,” she told the Ten Network on Sunday.
Sky News Agenda:
“My own personal view was that Peter Reith would bring a bit more dynamism to the job,” Mr Downer told Sky News on Sunday.
The Bolt Report:
Climate change denier Christopher Monckton has apologised to the government’s climate change adviser, Ross Garnaut, for comparing him to Hitler… On Sunday he apologised on TV and said he had written to Prof Garnaut.
Andrew Bolt – Monday, June 27, 11 (12:01 am)
AAP and ABC News Radio in today’s midday bulletin both started their reports with the same disgraceful and ignorant slur:
CLIMATE change denier Christopher Monckton has apologised ...
First, Monckton does not deny the climate changes, or that the world has warmed over the past century. So the description is false.
Second, the word “denier” is deliberately chosen to evoke Holocaust denial, which makes AAP and ABC guilty of a foul smear.
This is malicious and inaccurate propaganda, posing as objective reportage. The ABC chairman and managing director should demand higher standards.