Spending billions? Why not do a due diligence study? « JoNova: Science, carbon, climate and tax

Here’s an edited version of a comment found on Watts UP (h/t Ian :-) . A retired project engineer explains to Julia Gillard why peer review reports are not the same as a proper due diligence study — something smaller organizations would have done for projects twenty million times less ambitious than the Carbon Tax transformation of the Australian economy. Good luck with that message Colin. Since Gillard and Co didn’t think a feasibility study was worth doing for out $46 billion NBN, I can’t see them catching on to the idea of spending a few million as insurance against corruption, fraud or scientific stupidity. When they talk insurance, it’s only worth doing if it costs a magnitude more than the catastrophe. A due diligence study is too cheap. — Jo

Labor should foot bill for tax campaign: Abbott

Touring the marginal western Sydney seat of Lindsay today, Mr Abbott described the ads as taxpayer-funded propaganda that did not tell the full truth.
Advertisement: Story continues below

"If the Labor Party wants to advertise, the Labor Party should find the money and the Labor Party should spend the money," he told reporters in Penrith.

"Taxpayers should not be ripped off to fund political propaganda."

Review & Outlook: The Last Carbon Taxer - WSJ.com

All of this for negligible environmental benefits. Australia emits 1.5% of the world's greenhouse gases. Even if the country cut its emissions to zero, the move would do little to reduce global emissions. Australia's per-capita emissions are high compared to other developed nations because it's a sparsely populated continent blessed with an abundance of natural resources. Aussies have developed profitable, world-class natural resource and energy businesses that have lifted incomes at home and helped supply developing countries like China and India. This is bad?

It is if you believe in the theology that loathes carbon fuels and wants government to allocate the means of power production. In a speech Thursday, Ms. Gillard vowed to press forward with cap and tax and said that her convictions are "very deeply held." We'll see if her government can survive them.

PM's worst news looks like her only good news

IF THERE is but one consolation for Julia Gillard in today's Age/Nielsen poll, it is that this is surely as bad as it gets.

Usually, it is possible to find one ray of hope, however faint, for a leader or a party under the pump, but everything is bad in this result.

Hostility to the Prime Minister and her plan to price carbon is universal, irrespective of age, sex, state or whether the respondent lives in the city or the country. The only variation is the intensity of that hostility.