JULIA Gillard tonight confirmed she would join Tony Abbott tomorrow at a town hall forum held at Brisbane's Broncos Leagues Club.
And in breaking news tonight, the Prime Minister said she would attend the forum even though Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has rejected having a one-hour debate on the economy before the event.

Ms Gillard earlier had reissued a challenge to Mr Abbott to join her in a one-hour economic debate in Brisbane tomorrow.

As the debate about a potential second debate reached fever-pitch, Mr Abbott announced that if elected on Saturday he would establish an Independent Debates Commission to independently dictate the terms of leaders debates in future federal elections...........

No it's not called rolling over.  Gillard is meeting Abbott's challenge - but he won't meet hers.

Tonight at the Bronco's club (or wherever it's going to be) Abbott wants Gillard to face the same rednecked crowd she did at Rooty Hill and she could well have refused if she was gutless.

Abbott is the one who won't meet her half way and is continually refusing to have this debate on the economy.

Do you know why he won't debate it Sprintcyclist? It's because he's clueless. Tonight he's going to come across as the rough tough man's man and wants to watch Gillard being torn to shreds again by a feral crowd.

If she is - he'll lose plenty of votes because of it.

NBN & superclinics are national programs, this is worlds apart from the Rodent’s porkbarreling. Look at the NBN second roll out, they are in all sorts of electorates, Labor/Lib/Nats/indy.

Farmers cast doubt on Coalition's climate plan

Lenore Taylor

July 31, 2010

Australia's peak farm body has told the Coalition it is not certain agriculture can deliver the quantity of greenhouse emissions factored into the opposition's climate strategy at the estimated price.

More than 60 per cent of the greenhouse gas reductions from the Coalition's $3.2 billion emissions reduction fund are scheduled to come from soil carbon - at an estimated price of $8 to $10 per tonne of carbon abated.

The National Farmers' Federation says farmers are keen to tender for the Coalition fund but are worried they will be blamed if the farm sector cannot achieve the amount of abatement or if the price is higher.

''We think soil carbon has great potential and we can deliver significant amounts of greenhouse gas abatement but there is a great deal of uncertainty and a range of scientific advice, so we won't really know how much we can deliver and at what cost until the market is operating,'' said the National Farmers' Federation spokesman Charlie McElhone.

Coalition climate spokesman Greg Hunt is consulting the NFF on the design of the scheme and has promised detailed talks on draft legislation if the Coalition wins the election.

Mr Hunt told the Herald the Coalition's ''direct action'' climate strategy - designed to achieve the same 5 per cent reduction in Australia's emissions by 2020 as is promised by Labor - would be legislated by the start of next year.

He said it would include a ''probity commissioner'' to prevent more mistakes such as the Rudd government's home insulation program or the green loans scheme.

He also said the Coalition would subsidise ''for at least a decade'' the price of cleaner replacement power after paying for the retirement of one of Victoria's big-emitting brown coal-fired power stations such as International Power's Hazelwood or TRUenergy's Yallourn.

But the electricity industry warned that, without a carbon price signal for other investments in power generation, prices were still likely to rise even with a subsidy of $300 million a year to the gas-fired replacement.

The Greens, who are likely to hold the balance of power, said a buy-out made no sense without a carbon price.

''A direct buyout, with billions of dollars of compensation over years, would be the least efficient and the least fair way of achieving the undeniably vital goal of closing Hazelwood,'' said the Greens spokeswoman Senator Christine Milne.

''We would be open to more directly targeting Hazelwood through . . . giving the plant's operators assistance under the carbon price on the condition that the plant is closed over an agreed period of time.''

[...]

Climate Minister Senator Penny Wong said yesterday that under the Coalition policy ''even if one power station reduced its pollution, every other power station in the country could actually increase their pollution''.

Farmers cautious on Coalition pitch

    * Asa Wahlquist

    * August 12, 2010 12:00AM

FOR the millions who live in the Murray-Darling Basin, the looming election is overshadowed by a draft plan for its future.

The Coalition yesterday promised an urgent assessment of the social and economic impacts of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority plan, claiming an Abbott government would be "equally committed" to food and agricultural production.

The pitch was mostly welcomed by farmer and irrigation groups -- but there seems to be a catch. Mick Keogh from the Australian Farm Institute points out the MDBA is required by legislation to consider only the environment.

The Water Act 2007 was a product of the Howard government and received bipartisan support. Mr Keogh suspects Australia could find itself in the same situation as the US, where decisions on water are determined by the courts rather than the policymakers.

But farmer groups did welcome Tony Abbott's $300 million for improvements in on-farm water efficiency, their preferred option for saving water. Labor has been criticised as being too slow to roll out the $5.8 billion for infrastructure upgrades.

The Coalition has promised to buy 150 billion litres of temporary or leased water for the Lower Lakes and Coorong. That will please the environmentalists and South Australians, but it worries farmers, who must compete for water in the market against the government's deep pockets.

The Coalition's promise to deliver real, if temporary, water is designed to stand in contrast to Labor's buyback.

Both the ALP and the Coalition have promised to buy back water from willing sellers, to reach the new sustainable diversion limits. Irrigators had been worried the cuts would be reached through compulsory acquisitions or across-the-board reductions. This assurance may be the only lasting legacy of election 2010 for Murray-Darling Basin farmers.