O’Brien gives Rudd another easy ride

The look of love on Kerry O’Brien’s face said it all when he interviewed Prime Minister Kevin Rudd on last night’s “The 7.30 Report”.

On the agenda was the release of Treasury modelling about the economic impact of Rudd’s emissions trading scheme, or in Rudd spin-speak the “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme”.

O’Brien wasn’t interested in a critical, sceptical probing of the benefits of the scheme in the way he would have ripped into the former PM John Howard.

It was a cuddly little love in, with shared jokes about blokes, and finished with a “Dorothy Dixer” to embarrass even the most adept politician – how much extra workload was the current global financial situation adding to Rudd’s daily grind.

It was little more than an invitation for Rudd to present himself as hard-working, dedicated, energetic, decisive and generally on the ball.

O’Brien hadn’t bothered to find one example he could have thrown at Rudd to illustrate the point that Rudd was losing control.

He could have picked apart Rudd’s “policy on the run” bank guarantee scheme, rocketing inflation, the problem-ridden computers in schools roll-out, etc etc.

O’Brien made no effort to point out that Rudd’s ETS won’t make one iota of difference to the global climate because our emission levels are so miniscule.

He couldn’t bring himself to challenge Rudd to prove that the world’s big emitters like China and India would follow Australia’s lead and reduce CO2 levels.

O’Brien didn’t bother to question Treasury modelling that assumes China will reduce its emissions.

And here is some “modelling” of our own that O’Brien could have put to Rudd. Based on eight million Australian households, each paying an extra $364 dollars a year for energy expenses, Rudd’s ETS over the period of its projected operation from 2010 to 2050, will cost the economy (that’s our hip pockets) almost 120 billion dollars.

So much for the ABC’s Kerry O’Brien, and their 7pm news bulletin, stating that the impact of Rudd’s scheme would be minor.

120 billion dollars to address a problem that may not occur, in a response that won’t make any difference.

Perhaps O’Brien thought it would be impolite to trouble the PM with a few facts, given the way he wrapped up the interview by saying “Given the circumstances I won’t take up more of your time”.