Time for some straight talking on Malcolm Turnbull (now with extra glitter!)

Malcolm Turnbull has been gracious in defeat; he took it like a man and conceded the fact that his party was no longer willing to support him in his stance as sympathetic to the left.

That was until yesterday morning (7/12) with the publication of his blog entry: ‘Time for some straight talking on climate change’. I read it and laughed, purely because it pretty much summed up Turnbull’s leadership, especially in relation to the fallacious ETS.

To begin with, we have:

"While a shadow minister, Tony Abbott was never afraid of speaking bluntly in a manner that was at odds with Coalition policy. So as I am a humble backbencher I am sure he won't complain if I tell a few home truths about the farce that the Coalition's policy, or lack of policy, on climate change has descended into."

Here we have the “Abbott told on me, so I’m going to tell on him” argument. Real mature.

"First, let's get this straight. You cannot cut emissions without a cost. To replace dirty coal fired power stations with cleaner gas fired ones, or renewables like wind let alone nuclear power or even coal fired power with carbon capture and storage is all going to cost money.. So any suggestion that you can dramatically cut emissions without any cost is, to use a favourite term of Mr. Abbott, "bullshit." Moreover he knows it."

Despite the fact that Tony Abbott may have crazy ears, he is not an idiot. In fact, in an article released by the ABC on December 7, the estimated amount of the coalition’s take on climate change is to be approximately $50B, a far cry from the government’s original proposition of $120B. We won’t know the final figures until 2010, however, but this seems to be the direction they are heading. I’m pretty sure they are aware it is going to cost money, just not some ridiculously huge amount.

And, based on the policies he has outlined in his book, “Battlelines”, instead of imposing massive taxes on pollution, take that $50B and invest it in new technology, such as improving the fuel efficiency of cars, buildings, agricultural techniques, and (dare I say it), developing technology for nuclear power. When it seriously comes down to it, Australia is one of the few industrialised nations which can afford to wait for this technology to be perfected based on its unsubstantial 1.4% emissions rate. Reducing emissions is not going to come from taxing everything that breathes for some ‘quick fix’, but accepting that technology is our most important ally. It may be close to rocket science, but it is also common sense.

"Now politics is about conviction and a commitment to carry out those convictions. The Liberal Party is currently led by people whose conviction on climate change is that it is "crap" and you don't need to do anything about it."

No one is arguing that the party has once again returned to its rightist roots. But Abbott, again with the whole ‘not being an idiot’ thing, realizes that; a) public sentiment is towards perfecting a method of tackling climate change without making the cost of living unbearable is extremely high, and they would have no chance at the next election without an effective stance on the issue; and b) he also realizes we need to give the climate the benefit of the doubt (“It [is] common sense to minimize human impact on the environment and to reduce the human contribution to increased atmospheric-gas concentrations”). As far as I am aware, those who believed Climate Change was total “crap” were a minority in the party; most either did not believe Australia needed to act immediately (to the benefit of KRudd), protested against the ineffective method of carbon reduction, or did not believe Australia’s 5% reduction of a grand total of 1.4% worldwide emissions was worth the added $1,100 to family bills every year.

What Malcolm Turnbull seems to misinterpret is that he did not lose because of the “right-wing” extremists, but because of those who had far more common sense than he did. Sure Minchin, Tuckey and a few others have a firm “Climate change is bullshit” stance, but there isn’t a giant bucket load like Turnbull has proclaimed. Most want action on climate change, just not via being lackeys of the Rudd government.

"Not that anyone would doubt it, but I will be voting for the ETS legislation when it returns in February and if my colleagues have any sense they will do so as well. If the legislation is passed, incorporating as it does the amendments Ian MacFarlane negotiated with Penny Wong, then the issue will be settled. It is manifestly in the national interest and in the interest of the Liberal Party that it be so."

Like most moderates who read this blog would have undoubtedly asked: Why? Why is it so imperative? Will this tax be saving the polar bears? Will rain suddenly fall from the sky over inland Victoria? Seriously?

Again, here we have evidence that MT is always right, and that all else should bow down in support for their gracious leader. His and only his opinions are correct.

I think Malcolm “I am the leader” Turnbull has ignored is that he is not the leader as hasn’t been for some time. It is what allowed him to walk from the party room two weeks ago and proclaim the Liberals’ unwavering support for him, despite ultimately signing his death warrant; it is what compelled him to push for amendments to an ETS very few in his party supported; and finally, it is what encouraged him to post this blog entry, furthermore cementing in the minds of Liberal MPs that they had indeed made the right decision.

For a smart bloke, he can be awfully dense.

xXx