Brinkmanship !

Yesterdays rejection of the Emissions Trading bill in the Senate has opened a brinkmanship scenario that is far from clear.

The government has said that it will return this bill in three months time - and if it is again rejected it will have the opportunity to dissolve both houses of parliament and call a double dissolution election.

This seems to be a strategic move to capitalise on the divisions in the opposition and the hope that such an election might change the numbers in the Senate in the government's favour.

It is a plan that is not without risk. This bill was rejected 42/30 - and all the non government Senators gave it the thumbs down. It was a bill that badly lacked definition - and it left unanswered more questions than it zeroed in and explained.

Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong seem to be taking a " Hail Mary " stance - saying " Trust me and vote for the bill - and we will fill in the details later ".

As we all know - the Devil is in the details - and there are some very big details attached to this plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 5% below 2000 levels by 2020.

One critical question is whether agriculture will be subject to the tax. Most other countries have not taken that course and a bad decision here could cripple our farm sector.

Just what level of compensation will shield citizens from price hikes caused by the tax ? That is the sort of thing essential to making a rational decision.

Kevin Rudd may find that he has a tiger by the tail if he presses on to a double dissolution election.

This will be a virtual referendum on emission trading - and we have twenty-two million people in this country - and there seems to be twenty-two million different thoughts on the subject.

If it goes to an election we can be sure that this whole subject will get a huge and exhaustive examination by both the media and the scientific people who are qualified to make intelligent comment. Every nuance and possibility will be minutely examined and it will not be possible to cover defects with spin.

It should not be assumed that such an election would be an automatic win for the government. There is certainly a demand from the public for action on global warming, but most people are yet to consider all the ramifications - and how it will affect them as individuals - and that is the devilish detail that will become crystal clear when it goes under the spotlight.

Emission reduction if a critical need in this country and it should not be reduced to mere politics. It's time all sides of politics sat down together and thrashed out a workable plan that achieves a reasonable outcome - but delivers the least disruption to our standards of living.

Anything less is totally unacceptable !