Malcolm in the middle
One of the great political fantasies of the inner city chattering classes these past few years has been that federal member for Wentworth and one-time Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull might somehow switch teams and emerge as leader of the Australian Labor Party.
This was not to question the conservative stripes on Turnbull’s political suit, or to suggest that he turned up at the wrong party meeting when seeking pre-selection for Wentworth, it was more of a plea for someone at the head of the ALP who had Rudd’s vision, but who had the ability to Do Something.
So it was intriguing to hear that the newly important country independent Rob Oakeshott had a similar thought, when he put up the “cheeky” suggestion of a unity ticket to solve the current political deadlock in Canberra – either trade Rudd to the conservatives in exchange for a portfolio, or swing Turnbull over to ALP in a similar deal.
That might sound to many like an exchange of hostages, but the independents see Turnbull as one of their own. And Turnbull, judging by the independence of his spirit and thought on Monday night's Q&A on ABC TV, might fancy himself as one of them, too.
The desire to create some sort of “national unity government” runs much deeper than the musings of Oakeshott, as impossible as it may seem. So there might be a way to pull together two of the central themes of last weekend’s election result – the trust in intelligent independents more interested in policy than politics, and the call for action on the environment – and create a new “third force”. Let’s call it the Liberal Environmental Party (LEP).
Turnbull would be the natural leader of a LEP, with these country independents and other like-minded MPs in tow, and it would have the effect of shifting Australian politics significantly towards the centre and providing a vision that Australia desperately needs.
Supporters of the idea say it would provide an opportunity to establish a Liberal party that represented traditional liberal views, and members who joined him would do so knowing that they were serving national interest by delivering a stable government which would address key issues facing the nation. And, of course, it would conclude the current political stalemate.
One close observer said this to me yesterday: “Malcolm Turnbull is unlikely to be under any illusion about the issues faced within the Liberal Party. Its current composition of 60 per cent hard right and 40 per cent with traditional liberal values leaves him in a position where he is unlikely to ever be leader. He would be more likely to be classified as a traitor. But as a politician of principle, he should have a clear conscience in knowing that, while you are a party member, your obligation to your party is second to the obligation you hold to the nation.
“The fact that Malcolm Turnbull achieved a 10 per cent swing towards Liberal in his electorate is testament to the fact that he shares significant mainstream support. The fact that he ran a campaign without Liberal colours, and instead used green, signifies the importance he places on an appropriate environmental outcome.
“It is easy to criticise the emission trading system that (he) cobbled together trying to deal with the various factions and interests within the Liberal party. Once free of these limitations it is highly likely that he will be able to deliver an outcome which is more clearly in the national interest and less designed to provide subsidies to significant industry groups who support the Liberal party."
So let's say Turnbull forms this LEP and breaks the stalemate in Australian politics, and forms an alliance with either the Coalition, or even the ALP. In addition to achieving significant stability for the country, he would undoubtedly be rewarded with a significant portfolio, such as Treasurer, within a national unity government. If there's one thing Malcolm Turnbull knows more than anything else, it's how to operate a business. And he could conceivably become deputy PM, ready to step into the breach ....
More from the close observer: “This is Malcolm's greatest opportunity to achieve the outcomes which he set out to achieve when he first entered politics. It is in the nation's interest that he stands up. It is in the environment’s interest that he stands up. And finally it is in the interest of the real Liberal party that he stands up. It is high time liberals re-embraced traditional liberal principles and left the right wing game-players out in the cold.”
Comments on this article
Come to think of it - that
Come to think of it - that would be a dry wing of the Greens. limo services
Global Warming part 3 book list
OK..Lets try.
In these books you will find literally hundreds of references to peer reviewed papers, which you can peruse at your leisure. There are some references to news items and media items, but you can ignore them if you wish. And many of the books give appendices of "Additional Reading".
Listing these books gives you far more scope to read an very large volume of peer reviewed papers for yourselves.
You may find some very convincing data that disagrees with your present opinions...but that is why I am so anxious to provide access to this basic information.
You can read about any of these books on Google or better, on Amazon.
So my first preference is "Climate: The counter Consensus" by professor Robert M Carter isbn 978-1-906768-29-4. (Paleoclimatologist, Honorary Fellow, Royal Society NZ, Emeritus Fellow of the Institute of Public Affairs)
"The Real Global Warming Disaster" by London Daily Telegraph Journalist, Christopher Brooker isbn 978-1-4411-1052-7 (Yes, he's a journo, but he documents every statement and gives you the reference to the scientific paper and where published)
"Heaven and Earth" by Professor Ian Plimmer. ISBN 978-1-58979-472-6 (School of Earth Sciences Adelaide, twice winner of Australia's highest Scientific Honour, th Eureka Prize)
"The Deniers" by Lawrence Solomon isbn 978-0-9800763-1-8 (Environmental activist, contributor to Toronto National Post; Mr Solomon, probed Al Gore's "Deniers" and was shocked to find these eminent Scientists casting doubt on the foundations of the "Calamity" story of Global Warming. The credentials of each of the following interviewees and references to numerous scientific papers involved in the discussion are listed. The "Deniers" include Dr Edward Wegman former chairman of th Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of Science; Dr David Bromwich president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology: Prof. Paul Reiter, chief of Insects and Infectious Diseases at th Pasteur Institute: Prof Hendrik Tennekes director of Research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute: Dr Christopher Landsea past chairman American Meteorological Society's Committee on Tropical Meteorology and Tropical Cyclones; Dr Antonio Zichichi former President European Physical Society; Dr Zbigniew Jaworowski Expert on ice cores from ancient ice analysis of which illuminate climate trends over geologic time; Prof Freeman Dyson eminent physicist... None exactly obscure little men in small rooms under the stairs.
"Air Con" by Journalist Ian Wishart isbn 978-0-9582401-4-7 Every statement foot-noted to the source..many to scientific papers; some to statements made by politicians and scientists in the media.
"Power Hungry" by Robert Bryce isbn978-1-58648-789-8 A Journalist with a mathematical bent. Takes assertions about "Green Energy" and explains how difficult it will be for Solar and Wind to supply the gigantic daily power requirements of th world, and why, like it or not, coal and petroleum generated energy will be with us for at least another century.
I hope you can/will access some or all, and consider the data presented.
Cedrick Wade - awaiting your information
Cedric,
I think that you are correct in suggesting that Climate Spectator is biased towards Anthropogenic or "Man made" Global Warming.
I would suggest that this bias (as you call it, others may use the term sensible judgement) is well founded and in line with the fact that every single scientific body in the world also supports this thesis. Presumably you think that these scientific bodies are hopelessly misled (or corrupt, although it's hard to understand why they would be, since it is surely in the interests of governments not to do anything about AGW and they would therefore prefer findings which debunked this idea) and that a few relatively unknown scientists with no known peer reviewed research on the topic are much more qualified to comment. Is this correct?
If you have the details of the peer reviewed research piece which confirms your assertions, please post the name of the article and the journal. I would love to see it as would all the readers of this publication. I don't think this is likely to be censorred as it is not a commercially driven book. We can then all go to the actual scientific journals (not the books, which tend to twist findings and are not peer reviewed) and read about how wrong and misled we've been and then we can all go home and turn on our air conditioners and buy SUVs guilt free. You would really be doing us all a favour. At your convenience of course.
Turnbulls chance
If Tony Abbott hadn't have knifed Turnbull for Liberal leader just before christmas we would not be in this current position as Turnbull would now be prime minister and Australia would have an ETS that would have achieved real results of reducing carbon emissions without destroying the economy. Turnbull starting his own party with similiar aims to what the independents hope to achieve would be the best for Australia and anybody who wants our country to strengthen. It would also serve Abbott and all his "far right die hard Howard idolising" Liberal supporters right for just criticising labor not doing something for the betterment of our great country.
"Global Warming" part 2
I have asked the editor.."Please let me list several respected, peer-reviewed, scientists and journalists reporting the work of scientists, and listing references to scientific publications, their books, and their isbn numbers so that your readers with the inclination, can become informed of the science of earth's temperature cycles. "
If he will permit me to list these publications, Mr Palmer and Anthony W would be able to read from themselves the comments of real scientists, rather than the Humbug of the "Catastrophic warming" brigade.
From reading these references, one becomes convinced that while Co2 is a greenhouse gas, it is not significant or has it any detectable affect on the earths natural warming/cooling cycle..and the evidence is povided by highly regarded gentlemen such as Prof Robert M Carter, who you can google for his credentials in paleoclimatology.
Now for our editor. Please let me know..you have my email address...whether you will permit me to submit the booklist as I have offered. I am a retired scientist and I am not involved in selling books!
Global warming debate
No one more than I would be pleased to hear that global warming was not man made, however, to paraphrase a speech made by Senator Kim Carr, Minister for Science at the opening of the Eureka Awards; The climate change denialists who purport to have the backing of peer reviewed science are no more than purveyors of opinion, anecdote, and special pleading who demand to be treated as if is their view has the same standing as the countless scientific papers on climate change published world-wide over several decades. Too many have been willing to appease this demand. Too few are prepared to look humbug in the face and see it for what it is.
To those who doubt the veracity of climate science, stop cluttering up the word space with pseudo science that has more in common with the writings of Ron Hubbard. Go away, do your research and come back when you can present your case that will stand up to intellectual rigor.
Millions will applaud you and be ever thankful for ridding the world of the dire threat of global warning and its consequences.
Dream party
I would vote LEP, but only if it commits to ending population growth.
rate of change
Its the rate of change over the last 160 years Cedric, not just the fact of increasing temperatures. We are still coming out of the last ice age after all I believe. And CO2 is a greenhouse gas, without it the planet would freeze. It follows therefore that the greater the concentration of greenhouse gases the larger the 'greenhouse effect' will be, which ties in with the evidence of increasing CO2 levels from anthropogenic sources and rising average global temperatures since the industrial revolution.
An ETS? Bad Idea!
Malcolm Turnbull is a born leader and if he could separate big business and the ETS from the environment and expose the Greens' real agenda, he might be on a winner. We desperately need an alternative to the Greens; an environmental-focused party that doesn't reek of socialist lunacy.
While he continues to support an ETS, people will be suspicious that he's in it for the money because of his Goldman Sachs past and because the scheme is so open to rorts.
Ask any New Zealander what they think of their ETS and they'll tell you about power prices going through the roof and the money raised being pocketed by an international entrepreneur who made a fortune buying up plantation forests. Hardly a good deal for the NZ environment and a huge burden for the NZ population.
"Global Warming"
I perceive that Climate Spectator is biased towards Anthropogenic or "Man made" Global Warming. I perceive that Business Spectator is similarly biased. I have tried on several occasions to list books by reputable scientists and journalists quoting reputable scientists repudiating assertions of AGW and instead quoting millions of years of evidence from ice core and deep sea sediment core analysis which show that the earth's current temperature trend does not vary from the expected patterns of past temperature cycles. In short, there is not a skerik of evidence for any contribution from mankind to earth's current temperature cycle.
But letters listing these authors are never published.
Does this mean that both Climate Spectator and Business Spectator have joined the new 21st century quasi-religious guilt trip of man made disaster?
Please say it isnt so.
You only have to look back to the 1970s and 80's to see that "Before the turn of the century, earth will have run out of oil, most metallic minerals and all arable land due to man made catastrophe....overpopulation"...or even "Th Millennium Bug Disaster"...How the media fanned those guilt trips..how the politicians wasted taxes attempting to fix non-existent problems..How much greater is the political and dollar cost of the current guilt induced crusade to "Stop Global Warming". How impossible it is to halt the natural rhythms of the earths warming and cooling cycles.
Please let me list several respected, peer-reviewed, scientists and journalists reporting the work of scientists, and listing references to scientific publications, their books, and their isbn numbers so that your readers with the inclination, can become informed of the science of earth's temperature cycles.
There is far too much "Global Disaster" clap trap, fanned and promoted by the quasi-environmental NGOs and th media, and far too little factual science for the public to get a chance for informed evaluation.
Carbon scam
It's hard to decipher whether Wentworth voted for Malcolm or the Liberal Party. Contrary to the mindset of this article and most comments here, a carbon tax or ETS is not about climate or the environment, it's about power and money. Even some parties of the left are starting to wake up to the carbon scam. An ETS effectively controls the masses through their energy use. That doesn't sound very liberal. Totalitarian might be a better word. A Liberal Environmental party might very well oppose an ETS, on the grounds there is no evidence CO2 causes warming and much that has been theorised and projected is based on faulty data, see 'Satellitegate'.
Centrist Options
There is a party that was set up for disaffected libertatian Liberals - and they were called the Australian Democrats. They have virtually disappeared. This election there were a number of centrist libertarian /socially progressive style minor parties, including the Democrats and Secular Party, and they polled very low.
Turnbull is a great asset - he should perhaps consider joining the Democrats and reviving them.
A CEO for company Australia
For a talented business leader to manage Australia's economy has been the preferred concept which is now very long overdue.
Ideology groups red or blue enjoy discussing what to do, sitting around tables for hours, shelving the outcomes, once they have worn themselves out.
A country is like a business which survives and pleases the population when profits are made or alternatively goes bankrupt and makes the population feel miserable, if you are lucky!
The emergency discussions which now have emerged offer the choice of great future prosperity, as great potentail is still there, or bankrupty and falling back to become a second rate nation.
Australia and its people, who arrived here from all over the world to make a living and which brought many talents, unique skills and abilities, don't deserve to have these opportunities taken away from them by none business minded people who are trying desperately to rule the waves.
This is Malcolm's big chance
I voted for Malcolm, my first ever vote for the Liberals, it seemed imperative when the whole nation had to vote for climate sceptics, he was the only one willing to speak up for the environment while keeping an eye on business needs and the economy, and afterall he is more Labor than Labor and probably would have signed up with them but for the winds of fate blowing the other way. It seems he is more liberal than Liberal too, which iis refreshing. I would love to see him go independent he would do extemely well. It would be a great lesson for Tony Abbott who, is as guillty as Gillard, knifing him pre polls. Malcolm would have romped in if he had remained the leader. I'm going to give him a call and encourage the formation of a LEP as suggested, what a good idea. Should we worry about him becoming our first President yet or is it too early to call?
Dry and Green - it's a good combination
I wouldn't join a party called the Liberal Environmental Party but I would conceivably join a dry green Progressive Party which was pro-market but not scared of significant investment in nation-building where carefully justified (such as, perhaps, a high-speed train system), socially progressive (eg pro gay marriage, but pro straight marriage too) and interested in market solutions to sustainability and environmental issues whereever possible (eg extending our successful transferable tuna quota system worldwide), and supportive of generally low taxation but with a green tinge (eg repealing FBT concessions for cars and fuel excise exemptions for miners and farmers). Pro an ETS (or carbon tax) but for energy efficiency regulation as well. Anti offshore processing but for a regional accord on irregular migration. Come to think of it - that would be a dry wing of the Greens. Watch this space, perhaps, as the older redder hippy wing of the Greens shuffles off...
Cheryl he ain't
Two words describe this idea: Cheryl Kernot.
bit short of things to write about today, Giles?
I'm going to offer another perspective on this wishful thinking:
1. What's the rationale for the coalition joiing forces with this hypothetical LEP - they're hardly going to reward a splitter with a plum job and some choice policies, especially not an ETS? What's the rationale for Malcolm to leave the Libs if he's going to just join forces with them again - unless he needs the ego trip of being a party leader?
2. what's the rationale for a Labour/LEP government? Would Malcolm really want to be held responsible for porpping up the lame duck. remember the ALP has also backed off an ETS pretty firmly, so where's the common policy ground?
3. What's the rationale for the independents joining the LEP as you seem to be implying? They're all former Nationals (except Wilkie), so they're not really Liberal like Malcolm, and they're also anti-party (which is why they're independents!)
If Paul Gilding is right in his comment that "there's a great green, market friendly centre of Australian politics", (personally I'm sceptical) then maybe there's scope for such a party, but it's going to have to be built from scratch, rather than from existing elected represntatives and isn't likely to be in power even as a junior partner in its first few years.
Another Party?
The ACTU could form their own party as well, just so we know who represents whom!
Might be best to examine the science first (unlike Garnaut).
Wouldn't want all those banker mates of Mal get richer unless it was necessary (and it isn't).
Go for it Malcolm !
I am a true blue liberal , but have no truck with the hard right. It is time to move to the middle and pick up the best of policies labour and greens, managed with the economics of the Libs. Australia, needs this vision and intelligence in its politics. This is your time Malcolm.
Great Idea
What on earth can Mr. Parkinson have been smoking? It must be good stuff.
Middle ground
The nation is desperate for an environmental political party without the social agenda of the Greens Party. Currently left of centre non labor voters have nowhere to go, as they feel the Liberals are too far to the right, and that the Greens are too far to the left. A team led by Turnbull, with these independents, and policy makers like Ross Garnaut and Ken Henry, would be formidable. It would also give Peter Garrett a home...
LEPers
Either way you package it, the public majority would still treat them like lepers !
Malcolm for Speaker!
How about making him Climate/Environment minster in the Minority Government? Similar things have been tried in Victoria in the 90s. Failing that, I think Speaker would work for both sides.
Great idea
Interesting article - great idea. I would vote for Malcolm at the helm of the LEP. However, I am not sure that Malcolm Turnbull would have "these country independents and other like minded MPs in tow" , given Bob Katter's recent derisory comments about a carbon tax.
I know it would never happen...
...but imagine Malcolm in the Greens!
I have admired him since his support for the Republic and now through his laudable environmental concerns, even though he comes from the opposite end of the political spectrum to me.
Turnbull's great opportunity
Clearly an interesting idea at a very interesting political time. Obviously has its risks for Turnbull but then again, floundering in the Liberals for 10 years, now controlled by the anti environmental right, is not a very appealing alternative for him either. Now could be his time to leave them behind. A great deal to gain and not a lot to lose.
There is a great green, market friendly centre of Australian politics waiting for such an opportunity.