Senate Rejects ETS – Would The Democrats Have Improved and Passed this Law?

posted by Scott Kane on Wednesday, December 2nd 2009

The dogs have been barking for some time – the Senate has now rejected the Rudd government ETS legislation.  This sets in place, should the Rudd government choose to take it, a double dissolution trigger.  Rudd can call a general election for the House of Representatives and all the Senate.  Pundits are calling this for early March, others for August.  In reality, it could be just six weeks away.

Liberal senators Sue Boyce and Judith Troeth voted with the government,  but this support was far short of a Senate majority.  The Mad Monk Tony Abbott, practicing as he does the “withdrawal method” when it comes to all things not conservative, forced the rest of the Liberals to vote NO despite minister Wong’s previous efforts to negotiate the bill’s passage.

The Greens voted NO – as is their custom on every piece of legislation before the house and the rest on the cross benches followed suit. Their eternal purity makes them politically irrelevant and a parliamentary menace.  But politics isn’t about holiness, it is about securing the best possible outcomes, something the Democrats never, never forgot.

But what would the Democrats have done?

The ETS is not an ideal piece of legislation.  The Democrats would have negotiated for improvements in line with our own policies.  Fairer more equitable solutions, while not appealing to major polluters,  would reduce the impact any climate change mitigation legislation would have on the overall economy and on the poor.  Our view differs from The Greens’ “Put the oxy torch to all industries emitting a kilogram of CO2, dude!” economic vandalism.

We would have worked, as we always have, with the elected government to secure the best deal possible for the Australian people with a bill that, while limited, is  a step forward.  A step the Rudd government, despite having a fresh and clear mandate for it, will not now take.

That was role of the  Democrat for 30 years in the Senate – negotiating.   Ensuring the elected government functions, keeps its word and doesn’t cave in to sectional interests.  That we are needed to do this line-by-line work is demonstrated by the failure of the ETS.  A serious piece of legislation about a serious subject, one that ensures Australia’s future – from economy to environment –  has been flagrantly reduced to petty party-based squabbling.  John Howard must be laughing behind his hand as he eggs on the newly-anointed High Priest of Climate Denial – Tony Abbott.

Bob Brown is likewise congratulating the troops on a job well screwed with the rest of the cross benches looking for a pat on the head – from somebody or anybody!

Well done all!  You’ve succeeded in reducing our federal Parliament to a circus.  A national joke; a joke on the heads of the Australian people.  Thanks a bunch!

I urge those entitled to vote in the Higgins by-election to send a message to Canberra.  Use your ballot paper and the preferential system to its fullest.  Vote 1 Australian Democrats – David Collyer, and if you’re a Liberal voter and feel so compelled then (and only then) send your second preference to those who have failed you: the Liberal Party of Australia.

Scott Kane

ETS Lynchin? Better Ask Minchin!

posted by Scott Kane on Thursday, November 19th 2009

The temperature is rising across Australia this week.

The barometer and the thermometer are peaking out to red.  The forecast – FAIL.

Suburban Melbourne faces the first SEVERE fire weather warning on Thursday under the new system.  We follow the Weather Bureau’s predictions with our hearts in our mouths.

From Canberra, the news is even more serious.

EPIC FAIL!

• The Australian Greens are campaigning on Climate Change in the Higgins by-election while steadfastly refusing to negotiate with the Federal government in or out of the Senate chamber.
  Five (5) Australian Greens Senators in the Senate.  Five!
  Negotiation?  Discussion?  Nil, Nix, Nada, Zero, Zilch.
  What a waste of activist energy and tax payers money The Greens experiment is proving to be!

EPIC FAIL!

• The federal Labor government knows if they don’t get the Liberal/National Coalition on side their ETS bill will earn a “Catastrophic” forecast too.  The ETS faces the same future as PM Rudd’s Grocery Watch scheme.  Will we once again have politicians hiding behind “core” and “non core” election promises – as famously coined by John Howard?  “Not happy Jan!”

EPIC FAIL!

• The Liberal/National Coalition, currently undergoing the worst ignominy a conservative political party can endure – opposition – are  lurking in dark party corners with razor sharp knives for the ritual Seppuku of their leader Malcolm Turnbull.

EPIC FAIL!

• The Coalition opposition are flipping and flopping with contradictory statements of victory in respect of negotiating amendments to the ETS while simultaneously trying to torpedo it.

Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan has reportedly said:

“…the exclusion of agriculture from the ETS shows negotiations between the government and the opposition have been productive.”

He’s kidding right?  Has Heffernan  a future career as a stand up comic at the Melbourne Comedy Festival?  He must, because on the same day Senator Nick Minchin states:

“…the exclusion of agriculture alone would not be sufficient grounds for the coalition to back the ETS.”

“We’ll take significantly more concessions from the government before the coalition party room, I think, would be prepared to consider supporting this bill,” Senator Minchin told ABC Radio on Monday, adding that Labor needs to consider a “whole range” of other coalition amendments.”

A  “whole range of other coalition amendments”?  Reads like “Our way or the highway” to me.  This is not a process of negotiation – it is politcal castration being performed by an absurd and out-to-lunch far left (The Australian Greens) and a medley of Climate Change deniers within the Liberal/National Coalition.

EPIC FAIL!

• The Labor government’s Senator Wong meanwhile takes the fine art of saying nothing while implying new heights, when asked if the Federal government would be “willing to dump other sectors from the ETS to appease the coalition.”

“This is about getting majority support through the parliament for a piece of legislation that is in Australia’s national interest.”

Is that a yes, a maybe or are you just being contrite Senator?

EPIC FAIL!

And it’s not even Summer yet.

Scott Kane

Media Release – Exempt Left-Handed From Climate Change

posted by David Collyer on Sunday, November 15th 2009

Today’s announcement by Climate Change minister Penny Wong excluding the agricultural sector from the costs of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme under proposed new compromise legislation is ridiculous and mistaken, say the Australian Democrats, and opens the door wider to further lobbying and rent-seeking by major polluters.

“If minister Wong is willing to destroy the effectiveness and universal consequence of the CPRS with this attempt to buy the support of the conservatives, I would advocate also exempting left-handed people,” the Australian Democrats candidate for the Higgins by-election David Collyer said.  “After all, they only produce one twentieth of our pollution, are very nice people and are equally deserving of assistance.

“This proposal is no sillier that minister Wong’s nonsense.

Recent scientific studies suggest farm animals, notably ruminants, are major contributors to climate change through the emission of methane, a potent greenhouse gas with significantly larger impacts than carbon dioxide.

“These studies need to be repeated, refined and enlarged, but without an environmental ‘all clear’, exempting agriculture from the CPRS is a grave error and probably irreversible.

“Many members of the Liberal/National Coalition are Climate Change skeptics, who do not believe in anthropogenic climate change and are unmoved by the now-extensive scientific literature.

“Minister Wong is desperately trying to placate the implacable. The Opposition are laughing behind their hands at her weakness and impotence.

“Australia’s farmers are now well into their second decade of drought.  They know change is needed.  And while shifting adjustment costs to others is an old political game, accurately targeting the source of emissions for actions to change behavior is in the interest of all.

Exempting any polluter – let alone an entire sector – means the cost of adjustment must fall more heavily on the rest.  The Garnaut Report gave this matter great emphasis and sternly warned against permitting ‘business as usual’ anywhere.

“If minister Wong is so willing to riddle this crucial legislation with exemptions and concessions, then by her measure the left-handed are entitled to a free ride too,” Collyer concluded.

Media contact – David Collyer 0413 248 193

“David Collyer is currently contesting the Higgins by election for the Australian Democrats against Clive Hamilton for The Greens and Kelly O’Dwyer for the Liberal Party,”

Greens Surrender Freedom

posted by David Collyer on Monday, November 2nd 2009

David Collyer Australian Democrats Candiate For Higgins

Clive Hamilton, The Greens’ candidate in the Higgins by-election expects us to abandon a wide range of important freedoms by trumping them with the hideous spectre of child sexual abuse.  His position is morally bankrupt, say the Democrats.  It delegates to government a power they plan to misuse before it even exists.

“Hamilton affirmed his support for the Rudd Government’s Internet Filter scheme as recently as a week ago.  His position is breathtakingly naive and means all citizens can be denied access to any content deemed unacceptable by public servants for any reason,” the Democrats’ Higgins by-election candidate David Collyer said today.

“He and the government are taking a legitimate public concern – the need to protect children from inappropriate material – and are using it to push through a wasteful, secretive censorship program riddled with unintended consequences that cannot achieve its policy aims.

“Hamilton is in direct contradiction to The Greens’ position on the issue,” Collyer said. “Even if the issue of internet content and filtering means very little to you, it is important to understand that Clive Hamilton does not support core Greens policies.

“Everyone in public life wants a secure internet experience for children. However, the very structure of the Rudd Government’s Internet Filter means it cannot achieve this objective.

“The secret national blacklist of websites exposes us to government abuse in perpetuity: legitimate, legal businesses have already found themselves on it with no recourse or ability to challenge or appeal the decision. The blacklist works only on complaints made to the Government.  It is subjective, incomplete and draconian.

“If the Australian Government awards itself this capability, it exposes itself to irresistible political pressures.  For example, the Chinese Government could insist all Falun Gong sites be blocked to Australians. The Rudd Government would cooperate, and we would never know.

The Democrats position is reinforced by Civil Liberties Australia’s stinging denouncement in their most recent newsletter: “Dr Hamilton jumped on board the censorship bandwagon early and with a flourish. He endorsed a virtual “anything goes” approach to government censorship. It didn’t matter how slow the internet got, or how the government curtailed people’s freedoms to access information… all would be OK under the dictatorial approach of Dr Hamilton. ”

The Democrats believe it is possible to deliver a safer internet experience for children without compromising the social, economic and political freedoms of others through building on our censorship laws that already classify media – or denies classification – allied with existing and evolving net filtering software.

“The Government is elected to serve the people and secret Government censorship programs work against the people.  Electing a Democrat will send a message to the Government that this is not the path of progress,” Collyer concluded.

Media contact – David Collyer 0413 248 193

“David Collyer is currently contesting the Higgins by election for the Australian Democrats against Clive Hamilton for The Greens and Kelly O’Dwyer for the Liberal Party,”

References: www.cla.asn.au/clarion/0911CLArionNov.pdf

Malcolm Turnbull: A Democrat dressed in Tory togs? A conservative or a progressive? A moderate or high church?

posted by Kathryn Crosby on Sunday, October 4th 2009

Tim Blair’s opinion piece in the Daily Telegraph today http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/malcolm-seizes-muddle-ground/story-e6frezz0-1225782199044 had a line that made me see red:

Turnbull next restated his opposition to nothing. “To do nothing, to literally be a party with nothing to say, which is what some people are suggesting we should be, a party with no ideas is not the party I am prepared to lead,” he said, which at least rules out a third leadership role with the Australian Democrats.

What? The Australian Democrats a party with no ideas? You have got to be kidding me.

The sheer depth of now-mainstream policy first championed by the Australian Democrats hugely contradicts that claim, Tim.

We led on the environment before The Greens existed; our very solid climate change policy – balloted in 2001, while both Labor and the conservatives were still trying to figure out if it was real – which is so on-the-money it is scary; paid maternity leave long before anyone else; same sex marriage (Natasha Stott Despoja’s bill from 2006) and parliamentary oversight of war (Bartlett’s bill from 2002) – both of which The Greens have simply copied to reintroduce this year with next to no editing…

I could go on, but anyone familiar with the Democrats don’t need convincing: you already know we are the definitive party of ideas. And you also know we have member-based policy working groups toiling away right now, detailing the next round of new ideas to drive our country forward.

If Turnbull wants to be part of a party of ideas, then he should be an Australian Democrat.

Other Turnbull acts are classic Democrat moves – the shopping list of amendments for the ETS is a classic Australian Democrats approach to negotiation: see Kernot’s shopping list for workplace reform and Lees’ shopping list for Howard to get his GST. It’s an incredibly effective way to improve legislation for all Australians and Turnbull definitely lifted from the Democrat play book when he did it.

Turnbull is considerably more progressive than many of his conservative colleagues. I don’t think he’s a bad leader at all, but I guess he is pretty frustrated by the stick-in-the-muds that surround him, and struggling to get them to move. The Liberal/National coalition in its current form wants another Howard as leader – so they can sit back and just say no to anything that might take us forward, and support fear-inspired hateful measures that will only take us backwards. Dear Liberals: you may want that, Australia doesn’t.

There are many people on both sides that I think would be a lot happier in the Democrats. Peter Garrett and some of the other more progressive members of the Labor party, John Forrest from Mallee and Fiona Nash from NSW from the Nationals so they could better represent their constituency without getting whacked for voting against the party line, most of the wet Liberals (and no one from The Greens).

Would the Democrats want them? That’s another matter, and not for me to decide. I don’t see why not, as long as they respect the party’s core beliefs, objectives, constitution, and the membership.
Why are they in those parties and not the Democrats? Well, aside from that minor implosion we just won’t dwell on for the moment, the Democrats have failed to get the nation to see them as a true alternative in every level of Governance. We have allowed people like Tim Blair to label being centrist as being perched on the fence – as opposed to being a genuine alternative political position.

A centrist position is a perfectly valid position, and one that will suit most Australians.

The Australian Democrats also need to make it clear that we are actually not just here to make a few speeches and hang out in the Senate. Please read Objective 23 http://www.democrats.org.au/about/pages/objectives.php

I’d be happy with Turnbull as a Democrat.

Kathryn Crosby

Kathryn asserts this is a personal view aside from her role with the Democrats, is not advice to the party, nor is she about to pick up the phone to Malcolm with an invitation.

Red Alert? Australian Greens Showing True Colours? – Hands Off Australian Business, Watermelons!

posted by Scott Kane on Wednesday, September 30th 2009

Big Business CEO’s are paid obscene amounts!  There are few Australians who wouldn’t agree.  It is sickening to see leaders simultaneously preside over fiscal disasters and receive breathtaking rewards.

But the solution is not to cap their salaries.

The Greens want a $5 million cap on executive salaries. This may seem a reasonable idea.  It’s easy to rail against corporate greed.  But we must be careful and bear in mind that government does not own these businesses, individuals do,  directly or indirectly.

Our system of democracy allows each and every one of us to own property –  money, business and land – without effective limit.

Each and every one of us has that right!

Enter The Greens…

Very few Australians will ever enjoy multi-million dollar CEO salaries.  But there is no legal impediment to anyone doing it.

It can’t be stated more strongly.  Once we limit pay, it limits our right to conduct free enterprise as we see fit – within the already reasonable limits of existing law – and I see a clear and present socialist agenda.

A dangerous agenda coming from a political party that has positioned itself far to the left of Labor.

This raises the spectre of the bogey man the Conservatives loved to throw at us for decades, but for once with some merit.  Greenism Socialism.

Let me confirm I do not own shares or have a pecuniary interest in any corporations.  I run a small business.

The fair and reasonable position on this issue comes from the group  many Australians – and certainly The Greens – are likely to dismiss:

The Australian Shareholders Association.

The Australian Shareholders Association says legislation is not the answer.  They are right.

“If there is a substantial negative vote against a remuneration … (and) if the company has not made substantial changes (in the following year) … we will be voting against the re-election of any directors,” Association chair Helen Dent said on ABC Radio.

That is how the system is designed to work.  That is the proper process.

One could argue the system Helen Dent outlines has been remiss.  It’s a fair point.  But the people in that system – shareholders, management and directors – are the ones financially hurt if executive salary largesse continues.  Let them sort it out.   They have a direct interest in doing so – and will!

Financial Services Minister Chris Bowen identifies the issue correctly when he says “We don’t live in an economy where the government can come in and put a cap on.”

He’s right – though he should have also said we don’t live in a political system where the government can legislate a cap either – at least not yet!

Much to Senator Bob Browns’ chagrin.

Stick To Trees And Furry Furbies Bob Brown!

We know The Greens loathe business – they don’t waste any opportunity heaping compost on it.

We know they have serious issues with the number of people living on planet Earth and want reductions there too.  Try to pin them down on the implications of what they call “sustainable population” in their policies some time!

Reduce who?  You, your family, me - Black people?  Poor people?  The mentally deficient?  Moslems?  Calvinists?  Jews?

They’ve turned the Senate from a “House of Review” into “The House of No”.

I suppose some readers are thinking “Stop scare mongering, Scott!”  But making little snips here and there to our system, as The Greens do, only serves to diminish, undermine and ultimately damage our system.

They’ve caused enough damage to this country – witness Black Saturday February 7th 2009 and the nonsense we’re excruciatingly aware of when it comes to The Greens and fuel reduction.

But please…

Don’t let The Greens burn down our business and political system too!

Scott Kane