From The Australian:
MYSTERIOUSLY, once the election was over, an OECD report with a Treasury official’s input emerged indicating the carbon tax would need to be 10 times the EU rate and twice the $38-per-tonne level posited by Treasury to allow Australia to meet its 5 per cent carbon reduction goal…
The OECD report indicates that unless the developing world also implemented a carbon tax, Australia would see considerable de-industrialisation, moderated only by a retreat into an illegal protectionist regime. And the competitive pressures would further intensify if, as appears likely, Japan, the US and other OECD countries also reject a carbon tax.
This is contrary to the official Treasury line that we need a price on carbon now, that the longer we wait the more painful the transition and that the costs will be trivial. Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson would have known of the report’s findings months ago.
And there we have it.
Treasury knew full well what the true ramifications of our political leaders’ commitment to “emissions reduction” would be. They just weren’t willing to tell us.
Unless the rest of the developing world (China, India, etc) follows
our the 2010 Green-Labor alliance’s lead in implementing a carbon tax — which they aren’t — then in trying to meet the 5% emissions reduction target, Australia faces “considerable de-industrialisation”.
The devastating effects of which could only be moderated by … wait for it … protectionist policies.
Which are “illegal”; a reneging on “free trade” agreements, designed by international bankers and multinational monoliths, and happily signed up to by our former leaders, on both “sides”.
Protecting the interests of your own nation’s people is a really terrible and evil thing … according to the “free trade” globalists.
Being “open for business”, and willing to further expose your nation’s people to the predations of that 0.01% who wish to own (thus, rule) the whole world through debt … that is what makes you a “leader” worthy of international acclaim.