Long and short of a trading scheme

July 28, 2008, Kenneth Davidson

A carbon tax at this level would require a change in lifestyles. Birrell and Healy say these changes would not be acceptable to the community and they argue that cutting immigration and stabilising the population would be the most politically acceptable option to achieve the 60/2050 target.

They point out that as the Productivity Commission has shown, there is only a tiny projected gain per capita income from immigration. Just because some business interests profit from population growth, for ordinary Australians it is per capita growth that matters.

Birrell and Healy say the business interests that have the most to lose from the emissions trading scheme will have an interest in stabilising population growth to minimise the tax on carbon.