Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 18 July 2011 (emphasis in original):
This morning on ABC Newsradio Rob Oakeshott claimed that he had a “mandate” to support the carbon tax in Parliament.
“… I believe that the policy of an emissions trading scheme, as I have taken to the last two elections locally and been successful on and been given a mandate on, is the right policy for Australia and now is the right time to pursue it.”
Is this the same Rob Oakeshott who had this to say about the word “mandate” during his 17-minute speech to support a Labor government?
“This is not a mandate for any government. We should have a great big swear jar for the next three years and if anyone uses that word mandate they should have to chip in some money.”
While we are talking about mandates, what mandate did Rob have to support a Labor government?
Rob Oakeshott needs to explain himself to the people of Lyne. If it’s his policy he should defend it.
The member for Cowper, Luke Hartsuyker, has offered him the perfect opportunity, a debate in his local electorate.
Rob should explain his position to the people in his electorate not just the Canberra press gallery.
In the same interview Rob went on to complain about a newspaper that is run by some former Nationals staffers in his own electorate.
“There is a local newspaper here called the Port Paper which was set up by the press secretary of the Deputy Premier of New South Wales, you know the National Party and it is essentially now run by the National party. The editor is a former electorate staff member of the National party member for Cowper. So these are real issues that we need to look at not only at a community level, not only at a news limited level, but also why certain people are choosing to get involved in boards of, for example, Channel 10.”
Is Rob suggesting that some people should not be allowed to publish newspapers?
You are right Rob. It’s all just a huge clandestine plot. Every night we secretly rendezvous from all corners of Australia in Port Macquarie and talk into the wee hours of the morning about you (and where we are hiding the aliens in area 51) then we write editorials.
Barnaby Is Right 
I think Rob Oakeshott’s true colours were exposed way back in September 2010 when he expressed interest in becoming Speaker of the House. He was even thinking about discarding the very same vote that represented his electorate! Rob Oakeshott needs to explain himself on this issue too.
Oh Yeah! I heard Rob Oakeshot on ABC radio this morning! 702 I think it was. Thanks for reminding me; as I don’t mind a bit of tearing apart a stupid logical argument.
Rob went on about supporting the carbon tax and added that we need to trust the scientists on this matter, just as we need to, and often do, trust specialists like doctors or even an auto mechanic that are expert in their field.
Ahh, where to begin….
Firstly, on matters of grave irreversible importance you should not just trust your doctor. You should get a second opinion and possibly even a 3rd or 4th. And when the doctors opinions do not align, you’ve got to think carefully about the more invasive options espoused by some. And how many times has an auto-mechanic told me that I need to get some work done on the widget when it did not need it? Plenty.
Fail. There are plenty of second opinions on climate science and they ought to be sought.
Secondly, trusting your auto mechanic and even your doctor, and trusting climate scientists are not in the same league; with the impact of the former two limited pretty much to you and costing in the hundreds or perhaps thousands of dollars. The impact of the latter, climate scientists, will costs billions if not trillions of dollars and will greatly affect families, nations and industries, probably irreversibly. Even if a doctors choice kills you, it would be bad, but on the whole, at the economic level, it’s small potatoes.
Fail. Your sense of when and how trust should be applied is warped.
Thirdly, doctors and mechanics are doing their stuff day after day. It’s a trade. They get good at it, they test, they can see the good results and not so good results and they can adjust, learn and improve. By the time you see them, most are very good at diagnosing and rectifying. Comparing that to the carbon tax, we’ve never done it, the subjects are vastly different scale, the impact good or bad (of an ETS) will be huge and possibly irreversible, and the boof-heads in charge may be incompetent or worse.
Fail. Medicine and mechanics are pretty well proved. Fixing climate problems, and possibly fabricated problems, with financial tools is not proved. So they can not be compared.
Fourthly, that Rob would stoop to such ridiculous analogies that even plodders like me can make him look stupid by tells me that he ain’t thinking too straight, or he’s a little too cute or desperate or bought. Either way; your fitness for office now stinks.
Rob, I thought you were an OK guy until today. I had no problems with your political choice and I was pleased to see you shake up the lower house a little. But based solely on your idiotic and insulting rhetoric today on an important topic; you’ve lost me.
Brilliant rant. Love it. You should think about writing Guest Posts for this site, Fred. Seriously.
Dumb (Tony Windsor) and Dumber Dumshott (Oakshott). Firstly, rid our Parliament of these absolute peanuts. I really wonder about the people living in their electorates, what a mockery this pair have made of you and the citizens of Australia. Shame on you both, you are a disgrace to our proud democratic country.