News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Carbon rule foils farmers 

Carbon rule foils farmers

07 Aug, 2009 10:02 AM
CLIMATE Change Minister Penny Wong has played down the possibility of rewarding farmers for carbon stored in soil until international rules are changed to recognise biosequestration.

The National Farmers' Federation wants the government to exclude farmers permanently from emissions trading and to offer incentives for emissions reductions, as delays are creating uncertainty and putting farmers at a disadvantage.

Senator Wong, however, has refused to rule out the eventual inclusion of farming, saying only that agriculture was excluded until at least 2015 and was not in the scheme outlined in legislation that will be debated in the Senate next week, The Australian Financial Review reports on Friday.

She said the government was pushing to change international carbon accounting rules to allow recognition of emissions stored in soil, but until this happened, Australia could not afford to offer such farm credits.

Senator Wong's spokeswoman said that otherwise, the inclusion of biosequestration in the carbon pollution reduction scheme would bring "potentially very significant costs to taxpayers".

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size


comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
So the significant cost to farmers from native veg. laws (achieving Kyoto) and the inclusion of farm inputs in the ETS is quite fair, then?

As long as the government can get the benefit from a minority, and give it to the majority, it's fair and reasonable?

What is a potentially significant cost to taxpayers is an insignificant cost to farmer, she's saying!! The logic is bewildering.

Posted by Archibald, 7/08/2009 11:51:32 AM
Archibald, I agree with you but wasn't Penny Wong sooo predictable. Pigheadedness is common to Labor types.
Posted by Trugger, 7/08/2009 3:16:33 PM
So basically what she is saying is: Government gaining money, that's good. Government paying out money, that's bad. Carbon emitted, or sequestered, irrelevant.
Posted by Qlander, 7/08/2009 7:43:15 PM
Australian agriculture will be the sector of the economy most effected by the impacts of climate change. Reduced rainfall, increased evaporation = more droughts and less production.

So, Archibald, you're right, the rest of economy will have to pay increases costs for inputs (along with the agriculture sector). However, the agriculture sector will be one of the primary beneficiaries from reducing greenhouse emissions and reducing the likelihood of drought on the driest continent on earth.

Also, due to the government's decision not to include agriculture in the ETS until 2015 at the earliest, so the sector is not liable for 16pc of Australia's emissions.

While the sector is not being rewarded for increasing levels of soil carbon at the same time, farmers do not have to pay for the methane emissions from livestock or the nitrous oxide emissions from cropping.

Posted by suzzie lee miketon, 7/08/2009 8:41:22 PM
Where are the real representatives of normal, hardworking, common-sense Australians? These clever policy inventing pollies are going to lead us all into poverty and starvation!
Posted by Bluey, 7/08/2009 9:22:42 PM
Pigheadedness? The ALP (which should never be dignified with the title of Australian Labor) with its Marxist background, has long operated on the theory that it doesn't matter how big a lie you tell - if you tell it loud enough and long enough half the people will believe it.

That is their view of democracy. With AGW this theory is working like a charm.

Posted by Ted O'Brien, 8/08/2009 6:09:54 AM
Again, the agricultural sector means "jack" to this Federal Government ! Doesn't matter about the carbon rebates etc that are going to be given to the Big polluters, and, the companies that have their HQ and profits off-shore.

How 'bout it, Penny, you get off your leather seat in Canberra, and come see where your Australian meat, bread, vegetables, wine, eggs etc come from. And, at the same time, see how, and speak with, these 'Custodians of the Land', and inform yourself of how they look after their own individual environments.

Posted by Let Down . . . AGAIN !!, 8/08/2009 3:33:18 PM
Hah! Told you a few weeks ago they could not afford to pay (or couldn't politically stomach the thought of paying) farmers for sequestering carbon.
Posted by AJ, 10/08/2009 8:18:26 AM
With this type of government, I would not be surprised to see Australia importing meat, milk and grains from China soon.
Posted by Andrew, 10/08/2009 8:20:14 AM
So Ms Wong is telling us that we must wait for international legislation before we are compensated, yet they (Labor govt) want to make policy which will cost us all dearly in legislation which is not internationally agreed upon.

Wrong Ms Wong - it's all about fund raising for the broke and economically inadequate Labor government.

Posted by Fed up, 10/08/2009 9:17:46 AM
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Senator Penny Wong has refused to rule out the eventual inclusion of farming.
Senator Penny Wong has refused to rule out the eventual inclusion of farming.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
31 July, 2009
03 August, 2009
POLL
Q: Do you think that organic food is better for your health than conventionally farmed produce?

Yes
(34.2%)

No
(57.9%)

Undecided
(7.9%)

Total Votes: 605
Poll Date: 02 August, 2009

Most popular articles

Advertisement



Stock & Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...