As a follow up to my post yesterday on the Liberals’ revived climate change denialism and the the fear campaign they’re running, I thought I’d point to a couple of interesting signs of the times. Tim Watts at Tree of Knowledge thinks the Libs have taken a leaf from the Canadian Conservatives’ book - the Tories in Canada are running a campaign against Liberal opposition leader Stephane Dion’s support for an emissions trading policy. It’s all couched in terms of “new taxes” and “driving up the price of everything” by putting a… wait for it… tax on petrol. The ads, which you can preview at this woefully designed website, are said by Watts to be going up in petrol stations.
Given Nelson’s populism/desperation on the Fuel Excise Cut, no doubt we can expect to see the same from the Coalition. There will come a time when the electoral value of climate change credentials will have to go head to head with back pocket concerns and the above is not an encouraging vision of the future. Whatever the substance of the response to the Garnaut report, the Government is going to have to engage in some pretty serious ground work in preparing the public for any adverse impacts….
Another report suggests that time may have already come. Liberal frontbenchers are apparently arguing for a delay in the introduction of an emissions trading scheme. Turnbull is reportedly reiterating Coalition policy, but significantly, the justification for effectively junking the inclusion of fuel has already been defended by him in terms of “changed circumstances”. Conveniently, pushing the date out to 2011 would enable the Coalition to oppose an emissions trading scheme all the way to the next election if they so choose.
I think if we start hearing Liberal figures leveraging the “petrol tax” line onto claims it will fuel inflation and be a “tax on everything” as their Canadian counterparts are, that might be a good yardstick for judging as to whether it’s all over, red rover for any bipartisanship on Australia’s climate change response.
I don’t think they’d be as dumb as Andrew Bolt thinks they should be and come out with openly denialist lines like “the world hasn’t warmed for ten years” (which he seems to think is some clever argument to argue for - a “pause”), but the lines in the sand will have well and truly been drawn. It’s going to take a lot of heavy lifting to argue the case for an emissions trading scheme, and the government can’t do it all, if indeed they hold the line themselves on its design. It’ll be up to us.
The shape of political conflict for the rest of this electoral cycle may well be populism v. solutions. The latter will only be saleable if the ALP holds its nerve. If they cave, it’ll also be curtains for anything meaningful to be done in Australia to combat the impacts of global warming. We won’t have the luxury of sitting back and assuming that the battle is won. But then, that’s politics.
Kim,
The debate in Canada over Dion’s Carbon Tax is multi-dimensional. The NDP - the 2nd Left party in Canada has vociferously attacked the plan on class grounds - it will hurt “working families” on low incomes rather than targeting the big polluters. http://www.ndp.ca/page/6440v
I can see the debate in Australia being eventually framed in similar terms with fragmentation on the progressive side of this issue with increasing concerns as to how and to what extent to shift the tax burden away from “working families” and onto big(ger) business.
There is potential danger here for Australian Labor but in the absence of a progressive intellectual presence on the Right (cf. UK, Canada), I see no political why Labor shouldn’t hold their “nerve” - as you put it.
I don’t either, Antonio, but some of the more recent wobbles haven’t given me as much confidence as I’d like. I think that if Labor ruled out the inclusion of petrol with a lot of bleh about “working families”, it would be a really bad sign. They need to hold the line - not just because the issue is so important but also because politically they’d be dumb to stray onto Nelson’s populist turf.
Well at least one good thing happened - Wong and Rudd confirmed categorically that transport would be in the ETS.
“I think that if Labor ruled out the inclusion of petrol with a lot of bleh about “working families”, it would be a really bad sign.”
Surely they could be forgiven, on the petrol front, when the desired effect of dramatically lowered consumption is happening, anyway, due to higher prices.
and hopefully the higher oil prices will significantly reduce our overall GHG emissions and decrease the costs of carbon in the ETS.
Peacock’s ‘populist’ campaign was quite sucessfull in 1984 but it fostered Liberla complacency and lift them unprepared to face real pressure. Voters do dislike petrol taxes in UK in the 70s it was an issue unlike other indirect taxes. But by 2010 living standards will be higher than in 2007 and interest rates heading down = easy labor victory.
Don’t forget Labor have got it coming and going, because of the Right and their hatred of all things Green (and love of all things Car).
For example.
See also.
With friends like these…
Blame. Canada. Dion.
link
Yes, yes I do…
The tories, bosses and yuppies know full well there is a problem- have done for years. They just want costs shifted, as ever, on to those least able to afford them.
I’m not a real fan of AC/DC or Celine Dion…but my wife & I just don’t get what’s so wrong w/ that version. It has the same kind of energy. The band enjoyed playing. And it’s better than a karaoke version. Is there something sacrosanct about Aussie cock rock, so much so that women can’t cover a song that has been played at parties ad nauseum across the country to the point it makes me wanna puke everytime I hear it? It’s like an ocker national anthem, alongside a few other AC/DC songs.
Let’s face it, certain media outlets have an interest in trashing it because Hillary Clinton likes Celine Dion…& the Canadian health system & such shows the Yank’s system to be the flawed sh*t it is. Moving on.
Someone needs to make a poster of that “woefully designed website” and blast hockey pucks at it.
The next 5 months will be tuff & full of Liberal BS pulling on piss weak ideas from overseas…but if Labor doesn’t play footsy w/ the fossil fuel companies too much…& the property dievelopers…everything should be A-OK.
Keep up the good work alternative media. BTW, has anyone seen that radio jock w/ the continiously agro face that has a pink-hue? How odd? Blood pressure? Or lack of sleep? I think it’s been cloned.
How about some vulva rock from Canada?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpkitLUbeEg
Wong has consistently said that they will look to compensate those who are doing it tough.
Dennis Atkins’ column is a bit interesting:
As Antonio pointed out, the Can Liberals actually are proposing a carbon tax, which would include higher taxes on petrol. So it’s not exactly unreasonable for the Conservatives to argue that it is in fact a new tax, or indeed a ‘tax on everything’. Dion does suggest he’ll use the $ to reduce other taxes, but I don’t think there’s a full plan for how yet, so his credentials on that are fair game. You can argue that the Conservatives are neanderthals for not understanding the importance of AGW, but given that they basically don’t, they’re playing fair on this.
The NDP (leftier, trying to be greener) on the other hand, says the Lib’s proposal is bad because the tax will hurt working families, so they’re proposing cap and trade, but neglect to point out that this will in fact lead to higher prices if it actually does reduce carbon emissions at all. My assessment: they are helping the Conservatives win the argument.
If there is one thing conservatives do “well”, it is fear campaigns.