tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post2249243306103911642..comments2023-11-03T19:05:08.512+11:00Comments on Harry Clarke: Dr. Ken Henry's sensible remarksUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-52933569318564177302007-04-08T13:24:00.000+10:002007-04-08T13:24:00.000+10:00Mark, I think governments and oppositions should b...Mark, I think governments and oppositions should be far more relaxed about advice from Treasury that they disagree with. You are right that the ALP runs the risk of being charged with hypocrisy. But Turnbull too has overreacted - it is the old hands like Howard and Costello who understand the issues clearly.hchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799594181016858701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-56337537763253446752007-04-08T12:10:00.000+10:002007-04-08T12:10:00.000+10:00The ALP needs to be careful about criticising the ...The ALP needs to be careful about criticising the Government for not listening to Treasury on water and climate change, unless they are prepared to listen to Treasury on industrial relations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-62884725676260377612007-04-07T08:25:00.000+10:002007-04-07T08:25:00.000+10:00I'm not saying Treasury shouldn't have looked at i...I'm not saying Treasury shouldn't have looked at it, I am saying the ALP are being hypocritical in their condemnation of the government.<BR/><BR/>The costs of 60 percent abatement may be big or small but we won't know until that analysis is actually done. What surprises me is that so little serious economic analysis is out there (not including Stern).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-10353641159975143652007-04-06T11:43:00.000+10:002007-04-06T11:43:00.000+10:00Sinclair, I think Treasury should have had an inpu...Sinclair, I think Treasury should have had an input into the $10 billion water project. The technologically-oriented part of that expenditure (about $7 billion) is looking increasingly like a bad idea. Even if we understand that Treasury will be intrinsically reluctant to spend we still get good information from their idea input. <BR/><BR/>My thinking is that a 60% reduction in Greenhouse Gases would be costly but not very costly. But whatever the cost is we need to be informed of it. <BR/><BR/>I've heard Ken Henry speak a few times. It seems to me that as a civil servant he has impecable standards of fairness and integrity.hchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799594181016858701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-33443954704480845932007-04-06T07:50:00.000+10:002007-04-06T07:50:00.000+10:00Did you see the ALP having a go at the government ...Did you see the ALP having a go at the government over the $10 billion water project? Fair enough. They are the oppositon, but they were saying Treasury hadn't vetted the project. I imagine Treasury hasn't vetted the ALP 60 percent reduction in GHG emissions either.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1508937403197316562007-04-05T18:26:00.000+10:002007-04-05T18:26:00.000+10:00Look.Dr Ken Henry doesn't have any evidence for th...Look.<BR/><BR/>Dr Ken Henry doesn't have any evidence for the likelihood of CO2-induced catastrophic warming RIGHT!<BR/><BR/>And you don't have any evidence for such warming RIGHT!<BR/><BR/>So how is it that you can suddenly turn around and call this fellows comments "SENSIBLE".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com