Election 2010 :: Labours Enviromental policy

Rumours today of Labours environmental policy,  as reported by the ABC

A re-elected Labor government would ask a new "citizens' assembly" for climate change advice, under a key part of the ALP's new climate change policy set to be launched by Prime Minister Julia Gillard today.

I cannot but agree with Mr Greg Hunt our local man at Flinders who said

 Julia Gillard's proposed "citizens assembly" will fail to produce action.

The problem I see with it is that their is no actual leadership in a citizens assembly. I would rather vote for an environmental plan than somthing that 'might' happen. It's just to wishy washy for me.

The only person talking any sence in Malcolm Turnbull

"The Coalition's policy is not the ideal from my point of view I grant you that, I'd like to see a market-based solution, but I'll tell you this, it does have the potential to meet the emissions reductions targets by 2020," he said.
"The real question is the policy. Everyone knows where I stand, I've stuck to my principles on it. But the fact is, we have got a policy, Labor has nothing."

I think he is right. Labor has nothing!

Libs bring out there environmental policy....

I was pleased to see that the liberal party unveiled their environmental policy the other day. From the Herald Sun::

Opposition's alternative proposes a slow and gradual rise in penalties for electricity generators to allow them time to adjust to cutting their greenhouse gases.

It would also reduce the "churn" effect in the Government's plan, which will raise tens of billions in pollution revenue from industry, but then have to compensate households for their higher electricity and gas bills.

The alternative scheme would save 26,000 jobs in regional Australia, according to the Opposition, including in the Latrobe Valley, Geelong and Portland, which are expected to be hit hard by the Government's scheme.

-The positives as far as I'm concerned is that both Labor and the Liberals are on the same page, that the environment is important. That the have do do somthing in regards to reducing our Carbon emissions. That emissions without offsets aren't good for the environment.

-It also sidelines Fielding more and more. He is now in the minority that believe that carbon emissions don't effect the environment. I don't actually think he needs his 'scientific' argument. Just that Its Gods creation. That humans shouldn't be pumping stuff into the air. God didn't create the earth with chimneys all over the place belching toxic fumes.

-both parties need to articulate a policy which is simple to understand. Both as far as I'm concerned, are to complex in there presentation.

Once again as a Christian, I think its upmost important that we are good stewards of the earth. That there is to much of a linkage between poverty, justice and environmental issues for Christians to ignore.