News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Rudd plan unites Coalition, Greens 

Rudd plan unites Coalition, Greens

17 Dec, 2008 11:57 AM
The Coalition and the Greens are poised to forge an unlikely pact to order a parliamentary inquiry into the Federal Government's contentious plan to tackle climate change.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced on Monday that Australia would cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 5 per cent by 2020 or up to 15 per cent if other countries came on board.

''The Australian Government, given the global financial crisis, makes no apologies whatsoever for introducing responsible medium-term targets to bring down our greenhouse gas emissions,'' Mr Rudd said yesterday.

But Greens leader Senator Bob Brown blasted the plan, vowing to push for a Senate inquiry into the proposal.

''We'll have a chat to the Prime Minister if he cares to [or] wants to. I mean, I told him what I thought yesterday, that he'd failed this country and he'd failed the planet.

''But he said he didn't think so. Well, I'd certainly like to test that in ... the public forums ...''

Opposition spokesman on emissions trading design Andrew Robb said the Coalition also wanted a Senate committee to look into the plan ''in a most exhaustive way''.

''If the Greens want a Senate inquiry, I'm sure that we wouldn't stand in its way,'' Mr Robb said.

The Greens who share the balance of power in the Senate issued terms of reference for the inquiry to look into the ''adequacy or otherwise'' of the 5 per cent target.

Climate Change and Water Minister Penny Wong and Treasurer Wayne Swan defended the plan.

The Treasurer said yesterday, ''We think we have struck the right balance, given the nature of our economy and given our responsibilities to the national economic interest and to the global fight against climate change.''

Greens spokeswoman on climate change Christine Milne said the proposal was a failure on diplomatic, scientific and economic grounds.

''One of the big failures of the Rudd Government scheme is that 97 per cent of the money is going to go to compensate everybody.

''So on one hand you put in a price signal on carbon and on the other hand you take it out with compensation. Only 3 per cent of all that money will be going into actually changing behaviour.''

Mr Swan rejected the suggestion, saying ''we will all feel it. Some people will receive compensation over and above the cost they feel, but the price structure in the economy will change and consumers will have to make choices.

''What that price structure change does is that it encourages business to invest in new technology, to become much cleaner in terms of their use of energy. What it does is it encourages consumers to do the same.''

The Government is trying pressure the Opposition to back the plan when senators consider the legislation next year.

The Opposition was taking a two-pronged approach, according to its climate change spokesman, Greg Hunt.

''The first is that we will be developing a clean energy revolution. As part of that, we want the Government to reverse the cap, the inexplicable cap on middle-income families having access to solar energy. They haven't done that.''

The Opposition has also commissioned the Centre for International Economics to review the plan before deciding whether it will support the legislation.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
2

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
You can have all the inquiries you like, but until you control the destruction of the Amazon and South East Asian rain forrests you are just wasting your time and OUR money. Do you remember your basic biology from school, trees take in carbon dioxide and create oxygen, which helps to reduce global tempreatures and solve the problem, while carbon trading and other schemes only push the responsibility on to someone else. Saving and replanting those trees will do more good than Bob Brown, his looney Greens or any number of other schemes ever could. The new rule should be that if you chop down one tree, then you must plant at least 100 somewhere else to replace it.
Posted by wombat, 17/12/2008 8:18:43 AM
Where's Australia's leadership in this proposal? It is a rotten emissions scheme (I'm not referring to the target here - but Rudd not giving enough credit for renewables and carbon sinks). While Ruud has chosen the least offensive target to industry, the coal-dominated economy on the mainland is not one that looms large in Tasmania. This State has the highest renewable energy reserves and the largest tracts of forests locked up containing significant carbon reserves that are not being rewarded by Canberra, which can't even honour its own MRET targets. This is the crux of the matter, and gives Tasmania one reason to SECEDE from the Commonwealth if this state's unique advantages aren't taken into account under the new scheme. The current CRPS proposal misses the opportunity for Australia to sell a more nuanced pitch on trading emissions to the world.
Posted by phil from hobart, 17/12/2008 10:00:30 AM
'Wombat', well said and I agree wholeheartly. Australia can have the highest targets in the world, but they will not make a modicum of difference to the global problem until those great global polluters China, India and the US decide to do something about their situation and that won’t happen for another lifetime. Bob Brown and his naive colleagues should buy a one way ticket to any of those three countries and see how far they get when confronted with the real problems. Buckley’s features prominently.
Posted by Chris, 17/12/2008 10:18:22 AM
I think that public opinion will win out on this issue and that either this government, or future governments, will increase the targets.
Posted by Limnodynastes, 17/12/2008 12:29:49 PM
Given the problem the targets should be high - aim high.
Posted by Concerned Canberran, 17/12/2008 4:34:31 PM
I think limnodynastes is right, sadly it might be a long time coming, first this spells OUT for the current government, it spells NO ACTION by its replacement, That makes a tally of SEVEN YEARS delay, before labour gets another chance, can the WORLD afford seven years of no action.
Posted by watcher, 17/12/2008 5:35:03 PM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Greens leader Bob Brown
Greens leader Bob Brown
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
POLL
Q: What do you think of the Rudd Government's emissions cut target?

Responsible policy
(24.7%)

Far too low
(62.9%)

Far too high
(12.4%)

Total Votes: 1657
Poll Date: 15 December, 2008

MOST POPULAR

Yourguide to Your Toyota
James Bond Happy Hour at Flint - click now
 
 
Red Hot Deals at Eurobodalla! click now
 
University of Canberra - click here
 
Click here to read See Canberra online!
 
Ready, Set. Drive!
 
Classifieds
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...