I live in Queensland, a very large, resource rich northern state. For too many years we’ve had Labor governments that have run with very populist themes and policies. And we’ve had Chief Scientists that have actively ignored evidence to implement Labor politics. [1]
Tonight Queensland Labor was annihilated at the ballot box and will likely be left with just seven seats in the 89-seat parliament. Yes. Annihilated.
Like many Queenslanders I was so excited about voting today. I was so pleased to be a part of a democracy and to know that ordinary people voting together could and would change the government and decisively. And yes we did.
Next year there is a federal election. If only federal Labor government would learn from this Queensland Labor defeat and start reversing its most inane and ignorant policies now… like the carbon tax.
There has been comment that federal Labor is in for as convincing a defeat. But a big difference is that the federal Opposition doesn’t have clear alternative policies or a popular leader.
Indeed on the big issues that matter to me, like climate change and the Murray Darling, the Australian Liberal party has policy that is as embarrassing and ignorant as that of the current federal Labor party.
I may have been excited about voting in Queensland today for Campbell Newman. But unless Tony Abbot, as the alternative Prime Minister, starts articulating sensible alternative policies on the issues that really matter federally he won’t be getting my vote next year.
And on the issue of the carbon tax…
There may not have been many people at the no carbon tax rally in Canberra last Thursday, but weren’t the penguin costumes great. [2]
What this and so many related issues need at the federal level is an articulate and committed opposition. But go to the federal Liberal home page and click on the environment policy and this is what you get: “Tony Abbott and the Liberals stand for real action to tackle the complex challenges of climate change, energy security and water scarcity.”
There is no water scarcity: the drought broke with flooding rains about 18 months ago. We need a federal government that acknowledges the need to plan for natural climate variability. We don’t need subsidies for businesses that want to sequest carbon as proposed by Mr Abbot.
Read more and it gets worst. http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Environment.aspx
**********
1. Deceit in the Name of Conservation
http://jennifermarohasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Review55-1DeceitinNameConservation.pdf
2. Much thanks to Jim S. for the photograph and for being there.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Jennifer, I am truly sorry to hear your opinion. My heart soared when reading the article on Jo Nova’s blog because I think Australia may be a precursor for US next year elections. Maybe not.
FOIA broke the drought with ClimateGate. Please be upon he.
================
So Jen – I disagree – the electorate are waiting for the Feds with baseball bats.
The election day mood was excited. The turnout was early – many couldn’t wait to get down there to their local booth and kick the bastards out.
The result even worse for Labor than predicted. And the mood was there from mums and dads, small business, big business and throughout the public service. People who had never voted LNP ever before did. The hydra strategy to cut off the future ALP leadership in full expression and executed. Bligh’s concession speech showed she still don’t get it.
ALP’s fate sealed long ago on the asset sales, but also fuelled endless health dept bungles with payroll and misappropriation scandals and cost of living issues. And people had stopped listening to the ALP a year ago.
The philosophical opposition in Qld is now the Katter party – which is unashamedly anti global free trade, anti-public infrastructure asset sales, anti-private monopolies, agrarian socialist and anti- coal seam gas (and they like to shoot things too). A curious mixture of left and right wing pseudo-pragmatism. And they’re pissed off and very angry.
Which is cool – a very stark choice and given the regional support in Qld something to really ponder for House of Reps and the Senate. And Katter promises to use that powerfully ruthleslsy if he ever gets into a balance of power position to do so. Woo hoo !
If the Federal LNP want a landslide – have no policies and keep away from microphones.
But relax – Abbott doesn’t give a shit about climate change. The LNP deniers will bury that agenda and a generation of science with it. But be careful what you toss out – soil carbon is a great soil health idea – better soil structure, water holding capacity and cation exchange. LNP Qld are very interested in soils and soil conservation. And I reckon climate variability, climate risk management and seasonal forecasting are all back in fashion.
Is weather of any interest to producers?
P.S. Still coming down after last night.
I agree with Luke that the electorate is waiting with baseball bats for the feds but I also agree with Jen that the Liberal party has got to start making a mark with policy instead of just opposing Labor policy.
Abbott is playing it safe on climate and he shouldn’t – he should start by telling Turnbull the STFU with his climate opinions (and stop pandering the the ABC) and stick to his portfolio of communications and get stuck into the NBN. The Libs soils policy is good policy yet he won’t get off his bum and push it preferring to attack the carbon tax instead. We are getting sick of the constant attack on the carbon tax as it’s over and out, now Aussie law – he should start to push his alternative policies and get on with it.
The anti-globo Posh Left are, indeed, currently flirting with Katterism. It’s their “butch” phase, while they wait for the next crop of union ballot-riggers and schoolteachers to do that Light-on-the Hill schtick again.
Our posh anti-globos won’t be caught out on this year’s Earth Hour. The smart ones can get their LED flashlights, batteries and candles in bulk direct from China via Taobao. Air delivered! (Yes, you can probably get organic beeswax, as approved by WWF.) Ebay is so last century.
Definitely an annihilation.
It is very sad that the Opposition in Canberra are more likely to win if they have no iron clad policies and stay away from microphones as Luke points out.
Soil conservation is not a new idea Luke and it’s not about to be tossed out.
Neither is a generation of science.
What needs to be tossed out is the inane and incredibly wasteful political agenda that attached itself to the science.
Of course producers are interested in weather, that was never the issue.
Left and right wing are socialist terms Luke, they are not a big part of conservative politics.
Agrarian socialist? Your loose use of that terminology amuses me.
How is that different to govts maintaining industries like the automobile industry etc.?
What a great day for Queensland, but alas, I think Jen is right to be less than sanguine about the federal ballot. The only really good things about a two-party system are a certainly efficiency of operation and the ability to throw the bastards out every now and then. When the two dominant parties are owned lock, stock and barrel by the same interest groups that also own a mostly monolithic media, though, there is no opportunity to really give the buggers the heave ho. Unfortunately, in Australia, the US, the UK, and even Canada it is more pseudo two-party kleptocracy than democracy. The only way to change this is by electing people who are willing to take on the problems and solve them, but as long as the media is willing to assassinate any threat in the interest of the status quo, we won’t get them.
My best guess is that when Minchin become president of the Libs we will see some backbone in the Coalition on CC and MDB.
I agree with Jen’s sentiment on Yabbott, but with some gentle grooming from the brains in the party he should pass muster and win handsomely.
I am not totally comfortable with Hockey dismantling the whole Klimatariat ….we may need the foot soldiers to keep an eye open for tipping points….
I don’t think you’ll find any trendy anti-globo Posh Lefties flirting with Katterism. The lack of a big hat gives them away.
Debs – Katter is agrarian socialist and protectionist to the hilt – has a big portrait of Labor premier Red Ted Theodore on his wall.
A couple of thoughts Doc, if I may,
1) That was not a wheel dropping off the rear carriage of the Global warming circus in Australia yesterday that was the front end collapsing. No Labor or independent politician with any sense of political survival is going to try to save the planet anytime soon not publicly.
2)A little humor allowed to me, I don’t think the LNP are going to have heart palpitations on your possible veto. If you think Tony Abbott forgot how he became PM yet to be elected then you obviously give him very little credit as a Rhodes scholar from a working class background. Environmentalism is now part of the polity and needs discussion and a lot of farmers still see potential incomes not recognising bad science remains bad science.
3)Yesterday was fought on many issues, I think privatisation and public services, sale of assets and state issues were a betrayal by ALP to their base but the carbon tax on power prices were significant in the mix. A flooded capital city when there was supposed to be a never ending drought and a white elephant desal plant, topped off with with record rains recorded over SEQ polling booths this week sure as sally did not help the ALP. Thor came in and delivered a God damn smackdown with tempest.
Penguins are always good fun, but if you watch the world famous Documentary Madagascar you know they really are little mafioso and Pirates.
The words of the great Prophet Barnabus Joysius resonate still from last year, as he orated
“they are going to whack you like they whacked us all those years ago”.
Luke,
I didn’t mention Katter I was commenting on your licence with terminology.
Katter only secured 2 seats. Why do you see him as a huge threat?
Protectionism in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s got more to do with a sensible balance don’t you think? We do need to protect those industries which help to keep us as one of the luckier societies. We also need to be mindful of our vulnerable position on the globe. We are neither a huge market or an easy country to access with exports. A sudden shift in the dollar or a ‘peak oil’ scenario can leave us just as vulnerable as a change in the climate/weather.
BTW I am neither a fan or an opponent of Katter. I would however definitely choose his policies over the Greens if I was faced with that choice only (which we’re not) His at least have some basis in common sense and at least require some type of accountability.
As Jen points out, the Federal opposition are appearing devoid of iron clad alternative policy.
Because the electorate is waiting to take to the current mob with a baseball bat, the opposition don’t need to have good alternative policy.
That’s not good. I totally agree with you and Jen on those 2 points.
What that might transfer into for the Senate with respect to Katter? just musing about balance of power – certainly if you’re in Dalrymple or Mt Isa you’re on a different planet.
Apparently Katter’s support came from Labor defectors not the LNP.
Hi guys, I agree with most of what Luke says but I also agree with Jen about Abbot. He’s been pushing the biffo button a bit too often lately, sometimes on spurious grounds like the Thompson medical certificate issue. That was just embarrassing.
I have to say John S. that I disagree with you about shutting Turnbull up. I’ve always had a problem with politicians having to tow the party line and not saying what they really think. Just look at what’s happened to Peter Garrett.
IMO it would be better for this country if our elected members could have a conscience vote on every issue but that’s probably naive of me.
I like Nick Zenophon and would vote for him if I could even though I don’t agree with some of his policies.
When I read the good news today, I was really chuffed. (Love that Limey slang.) Just for today, I’m making myself an honorary Queenslander!
The political situation here in the US is different than in Qld. We only have two major parties, and they’re both bad. The best that we can hope for is Clintonesque gridlock, engendered by a balance of stupidity between the executive and legislative branches of ‘gummint’.
I’ve never voted for a Republican presidential candidate before. But if lightning doesn’t strike me first, I’m looking forward to voting for Romney, as the lesser of two evils, in November.
Derek
“that’s probably naive of me.”
Sorry to say Derek but are most naive in this respect, either you do not understand how a political party works or you think of political parties as discussion groups at a balmy Sunday afternoon BBQ.
If you do not agree with party policy, you should not be in the party.
End of discussion.
Want to follow your conscience and vote accordingly on every issue?
Fine, stand and be elected as an independent.
The fact that the liberals tolerate a certain amount of dissent is a leftover of the earlier years of the party where there were mostly like minded members in the party.
These days anyone who doesn’t get excepted or fit easily into an other party, joins the libs.
And may I say, not being a conspiracy supporter, there may be some spoilers in there as well with ulterior motives.
By politics I’m unashamedly a conservative in the true sense, as well as a libertarian which follows naturally from being a conservative, whether you believe it or not.
As to protectionism, I have no problem with it at all.
What is wrong in keeping your people in jobs and looking after the well being of your own citizens first and foremost?
There is no way we can compete on equal ground when others have protectionist policies in place or wages way below our own, so sometimes we have to make sacrifices.
Sure for some who earn their living off the public purse it makes good sense to import cheap stuff from overseas and maybe even desirable to turn otherwise productive people into dependents of the state.
Sometimes Luke makes good sense, but I can’t understand his fervent anti-farming outbursts, although I completely agree with him about Mr Katter being a socialist, small wonder, his father was also one before him as well as being a labor politician.
He just carried on from there and with far more fervor and zeal.
I don’t particularly like Mr T Abbott, for reasons of my own but I still vote for them, for someone to say they will not vote for the party because of him, I find that strange to say the least.
Previous post, “excepted” For some reason (surely not age yet at 50) I have trouble with this word, it keeps propping up when I mean ACCEPTED
Hence why I installed the previously mentioned grammar checker, to no avail needless to say
God it must be age after all “propping” popping up for chrs sake already!
I agree Mark A,
It shouldn’t be about the man (or woman), it should be about the policies.
Some accountability would no go astray either.
It doesn’t say much for our electoral system when the easiest way to win is to make the swinging voters hate the other man (or woman) more than they hate you.
I agree with Jen that it would be nice to have a clearer picture of what we’re voting for rather than what we’re voting against.
Mark A – I’m not anti-farming at all – I love agriculture but we still have issues to discuss. Someone has to brief Debs on the issues.
Protectionism – well problem being – others can do unto others too, and eventually you do need to pay for the Landcruisers you use to drive around the ranch in.
Luke
“Protectionism – well problem being – others can do unto others too”
True but as far as can see, so far it’s only being done to us.
As I stated before I’m for a level playing field Luke, find me one and I’ll be there alongside you playing my best team game.
Luke do you really think the Chinese or any other importers of our raw materials would stop if we import less from them?
Sure they would be annoyed, maybe, and look for alternative sources but they do that anyway, they are playing us for fools we are like a violin.
And what do we get from the EU for importing their stuff?
Do they reduce the concessions and assistance to their farmers?
Not on your nelly.
Luke I frequently travel to Europe on business and have many relatives living in different countries, you’d be amazed at the size of wheat fields harvested by combine harvesters, when a scythe or sickle would do just as well.
Also did you look at your supermarket freezers lately.
Did you see the frozen vegies imported from Holland and places like that?
Do tell me they are cheaper than the home product given the labour and transport, give over mate!
Level playing field and no protectionism hah!
Don’t get me started!!
And what issues would those be Luke?
Jen shouts “We need a federal government that acknowledges the need to plan for natural climate variability.”
Well WTF is this? http://www.managingclimate.gov.au/
Anyone patted their CyberKelpie lately.
Anyone flicked through a copy and the projects? Past issues?
http://www.managingclimate.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/MCV_CLIMAG_Ed22.pdf
Of course a lot of this work is done by those evil climate scientists yo’all don’t trust.
Now this program has been going a decade and never gets a mention by sceptics.
“I’m not anti-farming at all – I love agriculture but we still have issues to discuss. Someone has to brief Debs on the issues.”
unbelievable Luke, what world are you living in – don’t you understand that Debbie is living the farming reality and the issues?.
What would you like sceptics to say about them Luke?
I have never criticised genuine climate research and I have often commented that we find the work useful.
We are also fully aware of its limitations ( as are the genuine scientists).
When climate science has truly and usefully cracked the climate puzzle, there will be no one happier than us farmers.
What Jen asks for and what the govt is presently wasting our time our money and our water resources on are poles apart.
You also have very strange ways of expressing your stated love of agriculture.
It doesn’t even resemble ‘tough love’.
My comments and Mark A’s are aimed at the bi polar politics that have attached themselves to climate science and also to attacking Agriculture. . . and so are most of Jen’s comments at this post.
You know, things like a carbon tax and the MDBP that doesn’t want to tackle the nonsense that goes on at the top and the bottom of the southern connected system.. . stuff like that.
Your 2 links are not about that.
I did not know baseball was so popular in Australia that people would bring bats to the voting station.
Good luck on sweeping out your current leadership.
Debs can you no speaka de Anglais?
(1) Jen’s statement again “We need a federal government that acknowledges the need to plan for natural climate variability.”
(2) Well Debs what is THE MANAGING CLIMATE VARIABILITY R&D PROGRAM” then
Compare and contrast statements 1&2 – report back.
Luke, these are the sorts of programs govt scientists have been providing for over 50 years which is the knitting they should stick to instead of claiming they can predict catastrophic changes in climate when they can’t even predict what’s really needed which is ordinary changes in weather.
What would be an expected response from the federal government ruling coalition to the statement an election like this makes?
Hi Luke,
That agrarian protectionist stuff. Have you noticed that the US, Japan and Europe are NEVER going to give it away ?
They ,unlike Aussies , know that if something goes wrong with the planet- eg war, seismic , weather, -they need to still have food.
They are not ‘Cargo Cultists’ ,like City Aussies.
I reiterate -Why is OZ gas now over $1.36 here and still counted in cents in China ?
Must be labour cost . Hell nobody else in the World is’ protectionist’ ?
Bob Katter seems to be so politically incorrect that he believes in tit for tat with trade.
As I have said before- We apparently can’t economically make anything , but Germans can .
Our Germans are not better than theirs after all. lol
Apparently we have a Managing Climate Variability thingo . Can I get a job please ?
How are they going with the current water excess?
How do you manage that stuff anyway ?
Just thinking, we need a more apt name for the Managing Climate Variability Dept.
How does Geophysics Oversight Dept sound ? That’s G.O.D. for short.
Luke, maybe you should tell ’em how wonderful they are and lend them a shoulder to cry on:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/k-to-cheer-up-department-of-energy-and-climate-change-staff/story-e6freuy9-1226308900114
Maybe the staff of the Dept of E&CC have seen the writing on the wall even before the Qld elections.
Makes you wonder why we ever doubt these honourable scientists:
http://www.real-science.com/crutemp4-takes-climate-bs-to-new-levels
More manipulation by honourable govt scientists:
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/adjustmentgateaustralia/
Well Spangled you see it works like this – you might have been trundling along enjoying your climate variability research and started to get annoyed about all these trends in the data …. hmmmmm
Ian – you have food production capacity but also these days need John Deeres and inputs like high tech herbicides. hmmmmm
” – you might have been trundling along enjoying your climate variability research and started to get annoyed about all these trends in the data ….”
I wonder how much trend you can get with one thermometer?
But then look how much trend Briffa got out of one tree. [perfectly honourable of course]
Luke?
Just because they’re called the Managing Climate Variability R&D Program does not mean either:
1) They are successfully managing climate variability or,
2) They are cost effective.
Some of the work has been useful/helpful and rather a lot of it hasn’t and it has also used up a lot of tax payer money.
We are actually capable of surviving and progressing without their input. However, there is not anything wrong with the concept.
Unfortunately most of their work is just ‘busy work’ that doesn’t really achieve measurable productive results on the ground. There are however plenty of beautifully produced reports and lots of courses to help state what is often the ‘bleeding obvious’.
Just because you highlight this program does not answer Jen’s call. She is referring to issues that these programs do not cover.
I fail to see the relevance of your comment about tractors and herbicides. What was the point you were trying to make?
Never mind all that mucky agriculture. Nothing but probs. It’s best if it happens out of sight, in Pakistan or I dunno where. When they put Fair Trade on imported food and Organic labels on Australian food it’s not so bad. That way you know some white guy with a ponytail is getting his cut. But really…
What we need now is lots of coal power (as we condemn it); lots of transport, water, waste and communications infrastructure (as we condemn it all, except the cool electronics); lots of cheap and mainly imported party materials – decorations, candles, flashlights, batteries, cameras, fire control chemicals (condemned); lots of prosperous white people (condemned, with exemptions for grunge and gangsta affectations).
Some agricultural products will be necessary to celebrate EARTH HOUR…but can’t we pretend just for one evening that all that booze and food kind of materialises? I mean, when you think of the water that goes to growing just one apricot…
How are your ingratitude and idiocy levels? Saturday is your big chance! You get to spit on every blessing you wouldn’t do without for longer than one hour of fashion-dictated deprivation.
Don’t talk to me about yucky tractors and herbicides!
Well Debs – when you buy things like John Deeres from overseas that country assesses what your currency is worth (strangely).
What issues doesn’t the program cover Debs?
“We are actually capable of surviving and progressing without their input.’ ROFL – which is why the program was setup as you demonstrably haven’t been. Treasury worried about billions of drought aid outgoing for decades unchecked with no end in sight. You’ve probably been asleep Debs but that work has been very well received with a whole sea change in basic knowledge out there. I’m sure SAM and STR are bleeding obvious and in fact any survey will illustrate that most people have a completely unrealistic view of past climate. Your comments are nothing short of uninformed foolishness. Which is nothing new.
You’re in protected economic la-la land Debs. You should love Bob Katter.
People don’t want to put up with whingey expensive indulgent enviro-problematic production systems. It’s 2012 not 1950.
The unrealistic view of past climate is the same as the unrealistic view of present climate. Little is known, much is concluded from that little.
The unrealistic view of future climate is different. Nothing is known, much is concluded from that nothing.
Meanwhile, in a world of truly monstrous agricultural subsidies, our subsidies are merely large. Let’s keep the punters fed, and when this naughty world turns perfect, we’ll ditch all subsidy.
That’s right Luke,
At the moment a new JD machine is relatively cheap. So? ?
I still don’t see the problem.
Those programs do not cover the Coorong and LL issues or the fact that water is being dumped (ie wasted) into already flooded wetlands in the name of PR. Those are some of the main issues behind Jen’s call.
I fear you may be the misiformed individual living in protected la la land Luke, especially since you are the one who repeatedly uses outdated data re agricultural practices to try and justify your position.
Australian agriculture is one of the more advanced and efficient in the world.
Australian farmers in general also do everything they can to meet changing community expectations.
You are operating from misinformed and false assumptions that have nothing to do with what happens on the ground and everything to do with bureaucratic self justification.
We don’t need or use well over 50% of the gumph these impractical academics deliver us.
That means over 1/2 the money we pay them delivers no benefit to people on the ground.
Your comment
This of course should be the first subsidy we ditch before the ABC set themselves up as the Qld and Aust opposition party:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/abc_policy_dont_question_the_warming_theory/
Sorry. Technical hitch.
Your comment about past weather is just making me laugh. What makes you think generational farming businesses would not have an understanding of weather? It is far more important to them than it is to you Luke.
You are also adroitly avoiding my clear point about your definition of ‘burden’.
I’m willing to bet that my profession is far less of an economic burden than yours.
In fact Agriculture returns a net positive to Australia DESPITE all the insanely expensive government programs that are forced upon us and that we pay for and which return very little.
That means Agriculture is actually a good investment with a positive ROI.
There seems to be a general feeling of elation about the Queensland election result. I don’t live in Queensland but close by and the feeling is shared here as well.
The Federal Opposition should develop its policies around GW as stewardship endeavours. The policy focus should be on regeneration of our natural environment and not trying to partially jump on the Global Warming bandwagon.
Also why can’t we have a genuine National conversation about the theory of enhanced GW via a mechanism like a Roal Commission?
Sorry ‘Royal’ Commission..
Here’s another govt carbon farming subsidy we could do without. Bushfire and drought will prevent carbon farming here. You can’t believe this stupidity. What country does this govt come from? Not Australia. Old RM would be laughing in his grave.
http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2012/s3463193.htm
SD, that’s extraordinary. You give a futile subsidy and talk about how the thin air you purchase with that subsidy will actually be earning money in a “market” which consists, effectively, of buying and selling exemptions from imaginary pollution – at an artificially inflated price!
Still, the crusty, RM-and-Akubra-clad characters and ochre-with-heritage-green of the ABC site must be ravishing for those jaded urbanites as they prepare for their Earth Hour consumption orgies.
Just as an aside: I grow on a broad acreage what some regard as the world-champion carbon munching species. Can you guess how much interest I get from government and other “concerned” bodies? Go on. Guess.
Errrr none?
That’s because you did it by yourself and you didn’t need to pay for some highly knowledgeable bureaucrats to administer it for you and write up flowery PR reports for you. . . which you then need to pay for when it inevitably creates a new department and then ‘cost recovery’.
If it doesn’t appear in their reports and there is no ‘administration’ of the project, then it didn’t happen and you’re still farming via the old methods.
Didn’t you know that Robert?
You’re not allowed to be given credit for thinking of it yourself or doing it off your own bat.
That would mean that farmers actually care and are perfectly capable of making good progressive decisions all by themselves.
We can’t have that!
That’s right Robert and Deb. I try to raise wildlife and native trees these days. Been doing it for the last twenty-odd years and not asking for subs but even with super carbon sequestration through mulching and lack of grazing in rich, high rainfall country, carbon emissions via bushfires is always going to beat me. In “dry” country you’ve got Buckley’s. That’s the nature of Australia.
And locking up big areas this way is crazy.
In the sort of country that RMW Co is “carbon farming”, you will reduce emissions by actually grazing because grazing WILL help prevent bushfires in that country.
Correct stocking rates would, in the long run, show a more positive carbon accounting budget than no stocking.
If only this could be accurately measured. It would show up these dumb carbon schemes for the junk they are.
See Luke, the known unknowns work both ways.
SD, the fires that will eventually follow the boom years we are now in will be on a terrifying scale, with he scaling back of grazing and other rural pursuits that bring a measure of hazard reduction and supervision. The longer the fire stays out of an area, the worse the result when it finally comes. The indifference of climate bodies and theorists on this subject – and they are truly indifferent – is one of the most compelling proofs that none of the kerfuffle is about CO2. If it were, we’d be pouring billions into fire control measures, and guarding our bushland with an army. Lately, I saw some deceptive advertising about how carbon was wasted when a tree was harvested. We’re supposed to be that dumb that we think the carbon is no longer “captured” because the tree was “killed” like Bambi.
Try a couple of good fire-seasons, with Spring westerlies, when the climate turns about again. Then look out, Bambi, and hello, CO2!
But imagine being able to do extremely well paid, extremely dumb things and be beyond reproach. Who does it remind you of:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/24/where-theres-a-need-for-immunity-theres-a-crime-green-climate-fund-looking-to-un-for-diplomatic-immunity-protection-from-lawsuits/
Barnaby Joyce wants to run for Maranoa and he already has the ear of the future PM. There have been complaints from some Liberal MPs that Tony gives too much time to the Agrarian Socialist.
With the deputy’s job in the pocket there is certainty that the Coalition will overturn the CC scam.
EG, a lot of country people around here can see right through Windsor’s gruff-good-bloke act and Katter’s poofter-bashing yokelism. They don’t mind Abbott and they really like Barnaby.
Sorry Robert, I missed your post. Yes the coming fire problems are serious yet no one [incl local RFBs, I tell ’em to give me the box of matches but they wont] don’t seem to be worrying. As you say, it can’t be about CO2.
EG, d’ya think Windsor will run again after Saturday? OOH! the blood, the blood!
My rep was Aiden McLindon who replaced a retiring National Party Kev Lingard in Beaudesert and when they wouldn’t make him [as a rookie] the LNP chief, he spat the dummy and went independent, later to chum up with Katter. In spite of getting support from the close the gaters I always knew there were enough farmers left to wipe him out.
Fascinating how the old scores get settled. Wish they could get the carbon accounting books to balance like that.
After having a meeting with Windsor re the MDBP, I agree Robert.
He is really only interested in the politics and short term political gains, not in gaining sensible long term practical results.
Farmers have no time for that sort of behaviour.
Debs Debs Debs – if you knew about climate the sector wouldn’t have had billions in drought aid over 30 years.
So pick one of two options – (a) you’re climate clueless or (b) climate change might be happening and it’s outside your experience. Which is it?
Perhaps a bit of both ?
(and INCREDIBLY there’s still a few dots in EC – wow ! – http://www.daff.gov.au/agriculture-food/drought/ec – is it an ironic twist/joke that the lower Murray is still declared?)
Only billions over 30 years? Man, those Yanks and Japs are killing us! As for the Europeans…they must really be clueless about climate.
What we need is a bureaucracy to tell us what the climate is going to do. Oz agriculture could be scientifically modelled – love that word! – along the lines of Nikita Krushchev’s agrarian policies for the Ukraine. If either the climate or peasants are disobedient, there can be a remodelling of the population, and re-education of reactionary elements. Those elements can be addressed initially with affectionate and patronising terms such as “Debs, Debs Debs”. Mind you, if they hear “SIGH”, they’ll know it’s time to knuckle under, ’cause there’ll no more Mr. Nice Nikita.
Hi Robert,
We have the bureaucracy and you are right.
And Bob Brown, the New World Order and agenda 21 want to take care of us all:
http://teapartyeconomist.com/2012/03/23/aun-handbook-for-world-domination/
More evidence that it was people and not climate change that killed the giants:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/scientists-get-to-the-bottom-of-what-wiped-out-australias-ancient-gentle-giants-20120323-1vnrk.html
Lukey Lukey,
If you knew about climate we wouldn’t have need of the countless billions being spent on trying to pretend we do know about climate and creating policy and protocol that will solve nothing and cost us even more billions.
We could actually spend the money on sensible, practical projects like better access to health services and education and upgrading tired infrastructure and and and……
So pick one of two options 1) You don’t uderstand climate enough to create a workable, practical policy or 2) Climate change might be happening and we can only come up with useless impractical reports that do nothing other than waste ever more amounts tax payers money. Which is it?
Your ability to miss the point is absolutely incredible Luke.
The climate is no more your friend than it is mine. You may or may not know more or less than I do about climate and weather….and I couldn’t give a toss either way.
And you are STILL ignoring the main point about Agriculture and GDP.
If we weren’t returning positive there would not be money available to assist individual areas or to pay for the programs you have highlighted….how fiscally illiterate can you get?
NO ONE has ever claimed we are not vulnerable to extreme weather events. What’s currently on the table and costing BILLIONS does VIRTUALLY NOTHING practical to deal with that….repeat VIRTUALLY NOTHING!!!!!!
Farmers and all small business people are results orientated people Luke. They judge the success or failure of any enterprise on measureable RESULTS, not on flowery reports and political PR spin.
It appears from the latest election results in QLD that a significant portion of the electorate is the same.
Multi-year drought isn’t weather.
So which is it (a) after 200 years does the rural sector not understand it’s climate risk (b) just want to be subsidised – in which case the taxpayer wants to know if you’re using the best science and techniques for managing that risk – and with your cynicism obviously you’re not and just want a free handout.
It’s the old agrarian socialism of personally capitalising gains and socialising any losses.
Good rort if you can swing it.
(and gee wouldn’t be worth spending money on education – imagine if the little dears want to do science – you don’t believe in it – they might grow and produce (choke) glossy reports and papers)
ROFL 🙂 🙂
You have adroitly missed it again.
But that’s OK, I wasn’t expecting anything else.
No…multi year drought isn’t weather…it’s a multi year drought!!!
What on earth did you think you were proving by stating that????
A 2 year run of floods isn’t weather either….it’s a 2 year run of floods!!!
And despite the very loud PR claims otherwise, they have both happened before and right next to each other as well.
Got nothing against USEFUL glossy reports and papers Luke….you are very good at missing the point…I will give you that.
And also: a)After 200 years the URBAN and particularly the URBAN bureaucratic, legislative sector does not understand its climate risk or its financial risk or its poor planning risks &
b) just wants to be subsidised- in which case the PRODUCERS want to know you’re INVESTING WISELY in the best available PRACTICAL science and engineering to plan for that risk WITH SOME PROPER LONG TERM PLANNING AND LONG TERM VISION.
It’s the old city socialised habit of failing to invest in infrastructure and then blaming the ‘other side’ for the problem and then pretending it has something to do with the MUCH MUCH SMALLER amount of PERIODIC subsidising of PRODUCTIVE industries….you know…the ones who put the roof over our heads, supply food for our tables, 24/7 power to our homes, massive export dollars for Australia, countless thousands of tax paying jobs etc….
A good rort if you can swing it…especially if your whole income is based on that massive public purse.
I also have nothing against science Luke….what possessed you to say that?
As always…and this has never ever changed….I severely object to the ‘political agenda’ that has attached itself to one particular branch of science and actually hijacked the science…making exaggerated claims about its veracity, quoting the ubsubstantiated outer limits of the ‘best guess’ ranges and then attaching stupid impractical policy to it and a mindlessly expensive political PR campaign.
It seems the wider electorate is also noticing this problem and it has probably played a part in the recent NSW and more recent QLD electoral result and the recent polling Federally.
Unfortunately, as you pointed out, the opposition will be most successful if it just stays quiet and doesn’t provide good alternative policy…..let’s hope they are at least hearing the message.