Here is a transcript of Turnbull’s speech - perhaps his best.

Moves by others in the Liberal Party to support Turnbull either in the House of Representatives or- much less likely - the Senate might suggest a rebuild of one of Australia’s important political parties.  Currently it is a party of clowns.

Update: Samuel J probably the worst of the right-wing ignorami at Catallaxy gets it horribly wrong by suggesting that an individual nation cannot implement a CPRS so that Turnbull is a traitor to liberalism and small government! What a bad joke!

Abbott is an attractive candidate and may prove electorally much more successful than his opponents believe.  His eventual stance on climate change may gravitate towartds the Government’s. He is now distancing himself from his earlier denialist remarks, argues that policies are necessary to deal with climate change and, after embracing a central-planning supply-driven approach, now seems to even see the eventual need for pricing carbon after the US decides on how it well price its emissions.  Of course whatever influence  Australia might have exerted in fostering a decent deal in Copenhagen is now gone.

The obvious point is that it is hard to know what Abbott stands for despite his pretense at being a ‘conviction’ politician.  He has endorsed, then rejected and now half endorsed an ETS and wants to “pick winners” in the energy field in the best socialist tradition in order to deliver a path to controlling carbon emissions that conceals all cost inefficiencies in bad political choices – in bad technological choices and in further delays to dealing effectively with emissions. It might work and be electorally successful. I guess he would then be regarded as a successful leader and a canny politician.

The Coalition are pushing the ‘big tax’ line – of course most of the relative price changes on consumers were fully compensated by income tax cuts before the Coalition forced its amendments through. It was these amendments which forced bigger emissions handouts at the expense of consumers. The Coalition is engaging in deceit on this issue and, by forcing alternatives to charging for emissions, increasing the cost to the community of meeting emission targets.

What should the Coalition do? I was dismayed to find that only two Liberal Senators crossed the floor to vote with the Government although sincere thanks to them. I have no idea how the Coalition can move on from here. Abbott now says that climate change is real (!) and must be addressed but, if he opposes the current CPRS on the grounds it is a ‘tax’, there is no way he will sensibly endorse a pure carbon tax. He has gossiped a bit over recent days about nuclear power but this seems to be daydreaming – no power station has been built in the US for decades. Anyway, is Abbott suggesting a supply-driven response to climate change along central planning lines? That doesn’t sound workable and will inevitably be expensive if carbon isn’t in some way priced. The policy vacuum at the centre of the Liberal Party debacle has not been resolved and I assume further major changes will occur. Literally nothing has been resolved by the replacement of Turnbull by Abbott – at least in terms of climate change policy.

Update: Comments by Joshua Gans on the Liberal’s anti-market policies and from this in The Australian.  The Liberal logic seems so bizarre that you wonder whether Paul Kelly is right and Abbott is just making-policy-up as he goes along.  Even the Business Council of Australia thinks the Abbott scheme is foolish. Bizarre indeed, but maybe Abbott didn’t expect to become leader and was sprouting opposition to the CPRS without thinking about alternatives – or because he didn’t believe in climate change – and therefore did not see the need for alternatives. He has presumably now come back to earth.