I turned to the show as I do every Sunday but to my surprise each guest was a News Limited employee and it sounded more like a Abbott party room meeting then a chat show about the Sunday papers.

Andrew Bolt tho stood out the most with his anti HATE comments towards the labor party in general he would not stop ranting with his shock jock comments and un educated views on all the topics he was asked.

A source has told me today that the ABC switch board was running hot only 10 mins in to the show with complaints coming in via Facebook , Twitter , Email , Phone.

So then I headed over to Bolts so called blog on News Limiteds Herald site and what did I find well Bolt was laughing all the way to his car from the ABC studios.

Exit, laughing

I did have fun this morning, but others were choking with rage. The ABC switchboard is busy, dealing with people like viewer Steve:

I am a reasonably articulate person with a fairly “centre” political perspective.

But regarding your performance on Insiders just now, words fail me.

Here are some that come to mind:

ideologue, biased, bigotted, vitriolic, unpleasant, poisonous, destructive, unfair, own agenda, plain over the top, journalist impersonator, a fraud, a fake, etc etc etc ………… and sadly predictable in regard to all of these.

You used the phrase “a joke” several times. You are a joke, a caricature of yourself.

On the other hand, viewer David:

To watch your obvious delight at those three attempting to defend Julia Gillard and the comedy entitled, The A.L.P.” on the Insiders program this morning had me in stitches. From Rogue Kevin, The Carbon Tax, Christine Milne and Tony Windsor’s view of the World have all surely been sourced directly from an Australian version of Monty Python.

Like you, I await the Media to ask that obvious question:- “How Much Will the World’s Temperature Fall with this New Carbon Tax”. One thing we all know of course is, Pelicans and Australian Power Companies do have one thing in common…they can stick their Bills Up Their A…”.

I must admit I was laughing out loud as walked from the studio to my car. You see, if you didn’t laugh at this government, you would cry.

Be clear here: I don’t suggest that Insiders today has killed off Julia Gillard’s leadership. Rather, it’s a marker of her end.

UPDATE Reader Andrewe:

Gillard on skynews now talking about Japan. 10,000 dead and not a tear, its just lucky they werent landing on the moon because she would hardly be able to get a word out.

Sourced News Limited

 

So what can we all do about this pathetic shock jock well you can give feed back to Barry direct on his website

CLICK HERE TO SEND YOUR COMPLAINT DIRECT TO ABC AND BARRY

Climate change cage match: Abbott debates Abbott

by Bernard Keane

As the Gillard government’s plan for a carbon prices sends Coalition stocks soaring, attention is increasingly focusing on what opposition leader Tony Abbott believes in about climate change and how to deal with it. Today in Crikey, Tony Abbott debates one of his most formidable opponents on the issue — Tony Abbott.

Tony Abbott: Climate change is a relatively new political issue, but it’s been happening since the earth’s beginning. The extinction of the dinosaurs is thought to have been associated with climate change.

Tony Abbott: I’ve always thought that climate change was real because I’ve always known about the ice age and other things which indicate that over time climate does change.

Tony Abbott: I am, as you know, hugely unconvinced by the so-called settled science on climate change. Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have significantly increased since the spread of industrialisation, but it seems that noticeable warming has only taken place between the 1970s and 1990s.

Tony Abbott: We have a clear policy on climate change. Climate change is real.

Tony Abbott: I mean in the end this whole thing is a question of fact, not faith, or it should be a question of fact not faith and we can discover whether the planet is warming or not by measurement. And it seems that notwithstanding the dramatic increases in man-made CO2 emissions over the last decade, the world’s warming has stopped. Now admittedly we are still pretty warm by recent historical standards but there doesn’t appear to have been any appreciable warming since the late 1990s.

Tony Abbott: It’s quite likely that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has had some effect on climate, but debate rages among scientists over its extent and relative impact given all the other factors at work.

Tony Abbott: We can’t conclusively say whether man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to climate change. If they are, we don’t know whether they are exacerbating or counteracting what might otherwise be happening to global climate. Even if they are adding to climatic extremes, humanity may be able to cope with only modest adjustments.

 

Tony Abbott: What we can say, though, is that we should try to make as little difference as possible to the natural world. As well, prudent people take reasonable precautions against foreseeable contingencies. It’s the insurance principle.

Tony Abbott: OK, so the climate has changed over the eons and we know from history, at the time of Julius Caesar and Jesus of Nazareth,  the climate was considerably warmer than it is now. And then during what they called the Dark Ages it was colder. Then there was the medieval warm period. Climate change happens all the time and it is not man that drives those climate changes back in history. It is an open question how much the climate changes today and what role man plays.

Tony Abbott: I am confident, based on the science we have, that mankind does make a difference to climate, almost certainly the impact of humans on the planet extends to climate.

Tony Abbott: The argument is absolute crap.

Tony Abbott. We believe climate change is real, yes, we believe humans make a contribution towards climate change.

Tony Abbott: There may even have been a slight decrease in global temperatures (the measurement data differs on this point) over the past decade despite continued large increases in emissions associated with the rapid economic growth of China and India.

Tony Abbott: I think that the science is far from settled but on the insurance principle you are prepared to take reasonable precautions against significant potential risks, and that’s I think why it makes sense to have an ETS.

Tony Abbott: I think there are all sorts of ways of paying for this that don’t involve a great big new tax that we will live with forever.

Tony Abbott: There is much to be said for an emissions trading scheme. It was, after all, the mechanism for emission reduction ultimately chosen by the Howard government.

Tony Abbott: What we need is environmental direct action. We need action which is actually going to make a difference. What we don’t need is a whopping great new tax masquerading as a green measure.

Tony Abbott: The Howard government proposed an emissions trading scheme because this seemed the best way to obtain the highest emission reduction at the lowest cost… On the other hand, artificially created markets could be especially open to manipulation… For this reason, many now think that a carbon charge scheme directed at the least environmentally efficient producers would be simpler and fairer than an emissions trading scheme.

Tony Abbott: We have a policy to reduce emissions, not just to make them more expensive.

Tony Abbott: In the absence of wind that never stops blowing, sun that never stops shining and tides that never stop turning; in the absence of hydrogen cars; and in the absence of nuclear power stations to supply most base-load electricity, big reductions in emissions are impossible without a big increase in people’s cost of living or a significant change in their lifestyles.

Tony Abbott: The important thing is what will it do to people’s cost of living and if it drives up your cost of living it is a tax. It’s effectively an increase in the rate of GST — that’s what it is.

Tony Abbott: If Australia is greatly to reduce its carbon emissions, the price of carbon intensive products should rise. The Coalition has always been instinctively cautious about new or increased taxes. That’s one of the reasons why the former government opted for an emissions trading scheme over a straight-forward carbon tax. Still, a new tax would be the intelligent skeptic’s way to deal with minimising emissions because it would be much easier than a property right to reduce or to abolish should the justification for it change.

*Taken from Tony Abbott’s biography Battlelines and speeches, media transcripts and articles since mid-2009. Additional research by Crikey intern Nikki Bricknell.

media sourced http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/09/climate-change-cage-match-abbott-debates-abbott/

The 500 million people in European Union countries have lived with an emissions trading scheme since 2005.

Jill Duggan, a carbon price expert from the EU’s Directorate-General for Climate Action, says the scheme has created more jobs and was easier to implement than first feared.

Briefing journalists in Canberra, she said carbon tax only accounted for a fraction of the yearly price rises for fuel.

“The impact would be a quarter of the impact of gas or oil prices, so people notice gas or oil prices rising, they notice the impact on their household bills, but the carbon price is much, much smaller than that in impact.”

Ms Duggan said Australia had the chance to invest in sustainable energy systems such as solar to actually increase employment.

“The experience in Europe is the drive to a low-carbon economy has created more jobs – I’m not aware of any jobs that have been lost as the result of a carbon price.

“It was easier and cheaper to reduce emissions than was initially estimated. The impact has not affected the economy adversely.”

Speaking earlier, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott repeated his claim the tax would add $300 a year to power bills and bump up the price of petrol.

“Every time prices go up if this carbon tax comes in to effect people will think of the government, because this tax will cascade through the economy.”

Slush fund

Greens leader Bob Brown took exception to Mr Abbott’s description of household compensation as a “slush fund”.

“His new description of proposed compensation for households under the carbon tax proposal as ‘slush’ will offend many Australians but delight the big corporations who want the same money for themselves,” Senator Brown said.

Senator Brown says the “slush fund” is actually the Coalition’s “direct action” plan to compensate polluting industries without compensating households which he claims will have to pay an extra $720 a year.

Climate Change Minister Greg Comet has pledged to return the entire carbon tax to consumers, particularly low-income households and pensioners.

“Every dollar raised by the payment of the carbon price by the large polluters – because that’s where the obligation resides – will be used to support households to meet price impacts,” Mr Combet said.

He says it will also be used to help industries transition to a low-pollution future.

“Mr Abbott will run a fear campaign and that’s exactly what he’s doing, but we intend sticking to our guns, arguing the case because it’s the right thing to do for the future of this country.”

Mr Abbott said he would welcome an early election on the issue – but said it was not up to him.

“It’s up to the Prime Minister to go to Yarralumla and call an early election if that’s what she wants to do. It’s up to the independents to decide what they do.”

Media Sourced : abc.net.au

 

WHEN Malcolm Turnbull was asked to name an economist who supports the Coalition’s carbon reduction plan, he came up blank.

”I can’t cite any economists that agree with it but I have to say to you that at the moment it’s actually the only carbon reduction plan on offer,” he told the ABC’s Q&A.

Yesterday the Coalition’s finance spokesman, Andrew Robb, was asked the same question and named two economists: Greg Evans of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and Danny Price, who ”has said our program as it stands is far superior to the emissions trading scheme the government sought to bring in a year ago”. //

//

Mr Evans, normally a backroom operator, is a former Coalition aide and Treasury economist who once ran the Wool Council. Asked by the Herald yesterday whether he did support the Coalition’s plan as claimed, he drew a distinction between his own view as an economist and the chamber’s view.

”We unambiguously represent the views of mainstream businesses and energy users in particular and our view is consistent with their approach on this issue,” he said.

Unlike the Coalition, the chamber has no plan to cut net carbon emissions by 5 per cent by 2020. It does not see the point.

”We are not proposing a model to do that,” Mr Evans said. ”There is no case until there’s international agreement. In the meantime, we support voluntary action. The Coalition is closer to us on that than Labor.”

Danny Price, the other economist mentioned as supporting the Coalition’s plan to use grants and incentives to cut emissions, is an energy specialist who worked on the Coalition’s plan at Frontier Economics.

”I had to ring them up and tell them not to say I supported it,” Mr Price said.

”All I’d said was that their numbers added up, I didn’t say I supported it.”

He believes the Coalition’s proposal ”only makes sense as a transitional plan” along the way to something more permanent.

The acting Prime Minister, Wayne Swan, described Mr Robb’s claims as ”nothing short of cringeworthy,” but had difficulties asserting it was both ”legitimate” to describe Labor’s proposed carbon price as a carbon tax and also ”absolutely incorrect”.

”It doesn’t operate like a traditional tax,” he told Channel Nine. ”The government is not going to take the carbon price out of your pay packet and we’re not going to put it in the revenue.

”It is paid, by a small number of large polluters, and used to assist industry and households.’

Media Sourced : smh.com.au

When the boatload of asylum seekers smashed into rocks off Christmas Island just before Christmas, certain radio shock jocks went into a lather.

Julie Bishop was acting opposition leader and found herself being interviewed by Andrew Bolt and Steve Price on Melbourne’s MTR.

Bolt, the conservative columnist who expends a great amount of energy lecturing members of the Canberra press gallery on how to do their jobs, has a particular distaste for Labor’s asylum seeker policy. As is the norm for such ”interviews”, he tended to make statements and seek agreement.

”Look, Julie,” he said, ”this is a tragedy that is a direct consequence of the government policies that led to a resumption of the boat people trade. They were warned, the opposition warned them. I think today, now that the rescue operation is over, today is the time we start to hold people accountable. Would you agree?”

Bishop tried to play a straight bat.

”After any tragedy it is natural and appropriate for people to ask how did it happen, could it have been prevented,” she said. ”There will be many questions, no doubt there will be an official investigation, there will be formal inquiries . . . a coroner’s inquest, as there have been in the past. The Western Australian . . . ”

Bolt interjected: ”Julie, it seems to me you’re reluctant, you’ve been intimidated out of talking about the contributing factors to this tragedy. Is it not true that these people were lured to their deaths?”

On it went until an increasingly agitated Bolt, according to Bishop, simply hung up on her.

CLICK HERE TO READ BLOT”S REPLY TO HIS ARTICLE

“Suddenly sensitive Herald journalist hits back“

Previously, Bolt and Price had hung up on independent Rob Oakeshott because he wouldn’t give a straight answer on whom he was likely to support to form minority government. When Tony Windsor went public last week with concerns about the increasingly dangerous tone of public discourse, Bolt promoted his Wednesday morning radio show with the item: ”Tony Windsor’s attempt to play the victim to shut down a debate. We recall how this man who wants to ‘take on’ talkback hosts hung up on me the last time he tried.”

The boys at MTR are far from the only culprits contributing to increasing disrespect for the nation’s leaders. Gary Hardgrave, a shock jock who became a minister under the Howard government before losing his Brisbane seat and returning to radio, hung up on Greens leader Bob Brown 10 days ago.

Brown tweeted afterwards: ”What a spineless uninformed jock Gary Hardgrave is, who when losing the argument cut off the i’view! Voters of Moreton knew a thing or two!”

In their defence, radio jocks are not journalists per se and therefore are not strictly bound to address politicians publicly by their titles or Mr, Ms or Mrs. But is there any cause to be rude, regardless of the temperature of the debate or personal views?

3AW’s Neil Mitchell interviewed Julia Gillard just days after she announced the flood levy and the shock jocks were proclaiming the end of the world. The interview began with an accusation more than a question: ”Prime Minister, with your government’s history of mismanagement, like the insulation program, school rebuilding, who are you going to put in charge of the spending of this money you’re going to take from us?”

Mitchell’s line of inquiry was perfectly legitimate, but was the tone of the question? Days earlier at the National Press Club, Michelle Grattan put the same question to the Prime Minister, but with a civil tongue.

”We have seen from the global financial crisis and the government’s response to that that there are problems with speed. Have you any particular Commonwealth mechanisms to ensure that money is spent properly and there is proper value for that spending?”

The Mitchell interview, which degenerated into a slanging match, paled against the more recent Alan Jones interview. Jones clearly felt his time was more important than that of the nation’s leader, berating her for being 10 minutes late.

Politicians are the first to admit that the way they carry on in the chamber does little to engender respect among the public.

Up close, politics is an adversarial game with much at stake, but that doesn’t entitle the nation’s opinion leaders to treat them like dirt in their own race to become more notorious than the next bloke.

Media Sourced : smh.com.au

Its Funny with Bolt , when some other than News Limited says anything bad about BOLT they are from the LEFT ! but we all know that Conservatives are sore looses

Andrew Bolt “writes for Melbourne’s Herald Sun, Sydney’s Daily Telegraph and Adelaide’s Advertiser. He runs Australia’s most-read political blog, and appears on Channel 9, ABC TV’s Insiders and MTR 1377, 8am each weekday”

Andrew Bolt is News Limited’s version of Alan Jones a mouth piece for the hard right Liberal Conservatives under Abbott and his followers.

I have noticed over the weekend that The Menzies House Conservative website have setup a new website and petition to say no to Gillard’s Carbon Tax but it only had around 300 signatures before Andrew Bolt added the link to his Blog on News Limiteds website  Melbourne’s Herald Sun.

I have notice they dont have a Compliance disclaimer telling readers of Andrew Bolts Blog that his opinions dont represent News Limiteds or the editors views ?

“Sadly it’s what we expect from Andrew Bolt. Afterall it was him who, in 2008, reported the tragic death of a baby under the headline “Planet saved, baby dead” just because the baby was found in a green shopping bag. Outrageous!!” Link

Today the petition has over 3000 signatures and how funny this happened ever since Bolt added it to his BLOG .

Should News Limited step in and not allow this ?

We have sent a email to the Herald  Sun for a comment we will let you know

Abbott needs to step up to the plate and tackle industrial relations

Media Sourced http://www.theaustralian.com.au

Tony Abbott is so out of touch he said the argument on Climate Change is “absolute crap”.

1. Tony Abbott said climate change is “absolute crap”. “The argument [on climate change] is absolute crap.” SOURCE: THE AUSTRALIAN, 12 DECEMBER 2009. To view the full article click here.

“We can’t conclusively say whether man-made carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to climate change.” SOURCE: TONY ABBOTT, SPEECH, 27 JULY 2009 To view the full speech ‘A Realist’s Approach to Climate Change’ click here.

“I think the science behind the policy is contentious to say the least.” SOURCE: ABC RADIO AM, 4 AUGUST 2009 To view the full transcript click here.

If you support Gillard’s Carbon Tax Sign our petition

“I am, as you know, hugely unconvinced by the so-called settled science on climate change.” SOURCE: ABC 7.30 REPORT, 27 JULY 2009. To view the full transcript click here.

“It seems that, notwithstanding the dramatic increases in manmade CO2 emissions over the last decade, the world’s warming has stopped.” SOURCE: HERALD SUN, 5 JANUARY 2010.

2. Experts say Tony Abbott’s plan to tackle climate change will actually result in higher emissions. A Climate Institute analysis last week found the Coalition’s policies would result in emissions being 7 per cent higher than 2000 by 2020. That’s a long way from a 5 per cent cut. SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 19 JULY 2010 To view the full article ‘Climate Institute at odds with

3. Representatives of the electricity industry say Tony Abbott’s plans will result in higher electricity prices.

Chief Executive of the Energy Supply Association, Brad Page, says:

”Without a long-term carbon price the problem of inefficient investment has still not been addressed and electricity prices will still go up,” Mr Page said. SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 30 JULY 2010 View the full article ‘Abbott’s plans don’t stack up as prices set to rise’

4. Tony Abbott disputes that humans are responsible for climate change. Asked by the ABC’s Four Corners if he still disputed that humans are responsible for climate change, Mr Abbott said: ”Sure, but that’s not really relevant at the moment.” SOURCE: THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 17 AUGUST 2010

5. Despite scientific proof, Tony Abbott does not believe global temperatures are rising. ”I have pointed out in the past that there was that high year a few years ago, and … if you believe the various measuring organisations, [the temperature] hasn’t increased, but again the point is not the science, the point is how should government respond and we have a credible response that will achieve a 5 per cent reduction by 2020 and the government doesn’t.”

Mr Abbott was referring to global temperatures in 1998, which coincided with a heat-inducing El Nino cycle, and by some measures was slightly hotter than 2005. However, the same measurements show that the warming trend has continued steadily since the late 1990s. SOURCE: THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 17 AUGUST 2010 Read the full article Abbott still doubts planet is getting hotter.

Join Our New Facebook page “We Say Yes to Gillard’s Carbon Tax

6. When Tony Abbott became Opposition leader he promoted climate change sceptics. EXTRACT FROM SYDNEY MORNING HERALD ARTICLE: Abbott’s leadership marks the triumphant return of the climate sceptics to the top of the federal Liberal Party. SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 2 DECEMBER 2009. To view the full article ‘Climate sceptics have made their triumphant return’ click here.

EXTRACT FROM SYDNEY MORNING HERALD ARTICLE: Climate change sceptics triumph SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 9 DECEMBER 2009. To view the full article ‘Climate change sceptics triumph’ click here.

EXTRACT FROM SYDNEY MORNING HERALD ARTICLE: Nick Minchin: I don’t mind being branded a sceptic about the theory that that human emissions and CO2 are the main driver of global change – of global warming. I don’t accept that and I’ve said that publicly. I guess if I can say it, I would hope that others would feel free to do so. SOURCE: FOUR CORNERS ABC, 9 NOVEMBER 2009. To view the full transcript click here.

7. Sydney Morning Herald journalist Adam Morton says Tony Abbott is not telling the whole truth when he talks about rising electricity prices and a carbon tax. What he doesn’t tell them is that power bills are going up anyway, for a host of reasons – massive network upgrades and the 20 per cent renewable energy target (that was backed by the opposition as well as the Government) for starters. SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 19 JULY 2010 Read the full article ‘Climate Institute at odds with Abbott’s carbon copy’.

8. Tony Abbott can’t make up his mind about a price on carbon. On the first day of the election campaign Tony Abbott said he opposed a price on carbon. “I do not support… making consumers pay a price on carbon.” SOURCE: ABC, 18 JULY 2010. Read the full article here. But he changed his mind just 24 hours later. “If the world does, obviously that is a new situation and we would have to adjust to it.” SOURCE: THE AGE, 20 JULY 2010

9. >> First Tony Abbott supported an ETS. “The Howard Government (in 2007) proposed an emissions trading scheme because this seemed the best way to obtain the highest emission reduction at the lowest cost.” SOURCE: BATTLELINES, 2009, PAGE 171

>> Then Tony Abbott opposed an ETS. “This is not the time to take this risk.” SOURCE: ABC LATELINE, 17 MARCH 2009

>> Then Tony Abbott again supported an ETS. EXTRACT FROM THE AUSTRALIAN ARTICLE: We must vote for ETS: Abbott SOURCE: THE AUSTRALIAN, 24 JULY 2009. To view the full article ‘Senior Liberals at odds on climate change strategy’ click here.

“There is much to be said for an emissions trading scheme. It was, after all, the mechanism for emission reduction ultimately chosen by the Howard government.” SOURCE: TONY ABBOTT SPEECH ‘A Realist’s Approach to Climate Change’, 27 JULY 2009 To view the full speech click here.

“I think that the science is far from settled but on the insurance principle you are prepared to take reasonable precautions against significant potential risks, and that’s I think why it makes sense to have an ETS,” SOURCE: ABC NEWS ‘Abbott backs Turnbull despite climate change doubts’, 4 OCTOBER 2009 To view the full article click here.

“If the Government substantially accepts our amendments there is no reason why this legislation can’t be passed.” SOURCE: THE AUSTRALIAN, 11 NOVEMBER 2009. To view the full article ‘Row over sceptics hits climate ETS talks’ click here.

>> Now again Tony Abbott opposes it and even says climate change is “absolute crap”. EXTRACT FROM PERTHNOW NEWS ARTICLE: Tony Abbott resigns from Liberal front bench over ETS stance” SOURCE: PerthNow 26 NOVEMBER 2009. To view the full article ‘Tony Abbott resigns from Liberal front bench over ETS stance’ click here.

EXTRACT FROM BUSINESS SPECTATOR NEWS ARTICLE: Abbott says opposition will vote against ETS legislation in Senate if decision not delayed. SOURCE: BUSINESS SPECTATOR, 1 DECEMBER 2009. To view the full article ‘Abbott says opposition will vote against ETS legislation in Senate if decision not delayed’

10. Former Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull’s comments on Tony Abbott’s position. “Tony himself has, in just four or five months, publicly advocated the blocking of the ETS, the passing of the ETS, the amending of the ETS and, if the amendments were satisfactory, passing it, and now the blocking of it.” “We have an Opposition whose current leadership dismisses the Howard Government’s ETS policy as being just a political ploy. We have an Opposition Leader who has in the space of a few months held every possible position on the issue, each one contradicting the position he expressed earlier.” SOURCE: TURNBULL WEBSITE BLOG, 7 DECEMBER 2009.

11. Tony Abbott says he is against a carbon tax, but his plan has been labelled as “just another type of carbon tax” – but one that gives taxpayer’s money directly to polluters, funding a scheme that won’t bring about lasting change. The chief executive of The Climate Institute, John Connor, said the Coalition policy to subsidise one or two power stations was ”just another type of carbon tax”. ”It is still taxpayers’ money buying emission reductions. It’s just instead of businesses taking responsibility for their own pollution, the taxpayer takes responsibility for it directly,” he said. ”Without a price on carbon, it won’t do anything to shift the rest of the economy.” SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 30 JULY 2010 Read the full article ‘Abbott’s plans don’t stack up as prices set to rise’

12. The power industry says electricity prices will rise faster until there is a long term plan to tackle climate change. The power industry itself says they will go up faster while there is uncertainty about a carbon price, as they prop up the grid with comparatively expensive open-cycle gas turbine stations, rather than new baseload generation. SOURCE: SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 19 JULY 2010 Read the full article ‘Climate Institute at odds with Abbott’s carbon copy’.

Garnaut turns up the heat on Abbott…

Abbott’s song sheet on carbon…

The shadow treasurer, Joe Hockey, has said he believes a carbon price is ”inevitable”, and the environment spokesman, Greg Hunt, said last December the Coalition would use the direct action policy of government grants to reduce emissions in the ”first instance” but would ”consider [a carbon price] when we know what the US is going to do”.SMH.com.au

Abbott Vs Turnbull…

Dear Fans and Friends

AS you all know by now that Gillard has announced that she will want to Price Carbon in the next year but as we also know that this issue has brought down a Prime Minster and a Opposition leader LETS NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES lets make sure we all get behind Gillard and get on with a Price on Carbon.

To Help us get the message out we have set up a new Facebook page today and we need your help to spread the word

http://www.facebook.com/pages/We-Say-Yes-to-Gillards-Carbon-Tax/192879430732996?sk=wall

Click that link and become a fan of We Say YES to Gillards Carbon Tax the more that join the more we can get out message out

Thank you

Trevs Political Rants

Do not be fooled by this man and the NSW State Liberal party just because Labor has been in government for 16 years and has made some mistakes doesn’t mean you punish your local labor member that may of done some good for your area.

But im not going to do I told you so moment if Barry gets in he will be under the orders of Tony Abbott and our state will get  no funding from the commonwealth because of his negativity.

Now the libs want to take the fun out of NSW whats next he will Cancel the NYE fireworks

THE V8 Supercar championship at Olympic Park will be axed by the NSW Opposition once it wins government, the local Liberal candidate said.

In a move that has alarmed V8 organisers, the candidate for Auburn Ned Attie told the Save Olympic Park No V8s committee they would scrap the Homebush Bay event.

And in all likelihood the event would be lost to Sydney for good, a source from the sport said yesterday.

“The only reason we came back to NSW was to do the event at Homebush, otherwise we wouldn’t be here,” the insider said. “It’s almost ludicrous. It’s not even remotely on. That would be a massive backward step for Sydney and for NSW and for us.”

Despite years of work to get it to Olympic Park and the race attracting a record 150,000 people last year, Mr Attie said the Sydney Telstra 500 should be shunted to Eastern Creek – a venue at which it was almost irrelevant in years past and attracted just 26,000 fans.

“We’re in favour of the relocation of the event and will work with [V8 Supercars Australia] and Eastern Creek Raceway to achieve the final outcome,” Mr Attie said in comments on the official Liberal Party website that have since been buried.

The Auburn councillor praised “the great work done by the Save Olympic Park No V8s Committee in draw[ing] attention to the problems with the Labor Government’s contract with V8 Supercars Australia”.

The move could happen as early as 2013 and Mr Attie expressed frustration it couldn’t be done even sooner.

The Homebush Bay precinct is in Auburn and is close to other key seats such as Drummoyne, which Liberals hope to win from Labor with Green voter help, the newly-Liberal seat of Ryde and the once almost impregnable but now vulnerable Labor stronghold of Parramatta.

Opposition Leader Barry O’Farrell refused to commit to government funding for the event and has not mentioned it in the Liberals’ major events policy. He also said before the first race in 2009: “It makes no sense to have this race at Homebush”.

Tourism Minister Jodi McKay said a move would put millions of dollars and the event “under direct threat”.

“Barry O’Farrell wants to put an end to a NSW event that attracts more than 150,000 fans, hosts world renowned music acts and is beamed live to more than 110 countries – surely he cannot be serious.”

The V8s race is a key part of a stellar sporting month in Sydney, alongside the Australian Open golf and it has attracted tens of thousands of interstate and international visitors in its first three years and is expected to inject up to $86 million into the NSW economy over five years.

But Mr Attie was scathing of it, saying: “Unfortunately, NSW Labor has signed NSW taxpayers up to this rotten deal until the end of 2013. Re-location before 2013 is at the discretion of V8SA. If we’re successful in coming to office, a NSW Liberals and Nationals Government would better manage any future negotiations with V8SA (and major events in general).” Mr Attie also indicated a Liberal Government would cut off funding for the event, saying: “We continue to support motor racing in NSW and will advocate for any major events that will help boost the NSW economy but not at the expense of NSW taxpayers and local residents.”

The Liberal MP for Ryde Victor Dominello has also said: “I think the decision to move the V8s to Homebush is just crazy.”

Media Sourced : http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au