Carbon tax ruled unconstitutional in France

[JMJ]

I can't wait until these scammers are all locked up for life.

Blow to President Sarkozy as carbon tax is thrown out

President Sarkozy suffered a blow to his ambition to lead a green revolution today when France's constitutional court annulled a carbon tax that was to be introduced on Friday.

The Constitutional Council said that Mr Sarkozy's flagship scheme had so many exemptions that it "runs counter to the goal of fighting climate change and breaches the principle of equality in taxation".

The rejection scuppered what Mr Sarkozy had cast as an historic initiative that would make France a pioneer in the struggle to combat climate change.

Mr Sarkozy is on holiday in Morocco, leaving François Fillon, the Prime Minister, to deal with what the media and opposition are calling a fiasco. Mr Fillon promised to draft a replacement law in January but experts doubted that the scheme, which was to have raised petrol and heating fuel prices from the end of this week, could be salvaged.

Mr Sarkozy fought off opposition from within his own centre-right party to impose a measure that he depicted as the dawn of a new green age. The tax was supposed to open the way to a fiscal revolution that would advance low-emission products.

Promoting his new green credentials last month in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate change conference, Mr Sarkozy said: "This carbon tax has one objective – to force you to change your behaviour toward fossil fuels. Without fiscal pressure like this, nothing will change and it will be our children who pay the price."

More than 70 per cent of the French opposed the levy, which, at €17 (£15) per tonne of carbon dioxide, was due to raise more than €4 billion in 2010.

The Government had promised to balance the tax with income tax concessions and "green cheques" to low-income households. The gas and oil industries opposed it, as did road and air transport firms, which won exemptions.

The Constitutional Council, a nine-strong body on which two former presidents sit, noted that the Government and Parliament had granted so many exceptions that the tax would apply only to a fraction of greenhouse gas emissions. More than 1,000 of France's top polluters would have been able to dodge the tax because they were already subject to EU carbon-trading rules.

The council also rejected the exemption of electricity from the tax. Mr Sarkozy had spared it because French electricity, generated mainly by nuclear power, is deemed to be clean.

The Socialist opposition said that Mr Sarkozy had bungled the scheme and that the constitutional court had saved France from an undemocratic measure. The Greens, who have gained strength over the past year, welcomed the rejection, saying that the scheme had been a fraud because it exempted so many polluters.

Other campaigners regretted the failure. "This decision is catastrophic. The carbon tax is obviously on its deathbed," said the France Nature Environment group.

Critics inside Mr Sarkozy's parliamentary bloc said that it had been a mistake for France to go it alone. "France prepared the carbon tax poorly," said Jean Arthius, a centrist who chairs the Senate finance committee. "Before the Copenhagen summit, we tried to be pioneers ... but this is an issue that must be dealt on a supra-national level. We should have held talks with neighbouring countries."

There was glee among Mr Sarkozy's opponents at the failure of a project to which the President had attached so much importance. On taking office in 2007, he had put the environment at the top of his agenda by creating a "super ministry" covering transport and climate change. Jean-Louis Borloo, the incumbent minister, is the highest-ranking member of the Cabinet after the Prime Minister.

Mr Sarkozy depicted himself as the leading player at Copenhagen. He was quoted today as telling the Cabinet that he had saved the day at the summit. "I was obliged to take the helm in the face of ... a provincial chairmanship by Denmark, a UN system on its last legs and an American President who bungled his speech," Mr Sarkozy said, according to Le Canard Enchaine, the political weekly.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6971632.ece

[Raider]

John, I take it your not one of those green and gullible idiots who believe a carbon tax will prevent the earth from warming again, A warming we haven't seen for over 10 years as C02 levels continue to increase.

As for the ruling, HUGE victory for the people of France.... My congrats.

[jasdon11]

We agree on something Raider - this must be the dawn of a new era aswell as a new year!

Even though we disagree on so much, it's nice to see you back.

[Creature]

Won't this just get moved to the EU court and get passed that way? New era also starts tomorrow with 'Codex'.

[JMJ]

John, I take it your not one of those green and gullible idiots who believe a carbon tax will prevent the earth from warming again, A warming we haven't seen for over 10 years as C02 levels continue to increase.

As for the ruling, HUGE victory for the people of France.... My congrats.

The scammers I'm referring to are the "carbon tax" scammers.

[south]

Wow. France of all countries. Good for them!

[Raider]

We agree on something Raider - this must be the dawn of a new era aswell as a new year!

Even though we disagree on so much, it's nice to see you back.

Likewise....

But where have you been Jas? I've been a big Global warming skeptic here for years and I know you have too. I just wish more people would research the subject to learn the fraud behind it.

I haven't been gone that long have I?, Had to go back home for a while.

[H2FC]

From the following excerpts its very understandable why this was bound to fail. I believe Mr. Sarkozy's intentions were good but the plan was obviously not very well thought out. I'm in agreement with its failure but all the skeptics who are rejoicing now are in for big disappointments if they think this is the end of the green revolution and the fight against man made climate change.

"The Constitutional Council said that Mr Sarkozy's flagship scheme had so many exemptions that it "runs counter to the goal of fighting climate change and breaches the principle of equality in taxation".

"The Constitutional Council, a nine-strong body on which two former presidents sit, noted that the Government and Parliament had granted so many exceptions that the tax would apply only to a fraction of greenhouse gas emissions. More than 1,000 of France's top polluters would have been able to dodge the tax"

The Greens, who have gained strength over the past year, welcomed the rejection, saying that the scheme had been a fraud because it exempted so many polluters.

Critics inside Mr Sarkozy's parliamentary bloc said that it had been a mistake for France to go it alone. "France prepared the carbon tax poorly," said Jean Arthius, a centrist who chairs the Senate finance committee. "Before the Copenhagen summit, we tried to be pioneers ... but this is an issue that must be dealt on a supra-national level. We should have held talks with neighbouring countries."

[Donald Aquilano]

From the following excerpts its very understandable why this was bound to fail. I believe Mr. Sarkozy's intentions were good but the plan was obviously not very well thought out. I'm in agreement with its failure but all the skeptics who are rejoicing now are in for big disappointments if they think this is the end of the green revolution and the fight against man made climate change.

I see you're calling it "man made climate change" instead of "man made global warming" Doesn't matter though in a couple of years will all be making fun people like you who despite all the FACTS about how global warming isn't happening continued to be a believer just like those idiots in the seventies who believed we were headed for another ice age.......

[Raider]

I see you're calling it "man made climate change" instead of "man made global warming" Doesn't matter though in a couple of years will all be making fun people like you who despite all the FACTS about how global warming isn't happening continued to be a believer just like those idiots in the seventies who believed we were headed for another ice age.......

Nice catch Dan... It's almost comical reading H2FC's posts, He's been using the term "Man Made Global Warming" or MMGW on this Forum for over 3 years now, But now that the HOAX has been uncovered and the Earth has NOT been warming as C02 levels increase, he mimics the new phrase; "Climate Change" from the very donkeys who perpetuated the LIE...

H2FC... Always following the sheep.


The fact that Al Gore, Obama and other environmental nut jobs are now using "Climate Change" instead of Global Warming, is a retreat that Man Made Global Warming exists, It's a back stepping admission without an actual admission.

[H2FC]

I sometimes use wording such as MMGW, manmade global warming, MMCL, manmade climate change, or maybe some other term when referring to the certain dangers, disasters, and catastrophes that await mankind if we continue burning fossil fuels for energy. I didn't realize this could be confusing to the deniers....haha.

I know the skeptics are desperate to find anything at all to support their denial of the truth about MM Global Warming Climate Change but to use such nitpicking is laughable to say the least.

I guess its the best you can come up with in support your misquided opinions of the subject.

[jasdon11]

I know the skeptics are desperate to find anything at all to support their denial of the truth about MM Global Warming Climate Change but to use such nitpicking is laughable to say the least.

I guess its the best you can come up with in support your misquided opinions of the subject.

Probably the best I can come up with, is looking outside at the fresh snow falling (you know, seasonal weather....) and having to check if my kid's schools are going to be open or closed.

Perfect weather for the time of year - the kids love a bit of snow and so do I as I work from home.

H2, I guess you could find an 'expert' to tell us that it isn't snowing?

[south]

42 degrees this morning - Ft Lauderdale Fl

Freeze warnings & watches in South Florida tonight: http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick....y=83&site=mfl

[DomainsInc]

I see you're calling it "man made climate change" instead of "man made global warming" Doesn't matter though in a couple of years will all be making fun people like you who despite all the FACTS about how global warming isn't happening continued to be a believer just like those idiots in the seventies who believed we were headed for another ice age.......

Tell me about it. These people are just jealous and want to stop big business from doing what it does best. What kind of idiot thinks pumping a bunch of poison into the atmosphere is going to come with any consequences. C'mon people!

[H2FC]

Probably the best I can come up with, is looking outside at the fresh snow falling (you know, seasonal weather....) and having to check if my kid's schools are going to be open or closed.

Perfect weather for the time of year - the kids love a bit of snow and so do I as I work from home.

H2, I guess you could find an 'expert' to tell us that it isn't snowing?

No but I think I can find someone (and it doesn't have to be an expert) to tell you the difference between seasonable weather and GlobalWarming. The first thing you need to learn is that Global means...yep, you got it>>>>GLOBAL. Whats happening outside your window at the moment has little to do with whats happening on a global scale. Also you should be aware of this>>>>just because your daily temperature varies maybe 20 or 30 degrees or more that has nothing to do with the worlds average yearly temperature rise caused by burning fossil fuels for energy.

Our local temperatures may rise or fall 5 to 10 degrees per hour but when the yearly Average Global Temperature rises as much as 5 degrees we're in deep dodo, dudu or poo-poo...whatever you may call it. Thats predicted to happen by most of the world's best and most reliable climate scientist within the next 50 years or so if we continue business as usual.

Now that may not mean anything to you because its so far away but it will mean the world to our children and/or grandchildren.....and thats why I'm so concerned about it....and you should be too.

42 degrees this morning - Ft Lauderdale Fl

Freeze warnings & watches in South Florida tonight: http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick....y=83&site=mfl

the above response is for you too....

What kind of idiot thinks pumping a bunch of poison into the atmosphere is going to come with any consequences. C'mon people!

This is exactly what I've been wondering....

[jasdon11]

No but I think I can find someone (and it doesn't have to be an expert) to tell you the difference between seasonable weather and GlobalWarming. The first thing you need to learn is that Global means...yep, you got it>>>>GLOBAL. Whats happening outside your window at the moment has little to do with whats happening on a global scale. Also you should be aware of this>>>>just because your daily temperature varies maybe 20 or 30 degrees or more that has nothing to do with the worlds average yearly temperature rise caused by burning fossil fuels for energy.

Our local temperatures may rise or fall 5 to 10 degrees per hour but when the yearly Average Global Temperature rises as much as 5 degrees we're in deep dodo, dudu or poo-poo...whatever you may call it. Thats predicted to happen by most of the world's best and most reliable climate scientist within the next 50 years or so if we continue business as usual.

You miss the point.

The globe we live on has a very long history of heating up and cooling down, without any help from us - surely you can't deny that? You can quote whatever figures you like, but you can't really back them up with anything other than either more figures, or quoting somebody else whose livelihood depends on it.

You once provided a link to an equation which you believe added credibility to the daily tonnages of co2 pumped into the atmosphere which went something like this; add 1 kg of substance A to a weightless substance B and somehow that creates 15kg of substance C...of which apparently 90 million tonnes find their way into our air every day. I asked what this stuff looks like, and where the best place to find it is - going off your figures there must be about 167 tonnes per square mile deposited every year so it ought to be very easy to find. So where is it? Don't tell me; is it invisible? Or is it in the same place as the WMDs we were told about?

Unlike you, I tend to trust peoples actions more than their words - especially politicians and others with a vested interest in the status quo. The actions I see are governments making fortunes from global warming but using the money for anything but. I see seasonal weather (local), and I see sea levels (global) the same as they have been all my life - no discernable change at all and I've always lived near the coast.

You remind me of one of those people that get suckered into a religeous sect, handing over your money and letting the leader screw your wife in the hope that you'll get fast-tracked into heaven; or you'll have 76 virgins at your beck-and-call if you die defending the leader (personally I think I'd prefer 76 women who know what they're doing). Either that or you're on the side of those perpetuating the protection racket.

[katherine]

The globe we live on has a very long history of heating up and cooling down, without any help from us - surely you can't deny that?

Of course there is natural climate change. But it's a process that is measured in hundreds or thousands of centuries. Unlike MGW that is producing tangible effects in just a few decades.
While nature can keep pace with natural climate change, it cannot and will not (at some point) cope with careless pollution and wrecking of the planet.
Still missing the point ?

[H2FC]

You miss the point.

The globe we live on has a very long history of heating up and cooling down, without any help from us - surely you can't deny that? You can quote whatever figures you like, but you can't really back them up with anything other than either more figures, or quoting somebody else whose livelihood depends on it.

You once provided a link to an equation which you believe added credibility to the daily tonnages of co2 pumped into the atmosphere which went something like this; add 1 kg of substance A to a weightless substance B and somehow that creates 15kg of substance C...of which apparently 90 million tonnes find their way into our air every day. I asked what this stuff looks like, and where the best place to find it is - going off your figures there must be about 167 tonnes per square mile deposited every year so it ought to be very easy to find. So where is it? Don't tell me; is it invisible? Or is it in the same place as the WMDs we were told about?

Unlike you, I tend to trust peoples actions more than their words - especially politicians and others with a vested interest in the status quo. The actions I see are governments making fortunes from global warming but using the money for anything but. I see seasonal weather (local), and I see sea levels (global) the same as they have been all my life - no discernable change at all and I've always lived near the coast.

You remind me of one of those people that get suckered into a religeous sect, handing over your money and letting the leader screw your wife in the hope that you'll get fast-tracked into heaven; or you'll have 76 virgins at your beck-and-call if you die defending the leader (personally I think I'd prefer 76 women who know what they're doing). Either that or you're on the side of those perpetuating the protection racket.

James, the info I once posted on the subject highlighted above went like this....when we burn one gallon of gasoline in a car it produces 19 to 20 pounds of co2 even though the gas only weighed less than 7 pounds. The simple reason for this is that co2, as the symbols imply, is one part carbon and 2 parts oxygen. In other words for every one part carbon (that comes from burning gas) 2 equal parts of oxygen attach to it and forms co2. The combined weight equals approx. 3 times the original weight of the gas.

You question whether co2 is real because you can't see it or touch it.....because its hidden. Have you ever heard of CO or carbon monoxide? You can't see or touch it either but surely you know its real....don't you?

Co2 is real and its heavy. Its what will form a thin blanket around the earth in the atmosphere of our planet and will keep the suns rays from bouncing back into outer space as they normally do. This results in global warming. In other words the blanket of co2 and other GH gases will hold the suns heat closer to earth and cause our temperatures to rise on the averge just a few degrees, but enough to eventually cause global disasters.

Nobody on earth can stop this from happening if we all keep burning fossil fuels for energy as we have been for the last 150 years. There is enough carbon stored in fossil fuels and will be released into our atmosphere in the next 50 years or so to cause widespread destruction of our planet. The world climates will change.

Please understand my position. I don't get any satisfaction from having to disagree with you and other skeptics on this forum. I believe MMGW is real and it will cause serious problems. I know you and some others believe differently but I also believe some of the skeptics either haven't taken the time to really study the issue or they are so opposed to various elements such as Al Gore, Obama, bigger govenment, taxes, etc., etc. that they refuse to even acknowledge MMGW may be true. I think this is a bad mistake. I don't like higher taxes or bigger government either but if thats what must happen to control or deter the burning of fossil fuels then thats what I'm prepared to live with. The alternative is not an option.

[jasdon11]

James, the info I once posted on the subject highlighted above went like this....when we burn one gallon of gasoline in a car it produces 19 to 20 pounds of co2 even though the gas only weighed less than 7 pounds. The simple reason for this is that co2, as the symbols imply, is one part carbon and 2 parts oxygen. In other words for every one part carbon (that comes from burning gas) 2 equal parts of oxygen attach to it and forms co2. The combined weight equals approx. 3 times the original weight of the gas.

You question whether co2 is real because you can't see it or touch it.....because its hidden. Have you ever heard of CO or carbon monoxide? You can't see or touch it either but surely you know its real....don't you?

No, I question the massive figures you bandy about regarding it. Does oxygen weigh 12 to 13 pounds per gallon?

Co2 is real and its heavy. Its what will form a thin blanket around the earth in the atmosphere of our planet and will keep the suns rays from bouncing back into outer space as they normally do. This results in global warming. In other words the blanket of co2 and other GH gases will hold the suns heat closer to earth and cause our temperatures to rise on the averge just a few degrees, but enough to eventually cause global disasters.

Nobody on earth can stop this from happening if we all keep burning fossil fuels for energy as we have been for the last 150 years. There is enough carbon stored in fossil fuels and will be released into our atmosphere in the next 50 years or so to cause widespread destruction of our planet. The world climates will change.

Please understand my position. I don't get any satisfaction from having to disagree with you and other skeptics on this forum. I believe MMGW is real and it will cause serious problems. I know you and some others believe differently but I also believe some of the skeptics either haven't taken the time to really study the issue or they are so opposed to various elements such as Al Gore, Obama, bigger govenment, taxes, etc., etc. that they refuse to even acknowledge MMGW may be true. I think this is a bad mistake. I don't like higher taxes or bigger government either but if thats what must happen to control or deter the burning of fossil fuels then thats what I'm prepared to live with. The alternative is not an option.

But again, you miss my point:

I don't like higher taxes or bigger government either but if thats what must happen to control or deter the burning of fossil fuels then thats what I'm prepared to live with.

The point is; you're paying higher taxes and getting bigger government, but you're not getting the control - and you really need to ask why not if the problem is as huge as you believe.
If I became aware of something that could ruin my childrens lives within 50 years (as governments are telling us is the case here, and they have more info on the topic than even you, so they must surely believe?) then I would use all in my power to correct it. The thing is, 'they' aren't doing are they, which leads me to believe that they don't believe their own hype.

[katherine]

If I became aware of something that could ruin my childrens lives within 50 years (as governments are telling us is the case here, and they have more info on the topic than even you, so they must surely believe?) then I would use all in my power to correct it. The thing is, 'they' aren't doing are they, which leads me to believe that they don't believe their own hype.

Sure, it's just like the national debt. You know it's going to blow up in your face, yet corrective action is always delayed.