Site Meter

Monday, November 22, 2010

Comin' at ya!

Which would you prefer - a bill for $1billion or out of control climate change? You can have both, according to our Parliamentary Commisioner for the Environnment.

"Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright says the country is seriously off-course in meeting the emissions reduction targets signed up to under the Copenhagen accord."

Nick Smith, ever the gentleman has dismissed the price tag as "speculation".
(I love those weasel words. Of course it's speculation Nick, so will your best guess be.)


Dr Wright says that, "to meet its obligations, New Zealand would have to buy carbon credits to cover the huge discrepancy"
Dr Smith said the Copenhagen accord was not legally binding.
See the pattern. Not exactly respectful of the report from the Parliamentary Commisioner, is he!
Read the article "$1b bill feared for ambitious emission targets" here

The Standard cover it here with their "Doing nothing in the face of climate change crisis" post.

They add, "In fact, all National has done is weaken the already pathetic steps that were in place to limit greenhouse emissions. They gutted the ETS and now there’s every signal that they’ll make it even more useless by not including agriculture in it."

That's a 'fail' National, from the Commisioner.

4 comments:

Southernright said...

Speculation is an interesting word to use, mainly because climate change is pure speculation itself...

nommopilot said...

"climate change is pure speculation itself"

I take it you dress for sunshine even when the weather report says it's going to rain?

robertguyton said...

By 'speculation' Southernright, you mean ...what exactly?
Any attempt to describe future events is speculation, surely.
Predicting that the sun will rise tomorrow - speculation. That your car will start, speculation.
I don't grasp what it is you are trying to say.
'Pure speculation' is even more curious - are you implying some sort of logic-free, science-free form of speculation? If so, your view is demonstrably wrong. The climate has changed, is changing and will change.

robertguyton said...

Nommo - or perhaps the tin hat is sufficient for all weathers.
(Apologies Southernright - just playing with ideas).