Carbon Price from 2012 - FUEL RELATED

[vztrt]

Its not the ETS but it will be there while they try to push the ETS through.

This will get interesting. Not sure how it will effect fuel prices but I know previously that there wasn't going to be any more tax on fuel.

Please keep the political rubbish out of here, this tax will effect everyone so thats why I posted it. Mind you I'm sure the usual people will get this closed.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/ca...b6ag.html#poll

Carbon price to start July 2012: Gillard February 24, 2011 - 12:49PM

- No decision yet on what the set price will be
- Also no decision on household compensation
- Greens, key independents side with PM on deal
- The fixed price phase could be for up to 5 years
- Carbon price to increase annually at pre-set rate


Australia will set a carbon price from July 1, 2012, as an interim measure until a full emissions trading scheme can be introduced three to five years later, Prime Minister Julia Gillard says.

But Ms Gillard said no decision had yet been made on what the price would be, or how much industry and households would be compensated for the new costs.

Advertisement: Story continues below "This is an essential economic reform, and it is the right thing to do," Ms Gillard told a news conference. "Carbon pollution is a threat to our country, and a threat to our future prosperity."

The new deal has the backing of key Green and independent MPs in the lower house of Parliament but could still face obstacles in the upper house where three earlier schemes were defeated.

"I do not believe that Australia needs to lead the world on climate change, but I also don't believe that we can afford to be left behind. That is why the time is right and the time is now," she said.

Transition is key

Nathan Fabian, chief executive of the Investor Group on Climate Change, welcomed the starting date in July 2012.

"The key issue is the transition from fixed to flexible pricing to give certainty to investors for the long term," he said. "We think the transition should be three years as we need a target as soon as possible so the economy knows how much it has to adjust."

A climate change committee - which involves the government, Greens and independents Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott - has held four meetings since it was set up in September last year, in the aftermath of the election.

The government abandoned its previous emissions trading scheme last year after it failed to get it through the Senate.

The Greens sided with the Coalition to vote against an emissions trading scheme, arguing the carbon reduction targets were too low and industry compensation was too high.

The abandonment of the ETS breached a promise by former prime minister Kevin Rudd to tackle climate change and was blamed for his drop in opinion polls and eventual toppling by Ms Gillard.

The opposition has said it would block any new "carbon tax", so the government will rely on the votes of the independents and Greens to secure the passage of its legislation.

Time's ripe

Ms Gillard said it was time to put a price on carbon emissions.

"I'm determined to price carbon," she told reporters.

"History teaches us that the countries and the economies who prosper at times of historic change are those who get in and shape and manage the changes.

"The time is right and the time is now."

Ms Gillard said a fixed carbon price would start on July 1, 2012, before moving to a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme within three to five years.

Putting a price on carbon was the most efficient way to cut carbon pollution, she said.

"If you put a price on something, people will use less of it."

Review plan

One year before the end of the fixed price period, a review would consider if there were any reasons to delay moving to a cap-and-trade scheme.

"The hard-wired mechanism here is to move to cap and trade," Ms Gillard said.

"But there would be a review one year in advance to assess whether there were any real reasons not to take that step."

Agricultural emissions will not be included in the carbon pricing system.

"The measures and mechanisms for counting agricultural emissions are simply too complex," Ms Gillard said.

"But we do want to work with farmers with our agricultural community to make sure that they get the benefits of changing practices and changing carbon."

Ms Gillard said the carbon price set by the government would be fair.

"Every cent raised from pricing carbon will go to assisting households, helping businesses manage the transition and funding climate change programs," she said.

"And the government will always support those who are in need of assistance with cost of living pressures."

Carbon pollution threatened Australia's future prosperity, Ms Gillard said.

"We need to ensure that Australia has a low-pollution economy for the future - we can't afford to be left behind."

Abbott view

Ms Gillard said she would not back down during what she predicted would be a tough fight ahead with Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

He would immediately be spruiking a fear campaign "and talking to Australians about a great big new tax on everything".

"[But] can I make it very clear that in the debate that will ensue I am not intending to take a backwards step.

"We are a confident nation and we are good at change. We've proved it in the past."

Ms Gillard said more work needed to be done on the details of industry assistance and household compensation.

The government's failed carbon pollution reduction scheme had already achieved some good work in that area, she added.

"It's not my intention to just put that work to one side," Ms Gillard said.

"But there are discussions to come and there will be some difficult conversations to come."

Matters of compensation would be worked through with the multi-party climate change committee.

Household impact

Greens leader Bob Brown said his party would be lobbying to get a good deal for householders.

"It isn't just a matter of compensating industry - particularly polluters," he said.

"What we want to do is compensate those people who are suffering the outcome of long-term carbon pollution of the atmosphere."

Greens climate change spokeswoman Christine Milne said there could only be a price on carbon because the Greens held the balance of power in the Federal Parliament.

"It's exciting [and] it's happening because we have shared power in Australia," she said, adding that majority government would not have delivered the outcome.

"It is because the Greens are in the balance of power working with the other parties to deliver not only the aspiration but the process to achieve it."

However, Senator Milne sounded a note of caution, declaring a carbon price would only become a reality if all parties could reach agreement on the details.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet left the door open for fuel to be included in the scheme.

The proposal from the multi-party climate change committee includes a list of sectors which could be included - one of which is the transport industry.

Mr Combet said the committee would consider phasing in the ETS for different sections of the economy.

"That [including fuel] is not a settled issue at this point in time, but it is an issue the committee will consider," he said.

AAP, Reuters

[MAD]

I still cant see what incentives it is going to offer to actually reduce carbon output.
Rather it is just going to slug those that produce carbon with extra taxes that will no doubt be passed on to the consumer.

Add to that there is still no definite link between our extra carbon output and climate change.

Is it just me or does it seem ridiculous to add a new tax, and then try to work out compensation for it?

[JG34JA]

It will eventually lead to the financial sector controlling the productive sector. In some years time the price will be floating, companies will use sophisticated derivatives on it to hedge the carbon produced in their activities, market makers will instantaneously quote carbon spreads and speculators and hedge funds will join the market as the crowd forms an instantaneous and continuous opinion on the price of an invisible gas that may or may not cause changes to an ever-changing system. Ludicrous. See you there!

[Charliewool]

Compensation?? Yeah right!!
As good as written her own "political death warrant" if this eventuates.

[rancidpunx]

I suggest everyone start to mail the PM personally with their thoughts on her actions.
From the Daily telegraph news cast comments over 99% of people have written something in regards to not wanting this. You can look at that as 99% of Australians not wanting this.

[MONSOON]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

Compensation?? Yeah right!!
As good as written her own "political death warrant" if this eventuates.

It didn't do so at the last 2 elections when it was clearly on their agenda,
it's a real shame but it didn't

[b055m4n]

I believe in the UK that a carbon tax is built into car rego's making it very expensive ... bloody brilliant !!!

[MAD]

I see it as being a useful as energywatch.com.au and the like.
Clever business person that came up with something we dont need, something we dont directly pay for, and yet probably makes a fortune from the energy companies who then pass on the cost to the consumer (hence why I said dont directly pay for).

I'd love to come up with a business that isnt required but will make money anyway.

[Polyal]

Nothing good will come of this or the ETS..its as stupid as the NBN.

[Michael_F90]

As regards its effect on fuel, I heard on the radio Abbott say that it will add about 6 cents a litre. Whether that figure is accurate or not is another matter, I guess we will have to wait and see.

[Bucknaked]

The ETS which is another tax. A way to make us pay more while they compensate their rich labor mates and give away a large chunk of money to other countries.

[Redrum]

They can call it what they like, but it is just a new tax. And even if it was true, their theory on global warming, how will Australians paying more tax, actually solve anything. Flood levy, carbon levy, what next?

[GTP-814]

Originally Posted by Redrum

They can call it what they like, but it is just a new tax. And even if it was true, their theory on global warming, how will Australians paying more tax, actually solve anything. Flood levy, carbon levy, what next?

Polly levey, just because they can

[FPV+fteT3]

Successive governments both federal and state have over the last 2 decades sold off almost every asset the country has including mines to asia, ANL shipping line, the railways, electricity, public transport, major roads, speed enforcement cameras etc... all earned money for the govco but all were sold to private business for a short term cash hit well the cash is spent and we (govco) have no way of raising funds for the trough to bury our snouts in so we will put up more speed cameras and start a new tax based on assumptions and nothing but spin to back it up.
What happens is we (the taxpayers) pay for their mismanagement yet again. Just look at the yank running NSW she just about gave away some of the states electricity assets to fund her retirement and if you return her to power she will not go ahead with the sale of sydney water, well big deal ...who the hell gave her or any other polly a mandate to put any public asset up for sale?
Carbon tax just another cop out from govco to raise funds how will another tax stop pollution?...simply it wont and they dont care about that. Next will be an oxygen tax.............

[Raptor]

In theory;

A higher prices should dampen demand => therefore any fixed resource (oil/coal) should last longer = WIN

Competing alternative become more attractive => Solar/Wind/Wave (even Nuclear?-ignoring other issues) may gain greater investment/acceptance/attention = WIN

It'll cost ME more = LOSE (unless I change my behaviour <= THERE'S A CLUE)

And as we're not allowed to discuss politics I wont even go there.

[cheap]

What will this do the price of a carton of milk?
What will this do to the price of a slab of beer?
What will this do to the price of fuel?
What will this do the cost of electricity?
What is the correct level of carbon in the atmosphere (part per million)?
What year did this level of carbon (ppm) exist?
Assuming this is implemented, what will this do to global temperatures?
Assuming this is implemented, when will the world reach the correct level of carbon (ppm)?

These are some of the questions I want answered!

[ohzone]

[QUOTE=cheap]What will this do the price of a carton of milk?
What will this do to the price of a slab of beer?
What will this do to the price of fuel?
What will this do the cost of electricity?
What is the correct level of carbon in the atmosphere (part per million)?
What year did this level of carbon (ppm) exist?
Assuming this is implemented, what will this do to global temperatures?
Assuming this is implemented, when will the world reach the correct level of carbon (ppm)?

The only answer is....... it's just a new Tax

[colinl]

Originally Posted by Raptor

In theory;

A higher prices should dampen demand => therefore any fixed resource (oil/coal) should last longer = WIN

Competing alternative become more attractive => Solar/Wind/Wave (even Nuclear?-ignoring other issues) may gain greater investment/acceptance/attention = WIN

It'll cost ME more = LOSE (unless I change my behaviour <= THERE'S A CLUE)

And as we're not allowed to discuss politics I wont even go there.

I agree. I'm no fan of being taxed, but this is something that will cost us one way or another. The carbon tax might not be the best answer, but I'm happy enough to try it. IMO it is better than not doing anything, as I believe not doing anything may just be the most expensive decision we might make.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by colinl

I agree. I'm no fan of being taxed, but this is something that will cost us one way or another. The carbon tax might not be the best answer, but I'm happy enough to try it. IMO it is better than not doing anything, as I believe not doing anything may just be the most expensive decision we might make.

There's nothing wrong with investing in more renewable sources of fuel or energy. Living standards would almost definetely improve with less polution wherever it stems from. The problem is they've concocted a tax that will hurt the manufacturing base of this country and stifle investment in the country just to fill the coffers. We do need to look after ourselves as a country before we try to show off to countries about how "Green" we are because frankly they'll just laugh at us.

I don't think anybody will argue that we need to invest in more renewable sources of fuels, it's just how the message should be conveyed instead relying on the tired old scare campaign of "Climate Change".

[atec77]

Originally Posted by colinl

I agree. I'm no fan of being taxed, but this is something that will cost us one way or another. The carbon tax might not be the best answer, but I'm happy enough to try it. IMO it is better than not doing anything, as I believe not doing anything may just be the most expensive decision we might make.

The obvious answer is tax dispensation for those who provide and prove reduced pollution levels passing them on to the consumer , of course it doesn't provide a huge free money pit to stal from but it would certainly be permissable in reducing teh cost of most things , and fuel wouldn't forced up in a bogus cah grab , but of course the government wont be able to use slight of hand bailing it's self out of a self made black hole
and our cars and hobbys wouldn't be a larger cahs supply for the ranga with tax dispensation

[olfella]

Originally Posted by colinl

I agree. I'm no fan of being taxed, but this is something that will cost us one way or another. The carbon tax might not be the best answer, but I'm happy enough to try it. IMO it is better than not doing anything, as I believe not doing anything may just be the most expensive decision we might make.

I do not like being over taxed either, but there are better ways to manage this. What ever happened to reasearch into clean coal technologies? If coal is the major culprit then why not place the 'levy' 'tax' on the overseas purchaser. Same as they do to me with my water bill, electric bill, gas bill and on and on including rego.
The only thing we mere mortals have been told is the TAX is coming in July 2012, but no detail and no consultation (as promised before the election).

[mad-xa]

just australians bending over again and taking it in the a@#$ australians havent had a protesting voice since vietnam...

[ivorya]

Good on them for doing it.

What sh_tz me is the compensation. WHY should anyone be compensated for something they are 'trying' the eliminate/cut down.
Just get on with it.

[Brazen]

They should introduce a Millenium Bug Tax

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by ivorya

Good on them for doing it.

What sh_tz me is the compensation. WHY should anyone be compensated for something they are 'trying' the eliminate/cut down.
Just get on with it.

WHY should the australian people be burdened with another useless tax to fill the government coffers? It will do nothing for "climate change". Nothing we do as a race will change what the climate is doing, especially such a small nation as australia. We shouldn't need to be compensated for such a blatant money grab from a government hell bent on taxing us.

[atec77]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

WHY should the australian people be burdened with another useless tax to fill the government coffers? It will do nothing for "climate change". Nothing we do as a race will change what the climate is doing, especially such a small nation as australia. We shouldn't need to be compensated for such a blatant money grab from a government hell bent on taxing us.

Well it's certainly time for you younger folk to take note of what this current labouring abomination is doing to the country again just like most of the several preceding labouring governments , in all the decades I have lived here in Australia never has another government displayed such a lack of fiscal ability and compete disregard for the voters opinions and wants .
I will be actively opposing gullard and her piglet cronies in everyway that occours to me , she will fail at the next election not because of tony abbot but because of several major taxes being introduced ripping the general populace off and her lies and repeated lies again and again
I used to tell people I was proud to live in Gods own country , a lucky country when I came here almost 40 years ago , no more and I am ashamed to have our current governmet misleading us . Curse the ranga and all she stands for

[ivorya]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

WHY should the australian people be burdened with another useless tax to fill the government coffers? It will do nothing for "climate change". Nothing we do as a race will change what the climate is doing, especially such a small nation as australia. We shouldn't need to be compensated for such a blatant money grab from a government hell bent on taxing us.

The only useless part is the compensation because the people getting compensated the most will be the ones most producing of the 'C'.

I agree, i don't believe anyone in politics fully cares.. lets face it they don't give a hoot what happens after they die.

But it's a start, a move on a chess board. One that i agree with.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by ivorya

The only useless part is the compensation because the people getting compensated the most will be the ones most producing of the 'C'.

I agree, i don't believe anyone in politics fully cares.. lets face it they don't give a hoot what happens after they die.

But it's a start, a move on a chess board. One that i agree with.

It's completely your choice to agree with it and i have no problem with that, It's your right to voice that opinion.

What i do have a massive problem with is what continues to be one of the most outrageous scams of the modern era. The only thing this will achieve is speeding up the process of our manufacturing base moving offshore to a country where this form of tax is not in place. We can wave goodbye to the mining industry as soon as china becomes a player in that sector because they will never have a "Carbon Tax" or "Mining Tax". We can usher in a new era of massive energy costs that will futher burden families.

This is somehow meant to help the economy? I wouldn't mind knowing how?

[ivorya]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

It's completely your choice to agree with it and i have no problem with that, It's your right to voice that opinion.

What i do have a massive problem with is what continues to be one of the most outrageous scams of the modern era. The only thing this will achieve is speeding up the process of our manufacturing base moving offshore to a country where this form of tax is not in place. We can wave goodbye to the mining industry as soon as china becomes a player in that sector because they will never have a "Carbon Tax" or "Mining Tax". We can usher in a new era of massive energy costs that will futher burden families.

This is somehow meant to help the economy? I wouldn't mind knowing how?

Like i said b4. It's a chess game. You'll find everyone in the world watching each other, waiting to see who moves first and how it's implemented. I'm sure it won't just be us that'll be paying this tax.
I'm young and look at this as opputunites. We could be the world leaders in (eg) renewables, if all this money was put into this and not compensation, we could then export expertise around the globe.
One door shuts another will open......

[JG34JA]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

What i do have a massive problem with is what continues to be one of the most outrageous scams of the modern era. The only thing this will achieve is speeding up the process of our manufacturing base moving offshore to a country where this form of tax is not in place. We can wave goodbye to the mining industry as soon as china becomes a player in that sector because they will never have a "Carbon Tax" or "Mining Tax". We can usher in a new era of massive energy costs that will futher burden families.

This is somehow meant to help the economy? I wouldn't mind knowing how?

Brilliant! Of course other nations will not introduce such taxes because it offers them a competitive advantage not to do so. They must enjoy our stupidity. Bye bye manufacturing base. Bye bye productive sector. Hello cargo cults and banana republic. If we were to shut down 3 coal fired power plants (and feel good), would it bother us that the Chinese have perhaps 50 more they need to open to feed their economy, which is set for productive growth? The net carbon output massively increases, no matter what.