I have just read and researched each link, line by line at the Federal Government's climate change website, under its heading the A-Z of Government Programs and Initiatives.
The litany of bureaucracy, waste, extravagance and unspeakable amounts of money just racing out the door defy logical explanation.
I tracked the reading by putting together a simple spreadsheet with each initiative or program taking up one line - just those few minutes of reading and writing about each activity has left me lamenting the wanton, sheer, utter waste of most of that money. Many of the initiatives then have dozens or hundreds of individual grants and sub-programs - I've not gone down to that level in this spreadsheet. Some of the programs pre-date this government - it's gob-smacking.
How could so much money be spent on so spurious an hypothesis - ie that Western industrial activity is dangerously warming the world and only "action on climate change" (a euphemism for "spending on climate change") by Western governments can stop it? Developing-world emissions are different, it's Western emissions that are doing the damage under the UN sanctioned blueprints for "action".
See if you can find a few minutes to go through the spreadsheet and click on a few links.
Finally - if Swan, Combet, Garrett, Gillard, Wong, Conroy et al were singularly incapable of adequately administering programs involving tangible, viewable outcomes like school halls, pink batts or fibre-optic cable roll-out - how on earth could they devise and oversee governance systems properly to acquit billions spent on chasing down green-house gases?
(Christine Milne - I want that $10 billion - for Greens programs)
This is a direct quote from Christine Milne from the ABC's Q and A program on Monday, 4 March, 2013 - go to the Climate Extremes and Carbon Tax link on the right hand side of the transcript page, it's about 44.45 min in.
CHRISTINE MILNE: It is essential that we not only reduce our emissions but we actually go much faster and that's the benefit of having a market-based mechanism that we have put in place, and the problem with direct action is that if it ever achieved 5%, which I don't believe it will since 60% of it is soil carbon and there is no methodology for that as it stands, but it can't be scaled up. So Tony Abbott doesn't take climate change seriously. He doesn’t take the science seriously. If you did then you would be scared by what's happening and you would be moving to go faster, not try and slow it down. And the Greens in the Senate will stand there and not repeal the clean energy package because I want that 10 billion to go into renewable energy around Australia and into energy efficiency. And as for the jobs, let me tell you, China is moving on this with some of their pilot emissions systems larger than the whole of what Australia is proposing. The US is moving in some States. We are now moving globally to a treaty in 2015 and Australia will be trading the possibilities that are there in the low carbon, zero carbon economy. That's where the new technology, where the excitement is, not in old coal-fired technology.