BHP will monopolise the mining industry, this is why a carbon tax suits them and is also why they are happy to oblige. Recall, their having struck a deal with the ALP before the election?

Gillard lied, if you watch the above clip, you will see how she has changed her stance on a carbon-tax within weeks after the election.

Gillards hand-picked environmental committee is biased, and not one of our 'said' independents are questioning the ALP's decision to push through with a carbon tax despite their having been opposed to it in accordance with their electorates prior to becoming king-makers.

This is a dangerous far-left government out of control.

Clearly Australians don't care where their electricity comes from,(Foreignly owned company or not)... but after this carbon-tax is imposed, I think they may care about their having to pay twice as much for it within the next 3 years.


Enjoy.

i

as said in the other thread where you posted this


Labor, Like Liberals ... did not win government ... so have no mandate


Both old parties now have to start from scratch and work with the cross bench.

Time to put the miners in charge. Let the mining industry run the country?  Perhaps it is time to end the charade and install Mr. Kloppers, Mr. Palmer
or Mr. Forrest as our “Prime Miner” in chief?





http://guyberes.com/

So you are happy to listen to the miners when it suits your agenda.
=========================

Im not listening to  the miners  - see it more as  giving in .
And ,  why not .  Sometimes the fight is to hard.

The miners have already 'shown control'  as I have seen  much more so of late..

freediver wrote on Sep 17^th, 2010 at 8:33pm:


I'm not sure I have much trust in the 'will of the people' concept anymore. IM sure the voters in the indendants electorates have hte same concern. Whgen 'wil of the people' turns into the 'will of the MP' we lose much more in the long-term than any small group of people iwn in the short-term.

freediver wrote on Sep 17^th, 2010 at 8:50pm:


Do you see the hypocrisy in your position? You believe in direct democracy because you think (although evidence is against you) that you wil get a carbon tax that way. but you accept the inherently UNDEMOCRATIC notion of 81% of the people voting for parties that oppose a carbon tax and stil being overridden - because you support the policy?

not exactly a position of PRINCIPLE, is it?

freediver wrote on Sep 18^th, 2010 at 12:55pm:


Polls taken on a carbon tax do not come down in favour of it when the WHOLE issue is explained - eg price increases. Direct Democracy is an interesting concept I agree. I just found it interesting that you were willing to accept having a carbon tax foreced on us when both major parties were 100% against it and 81% of the population voted for them. on the evidence to date, a carbon tax is comprehensively rejected. you could hold an election on the topic - oops! just did that! - or hold a referendum. but to bring forward a carbon tax now would be more comprehensively undemocratic than WorkChoices ever was. Howard had no mandate for WorkChoices but Gillard actually has a mandate for NO CARBON TAX. thats at least twice as bad as the workchoices mis-step.