Ross Garnaut has just published his Review on Policy for the Australian Government.

He calls C&C -
“transparent, fair, pragmatic . . ”

Why George wants to diss C&C and join the *banks* at this point when support for C&C is finally coming together, even by his standards, is a sharp and inexplicable discontinuity.

July 04, 2008 02:13 PDT

Ross Garnaut’s latest Climate Report to the Australian Government is the longest and strongest C&C endorsement and advocacy ever published by serious government source.

Not only does Garnaut comprehensively make the case for C&C as ‘pragmatic’ [noting recent converts to it], he takes on the arguments of C&C’s critics . . .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Full Report at: -
http://www.gci.org.uk/Garnault/Climate_Change_Review_Draft_Report_040708.pdf

Full C&C section at: -
http://www.gci.org.uk/Garnault/Garnaut_C&C.pdf

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[sample]

“The per capita approach is generally referred to as ‘contraction and convergence’ (Global Commons Institute 2000) and has figured in the international debate for some time.

It has been promoted by India and has been discussed favourably in Germany and the United Kingdom (German Advisory Council on Global Change 2003; UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 2000).

Recent reports have shown increasing support for this approach internationally: see, for example, Stern (2008) and the Commission on Growth and Development (2008).5

Under contraction and convergence, each country would start out with emissions entitlements equal to its current emissions levels, and then over time converge to equal per capita entitlements, while the overall
global budget contracts to accommodate the stabilisation objective.

This means that emissions entitlements per capita decrease for countries above the global average, and increase (albeit typically at a slower rate than unconstrained emissions growth) in countries below the global average per capita level. Importantly, emissions entitlements would be tradable between countries, allowing actual emissions to differ from the contraction and convergence trajectory.

The per capita approach addresses the international equity issue transparently: slower convergence (a later date at which per capita emissions entitlements are equalised) favours emitters that are above the global per capita average at the starting point, while faster convergence gives more emissions rights to low per capita emitters.

The convergence date is the main equity lever in such a scheme.”

Piedad Cordoba is a traitor to her own country and instead of highlighting the greatest step in the direction of peace you talk about continuing the war. And what does an American Senator have to do with the defeat of the leftist COLOMBIAN terrorist group?

Also what probably won’t get mention is Uribe’s attempts to reform the constitution to allow him run for a third term.

This part of the interview provides a lot of context:

PIEDAD CORDOBA: Well, I think that the first thing I have to acknowledge is the enormous support of the Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez, and the Venezuelan people in general, have provided to Colombia. And after many years, we’ve gained the freedom of seven people, with a lot of hostility mainly from parts of the government and some sectors of public opinion who don’t want peace in Columbia Who have this war as a business which allows them to gain enormous amounts of wealth. Right now, after the process after the killings, and the violation of Ecuadorian territory from part of the Columbian government is without a doubt, has created a situation that is very difficult.

I think that it is what the sectors wanted was simply to end the process and put it to a stop. To avoid the humanitarian liberation of hostages, and I think that there is pretty strange that the death of commander Manuel Marulanda has created a situation of a lot of instability inside the FARC and generally in the country but, I think that there’s an important factor which is that many people have conquered fear and terror, they are not falling in the trap of keeping the FARC isolated so that people who are hostages of them will die in the jungle, or the persons that are detaining in jail just die there. So there is a new context.

We are basically very willing to ask for a new context and make progress in the liberation of civilians and the humanitarian exchange of prisoners. There’s three American citizens we’ve been working for intensely. And also the possibility from here to December through political agreements with the FARC we would manage to finish, to end completely with the kidnapping as a weapon of political perjury. Personally I don’t think there’s a possibility of real peace with this government because of the mistrust, because of the lack of continuity, and mostly because of the scandals of support of the paramilitaries and of reforming the constitution.

But if we manage to do these three things, and to form groups that are important inside the country and with international community, we will be taking the first steps towards peace process in Columbia.

However, what this anonymous person has failed to realize is that false rape claims are negligible next to the increasing number of rapes in Ireland and the number of cases of rape that never go to court. So, while the number of convictions is quite high, it is nothing compared to the actual occurrence of rape.

From the Irish Independent Nov 2007

Ireland has one of Europe’s lowest reporting rates for rape. A major survey has found just one in 10 cases is reported to the gardai. Only one in 20 ever gets to court. For those victims who do go to court, the conviction rate is quite high.
Ireland’s low prosecution rate means that some perpetrators of rape “are cavalier in their attitude”, according to Dublin’s Rape Crisis Centre. The chief executive officer of that centre, Ellen O’Malley-Dunlop, told me last week that the false report in Sligo was “a sad situation” and added that “it is a terrible thing to do” to claim that you were raped if you were not.
Last year alone, trained volunteers at the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre attended the Sexual Assault Treatment Unit with 315 victims of rape. Out of 396 cases of rape reported to the centre, 122 victims went to the gardai. Five cases were tried, resulting in five convictions.

For more information you can check out the Rape Crisis Centre network.

This assertion is not just disappointing, it’s wholly inaccurate. In “Until Proven Innocent,” the widely praised widely (praised even by liberal publications such as the New York Times, which the book skewers) and painstaking study of the Duke Lacrosse non-rape case, Stuart Taylor and Professor K.C. Johnson explain that the exact number of false claims is elusive but “[t]he standard assertion by feminists that only 2 percent of rape claims are false, which traces to Susan Brownmiller’s 1975 book “Against Our Will,” is without empirical foundation and belied by a wealth of empirical data. These data suggest that at least 9 percent and probably closer to half of all rape claims are false . . . .” (Page 374.) Whatever the exact number, it is significant, and it is multiple times the politically engendered three percent cited by Ms. Cochrane.

The tableau Ms. Cochrane paints bears no relation to reality. The fact is, the crime of making a false rape report has become so embroiled in the feminist sexual assault milieu that it has been largely, and improperly, removed from the public discourse about rape. Sexual assault counselors and feminists such as Ms. Cochrane often disingenuously refer to false accusations as a “myth” or a “bugaboo” or, as here, the product of someone’s “imagination.” Denigrating the experience of the falsely accused by dismissing their victimization as a myth is not merely dishonest but morally grotesque.

Far from elevating false rape claims over real rape claims, we live in a culture that pretends false rape claims are so aberrational that their occurrence must be news. Sentences for this crime are notoriously light, if any charges are brought at all. It is not uncommon for the falsely accused male to serve more jail time than the criminal who put him there. Moreover, the news coverage afforded these stories typically focuses on the “real” victims of a false claim — future, hypothetical, phantom, even unborn women who might, maybe, perhaps, possibly will be deterred from “coming forward” because of skepticism caused by the lie. The innocent men often publicly destroyed by a false accusation (since, unlike their accusers, they are not afforded lifetime anonymity) are treated as collateral damage in the war on rape where the mission is to encourage as many women as possible to “come forward,” the truth be damned.

Ms. Cochrane has done a disservice to countless men who have been falsely accused, and she should be ashamed of herself for trying to garner readership with such a gender divisive exercise in misandry. My Web site is intended to be an antidote to persons such as Ms. Cochrane — it is devoted to raising awareness about the false rape epidemic. http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/