Campaign against Rudd climate plan intensifies
The campaign against the widely unpopular planned emissions trading
scheme intensified Thursday, with warnings of billions of dollars in
lost minerals export revenue, and the revelation the federal government
was spending millions on advertising in an attempt to sell the plan to
the Australian public.
The massive coal export industry alone would face a $5 billion burden in just the first five years of the scheme, the Minerals Council of Australia warned, adding the industry would be put at a serious disadvantage at a time when Britain was actively promoting increased coal exports.
For Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scheme targets to be met by 2020, almost the equivalent of all 2006 emissions from Australia’s entire electricity and transport sectors would have to be eliminated, Minerals Council deputy chief executive Brendan Pearson wrote in The Australian newspaper.
“This warning bears out what I have been saying all along,” said Federal Member for Tangney Dennis Jensen.
“The Rudd emissions trading scheme would be disastrous for Australia. It would be disastrous for industry. And it would be disastrous for every single Australian.”
Dr Jensen, a long-time critic of the plan who also believes it is based on dubious scientific data on global warming, insisted that if Australia felt it must adopt any such scheme, it had to be in concert with the world’s major emitters, such as India and China.
“As we can see from the Minerals Council warning, any move to go it alone will give a cost advantage to industry in other countries,” he said.
“We would be cutting our own throats.”
The warning on coal exports came as it was revealed the Rudd government had spent nearly $14 million trying to sell the emissions trading scheme plan to the Australian public and was continuing to pour money into promoting it.
Environment Minister Penny Wong conceded promotion of the “Think Climate. Think Change” campaign had already cost $13.9 million since it began last July, reports said.
And the bill was expected to soar when details of the plan were finalised and promotion began in earnest.
Advertising efforts to date included magazines such as FHM, Cosmopolitan and Women’s Day, as well as a website, a call centre and market research.
“The government has been telling us that the Australian people want this scheme,” Dr Jensen said.
“If that is the case, why the need to spend millions on trying to sell the idea? They are snake oil merchants, with no credibility.”
Meanwhile, the Australian Environment Foundation lobby group said it was launching a campaign against the emissions trading scheme.
“You might well ask why an environment group would oppose such a scheme,” the organisation said in a statement on its website.
“Well, for three reasons: 1. An ETS will not change the global temperature; 2. It will force many clean and green Australian industries overseas; and 3. It will make Australians poor, but it is richer, not poorer nations, that are generally better able to protect their natural environment.”
The group said it had already raised $20,000 of the $30,000 it expected to need for the campaign.
“I applaud this move by Australians who hold genuine concerns for our beautiful and diverse environment, but also hold grave fears for our economic future,” Dr Jensen said.
The massive coal export industry alone would face a $5 billion burden in just the first five years of the scheme, the Minerals Council of Australia warned, adding the industry would be put at a serious disadvantage at a time when Britain was actively promoting increased coal exports.
For Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scheme targets to be met by 2020, almost the equivalent of all 2006 emissions from Australia’s entire electricity and transport sectors would have to be eliminated, Minerals Council deputy chief executive Brendan Pearson wrote in The Australian newspaper.
“This warning bears out what I have been saying all along,” said Federal Member for Tangney Dennis Jensen.
“The Rudd emissions trading scheme would be disastrous for Australia. It would be disastrous for industry. And it would be disastrous for every single Australian.”
Dr Jensen, a long-time critic of the plan who also believes it is based on dubious scientific data on global warming, insisted that if Australia felt it must adopt any such scheme, it had to be in concert with the world’s major emitters, such as India and China.
“As we can see from the Minerals Council warning, any move to go it alone will give a cost advantage to industry in other countries,” he said.
“We would be cutting our own throats.”
The warning on coal exports came as it was revealed the Rudd government had spent nearly $14 million trying to sell the emissions trading scheme plan to the Australian public and was continuing to pour money into promoting it.
Environment Minister Penny Wong conceded promotion of the “Think Climate. Think Change” campaign had already cost $13.9 million since it began last July, reports said.
And the bill was expected to soar when details of the plan were finalised and promotion began in earnest.
Advertising efforts to date included magazines such as FHM, Cosmopolitan and Women’s Day, as well as a website, a call centre and market research.
“The government has been telling us that the Australian people want this scheme,” Dr Jensen said.
“If that is the case, why the need to spend millions on trying to sell the idea? They are snake oil merchants, with no credibility.”
Meanwhile, the Australian Environment Foundation lobby group said it was launching a campaign against the emissions trading scheme.
“You might well ask why an environment group would oppose such a scheme,” the organisation said in a statement on its website.
“Well, for three reasons: 1. An ETS will not change the global temperature; 2. It will force many clean and green Australian industries overseas; and 3. It will make Australians poor, but it is richer, not poorer nations, that are generally better able to protect their natural environment.”
The group said it had already raised $20,000 of the $30,000 it expected to need for the campaign.
“I applaud this move by Australians who hold genuine concerns for our beautiful and diverse environment, but also hold grave fears for our economic future,” Dr Jensen said.
Tagney Info
HAVE YOUR SAY!
Key Issues
Have your say on issues
that concern you!
that concern you!
- Crime
- Transport
- Environment
- Road Safety
- Etc.
All Rights Reserved