JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Turnbull, Hunt suggest carbon emissions trading could start mid 2016 (Thank Gore and Palmer for the open door)

Australians have voted against a carbon tax twice. Liberals threw out Turnbull over the introduction of an emissions trading scheme in 2009, yet here he is, barely leader for two weeks and already they are floating a timeframe for the introduction of emissions trading.

I did warn that the Turnbull agreement  with the Nationals to keep Tony Abbott’s climate policies means almost nothing. It’s easy for him to keep the “target” and shift towards an Emissions Trading scheme (ETS) and he and Greg Hunt are suggesting that already.

Indeed, some of the fine print Turnbull probably wanted was already written in Abbott’s plan. Thanks to Al Gore and Clive Palmer, the possibility of emissions trading was left in the Direct Action legislation.Why else would Gore fly out here to stand next to a coal miner? And what did he offer Clive in return we wonder? Suddenly, Palmer demanded an ETS for his vote, but finally settled for a clause saying an ETS should be “reviewed” if our main trading partners brought one in. So Turnbull can technically keep the Abbott “plan” but entirely break the spirit of it. The Nationals (and 54 pro-Turnbull Liberals) will look like fools if they have inadvertently given a green light to force Australians to pour money into corrupt pointless foreign carbon trading schemes. It’s money for nothing. The EU will get to decide how much a carbon credit (and your electricity) costs in Australia.

Our main trading partners — like China — are bringing in token trading plans. China is going to keep increasing emissions for at least ten to fifteen years (which it was always going to do). But these symbolic plans are enough for Turnbull to pretend that bringing in an emissions trading scheme is what the Abbott plan does, and what Australian voters “want”.

Australians have voted against a carbon tax twice. Liberals threw out Turnbull over the introduction of an emissions trading scheme in 2009, yet here he is, barely leader for two weeks and already they are floating a timeframe for the introduction of emissions trading.

A forced payment to a “trading scheme” is a kind of tax, and it’s the worst kind where the money goes direct to financial houses rather than the government, creating long-lived commitments that are expensive or difficult to get rid of.

From the Australian Fin Review last weekend:

The purchase of international permits could start as early as mid-2016 with the introduction of the government’s safeguard mechanism regulations for the top 140 biggest polluters. Andrew Meare

September 22:

Mr Hunt said “the door was open” for international permits to be considered as part of a 2017-18 review of the emissions reduction fund and safeguards.”

The Turnbull government is considering fast-tracking a scheme to allow big emitters of carbon to buy international permits to offset their emissions.

This is the strategic door left open by Clive Palmer when Al Gore came in June 2014:

The Abbott government left the door open for review of the purchase of international permits in 2017-18 as part of its Direct Action scheme to tackle climate change.

But the departure of Tony Abbott – who was not a fan of international permits – has cleared the way for a reshaping of the federal government’s climate change policies including bringing forward the date for the purchase of permits as well as the survival of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.

The purchase of international permits could start as early as mid-2016 with the introduction of the government’s safeguard mechanism regulations for the top 140 biggest polluters.

Under the possible changes, international permits could also be used by companies in the $2.5 billion Emissions Reduction Fund to meet their obligations. That option was supported by Environment Minister Greg Hunt when the fund was first proposed and blocked by Mr Abbott.

There has been no direct discussion about the international permits being moved forward, but it is strong possibility given the support for the scheme, including from Mr Hunt and senior Nationals MPs.

Note that Australia does not have to have an ETS, only to “review it”.

But the review will be carried out by the Climate Change Authority, and we can guess what they will say. It will be the excuse. Abbott stymied Palmer (and Gore) as much as he could, but the door was still left open. An ETS was not ruled out.

From October 2014:

Wednesday’s deal also represents a concession by Mr Palmer because he has secured no commitment to adopt an ETS even if the review finds one is required to meet Australia’s international obligations.

Fairfax Media first revealed on Sunday that an agreement was imminent after Mr Palmer appeared to soften his position by calling for a review of an ETS, rather than a straight commitment.

Here’s a detail we need to pay attention too in the Fin Review last weekend:

Under the Coalition’s safeguard mechanism policy – which is supposed to stop rogue emitters from negating reductions in other parts of the economy – companies will be penalised for exceeding emissions baselines. The purchase of international permits would allow them to offset any potential rise in their emissions.

Hunt said there has been “no decision” or even a discussion on bringing in international permits. The second auction for the Direct Action plan happens next month.

Keep your eyes on the “Safeguard mechanism”…

This may force some of our companies (and hence Australian consumers or stockholders) to buy emissions permits:

Some have criticised the federal government’s carbon rules as “all gums, no teeth”, which would allow big polluters to increase their emissions without penalty. They said the emissions baselines should be lowered to force companies to change their behaviour and cut emissions.

A study by Melbourne-based carbon consultancy RepuTex in August found that only 30 of the largest 150 polluters will be required to reduce their carbon emissions under the existing safeguard mechanism rules.

The “Safeguard Mechanism” is a basis for an ETS, it gave hope to  Alan Pears, Sustainable Energy and Climate researcher at RMIT, Nov 4, 2014:

The fine print on Xenophon’s proposed “safeguard” mechanism to prevent emissions blowouts under the Direct Action scheme will be critical. If this is weak, as envisioned by the government, we are wasting time we no longer have. If an effective framework is introduced, it could form a basis for a “baseline and credit” emissions trading scheme, which could be run by industry if the government doesn’t want to be accused of a backflip, having promised never to return to what it views as the dark days of carbon pricing.

Sadly, Pears resorts to namecalling in the rest of his confused article, but then, if CO2 has a minor role, he doesn’t have a job.

Greg Hunt has been given the role of “greening cities” and working with state and local government

The ICLEI and Agenda 21 people will like the direction this is going.

The new government has beefed-up Mr Hunt’s responsibilities ahead of crucial international climate talks in Paris later this year.

Although Mr Hunt, a Victorian, backed Mr Abbott in last week’s leadership ballot, he has emerged from the cabinet reshuffle with greater powers, including overall responsibility for the new Cities and Built Environment portfolios being taken on by junior minister Jamie Briggs.

The yet-to-be-finalised cities agenda is expected to focus on long-term planning for cities up to 2050, transport – including a greater focus on public transport and road design to deal with congestion – and the “greening” of cities.

The new role is expected to involve close cooperation with state and local governments …

Read more: Australian Fin Review (paywalled).

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.1/10 (57 votes cast)
Turnbull, Hunt suggest carbon emissions trading could start mid 2016 (Thank Gore and Palmer for the open door), 9.1 out of 10 based on 57 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ocvqf2r

109 comments to Turnbull, Hunt suggest carbon emissions trading could start mid 2016 (Thank Gore and Palmer for the open door)

  • #
    GeeANGRY

    I’m out of breath from running around waving my arms about and bumping into thing. Panic!

    718

  • #

    All the more reason to vote Nationals, if you are not already.

    160

    • #
      Len

      Some of the Nationals are believers,particulary in WA. Not as bad in the Eastern States. You would need to ask each individual Nat what are their views. You could get same same if you are not too careful.

      70

    • #
      Leigh

      Tom that’s fine in theory but reality is a little harder in achieving.
      In my case we have a dominant liberal representative in professional “fence sitter” Susan Ley.
      She holding the seat with a double figure percentage, a super safe seat.
      I very much doubt wether the nationals will stand somebody against their coalition “partner” in such a safe seat.
      They should, just to slap some sense into the core of the liberal party.
      Both major partys are hell bent on making our lives a misery, one with their socialist ideolygy and the other for purely financial reasons.
      Either way your going to get a pain in the butt.
      With out a fairdinkum option to give my vote to,I simply will not vote.

      120

      • #

        At least the Liberals need the Nationals to stay in power, and if the Libs keep trending left, a change of government may be the only thing to show everyone again just how bad the left really are. A loss will be the only way to get Turnbull chucked out.

        110

        • #
          Leigh

          Exactly Tom but could the country survive another three years of labor?
          And yes, we would be rid of Turnbul but he would have already committed a substantial percentage of our GDP to the UN’S “fighting fund” against global warming.
          Locking all doors for us to exit in the future as he was shown the door.
          People need to understand Turnbuls personal wealth will skyrocket with what he commits you and I to pay to save the planet from catostrophic anthropological global armegedon.

          70

        • #
          Bobl

          There is another way, to target Mals seat Wentworth.in order to unseat Mal, but the seat is very conservative, you pretty much would have to field a very notable conservative against him, Andrew Bolt perhaps.

          70

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        The Nationals do not have to stand in safe Liberal seats to be effective. Indeed to do so by and large would be counter productive and a waste of resources.

        They should stand in ALP and Greens seats, including some safe ones.

        00

    • #
      Hasbeen

      This is the nationals big chance to regain relevance, & become a true force in Oz again.

      Simply crossing the floor & voting against this would gain them a considerable following, enough to stand in a number of seats, & probably win a few.

      The fact is this is probably their last chance to regain any meaning in the scheme of things today. At least putting some fear into a few Liberal backbenchers should actually spur the growth of some backbone in some of them.

      Am I just dreaming, or will we have to wait for the planet to bash some sense into these dills?

      130

  • #
    Fat Tony

    Well, did anyone really think that the Member for Goldman Sachs would not bring in an ETS????
    I’ll stop here cos anything else I add will only be a string of profanities…..

    520

  • #
    Peter OBrien

    I have, reluctantly, decided not to join the chorus of disaffected conservatives who are planning to desert the Coalition, believing that, even a Turnbull government is better than a Shorten one. But if he plays fast and loose with his agreement on climate change policies, all bets will be off with me. Hunt has always been a worry and Abbott should never have put him in charge of climate policy. He will fall in with whatever Turnbull wants. Lets hope the Nats have the courage of their convictions. I note that some commenters have suggested voting National but the agreement re 3 cornered contests means that most voters won’t get that option. Hopefully if Turnbull reneges on the agreement, the Nats will contest all Liberal seats.

    330

    • #
      el gordo

      Hunt and Turnbull are a couple of AGW zealots and totally untrustworthy, so there is no doubt in my mind where they intend taking the Party.

      They are prepared to dump the Coalition to garner Green/labor swinging voters, a broad church with the pariah Nats standing outside the tent spitting chips, but Talcum Power doesn’t operate that way.

      Its more likely he will offer the Nats a large sweetener, like a continental bullet train network and new satellite cities totally powered by renewables, if they would just turn a blind eye and roll over.

      At that point my faith in humanity would have reached a low ebb and I’ll vote for any candidate who says global warming sux.

      300

      • #
        scaper...

        Bullet train? Never will happen as does not stack up financially. Turnbull did give the Nats the promise to build the inland rail project, though.

        I believe $300M for the pre-construct stage…land acquisitions and the environmental assessments and the such.

        I note that Turnbull gave Hunt new portfolio responsibilities that might enhance my project prospects. I wonder how that will turn out? No, I don’t!

        70

        • #
          el gordo

          The inland rail from Brisbane to Melbourne is going ahead at full speed, yet a bullet train on the same route is a pipe dream.

          You maybe right.

          Hunt’s new responsibilities to green our old cities is unlikely to come to fruition, but new cities of 50,000 inhabitants could rely on renewables to a great degree and would probably enhance your project.

          10

    • #
      Dennis

      Yes, me too, but don’t forget that at the recent ALP National Conference Bill Shorten promised Labor, if elected to government, will introduce the EU ETS here and on a three tier basis. This means a new carbon tax in terms of coverage and a couple of more specific targets such as transport fuels.

      Labor cunningly claims that their “new” ETS would be at a lower price than their carbon tax, about one-third of that price. Well that’s the current EU ETS price however, multiply that by the three tiers in Australia and the price would be no less than carbon tax was before the Abbott Coalition repealed that legislation.

      110

  • #
    Another Ian

    The ALA must think there really is manna from heaven

    220

    • #
      Dariusz

      ALA it is. I have changed my vote. For me to move away from liberals?, I thought it would never happen. If it was not for ALA I would have to go to prison for not voting, then not paying fines. And we live in a free democratic society? My ar…e.

      260

    • #
      James Bradley

      Several of my co-workers have already joined ALA and I have completed my application. I also notified my local member, Angus Taylor, of our reasons which included Turnbull introducing a carbon pricing system.

      My observation is that China has a huge population that lately enjoys playing the stock market, in fact that is where all the mums and dads of China have put all their eggs for a prosperous future – very big thing in the Chinese culture – and with the Chinese economy on rapid decline the Chinese stock market is being artificially propped up by the government to avoid the country falling into a new ‘depression’. The market in carbon is probably the only other prop the Chinese government cling to in the hopes to avoid a major financial crisis.

      Europe is in a worse situation than China because it not only has to deal with declining industry from useless, uneconomical and inefficient ‘green’ energy, but it also faces paying room and board for millions of a largely unproductive, unskilled, uneducated and disenfranchised underclass with an over responsive sense of entitlement, and access to weapons. If that weren’t enough then add the global liability for Europe’s largest manufacturer as a result of the VW emmissions scam along with all the attendant manufacturers and suppliers that will be forced to close.

      I’d say there will be a lot of p!ssed off unemployed people in Europe, let’s see who marches into Paris with an open cheque book this summer vacation.

      Like I always told my kids, if your in a situation that feels bad, get out straight away because it will always get worse quicker than you think.

      260

      • #
        Hasbeen

        The EU also has both the huge turmoil & cost of a million mostly middle eastern gate crashers to deal with.

        Unless they are ruthless there, it will soon be 2 or even 5 million. I doubt global warming/CO2 emissions will continue high on their agenda for much longer.

        It really is becoming pretty much the days of the mobs of Rome. Just how much longer can we survive the growing number of pseudo people in our nations?

        80

    • #
      Dennis

      Possibly, but unfortunately ALA will not have candidates for the Legislative Assembly where the legislation is debated and created. Where the government is formed.

      ALA only want Senate seats, and if successful they would add to the log jam slowing and blocking government legislation.

      80

    • #
      David Maddison

      I was a life-long Liberal voter but I have now joined the ALA. Under Turnbull Liberals are now almost indistinguishable from Labor and just as Moronic. ALA will initially only run Senators so hopefully I will have a vote-worthy person running in my seat.

      110

  • #
    David Wood

    Leopards NEVER change their spots!

    150

  • #
    Keith L

    Oh well, may as well go with the flow. I will be setting up Krooked Keith’s Kut Price Nigerian Karbon Kompany. Permits emailed by return post. No quantity too big to handle! We guarantee to beat all honest players or your money stolen!

    160

  • #
    Leigh

    “money goes direct to financial houses”
    I’ve said it numerous times before over the last six years.
    And again it is stating the bleeding obvious.
    Turnbul does not care if he is prime minister for three months or three years.
    As long as he stitches Australias arse to an emissions trading scheme.
    Where and how he does that is of no concern to him but the “Paris fund raiser” being his best near term opportunity to do just that.
    Abbott had to go before Paris.
    It was a huge worry to him that a by election was happening.They were never going to lose Canning.It was winning it that was a worry.
    The result they got was really no different to what Abbott would have attained, it just would have made it a little more difficult justifying his removal.
    Is not Turnbuls business interests not all about the financial houses of the world, where trading in these “invisable commodities” is front and centre?
    The nationals can stop him but do they have the guts to do the right thing by the people that put them in power?

    330

  • #
    David S

    I can’t help but think the media will try to create the impression that the public wants an ETS. I’m not so convinced that Turnball will be in such a hurry. There is a genuine belief by the left that now they have the left in charge of both parties they can’t lose. It is crucial that Turnball doesn’t ignore the conservatives. It will be political suicide.

    200

    • #
      Dennis

      Last time he was the leader he ignored the conservatives within the Parliament and Coalition supporters.

      Reemember how angry people were when PM Rudd and Turnbull acted like blood brothers.

      130

  • #
    David S

    I can’t help but think the media will try to create the impression that the public wants an ETS. I’m not so convinced that Turnball will be in such a hurry. There is a genuine belief by the left that now they have the left in charge of both parties they can’t lose. It is crucial that Turnball doesn’t ignore the conservatives. It will be political suicide.

    40

  • #
    RoHa

    Jo, from the tone of your article, it almost sounds as though you expect pollies to occasionally give a XXXX about what the Australian people want. Aren’t you a little [ahem] old for that sort of naivety?

    100

  • #
    Robert O

    It gives Viscount Monkton’s prediction about the demise of the Australian and Canadian PM’s, due to their realistic views on global warming, some credence. I think PM Harper has an election before the Paris meeting so time will tell. The Nationals have a written agreement with PM Turnbull so he really has to stick to that, but PM Chamberlain had a signed agreement from his visit to Munich in 1939 and Russia signed an agreement with the Ukraine. I think that Mr. Turnbull is more motivated by his self esteem and he risks the ire of the electorate if he goes back on his word. Irrespective of the change in leadership the media are still beating the AGW drum as much as they can.

    140

    • #
      Turtle of WA

      Canadian federal election, October 19, 2015.

      Damn Canadian lefties. They believe such stupid stuff, but they’re so nice! Disarming bastards.

      90

  • #
    Ruairi

    Those reckless Australians hell-bent,
    On squandering every cent,
    By scheming ambitions,
    On trading emissions,
    May soon ask where all their cash went.

    250

  • #
    Turtle of WA

    This ‘green city’ rubbish is a major worry. It has ‘totalitarian’ written all over it. It gives governments an environmental excuse for extensive planning and micromanagement of development. To turn us all into tram-riding Melbourne gruppies.

    George Monbiot criticised Perth, for example, for being so spread out, and said this was unsustainable. If the rest of the world was as sparsely populated as WA, most of Georges environmental worries would be over.

    80

  • #
    Stephen Richards

    From France it seems that your governmental system works against the voters and for the scammers. Am I correct?

    90

    • #
      Rob JM

      Yes, Both side of politics are owned by the FIRE industry (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate) with any left overs being served up to the current mates of the government (Labor-unions/Liberal-corporates) Australia is now a nation of debt slaves and rent seekers! All we have left is a semi decent public health system.
      Direct democracy is the only real solution to corrupt politicians.

      70

  • #

    The Australian Government, if it had any commitment to the people it serves, would take a look at what other countries are proposing for Paris 2015 before committing any more to this climate lunacy. Countries covering about 80% of global emissions have made submissions to be found at the UNIFCC website on what they plan by 2030. Decode the language and what looks like bold reductions are actually huge increases. These are my calculated changes in emissions on 2010.
    Australia -25%
    China +70%
    Indonesia – Energy Emissions +260% (reduced to 220% with foreign aid)
    Vietnam +220%
    India +220% (but will plant new forest equivalent to 1.5% of the land area)
    These four countries will constrain their emissions increase to only 10000 MtCO2, whilst Australia will cut its emissions by 150. Maybe I am putting too much pressure on Australia. The EU will chip in with -1200 MtCO2 (40% reduction on 1990) and USA with -1750 (28% reduction on 2005). That is, commitments from 30 developed nations go just 30% of the way to offsetting the four largest emissions increases from developing countries. Even if the worst case of the climate extremists were true, trillions of dollars spent on mitigation would deliver near zero return.

    230

    • #
      Yonniestone

      This excellent observation,

      The Australian Government, if it had any commitment to the people it serves,

      can be applied to virtually every governmental system that has been seduced by this globalist agenda, while a compliant MSM help spreads the red herring’s to an agitated population the real decisions have been made covertly without proper discourse with those they pretend to serve.

      Isolated cases of corruption are expected but we are witnessing tyranny on a global scale.

      200

      • #

        Yonniestone, I agree with your comment to a certain extent. Virtually every developed country “has been seduced by this globalist agenda“, but the poorer nations realize that their priorities lie elsewhere. In these political correct times they are all lumped together as developing nations. But in reality only some are developing, whilst others are underdeveloped. Vietnam is in the developing category. It says

        Viet Nam’s INDC identifies the GHG reduction pathway in the 2021-2030 period. With domestic resources GHG emissions will be reduced by 8% by 2030 compared to the Business as Usual scenario (BAU). The above-mentioned contribution could be increased up to 25% with international support.

        The BAU is for emissions to increase from 2010 to 2020 in line with growth expectations of 7% from 2010 to 2020 and 5% from 2020 to 2030. This is where I get the 220% increase from. Vietnam very astutely says all the right things to gain acceptability in the climate talks, whilst not imposing any damaging costs on its people. Unlike the Australian Government it the Vietnamese Government serves its people by some simple smoke and mirrors.
        Chad in Central Africa is an underdeveloped country. It is ranked 184 on the HDI index. Life expectancy is less than 50 years. Chad’s Unconditional Contribution to climate change by 2030 is

        Reduction of 18.2% of GHG emissions in comparison with reference scenario (BaU) by 2030

        But for $900m of funding the conditional contribution is

        Reduction of 71% of GHG emissions, between 2016 and 2030 in comparison with reference scenario

        To get to the 2030 BAU the officials assume emissions will be 5 times higher in 2030 than 2010, a growth rate > 8% pa. In 2010 they were 3.13 times higher than in 1990.
        If Climate is the major source of foreign aid in the coming years, then Chad, like Vietnam, should not be blamed for playing the game when such money could make a real difference to some of the poorest people. The blame should lie with the so-called experts who fail to see the unintended consequences of their actions, and who cannot devise a budget.

        50

        • #
          Ian Nairn

          I don’t think every nations has been seduced, just the ruling elite who think they know what’s best of the little people, but in reality they are only looking out for themselves and will get rich as a result.

          10

      • #

        Yonniestone,
        Another example I found of a country that wants to deflect attention is from Chile. They make all the right noises to impress then say:-

        Según la Agencia Internacional de Energía, en 2012 el promedio mundial de emisiones de CO2 por persona era de 4,5 toneladas por habitante, al igual que el de Chile, y muy por debajo del promedio de 9,7 tCO2 per cápita de los países OECD. A nivel latinoamericano, Chile contribuyó el año 2012 con un 4,7% de las emisiones de la región, situándose por debajo de México, Brasil, Argentina y Venezuela. A nivel mundial, su contribución fue cerca del 0,25% de las emisiones globales.

        I do not speak spanish, but did not need Google translate to realize this was an exercise in political deflection. The main points are that Chile’s emissions are
        - about the global average
        - half the level of the OECD average
        - fifth highest in Latin America
        - 0.25% of the global total
        Translated from diplomatic language, it is basically saying Chile will continue making the right noises as long as you leave us alone. The problem is that the majority of countries are playing this game as well. It is a charade, with the only ones suffering are the ordinary folks in the richer nations of the world.

        70

        • #
          Robert O

          That’s pretty correct, I used to speak it many years ago. Remember that the Spanish do not want to offend, when they say perhaps they mean no, and when they say yes they mean perhaps.

          20

    • #

      In the above I was going to include the submission of Bangladesh. In the Bangladeshi submissionthey forecast that from 2011 to 2030 emissions will increase by 264% or 170MtCO2, more than the reduction proposed by Australia. But with that increase emissions will still be 1/10 per capita of those in Australia. Bangladesh will unconditionally reduce this increase by 5%, or 50kg per citizen. With international funding, they will triple this to 36 MtCO2e, equivalent to 0.073% of 2010 global emissions. The country is crying out for power stations, and a grid system. For the cost of an ETS system, Australian’s could noticeably change the prosperity of a country with five times its population but funding fossil fuels.

      40

  • #
    handjive

    Tallbloke has the ducks all lined up:

    Follow the money part 2: Goldman Sachs getting their sitting carbon-ducks in a row

    Tallbloke amongst the comments: “Cap-and-trade is going to happen. Or, if it doesn’t, something like it will.”

    160

  • #
    pat

    3 Oct: Australian: China’s emissions trading scheme at risk amid governance fog
    by Scott Murdoch, China correspondent, Beijing
    Additional reporting: Wang Yuanyuan, agencies
    China’s proposed national emissions trading scheme is already facing scepticism, with experts questioning whether the framework due to be in place in less than two years will have the correct transparency guidelines, given the nation’s poor track record at ­corporate governance…
    China’s most high-profile environmentalist and global award winner, the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs director Ma Jun, told The Weekend Australian while the decision to move to a national ETS was promising it was vital that the central Chinese government, not known for its openness, put in place a transparent trading and robust system. “It’s a positive move but we have said that China has to have a system that can be trusted,” Mr Ma said.
    “You can easily build a system and have carbon emission trading but will that be a sound and robust system that will actually reduce carbon emissions in this country, that’s the question.”…
    In Australia, the Coalition has confirmed China’s decision to ­introduce a nationwide ETS will not affect its decision to rely on a Direct Action Plan to help drive down the nation’s carbon emission…
    There has been criticism that the schemes, because they cover key manufacturing and industrial regions, have been too generous with reduced trading permit ­prices and generous incentives to have major companies, especially state-owned enterprises participate.
    Mr Ma said the most important corporate governance practice that has to be put in place with a nationwide ETS is third-party ­auditing of the scheme’s management and results, rather than relying on central government authorities…
    “There is going to be an issue with a nationwide ETS and that is going to be data quality. There also has to be transparency around the initiation of emission rights and trading credits, there has to be public supervision.”…
    Ms Wu said some industries would ready to have the scheme implemented while others could take years to prepare…
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/chinas-emissions-trading-scheme-at-risk-amid-governance-fog/story-e6frg906-1227554766880

    30

  • #
    pat

    2 Oct: ReutersCarbonPulse: Ben Garside: Poorer nations face let-down as INDCs lack carbon market buyers
    Dozens of poorer nations seeking to sell emission reductions to help decarbonise their economies are likely to face disappointment because barely any rich countries are willing to outsource their abatement efforts through buying carbon credits…
    There are at least 70 countries that are seeking to use, or considering using, market-based mechanisms, according to INDC data compiled by Carbon Pulse.
    But the vast majority of those are developing nations looking to sell emission reductions to richer governments, with barely a handful of willing buyer countries and no interest from the major economies of China, the EU and US.
    “The seller countries would be disappointed, and as the INDCs are the result of hard-won national compromises they are not subject to negotiation in Paris,” said Frank Melum, an climate policy analyst at Thomson Reuters Point Carbon…
    The remaining buyer nations are relatively small emitters with limited demand, such as Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Switzerland…
    As a result, the prospect of a burgeoning transnational carbon market or a resurgence of a global crediting mechanism such as the CDM seems slim in the near-term, but a Paris deal could set a course for more trade in future, observers say…
    http://carbon-pulse.com/poorer-nations-face-let-down-as-indcs-lack-carbon-market-buyers/

    40

  • #
    Peta

    You all face the problem we have in the U.S.. Two faced politicians. Follow the MONEY!!

    80

  • #
    Robdel

    I have always considered Hunt a suspect, especially after he refused to answer Bolt’s question as to how much the temperature would drop if we stopped all co2 emissions.

    160

  • #
    Lord Jim

    The media is supposed to defend the public against stunts like this.
    Instead they are its biggest cheer squad.

    130

  • #
    Richo

    Gee a hard choice at the 2016 election, a union run kleptocracy or a merchant banker run kleptocracy.

    130

  • #
    Ross

    handjive

    October 3, 2015 at 4:09 pm · Reply

    “The United States or China or Tuvalu, to choose a tiny little economy – none of them are doing this to save the planet.

    Maybe it surprises you that I say that,” Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, told CBS News in an exclusive interview.

    “Let’s be realistic here,” she continued.

    “All of these countries are putting their best foot forward because they understand it’s good for their economies.

    30

  • #
    Ross

    ooops

    My post went wrong above after previewing it.

    How much would it cost to put an add in the Financial review or The Australian ? We could all chip in, if Jo used her writing skills to frame advert around the post from handjive above —it would need to be put in at the appropriate time as from what I read above it is just a possibility ( or maybe probability) at this stage.
    Even as a Kiwi, I’d chip in.

    60

  • #
    • #
      mobihci

      you mean 0.03. it is interesting looking at the spread, the tropics are way up, but the nh and sh are way down.

      it looks more and more like this is the process of a cooling planet. the el nino pops and down goes the temps. end of 2016 will be the time to see if we really are headed for a fall or not.

      40

  • #
  • #
    KinkyKeith

    And what is behind all this UN focused carry on?

    Well big Kev is lining up for the UN Sec Generals job and would like Julie to help.

    just a few million to grease the cogs.

    If Julie helps, then guess what.

    Big Kev may be in a position to return the favour so that Julie can spend the best years of her life jogging

    around 5th Avenue in the morning and later in the day putting on her eye-shadow to go out to another dinner party with the world elite.

    Not a bad life when it is all done with other peoples money

    How do we stop this appalling betrayal of trust by Turnbull, Julie and Hunt?

    Apart from these who have motive, it is hard to believe that other Liberals would jeopardise their own positions by enabling the

    introduction of Carbon Taxing and Trading, the future blight on our country’s jobs and manufacturing.

    KK

    70

    • #
      ianl8888

      I certainly do not want to gild any lilies, but my much earlier comments still prevail:

      the Libs who voted against Abbott think deep in their heart that Turnbull has much more influence over the public megaphone (ie. the “meeja”) than Abbott … and they’re right, of course. The populace now has no real choice, as both major political players tacitly agree on CAGW. The Libs voted for Turnbull the way they did to gain respite from the ceaseless, malicious MSM attacks

      The power of the public megaphone resides in the credibility the populace attributes to the MSM – this won’t go away

      Arguing the science is interesting to us, perhaps, but completely irrelevant to the general public (they have absolutely no interest in it, nor any aptitude for it). If the MSM tells them Turnbull/Shorten and a ETS will save them from climageddon, that is what they will believe

      50

  • #
    pat

    2 Oct: Bishop Hill: The carneyage of Mystic Mark
    It is said that once people (Financial Times) start laughing at you, you are completely finished. I think Mark Carney may have reached that point (LINK plus text in the comments for those who can’t access it)
    COMMENT by son of mulder:
    Mocked in the Times today as well today (behind paywall)
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/columnists/alistairosborne/article4573805.ece
    Starts off “Being the world’s leading expert on climate change is typically a full-time job. So it’s easy to forget that Mark Carney also has a part-time role as governor of the Bank of England, proving himself the man for a forecast immediately overtaken by events.”
    Ends “If he ever sets a target for the ice caps melting, buy a boat.”
    The middle is a list of failed/useless targets.
    http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2015/10/2/the-carneyage-of-mystic-mark.html

    50

  • #
    pat

    should have made clear BOTH the Financial Times and The Times have mocked Carney – to be added to Daily Mail and UK Telegraph (links in comments at jo’s “Scientist calling for RICO investigation” thread.

    40

  • #
    scaper...

    The article from the AFR is to be believed? Greg Hunt and senior Nationals support the scheme? Pray (prey) tell, what senior Nationals would that be…Barnaby and Warren? Oh, how I’m laughing!

    The agreement that Turnbull signed with the Nationals, strictly forbids any such schemes being introduced. Effectively, Turnbull has been knobbled. Over the next few months you will read a lot of so called pronouncements but no actions…lip service comes to mind.

    Don’t take what you read in the leftist media as the gospel truth…especially if it feeds your consternation in regards to the leadership change.

    On Greg Hunt…I asked him this morning if it was indeed true.

    They are not introducing such a scheme.

    The ERF is rock solid.

    71

  • #
    Rob JM

    Chin up folks, the Russian just completely altered the world we live in with their campaign against the CIA back opponents of syria (ISIS and Al qaeda). Putin is riding to Europe’s rescue for refugee invasion and with luck we can finally place some blame on the debt peddling merchants that are rigging the game against our interest.

    90

  • #
    pat

    29 Sept: Redd-Monitor: Chris Lang: London Carbon Credit Company scammed people out of £1.7 million. Company director Young Erumuse disqualified for 15 years
    Foundation projects
    On its website, Erumuse’s company claimed that,
    “”London Carbon Credit Company is currently in advanced negotiations with the world renowned Clinton Foundation to be sole UK provider of carbon credits produced from the Clinton Climate Initiative’s Carbon Capture and Forestry projects.”
    And in a press release dated 16 October 2011, London Carbon Credit Company announced that the company
    “will soon be able to offer its clients carbon credits from Bill Clinton’s Clinton Climate Initiative, part of the Clinton Foundation”…
    So, on 13 September 2012, REDD-Monitor wrote to the Clinton Climate Initiative to ask them some questions about their relationship (if any) with the London Carbon Credit Company.
    The following day, the Clinton Foundation Fraud Alert page was updated to include the London Carbon Credit Company as one of a list of scams claiming to be associated with the Clinton Foundation…
    (Director of Global Carbon Measurement Program at the Clinton Foundation D. James) Baker did not reply to my question about whether it was possible that the London Carbon Credit Company had bought carbon credits from Clinton Foundation projects.
    He also declined to tell me what precautions the Clinton Foundation takes to ensure that its name, reputation and its projects are not used to legitimise the fraudulent activities of companies like London Carbon Credit Company…
    According to the Insolvency Service, London Carbon Credit Company managed to sell the carbon credits at an average price of £110.70, having bought them for around £3.50…
    http://www.redd-monitor.org/2015/09/29/london-carbon-credit-company-scammed-people-out-of-1-7-million-company-director-young-erumuse-disqualified-for-15-years/

    10

  • #
    pat

    1 Oct: UK Mirror: Andrew Penman: The carbon credit conman who sold investors hot air
    Not the slightest flicker of remorse crossed the face of investment conman Young Erumuse when I confronted him.
    It was a short walk from the financial heart of Britain in the City of London, and he stood glowering down at me in his blue three-piece suit.
    At first he denied he was Erumuse, the director of London Carbon Credit Company Ltd…
    One victim was told: “Many savvy investors and corporations alike are adding carbon credits to their portfolios. Please don’t delay the process any longer than necessary as prices for credits are rapidly increasing on a daily basis.”
    The website used a string of logos of official bodies in this field, including the Gold Standard Foundation, Ethical Junction and Verified Carbon Standard.
    Erumuse, 34, did not have permission to use any of their names…
    Official Receiver Paul Titherington warned that anyone cold-called by carbon credit salesmen “is being offered nothing but hot air”.
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/carbon-credit-conman-who-sold-6552324

    50

  • #
    pat

    30 Sept: Reuters: Germany issues warrants for two in $171 mln CO2 trading fraud probe
    International arrest warrants were issued in late July for Mobeen Iqbal, 32, and Ashraf Muhammad, 35, both of whom are thought to be living in Dubai, the Frankfurt prosecutor’s office said in an emailed statement.
    “The accused are strongly suspected to have been backers and leading members of a gang employing a tax evasion scheme in connection with the trade of CO2 emission rights and to having evaded a total of approximately 136 million euros between August 2009 and April 2010,” the statement said…
    The prosecutors also took to social media website Facebook to seek help from the public in tracking down the two men…
    In April, Frankfurt prosecutors charged two British citizens for suspected tax fraud amounting to 31 million euros in the same carousel trading investigation. Another Briton was arrested by U.S. authorities in Las Vegas in May.
    The investigations broaden the carbon trading scandal that has also affected Deutsche Bank, where prosecutors are investigating 25 staff, including co-Chief Executive Juergen Fitschen and finance chief Stefan Krause, on suspicion of tax evasion, money laundering and obstruction of justice.
    Prosecutors are not preparing to lay any such charges against the bank as investigators have turned their focus to the role of independent traders, a person close to the investigation told Reuters last month.
    The source said any potential charges against the bank would likely be over its negligence in failing to properly screen clients. The probe could conclude by the end of the year with a possible settlement agreement…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/30/carbontrading-germany-idUSL6N0RV3DG20140930

    don’t expect ABC or Fairfax to pick up such stories. doesn’t fit their narrative.

    in fact, following is the only result for “ABC + carbon fraud” in google search.
    could be the funniest CAGW piece ever (i know, i keep saying that, but read it and decide):

    2007: ABC Health Report: Personal carbon trading to fight obesity
    Transcript
    In this morning’s edition of the Medical Journal of Australia, health, fitness and weight loss researcher Dr Garry Egger argues that one of the routes to weight loss may be to institute personal carbon trading…
    Norman Swan: So what do you suggest happens next, from the Australia card to the carbon card?
    Garry Egger: Yeah maybe. A carbon card wouldn’t be any different to a credit card and in fact the English looked at the prospects for fraud with such a card and found that it is no greater than….
    Norman Swan: Carbon fraud.
    Garry Egger: Carbon fraud exactly.
    Norman Swan: So fresher air and thinner abdomens.
    Garry Egger: Exactly and doesn’t it all make sense.
    Norman Swan: Makes sense indeed. That was Dr Garry Egger whose life is spent on lifestyle, he’s even a Professor of Lifestyle Medicine at the University of Southern Cross.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/personal-carbon-trading-to-fight-obesity/3244660#transcript

    20

  • #

    If you want to see how an ETS fails so comprehensively, you need look no further than South Australia.

    South Australia has the largest wind power component in Australia, and the problem arises when the wind is not blowing and those turbines are not delivering.

    Hand in glove with an ETS is a Cap and Trade regime. This sets in stone the total emissions from a power plant for a whole year, and thus dictates the number of credits set at whatever cost that may be which that plant will need to cover its emissions.

    Now, while coal fired power runs constantly providing the absolute physical requirement, there are other smaller plants which are required to run to top up the availability of power at the grids, and these plants are nearly all of them Natural gas fired turbines. In the main, they usually run for a couple of hours in the AM, and more in the PM starting at around 4PM or so.

    Under the Cap and Trade and its ETS, they budget their hours of operation across the year and calculate that down to an approximate daily run time, some days more, and some days less, but the overall is set in stone by the Cap and Trade and the ETS.

    However, when the wind does not blow, those gas fired plants have to run for extended periods of time, sometimes for days on end.

    You can see how even just a a few wind free days throughout the year would blow that budget right out of the water.

    Perish the thought of the Government Minister on the end of the phone yelling to get the power on line when the wind fails, because even hours without power would have huge political ramifications, so the plant MUST provide no matter what. The blown cap and trade ETS is no excuse when a Government minister’s job is on the line here. A power plant operator mentions the blown cap and trade/ETS requirement and the Ministers skull explodes in wrath. He, umm, might even be tempted to possibly reply, that not to matter about that, we’ll, umm, cover that. But I can’t see the operator even risking that his budget is blown and using that as an excuse, because of the ramifications of refusal to supply.

    So, the plant MUST run overtime. They have now also on blown their fuel supply budget as well, having to source more gas at a raised cost because of the short notice, and outside of their budget.

    A few wind free days and their cap and trade is also blown, so not only do they need to source extra ETS credits at the extra cost, 1.5 times the going rate , on top of that, they are also then fined 1.5 times their over emissions budget, and have that over emissions total subtracted from their already lowered Cap and trade target for the following year, in effect three penalties.

    If you think I’m making this up, then just refer to the two following charts and note the cost of electricity for South Australia, while the Rudd/Gillard carbon (dioxide) tax was in place.

    May 2013

    June 2013

    Note especially June 3rd, corresponding with almost 40 hours of all but zero generation from wind power, and that cost of $866.41/MWH is the average for 15 hours. This is the WHOLESALE cost of generating electricity which the retailers can then only sell at less than $300/MWH, one third of what they had to pay for it.

    An ETS with its accompanying cap and trade is NOT DESIGNED to lower emissions. It’s specifically designed to make money.

    Tony.

    180

  • #
    Sean McHugh

    It is now clear that Abbott was suffocating Greg’s inner Green. I’m not being disrespectful using his Christian name. It’s due to spelling uncertainty.

    100

    • #
      scaper...

      “Christian name” instead of ‘first name’? A Freudian slip there mate, that exposes your ‘inner Christian’. Who would have thought…?

      31

      • #
        Sean McHugh

        You are wrong about that, Scaper and need to be more careful. On the Net I have posted about two decades of debate countering the Christian belief system. I still prefer it to Islam though, massively.

        By the way, I believe that Greg what’s-his-name was raised as an Anglican and as such would have probably been christened, ‘Gregory’. I’ll therefore wager that Greg is his Christian name.

        Perhaps you meant that I being politically incorrect. I don’t mind that.

        22

      • #
        Matty

        Like BC instead of BCE. Can you imagine Rachel Welch in One Million Years BCE. Common usage has a lot to answer for. Can’t help thinking CE was chosen so it might just as easily be remembered as Christian era

        20

  • #
    TdeF

    “the Turnbull agreement with the Nationals to keep Tony Abbott’s climate policies means almost nothing”

    Surely it means, no Carbon Tax in a government he leads?

    This was Abbott’s clear and fundamental view on which this government was elected and incidentally, and without question an absolute promise to the electorate of the previous Julia Gillard government. To do anything else is a total betrayal of voters on both sides of the house, again. This is politicians doing what they want and ignoring the voters completely.

    Paying for the right to burn our own fuel is a carbon tax. Worse, it means surrendering our sovereign right of taxation to people overseas, from countries who collectively produce 98% of the world’s carbon dioxide. Trading scheme? Weasel words from a compromised merchant banker.

    No one has even explained how Australia paying a carbon tax on 2% of world emissions changes anything, let alone the temperature. Perhaps it means a better future for retired politicians in the UN, a job application as it was for Helen Clarke. The Nationals need to force the return of Tony Abbott if there is even the hint of a carbon tax. Sorry, Emission tax in the new double speak.

    120

    • #
      Dennis

      Nobody has explained why Australia is not held high as a model for other countries. Australia has achieved its emissions reduction targets while most countries have not even got close to target and is now likely to achieve or even exceed the next emissions target.

      There can be no reasonable excuse for reintroducing a “price” on “carbon”.

      70

  • #
    markx

    All else aside, hitching our wagon to an international emissions trading scheme is a terrible idea because of the exposure to currency fluctuations.

    Example: Greece and the Euro.

    A devaluing Oz dollar dampening an economic downturn will be negated by rising ETS exposure to foreign currency.

    If there must be a scheme, it should be a locally based carbon tax. (Preferably hitched to some sort of sliding scale energy pricing scheme to avoid bureaucratic redistribution, but that is another story)

    30

    • #
      TdeF

      Why pay people overseas? Why not an Australian tax, except that an Australian Carbon tax has been overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate.

      There are many unfair and unreasonable Australian, State and Council taxes, but at least Australians get to spend the money on themselves.

      This is a tax on Australians by people overseas and they set the rate of tax! An occasional gift to the UN is something, but being legally obliged to pay people overseas for our right to warm our homes and drive our cars is an attack on Australia as a sovereign country. We must reject taxation without representation, the very rejection which was the basis of the creation of the United States of America.

      Not only does Turnbull not want a Constitutional Monarchy, he wants the destruction of the concept of an independent Australian state. Perhaps he believes in one parliament, the UN run by unelected ex politicians and opportunists from endless tiny countries and totally undemocratic. What drives Turnbull is unknown, but taxing ourselves on behalf of others is wrong and a UN driven world is wrong.

      100

      • #
        Dennis

        Turnbull showed us that he is only interested in what he wants and that what we want is not on his agenda.

        80

      • #
        • #
          TdeF

          Thanks. Yes, I had read it and $79Trillion is a bit much, even for Malcolm. The greed of the UN is patent and the desire of politicans like Julia to get a retirement scheme is also clear. After all they cannot rise higher in the public service in Australia or NZ than Prime Minister, without getting a real job. Rampant self interest and ego trump any loyalty to the country. That is why you had to admire Tony Abbott and his weeks of unpaid selfless generosity. I cannot imagine Malcolm living with aborigines for a week or Bill Shorten on a fire truck in real danger or rescuing people swept out to sea. It is tragic that bankers and the UN have conspired to remove Tony before Paris. I would guess that every MP was threatened with his job, by the universally Left media. The one thing all politicians fear is a media campaign against them, which is why the ABC are in charge.

          70

    • #
      markx

      Yeah TdeF,
      That’s exactly what I meant by a local tax.
      There is no logic in paying offshore, and less in locking in to another currency.
      Most people probably have no idea how wildly the Aus$ fluctuate s against other currencies.

      10

  • #

    Approximately 350ppm¹ of every dollar spent to prevent climate change is of actual benefit to the ordinary people living on the planet.


    ¹ I made up that number; a process good enough for climastrologers.

    60

  • #
    NoFixedAddress

    Dear JoNova,

    Maybe we, as Australians, should get rid of all Prime Ministers, Politicians, and Local Councillors.

    You know, why does the lord mayor of Sydney or Melbourne or anywhere else have some form of ascendancy over any of us.

    Or a political operative called an either State or Federal politician rule us.

    I think plebiscites should be the go for everything.

    30

  • #
    MarkMcD

    Personally, I am voting Independents. Several reasons:

    1. They can’t do any worse than the current mobs with their petty politics, personal greed and outright lying.

    2. It will shock the hell out of the party mobs and we might actually get them doing what we want instead of what their corporates tell them to do. (after all, no cushy job nor payouts if they aren’t actually IN Parliament :D )

    3. The Independents will of necessity have to operate as a democratic body – you know, get people to agree in a majority regardless of what they are told from above – kinda a regular ‘conscience vote’

    4. The Independents might just have enough clout to remove the Party system altogether – after all, it is not in the original Constitution and it is what has kept many Independents out of office.

    5. They might even remove the preferential scam – see 2nd reason in #4

    It doesn’t matter who we vote for as far as Party members go – they promise us anything to get our vote then do exactly what they are told by their party. I’m pretty sure a savvy lawyer could make a class action ‘breach of promise’ against them.

    We have computers these days – we could easily have an Australia-wide system where each day, Australians could log in and check the proposed Bills and vote, right then, Yes, No, More Info and even type in a change to the bill.

    Then we would REALLY see what Australians are willing to pay for in regards to Climate. They seem already to have opted wholesale to go solar and the possible advent of Tesla batteries has AGL and the others running scared.

    Imagine… with such a system, pollies would become, *gasp* Public Servants! :D

    40

  • #
    jimheath

    Time to change, if you vote for bad character you get bad Government, I would rather vote for a Green candidate that believed in what they say than a Lib that doesn’t. I will never reward treachery. Remove them.

    21

    • #
      hunter

      The problem is that the greens don’t really believe either, but will impose many more bad policies.

      10

  • #
    boyfromTottenham

    Jo, I love this bit in your article: ” …if CO2 has a minor role, he doesn’t have a job.”. Maybe all climate skeptics should make a habit of saying this about articles or comments by anyone whose job DEPENDS on the CO2 scam continuing. After a while, folk might catch on!

    50

  • #
    MarkMcD

    My problem with voting Green is their lack of character. Let’s face ity, EVERY problem the Greens wish to address has one cause – too many people. But no party wants to put population on the agenda.

    And it’s NOT actually a hard thing to achieve – educate people. The one single correlation with reducing birth rates is to educate people and raise their standard of living. We could make a saner world simply by advocating population control by better living standards.

    There are several studies that put the cost of clearing world poverty and providing everyone with good water, good food and shelter for a cost of something under $100 billion.

    Think about that. Cut the ground from under all the terrorists, stop the massive migrations, end pictures of pitiful chil;dren and people starving and thirsting to death for less than one year of profits for any of the multinationals.

    I mean seriously, the Queen or the Pope could do it and barely notice the difference in the Zeroes on their bank statements.

    Instead we have all this pissfarting around with fiefdoms and petty greed and the world is going to hell.

    30

  • #
    gai

    Seems Word Press is engaging in censorship again. My post about the Turnbull, Al Gore, Clive Palmer and Goldman Sachs just got booted into the ether. (It is not even in moderation)
    Turnbull and Son’s connection to Goldman Sach is very obvious (Go to ZeroHedge for a look see.)

    For what it is worth Al Gore lied to the US Congress about his Goldman Sachs connections (You can look it up)

    However the interesting thing is Palmer’s connection and unhappiness with China CITIC Pacific who is involved in mining iron ore in Australia. (He sued them over ownership of the port they built.)

    The parent company, China CITIC Bank Corp Ltd was taken over by Beijing in April 2014 and Goldman Sachs among other international financiers lost control. This means the under capitalized CITIC is no longer in danger of throwing in the towel over the money pit the mine has become and I would hazard a guess good old Clive was planning to step in and snap it up at fire sale prices.

    This leaves Clive and Goldman Sachs with a mutual dislike of CITIC.

    The South China Morning Post (no doubt the censored URL) had an article titled: How did international banks miss Citic Pacific’s US$36 billion takeover deal?

    Tuesday, 01 April, 2014 — Foreign bankers jealous of Citic’s takeover of HK subsidiary, having been left out of the deal because of its size and political sensitivity

    Beijing has been increasingly concerned about foreign banks’ roles in economic reforms, especially in the mainland’s financial industry development because it is considered strategically important for national security.

    Such concerns came to the fore after the banking industry reforms, which first started in 2003.

    For the past decade, many foreign banks such as Goldman Sachs and Citigroup had poured money into mainland banks – at very low cost initially – and then obtained sponsor roles to help the banks go public so they could charge big advisory fees.

    Now, home-grown financial institutions such as Citic Securities are more confident about handling complicated listing and merger and acquisition deals.

    On the other hand, the 2008 global financial crisis changed the world’s financial industry landscape. Mainland officials and bankers saw how Western banks failed and they do not consider them as their models anymore.

    The Citic Pacific takeover deal is widely considered a new chapter for Beijing to kick off its long-awaited state-owned enterprise reforms, signalling more similar asset purchases and injections could happen, with foreign banks excluded from the exercise.

    Indeed, to showcase the growing strength of mainland financial firms, Citic Securities is not alone. Other home-grown investment banks have emerged as market leaders and include China International Capital Corp, led by Levin Zhu Yunlai, the son of former premier Zhu Rongji, and BOC International, the Hong Kong-based flagship offshore investment banking arm of Bank of China….

    Of interest is Matt Taibbi: The Great American Bubble Machine, Goldman Sachs
    and How Goldman Sachs Created the Food Crisis

    It is always bad for the grass when the elephants come out to dance.

    30

  • #
    hunter

    Australians are the victim of an Obama-engineered coup designed to keep Australia safe for climate profiteers.

    10

  • #
    Graham Richards

    Time for he Nationals to pull support for the Turnbull government and start crossing the floor.

    I don’t think the LP & National electorate will vote for another climate change lie. I certainly will not.

    10

  • #
    AndyG55

    At WUWT they are looking at data from the new OCO2 satellite.

    It seems that Australia is a NET CARBON SINK in all seasons of the year.

    Come all you CO2 polluting countries.. pay up !!! :-)

    20