Coal Miners to blame for Qld Floods - Brown

[scoob]

Is he also blaming them for the 1893 Floods?

[Ronnie]

This episode is just classic Bob Brown.
The problem with Bob (one of his problems) is that he overstates his case to a ludicrous degree.
Surely no high school student would dare to string along his cause and effect arguments like he does.
He then indulges in political opportunism to an indecent degree, he's not the only politician to do this, but he is the grand master of it. He did a similar thing during the recent Victorian bushfires. Everyone else is coming to terms with the devastation and immediate disaster recovery needs and government and opposition alike in general terms pull their heads in and observe some sort of dignified ceasefire. Bob just sees an opportunity and is there wagging his finger at everyone and lecturing them how naughty they are and how he is the one with all the answers. He has his own rules and they stink.

[dedja]

Let's just say that his timing is sometimes a tad off ...

[Gozu]

Yes, his timing is off but I don't see any of the right-wingers on here licking their lips while sinking the slipper into Bob Brown mentioning what Tony Abbott said about a week ago. Something along the lines of if the govt wasn't putting so much money into the NBN it would be a lot easier to pay for all the damage the floods have caused.

[redandblack]

Yes, his timing is off but I don't see any of the right-wingers on here licking their lips while sinking the slipper into Bob Brown mentioning what Tony Abbott said about a week ago. Something along the lines of if the govt wasn't putting so much money into the NBN it would be a lot easier to pay for all the damage the floods have caused.

Which is a nice segue (?) to remind posters that they're 'quoting' stories from the paper violently opposed to the NBN and the same paper who editorialised that they were out to 'destroy' the Greens.

Having said that, I await with interest the answwers to Gozu's reminder about Tony Abbott

[Bat Pad]

Yes, his timing is off but I don't see any of the right-wingers on here licking their lips while sinking the slipper into Bob Brown mentioning what Tony Abbott said about a week ago. Something along the lines of if the govt wasn't putting so much money into the NBN it would be a lot easier to pay for all the damage the floods have caused.

Look every statement made by a politican at a time like this has at least some politics behind it. You don't think the convenient timing of the announcement today that the NBN will be exempt from the freedom of information act was taking advantage of the news cycle from the floods? So taking that in mind, lets just look at the statements removing any cynicism from their review.

Giving an idea to help pay for the damage caused by the floods, with evidence

Blaming floods on a group of the community with no evidence

Hardly in the same ball park.

[Gozu]

Look every statement made by a politican at a time like this has at least some politics behind it. You don't think the convenient timing of the announcement today that the NBN will be exempt from the freedom of information act was taking advantage of the news cycle from the floods? So taking that in mind, lets just look at the statements removing any cynicism from their review.

Giving an idea to help pay for the damage caused by the floods, with evidence

Blaming floods on a group of the community with no evidence

Hardly in the same ball park.

Yep, Abbott's just a typical politician but Bob Brown on the other hand? This isn't about the NBN it's about being even handed. Don't get me wrong Labor have played silly buggers a bit with the NBN. But I look at things as like Bob Brown coming down on the side of the environment and Abbott coming down on the side of playing politics, what Abbott said was just pure political point scoring.

1. I've got an idea about how to pay for the damage caused by the floods? Labor growing a pair and reverting back to the original mining tax proposed by Garnaut.

2. You've got any evidence whatsoever that the floods were not caused in part by climate change? Didn't think so.

[Bat Pad]

Look every statement made by a politican at a time like this has at least some politics behind it. You don't think the convenient timing of the announcement today that the NBN will be exempt from the freedom of information act was taking advantage of the news cycle from the floods? So taking that in mind, lets just look at the statements removing any cynicism from their review.

Giving an idea to help pay for the damage caused by the floods, with evidence

Blaming floods on a group of the community with no evidence

Hardly in the same ball park.

Yep, Abbott's just a typical politician but Bob Brown on the other hand? This isn't about the NBN it's about being even handed. Don't get me wrong Labor have played silly buggers a bit with the NBN. But I look at things as like Bob Brown coming down on the side of the environment and Abbott coming down on the side of playing politics, what Abbott said was just pure political point scoring.

1. I've got an idea about how to pay for the damage caused by the floods? Labor growing a pair and reverting back to the original mining tax proposed by Garnaut.

2. You've got any evidence whatsoever that the floods were not caused in part by climate change? Didn't think so.

Why is Abbott's comment purely political, you don't believe there is any practical value to it at all? And why is Bob Brown not just a politician? Name what he has done to the contrary.

1. Both Abbott and yourself are entitled to voice your ideas. The merit of your idea is not the talking point of this thread.

2. The burden of proof is hardly on me , I'm not the one laying blame.

[Gozu]

Why is Abbott's comment purely political, you don't believe there is any practical value to it at all? And why is Bob Brown not just a politician? Name what he has done to the contrary.

1. Both Abbott and yourself are entitled to voice your ideas. The merit of your idea is not the talking point of this thread.

2. The burden of proof is hardly on me , I'm not the one laying blame.

No and I think if anything it's far worse than what Bob Brown said. BB is a politician just like Abbott it was sarcasm directed at your "Look every statement made by a politican at a time like this has at least some politics behind it" something that funnily enough only appeared from you after I mentioned Tony Abbott's comments.

1. No the talking point is right-wingers kicking the crap out of Bob Brown but not Tony Abbott, I got it.

2. The burden of proof is on you when you make statements like "Blaming floods on a group of the community with no evidence".

[fish]

Here is the text of The Greens press release:

Coal barons should help pay for catastrophes - Brown

The full tax on excess profits by the coal mining industry, as recommended by Treasury, should be imposed with half set aside for future natural catastrophes in Australia, Greens Leader Bob Brown said in Hobart today.

"It is unfair that the cost is put on all taxpayers, not the culprits," Senator Brown said.

"Burning coal is a major cause of global warming. This industry, which is 75% owned outside Australia, should help pay the cost of the predicted more severe and more frequent floods, droughts and bushfires in coming decades. As well, 700,000 seaside properties in Australia face rising sea levels."

"A Goldman Sachs study found that the reduction in the mining super tax agreed by the current Labor government (the coalition opposes the mining tax) would cost Australians $35 billion in forgone revenue to 2019-20."

"Scientists agree that current floods come from record-high temperatures of Australian oceans this season."

"We also ask insurers to show some compassion to Queensland's flood victims, and to others who face loss as wild weather besets the country. Many people believe they have flood cover and, if not, the fine print should have been disclosed to them."

Not much there that I can find fault with!

[Q.]

Fish, his public comments were a little less 'scripted' than the press release.

[fish]

Fish, his public comments were a little less 'scripted' than the press release.

What did he say?

[Psyber]

Look every statement made by a politican at a time like this has at least some politics behind it.
You don't think the convenient timing of the announcement today that the NBN will be exempt from the freedom of information act was taking advantage of the news cycle from the floods?
So taking that in mind, lets just look at the statements removing any cynicism from their review.

Giving an idea to help pay for the damage caused by the floods, with evidence

Blaming floods on a group of the community with no evidence

Hardly in the same ball park.

Did they offer any rationalised justification for that or are they admitting they just need to cover up something?

It reminds me about Don Dunstan exempting the SA Housing Trust from his then new Housing and Tenancy Act.
His justification was, "They are a government agency and therefore will always treat clients better than the Act requires."
[ That one was demonstrated later to be almost as big a joke as his, "Yes, we have borrowed the state superannuation funds but we are the government and will put them back when needed." ]

[Bat Pad]

Why is Abbott's comment purely political, you don't believe there is any practical value to it at all? And why is Bob Brown not just a politician? Name what he has done to the contrary.

1. Both Abbott and yourself are entitled to voice your ideas. The merit of your idea is not the talking point of this thread.

2. The burden of proof is hardly on me , I'm not the one laying blame.

No and I think if anything it's far worse than what Bob Brown said. BB is a politician just like Abbott it was sarcasm directed at your "Look every statement made by a politican at a time like this has at least some politics behind it" something that funnily enough only appeared from you after I mentioned Tony Abbott's comments.

1. No the talking point is right-wingers kicking the crap out of Bob Brown but not Tony Abbott, I got it.

2. The burden of proof is on you when you make statements like "Blaming floods on a group of the community with no evidence".

I fail to see why I would bother mentioning that all statements have politics at this time when I was making the point that Bob Brown was scapegoating a portion of the community for political gain based on no evidence. People aren't having a go at Tony Abbott because he didn't do the same thing as Brown so there is no comparison. And no, the burden of proof is on Brown to provide evidence when he wants to make accusations. I'm glad Fish has pulled up the entire statement from their site as its there for all to see, he has not pointed to any evidence what so ever that climate change caused the floods. But Professor Nicholls of Monash University, who is meteorologist and one of the authors of 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, had this say on the floods.


"The main reason we're seeing this heavy rain is just this incredibly strong La Nina, and that's almost certainly a natural part of climate variability," he says.

Prof Nicholls says the evidence is inconclusive about the effect of global warming on the La Nina phenomenon.

"The question is, is it exacerbated by climate change or global warming? At the moment, we just can't say. No one has done the studies yet," he says.

"You would have to think the warming we've seen - about half a degree in the last 30 or 40 years - should have had some influence on this event, but we can't tell you reliably or credibly what that influence is."

Now it may come out that the flood did have a climate change element, but at the time of Brown's statement there was no evdience to support that theory. And to make accusations against members of the community, and blame them (even if just in part) for the deaths of 20+ people is a disgrace. And Tony Abbott did not do anything even remotely like that.

[Darth Vader]

You know, it might make it more enjoyable to follow this entertaining, well informed and nicely rounded debate if readers had an inkling of the author's politics. Say something like - "swinging voter" "leans left" "Labor voter" "leans right" "Liberal voter" "Greens voter" "Don't vote" to your paragraphs and immediately the dynamics change.
When talking footy we all know who we barrack for so same principle maybe?

[dedja]

Based on a very false premise methinks ... that one's political views and voting patterns are as fanatical as supporting a footy club and are just as fixed.

In any case, why does it matter?

[fish]

Now it may come out that the flood did have a climate change element, but at the time of Brown's statement there was no evdience to support that theory...

Consider this: The Age ran this article on 14/01/2011, which stated: "Experts blame a combination of a La Nina weather pattern and global warming for the magnitude of the Queensland flood disaster."

Bob Browns press release came out on 16/01/2011, two days after The Age article.

So expert advice regarding the role that climate change played in the floods was available to Bob Brown prior to the issue of his press release.

Consider also that the scientists have been warning about this sort of thing for years. In 2010 the Scientific Advisory Group to the Queensland Government's Inland Flooding Study advised that "an increase in rainfall intensity is likely" and "the available scientific literature indicates this increased rainfall intensity to be in the range of 3–10 per cent per degree of global warming". See page 1 of this report.

The way I see it is that the "perfect storm" conditions of: strong La Nina, increased evaporation due to elevated sea temperatures, and a wet catchment that was unable to absorb much rainfall combined to produce intense rainfall, runoff and flooding consistent with the scientific predictions. The second (and possibly third) of these conditions represents where climate change influenced the severity of the disaster. I am unaware of any influence that climate change had on the strength of the La Nina event.

In regard to the timing of Bob Browns press release, I agree that it could be seen as poor, but then again what better time to present to the public the link between severe weather events and climate change?

In regard to singling out the coal industry as having to contribute towards the cost of future natural catastrophies, I don't agree with that. Whilst the coal industry is a major producer of greenhouse gases in Australia they are not the only producers.

[Interceptor]

In regard to the timing of Bob Browns press release, I agree that it could be seen as poor, but then again what better time to present to the public the link between severe weather events and climate change?

Because it's pure speculation that so-called climate change had anything to do with it.
What about other weather events around the world such as record low temperatures and blizzards in the Northern Hemisphere?
Oh that's right, they're events, not long term trends.

Just like the La Nina induced heavy rains in Qld.

[Psyber]

"Burning coal is a major cause of global warming.
"Scientists agree that current floods come from record-high temperatures of Australian oceans this season."

In the statement you quote there is not real argument with line two above.
However, line one contains unproven hyperbole.

The current global warming cycle began about 12,500 years ago and was briefly interrupted by a mini cooling cycle between the mid 10th century and the late 19th century.
Coal may be a minor contributor at present, but I agree it should be phased out before it becomes a major one.
If only the Greens were not blind to safe nuclear options recently developed, that could maintain the base load solar systems cannot.

[ I've posted references several times in the past so I won't bother again.]

[fish]

"Burning coal is a major cause of global warming.
"Scientists agree that current floods come from record-high temperatures of Australian oceans this season."

Sorry Psyber but these are Bob Browns words, not mine.
My lawyers will be contacting your lawyers to negotiate an appropriate out-of-court settlement payment.