Don't resort to China bashing on carbon tax

Comments on Rob Burgess “Labor's return to protectionism”, 23/03/2011, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/carbon-tax-climate-change-Garnaut-Kraehe-pd20110323-F7RMU?opendocument

While I agree with the essence of the argument for a proper, fair, effective and simple border mechanism to account differences in emission reduction regimes and I have advocated for a simple border trade adjustment, the mentality of China bashing or demonising China to attract sympathy and support used in this article is grossly inappropriate and simply ignores the facts that China is doing much more than Australia's proposed carbon tax.

The real costs of China's measures to reduce its emissions intensity of GDP are much higher than the cited $16 per ton.

China has a higher target for the share of renewable energies. China forces heavy emitting factories to close down and stop the supply of electricity to its residents and industries to achieve its targets.

Do anyone with an independent and rational mind think it does not have costs to do those? How did the assumption of $16 per ton factor them into account?

China has done more than Australia has and is likely to do much more than Australia would in the future, even though Australia emits many times than China does on the per capita.

Besides, how would Australia account for and pay for its much higher per capita emissions to those countries that emit much less per capita?

Taking a holistic view, China bashing and demonising China in the area of emissions is extremely unwise and will unfortunately harm Australia’s national interests and international standing. It shows a lack of intellectual intelligence and narrow mindedness, possibly stupidity, by some.

PS: A border carbon adjustment scheme must be supplemented with another international adjustment scheme to account for the differences in per capita emissions between countries. Only when they go hand in hand, a border adjustment for carbon tax can be justified.