Well I'll be. It seems that Nelson did not agree to a 2012 start to the ETS after all. It seems I was mislead by News Ltd. And I thought left-wing con-jobs came from the Fairfax press.
The written party room statement gives in-principle support - that means support for an ETS or something like it, but not necessarily and ETS - to start "slow", "probably by 2012" and not "too far ahead of the rest of the world."
www.news.com.au is running the story that this is not what Nelson's policy was prior to the meeting.
But it is.
Before there was doubt on whether there should be an ETS or something else less damaging to the economy. Still doubt, looks like.
Before there was doubt about the timing: probably 2012, maybe not depending on other countries. Yep thats the same too.
Yesterday arvo the OZ ran a story that spun the whole thing as a victory for Nelson. This is what confused Andrew Bolt who wrote a really happy assesment of the exchange, then retracted it when he read the OZ next headline "Start climate scheme in 2012: Nelson".
This is not Nelson's position at all as can be seen from today's written statement. But Nelson's opponents in the libs and at News wanted to steal the this mornings headlines, so they got in last night. Somebody (not naming names Turnbull and Hunt) briefed the OZ (Samantha Maiden i guess) that Nelson gave full support to a 2012 start, and the only variable was the carbon cost.
The OZ's on-line articles today but still insists that Nelson changed position again, when the "in principle" stuff has always been there. And www.news.com.au is running the story that Lib policy is not Nelson's. This is all bullshit. It is his policy.
Turnbull and Hunt got nothing more than in principle conditional support for a probable ETS start date of 2012. If they think otherwise and breif the OZ, that's their problem. The Liberal party's position is in the document and it is what Nelson said it would be.
