This completely pointless nonsense, (ask yourself the obvious question - what percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions, currently in the order of 40 billion tonnes a year, will be saved by banning incandescent lights globes? Answer: a tiny fraction of a percent), would have happened anyway, but still, thank you Malcolm Turnbull for nothing.
Just so you could satisfy the rich greenie wankers in your seat of Wentworth we are going to have to put up with this:
Shops will be banned from next month from selling incandescent lights globes, so why isn’t the Rudd Government now running an ad campaign warning consumers of the dangers of switching to low-energy compact fluorescent lamps instead?
Surely it doesn’t want to save the planet by poisoning people?
Tens of thousands of Australians will next month be forced to buy these new greenhouse-friendly CFLs without the Government warning them that, unlike normal light bulbs, they contain mercury and are dangerous when broken. What’s more, they shouldn’t just be thrown out with the rubbish.
How many consumers know this?
How many of them have looked up the Environment Department’s website to find what its bureaucrats falsely describe as the “simple and straightforward” precautions to take against poisoning should one of these lamps smash:
“Simple and straightforward”? Peter Garrett’s department not only deceives you about global warming, but about the ease of this useful “fix”.
Surely this is safety information the Rudd Government should be publicising widely, on radio and television, before next month’s switch. Is the fact that there’s been no such campaign, at least to date, because the Government is scared of a consumer backlash? Already people are rushing stores to stock up on the soon-to-be-banned incandescents.
And where is the publicity campaign to warn householders that the millions of CFLs they’ll soon be buying cannot all be thrown into the bin when they’ve stopped working?
Again, here is the official procedure, as recommended by the Rudd Government - but not widely advertised:
How smart is it to force Australians to use a product so apparently dangerous, and so difficult to dispose of when broken? How responsible is it not to mount a campaign to warn them how to protect themselves?