colleagues, I do not act as an uncritical, interactive press release for the political party which I support. I have been quite open about the fact that I do not agree with Tony Abbott's direct action CO2 plan. If you would like more information about it, go to the Liberal Party website and do some research for yourself. Disraeli says: 07:12am | 15/09/11 "It is sometimes suggested that providing households with assistance would cancel out the benefits of introducing a carbon price. It is said that, if we impose a carbon price that costs a household $100 and then provide that household with a tax cut worth $100, nothing has changed. These suggestions are wrong. The carbon price, even with the tax cut, alters the relative prices of more and less emissions-intensive goods and services. High-emissions goods become more expensive relative to low-emissions goods. Demand for the former falls, while demand for the latter rises. And putting a price on emissions encourages producers to use less emissions-intensive processes to produce goods and services." http://www.garnautreview.org.au/update-2\\... In reaching my considered view, I'll put more weight on Garnaut's conclusions as an economist any day, than any sly personal insult slopped out on The Punch. Personal insult and misrepresentation: the habitual tatty window dressings of those without a case other than aggro and factoids. AdamC says: 09:37am | 15/09/11 Disraeli, I used the term 'blunt' for a reason. I never suggested that over-compensating people for the cost of the carbon tax would render the