also, aren’t you being far too precious?

Stan doesn’t seem to have been “banned” there are two posts from Stan after his two posts were deleted. Also we only have your word that Stan’s posts were deleted for “debating tax cuts”, perhaps his posts were deleted for being offensive.

Canterbury ACT on Campus member Stanley Climbfall has been banned from a Left wing blog for debating tax cuts.

Stanley calls on all who support the Right to continue the discussion and show that oppression of the people does not kill the liberal vision. Lefties are also invited to participate and further build on their arguments.

“We cannot allow people to be misinformed by shutting down debate. Statements such as “Stan, you seem to put a lot of faith in tax cuts. The problem here is that it’s by no means proven that they have the results you suggest.” and “I’ve always found it hilarious how ready people are to believe fix the economy and everything else will magically fix itself. It sounds kind of like salesman talk.” will only allow economic ignorance to continuously plague the blogosphere. If we want people to understand what ACT and National are advocating we need to fight the suppression of differing points of views.” Stanley said.

Site owner Andrew Brehaut attacks the Maxim Institute by labelling their core responsibilities as “guns and gay bashing”. He calls Rodney Hide and Heather Roy residents of “Toad Hall”. The relevant link is http://brehaut.net/blog/2006/05/19/core-responsibilities-are-guns-and- gay-bashing/

ENDS

I imagine the whole thing has been a massive rort with various lawyers lobbyists and corrupt politicians all managing to skim off some of the money as it changed hands.

Commenting on the figures for emissions in the EU-25 for 2005, released by the European Commission today, Satu Hassi, Vice-Chair of the Environment Committee (Greens/EFA, FIN) said:

“The lower than expected level of EU emissions last year proves that economic instruments can be effective in combating pollution and confirms that the Emissions Trading Scheme fulfils its main aim of reducing emissions. Putting a price on polluting means businesses will find ways to produce less emissions.

“However, the recent plummet in prices in the emission market has revealed the initial over-allocation of allowances. The EU must learn from this mistake and the issuing of allowances for the second trading period must be much lower if the scheme is to survive and function effectively. Member States should also partially auction allowances, which would provide more reliable price signals to the market and therefore reduce price fluctuations. Auctioning would also reduce windfall profits and generate revenue which could be invested into energy efficiency and renewables.

“Europe is progressing towards the achievement of its Kyoto targets. Emissions trading has proven its effectiveness as a vehicle for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This is important because the better the EU system works, the more useful it will be as an example for global emissions trading.”

While we are still sitting on our hands or having another review the EU is not afraid to make a start and to learn from their mistakes in the first 15 months of operation. While they are climbing the learning curve we are …….

And I didn’t hear you protesting when a recent evaluation of the EECA (budget $79 million over 5 years) said: “Action to date has been insufficient to produce a substantial improvement in energy efficiency and renewable energy uptake at the national level.”

So what are we going to do after 4 years of ineffective action? Well, have another review of course. Nero would be proud.