Tag Archives: clean energy future

Brace Yourself, Here Comes Your 37% Bigger Clean Energy Future Power Bill

30 Dec

Illustration by Zeg | Click to enlarge

Wonderful thing, this carbon dioxide derivatives scheme scam.

Even more wonder full … the Treasury department’s modelling of it.

Bend over and grab your ankles Australia. Here comes your Clean Energy Future power bill.

From the Australian:

The carbon tax will push up electricity prices by about double the 10 per cent nominated in Treasury modelling for some of the nation’s biggest industrial power users.

The biggest electricity users will face power price rises of about 20 per cent, sparking warnings that it will severely damage elements of the nation’s manufacturing sector…

National Generators Forum chairman Trevor St Baker said industrial power users would face higher proportionate electricity price rises compared with residential power users. This is because many big power users have contracts at lower rates than those paid by residential users.

Some of the biggest power users pay about 10c a kilowatt hour, while many others pay from 12c to 17c/kWh. Residential customers pay about 21c/kWh.

Treasury argues that power companies will pass through about 85 per cent of the carbon price, equating to a price rise of 1.95c/kWh for all users.

Oh, well that’s alright then. Just don’t mention that the Australian Energy Market Commission has reported that residential power users can expect a 37% increase in their bills (more below).

This would equate to a 19.5 per cent electricity rise for a big user with a contract price of 10c/kWh and about 13 per cent for a user with a contract of about 15c/kWh.

“The reality is that the little Victorian factories and factories all over the country are going to be affected,” Mr St Baker said. “There needs to be a circuit breaker. These are people who are employing people in the most marginal import-competing jobs. And they are all going to go overseas.”

…

Queensland Nationals senator Ron Boswell said the carbon tax would impose another cost on manufacturers on top of the high dollar. He said many businesses would be caught unawares by the increase in electricity prices when the carbon price takes effect from July 1 next year.

“The cost is bigger when you add the cost of renewable energy,” Senator Boswell said. “Renewable energy could take the increased costs up to 30 per cent.”

There goes the (manufacturing) neighbourhood.

Meanwhile, now that the carbon “tax” legislation has been rammed home by Green-Labor and the “Independents”, the lamestream media has gone all quiet on the true consequences.

As Keith Orchison at Business Spectator notes (emphasis added):

Given the supposedly “white hot” community views on electricity prices – which we were assured back in March was the voter mindset as NSW went to the polls and which we may see play a role in the upcoming Queensland election – there was surprisingly little mainstream media follow-through in December on an important report delivered to the Council of Australian Governments’ energy ministers committee.

The critical point in the report prepared by the AEMC [Australian Energy Market Commission] is that we can expect a rise of 37 per cent in power bills across the country between 2010-11 and 2013-14. In other words, a householder paying $1,500 a year for electricity today can expect to be forking out about $2,050 in 2013-14.

On the AEMC’s estimates, the two states with the most consumers – NSW and Queensland, with 4.5 million residential account holders between them, half the national total – will be the ones to see the highest prices rises: 33 per cent south of the Tweed and 32.2 per cent north of the river.

The AEMC breakdown of costs sees networks (transmission and distribution) contributing half of the increases across the country with wholesale energy prices (including the impact of a carbon charge) adding 40 per cent.

No Keith.

The lack of mainstream media follow through is not surprising at all.

They are the sand that the mainstream masses have their heads buried in.

Their job is done.

Tags: , ,

World Banks’ $707.5 Trillion Derivatives Time Bomb

12 Dec

No, dear reader. That headline is not hyperbole.

It’s based on official Bank Of International Settlements data.

For what that’s worth.

Money Trends Research has the story (emphasis in original):

$707,568,901,000,000: How (And Why) Banks Increased Total Outstanding Derivatives By A Record $107 Trillion In 6 Months

While everyone was focused on the impending European collapse, the latest soon to be refuted rumors of a quick fix from the Welt am Sonntag notwithstanding, the Bank of International Settlements reported a number that quietly slipped through the cracks of the broader media. Which is paradoxical because it is the biggest ever reported in the financial world: the number in question is $707,568,901,000,000 and represents the latest total amount of all notional Over The Counter (read unregulated) outstanding derivatives reported by the world’s financial institutions to the BIS for its semi-annual OTC derivatives report titled “OTC derivatives market activity in the first half of 2011.” Indicatively, global GDP is about $63 trillion if one can trust any numbers released by modern governments. Said otherwise, for the six month period ended June 30, 2011, the total number of outstanding derivatives surged past the previous all time high of $673 trillion from June 2008, and is now firmly in 7-handle territory: the synthetic credit bubble has now been blown to a new all time high. Another way of looking at the data is that one of the key contributors to global growth and prosperity in the past 10 years was an increase in total derivatives from just under $100 trillion to $708 trillion in exactly one decade. And soon we have to pay the mean reversion price.

What is probably just as disturbing is that in the first 6 months of 2011, the total outstanding notional of all derivatives rose from $601 trillion at December 31, 2010 to $708 trillion at June 30, 2011. A $107 trillion increase in notional in half a year. Needless to say this is the biggest increase in history…

…

Which brings us to the chart showing total outstanding notional derivatives by 6 month period below. The shaded area is what that the BIS, the bank regulators, and the OCC urgently hope that the general public promptly forgets about and brushes under the carpet.

Try not to laugh. Or cry. Or gloss over, because when it comes to visualizing $708 trillion most really are incapable of doing so.

Click to enlarge

(click here for the full article)

What is the Aussie bank(ster)ing system’s share of that total?

According to the RBA, at June 30 2011 our banks held … wait for it … $16.97 Trillion in “Consolidated Off-Balance Sheet Business”.

An all-time record total. And a record increase of $2.14 Trillion in just 6 months.

Including almost $9 Trillion in OTC derivatives bets on Interest rates. And $2.2 Trillion in OTC bets on Foreign Exchange rates.

Can you say “galactic-scale casino”?

Seems our little Milky Way galaxy just isn’t big enough for our bank(st)er ‘masters of the universe’.

Because the dream of global carbon dioxide derivatives trading has always promised an intergalactic expansion of Big Bang proportions.

As your humble blogger has argued for so long, our Green-Labor government is playing their part in the banksters’ dream.  Despite being presented as a “tax” for the first three years, the truth is that derivatives trading is the real goal of a scheme purportedly designed, and certainly fronted, by Trilateralist “economist” Ross Garnaut. A new form of wholly unregulated derivatives trading that will begin from Day 1 … before the so-called “fixed price” period ends, and the “ETS” begins.

Here’s a Bloomberg news article I missed back in November, reporting on an ASX announcement that adds further proof to that already presented in previous posts.

That the Clean Energy Future scheme, is the bankers’ carbon derivatives scam from Day 1 (emphasis added):

ASX Group, operator of Australia’s main stock exchange, plans to offer secondary and futures markets for carbon allowances before the country’s emission trading system begins in 2015, the exchange said.

“Key to the success of the ETS will be the introduction of second and futures markets for carbon permits and any fungible carbon-related products,” the Sydney-based company said today in a statement. “The markets will generate the short and long- term price signals and risk mitigation required to underpin investment certainty.”

UPDATE:

For any readers wondering whether the ASX’s reference to “secondary and futures” markets does mean “derivatives”, take a look at the European Energy Exchange’s website, under “Market Data” – “Emissions Rights”:

Click to enlarge

And consider the words of our own bankers:

Australian banks are eyeing opportunities to cash in on the proposed carbon tax by developing new financial products and services that capitalise on a market seen to be worth billions of dollars annually, according to a report by the Australian Financial Review…

ANZ’s head of energy trading said the value of the derivatives carbon market would dwarf the $10 billion initially raised by the government, according to the AFR.

For more, see my earlier article “Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax”.

Tags: , , , , ,

Carbon Derivatives 101

19 Nov

Do not fear, dear reader. You are not about to be subjected to a boring, #JAFA-style lecture.

101 is just my shorthand for “1-on-1”.

Today we are going to compare notes. On the topic of carbon derivatives.

Whose notes?

The SMC University in Switzerland’s recent Working Paper titled, “Carbon Derivatives and their Application within an Australian context”.

And, excerpts from my numerous articles predicting and forewarning that the Green-Labor government’s Clean Energy Future legislation is nothing more, and nothing less, than a banker-designed carbon derivatives scam.

Let’s begin, shall we?

SMC Working Paper (page 8):

Risks involved with carbon markets and carbon-based derivatives are those that are typical to standard derivatives, including price, counterparty, credit, operational, spread, currency and liquidity. Again like any derivative, the value of a carbon derivative is based upon the value of the underlying commodity.

Compare Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax (Nov 2011):

[A “security interest in” a carbon unit is, quite simply, a derivative or “security” that is based on the underlying “value” of the carbon “unit”]

And compare Our Bankers’ Casino Royale – “Carbon Permits” Really Means “A Licence To Print” (July 2011):

The “creation of equitable interests”, and “taking security over them”, simply means this.  The carbon permits can be used as the basis for bankers to create other, new financial “securities”.

Carbon derivatives, in other words.

Derivatives (or “securities”) are the toxic, wholly-artificial financial “products” that were at the heart of the GFC.  The same bankster-designed “widgets” that the world’s most famous investor, Warren Buffet, spoke of as “a mega-catastrophic risk”, “financial weapons of mass destruction”, and a “time bomb”.

SMC University Working Paper (page 9):

Questions therefore arise as to how an odourless and colourless emission can be considered a commodity. For example, “…the commodity traded as ‘carbon’ does not actually exist outside of the numbers flashed up on trading screens or the registries held by administrators (Gilbertson & Reyes, 2009, pg. 12).”

Compare Our Bankers’ Casino Royale – “Carbon Permits” Really Means “A Licence To Print” (July 2011):

They are an artificial construct – “an electronic entry” – that is deemed by government decree to be a new “financial product”.

And compare Carbon Permits Do Not Even Exist (Aug 2011):

As I have said all along, the carbon permits will not even be printed on physical paper.

They will be electronic bookkeeping entries.

Electronic digits.  In a computer.

It is yet another similarity with the completely farcical EU system, where over 3 million of these “permits” – which only exist as numbers in a “Registry” computer – were stolen between November 2010 and January 2011…

From our government’s exposure draft Clean Energy Bill 2011, Part 4, Division 2 (emphasis added):

98 How carbon units are to be issued

(1) The Regulator is to issue a carbon unit to a person by making an entry for the unit in a Registry account kept by the person.

(2) An entry for a carbon unit in a Registry account is to consist of the identification number of the unit.

SMC Working Paper (page 9):

With stark disparities in existence, how can countries come to accept as true fact the admissions made by another? Further, if countries have such different approaches, how can companies across nations be asked to trade an underlying commodity that has different measuring techniques!!! As highlighted by one paper, “…this makes putting a price on carbon largely an arbitrary exercise and uncertain as predicting a price of even the most mundane commodity is at best guesswork… (Gilbertson & Reyes, 2009, pg. 13).

Therefore, due to a lack of transparency and lack of a generally accepted approach on quantification and pricing, the primary concern with carbon trading is the ability of carbon derivatives markets to be manipulated.”

Compare Government’s RIS Admits Carbon Emissions “Audits” A Propaganda Exercise (Aug 2011):

… the question still remains – how are they going to measure the “emissions”?

Answer: They are not going to measure them.

They are not even going to audit any but a very few of the very largest “emitters” either.

It is all a hoax.

Just as under the present National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) department “system” – one that only came up with 299 companies reporting emissions in their latest Report – the companies “caught” in the system will be asked to “estimate” their own emissions…

Let us take a look at the Government’s Clean Energy Future Regulatory Impact Statement.

It is yet another telling indictment of the total fraud that this carbon pricing scheme scam actually is (emphasis added):

“Under the proposed reporting requirements liable entities will report on their own emissions. As they will also have to acquire (buy) permits to cover these emissions, they will have an incentive to underreport their emissions… It is to be expected that most (intentional) misreporting would result in an underestimation of emissions and less permits being surrendered to Government. This would have implications for the accuracy of national emissions estimates…”

SMC Working Paper (page 9-10):

…one might argue that due to carbon-based derivatives being founded upon carbon emissions and ownership is via computerised notations, it would be difficult to manipulate such a market. In other words, like more typical commodity markets, influence the price of the deliverable up the supply curve.

Whilst that is a feasible argument, it needs to be also remembered that financial-based derivatives, such as treasury notes and bonds, are also based upon computerised systems where such price manipulation still occurs. This was recently noted in 2006, where the U.S. Treasury “…observed instances in which firms appeared to gain a significant degree of control over highly sought after Treasury issues and seemed to use that market power to their advantage (Forbes, 2006).” Hence, if markets can come undone so traumatically after pricing investments which contain apparently measurable levels of risk, difficulties will easily arise in how markets can price a commodity that can hardly be seen!!!

Compare Flash Crash “Had Something To Do With Some Derivatives”, Says Goldman Trader (Aug 2011):

… it is all about preparing the way for international banking’s latest casino – carbon dioxide futures and derivatives trading. A mega-casino with trading via the bankers favourite new toy, HFT (High-Frequency Trading) – advanced computerised platforms directly linked into the stock exchanges and able to execute fully-automated trades in under 10 milliseconds…

The government’s scheme is all about putting in place the necessary laws to allow banksters the legal right to create trillions of new carbon “securities” – that is, new carbon derivatives, and futures “products”.

The kind of “products” that lead to “flash crashes” which can wipe out 98% of the sharemarket value of one of the world’s biggest mining companies in less than 4 minutes.

SMC Working Paper (page 10-11):

 It has been claimed that derivatives were a major contributing factor in the most recent Global Financial Crisis in 2008-2009, whilst also a causative in distorting energy and food market prices during 2007-2008…

Of course there has been much debate about the introduction of the Waxman-Markey Bill, much to the enormous potential it has in creating the next global financial crisis. For instance, according to Friends of the Earth, an independent organisation that aims for the establishment of environmentally sustainable solutions, “…the development of secondary markets involving financial speculators and complex financial products based on the financial derivatives model brings with it a risk that carbon trading will develop into a speculative commodity bubble. This in turn would risk another global financial failure similar to that brought on by the subprime crisis (Clifton, 2009, pg. 32).”

Compare Our “Squeeze Pop” Carbon Bank (May 2011):

And derivatives, well, they’re safe-as-houses too.

After all, the mortgage-backed derivatives market that blew up America is only a tiddling little market.

So there’s clearly no cause for concern about yet another bankster-driven scheme, to blow up a global, air-backed derivatives bubble…

And compare Doing God’s Work – Turnbull An Angel of Death Derivatives (May 2011):

To banksters, insurance companies, and superannuation fund managers, the possibility of your living “longer than expected” is considered a “risk“.

Nice.

And now, thanks to the sick, evil genius of global banksters like Goldman Sachs, this “risk” factor of you and your loved ones living longer than expected can be packaged up into a tradeable commodity.

A ‘death derivative’.

A new artificial “commodity” – exactly like “carbon permits” – that can be used to attract “investors” who want to place bets with despicable scumbag banksters like Goldman Sachs, on how long each securitised “pool” of human beings will live for…

…

Can you imagine just how many elderly (and not so elderly) people will suffer physically in the future, when current record-high electricity prices double?

From The Age, May 22 2011:

One of Australia’s largest home and business electricity suppliers, TRUenergy, has warned that household power bills will double in six years after a carbon price is introduced and uncertainty over its implementation might lead to power shortages.

That would be bad enough for older Australians.  People just like your mum and dad. Your nanna and grandpa.

Imagine the impact on elderly folk in the much-colder Northern Hemisphere, where far more of the world’s total population lives. And where, right now, 44 million (about 1 in 7) Americans already depend on food stamps for survival.  All thanks to the banksters’ GFC.

The effect of our allowing CO2 taxes / emissions trading to be enacted, is now very clear…

Thanks to carbon dioxide derivatives trading, more and more human beings will die earlier and earlier than “investors” in death derivatives have estimated.

Superannuation fund managers, insurance companies, “investors” and speculators will find that they have made the wrong bet on average life expectancies.

Meaning – the banksters will first make a killing on the trade in carbon dioxide derivatives.

And then make another killing on the trade in their new ‘death derivatives’ too.

Compare also, Bankers’ Chief – Carbon Price Is “Essentially Creating A New Market” (July 2011):

The carbon permits can be used as the basis for bankers to create other, new financial “securities”.

Carbon derivatives, in other words. Derivatives (or “securities”) are the toxic financial “products” that were at the heart of the GFC.

And compare most recently, Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax (Nov 2011):

Derivatives are a toxic, wholly artificial and unregulated financial product, created and traded en masse by the banks; they are held Off Balance Sheet so that noone really knows anything about their real activities. It was toxic derivatives over mortgages that nearly blew up the world in 2008.

SMC Working Paper (page 11-12):

Today, via the European Climate Exchange (ECX) and cleared through the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), futures and options contracts are based upon three types of carbon-related units being European Union Allowances (EUAs), Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) and Emission Reduction Units (ERUs).6 Another derivative referred to as the European Carbon Futures (ECFs) contract, again based upon the EUA is traded via the European Energy Exchange (EEX)…

All contracts are standardised in respect to contract terms. Across either exchange, the futures contracts allow the holder the right and obligation to buy or sell 1,000 EUAs at a certain date in the future at a pre-determined price.

Compare what I said in Our Bankers’ Casino Royale -“Carbon Permits” Really Means ” A Licence To Print”, the day after the release of the draft legislation (July 2011):

Now, why have I bold underlined “borrowing“?

And why have I bold underlined “advance auctions of flexible price permits…”?

Because these are the key words from the “banking and borrowing” section. The words that tell you all you need to know.

That this SCAM is nothing whatsoever to do with the global climate.

And that it is 100% about creating a new, global, CO2 derivatives-trading market for the banksters.

The world’s biggest-ever financial cesspool.

Of toxic, intrinsically-worthless, humanity-raping financial “instruments” called derivatives.

Non-existent, digital “widgets”.

That can be borrowed from the future – ie, before these artificial carbon “widgets” are even issued – and leveraged by scum-of-the-earth banksters.

And then, traded by these parasites at multiples of hundreds and thousands of times more than the underlying, artificially-created “value” of the carbon permit.

Furthermore, the “advance auctions of flexible price permits in the fixed price period” proves beyond all shadow of doubt, that I was right.

That this “carbon pricing mechanism” is the bankers’ CPRS by another name. From Day 1.

Why does it prove it?

The advance auctions of flexible price permits “in the fixed price period” means this.

From Day 1, the government is effectively allowing the setting up of a futures trading market, for Australian CO2 permits.

Futures trading of nothing. Before the nothing is even created.

The banksters’ wet dream.

And compare Bankers’ Chief – Carbon Price Is “Essentially Creating A New Market” (July 2011):

The news gets even better for the bankers.

Because the Government’s scheme scam will also set up an “advance auction” system, during the so-called “fixed price period”, where carbon permits valid for the later “flexible price” system can be purchased in advance.

Which is essentially nothing less than a Futures trading system for the bankers and speculators to exploit…

It’s easy to see why the banksters’ are pleased right now.

The Government’s scheme allows them to:

1. Begin creating and trading in carbon “securities” (ie, derivatives of carbon permits) from Day 1.

2. Earn fees and commissions from trade in “freely allocated” permits during the “fixed price” period.

3. Earn fees and commissions from Futures trading in the “advance auctions” of “flexible price” permits during the “fixed price” period.

4. Create other derivatives products on top of the Futures trade in advance auctions of permits.

SMC Working Paper (page 14):

A number of submissions were made to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), requesting that the permits within the current scheme be included as financial products. Yet counter submissions took a different route, with requests made by the Australian Bankers Association and Australian Financial Markets Association recommending that permits be regarded as commodities. Such arguments were made on the basis “…that traders are relatively uninterested in permits…”

Compare Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax (Nov 2011):

The fees and commissions on the straight trading in carbon permits … is peanuts.

The real monster action is in the unlimited, unregulated derivatives market, that sits on top of the basic carbon trading market. Just imagine an inverted pyramid, with the trade in carbon permits at the bottom, pointy end.

What the banks really want – and what this blogger predicted and forewarned of time and again leading up to the release of the draft legislation – is a mechanism that allows them to create and trade carbon derivatives.

In unlimited, unregulated quantities.

And compare I Was Right – Banks Begin Preparing Carbon Derivatives Market (July 2011):

ANZ’s head of energy trading said the value of the derivatives carbon market would dwarf the $10 billion initially raised by the government, according to the AFR.

SMC Working Paper (page 15):

It is therefore interesting to note that the scheme eventually allows freely allocated permits to be traded within the compliance year of issue. Such a statement seems to indicate a profit making opportunity not to dissimilar to the situation within the EU ETS, where power companies generated large profits. In a submission to the House of Commons by Ofgem, the energy and gas regulator in Great Britain stated that between 2008 – 2012, UK power companies could receive windfall profits approximately amounting to £9bn (House of Commons, 2008). Concerns are still being voiced about such astonishing revenues, with the European Commission further indicating that via the accumulation of excess free credits (i.e. freely allocated permits), “…the surplus is estimated to amount to 500 – 800 million allowances with an economic value of around €7bn – €12bn (European Commission, 2011, pg. 2).”

Compare A Disturbance In The Farce (July 2011):

… even the Green-Left Weekly is aware of the disturbance in the farce:

Europe’s biggest polluters have made billions out of the European Emissions Trading System (ETS). But a new briefing by Carbon Trade Watch (CTW) says the scheme will ensure industry will not have to cut its emissions until at least 2017.

The first phase of the ETS ran from 2005 to 2007. It made no dent in emissions. But power companies made about 19 billion euros by charging customers for the “cost” of permits they were given for free.

Manufacturers made about 14 billion euros in windfall profits with the same trick.

The European Commission said the scheme’s problems would be ironed out in the second phase, from 2008 to 2012. It claimed the ETS was working when emissions from the 11,000 polluters covered by the scheme fell by 5% in 2008 and 11.6% in 2009.

But CTW points out the emissions fall was due to the impact of the global recession, which caused a fall of 13.85% in industrial and electricity production in 2009.

In 2010, as the economic crisis eased, emissions shot up again by 3.5%.

The polluters stand to make more money for doing nothing in the ETS’s second phase. By 2012, power companies will make between 23 billion and 71 billion euros from passing on the cost of their free permits.

The third phase of the ETS, which will run from 2013 to 2020, won’t solve the problems. Companies will still be able to use the excess permits given out in the second phase. The World Bank has estimated about 970 million permits will be available.

This means polluters won’t have to cut their own emissions until 2017 — they can just cash in their free permits instead.

SMC Working Paper (page 15-16):

The Way Forward

Within the Australian context, what does this treatment of permits mean for carbon-based derivatives? With permits freely allocated to emitters and with the ability of permits to be price squeezed because they are allocated rather than auctioned, the possibility of carbon-based derivatives to be manipulated increases substantially. Such instances have been witnessed within the EU ETS and are one of the major criticisms levelled against derivatives as a whole (Clifton, 2009; Pirrong, 2009; Wood & Jotzo, 2010; Holly, 2011).

…

The maturity of the carbon market within Australia is still in its infancy and debate will continue about how the country should undertake its approach to CO2 emissions. At this early stage, it would seem that carbon-based derivatives will mainly be used once the fixed-price period begins…

[Compare what I have said countless times – that “our” system enables banksters to begin creating and trading carbon derivatives from Day 1.  Our government has successfully conned the Australian public (and all mainstream commentators) into believing that their scheme is a fixed price “tax” for the first 3 years, and only after three years will trading commence. That is pure deception. While “purchased” permits cannot be traded, “freely allocated” permits can; and far more importantly, banksters are enabled to begin creating derivatives based on the underlying “value” of permits, from Day 1. The SMC Working Paper confirms my warning/prediction, as does the Clean Energy Future legislation itself.]

Globally, even though a mixture of regional policies are currently in existence or are looking to come online, inconsistent methodologies across countries make it difficult for a truly global acceptance of carbon derivatives to take off.

As such, the acceptance and establishment of any true global exchange or global central bank of carbon is some time away. Simply, this retains the odour of trouble, with increased opportunities for manipulation and failure. Whilst volatility and manipulation is in no means isolated to only carbon-based derivatives, “…due to the lack of policy towards the development of an efficient carbon derivatives market and the absence of a standard pricing tool (Leconte & Pagano, 2010, pg. 3),” greater opportunities for manipulation and fraud are present.

Exactly.

Which, as I have long said and demonstrated, is precisely what the true architects of both the Great Global Warming Hoax, and its popularly advocated “solution” (carbon trading), have always wanted.

A new, bigger, rigged, derivatives casino. One that they control. With no regulation, or government oversight.

A galactically-huge speculative financial bubble.

Based on thin air.

Hot, thin air.

Guaranteed to end like this –

Next week, we will take a look at a webinar by the President of the Institute For Agriculture and Trade Policy on Carbon Derivatives: The Next Toxic Asset, where we will see how derivatives have been used by banksters to manipulate markets and drive up the price of other commodities. Especially food … wheat, corn, sugar, soybeans, and more.

And we will again consider the implications of allowing our politicians to allow greed-obsessed banksters to create wholly unregulated derivatives, thus enabling them to manipulate the prices of food (and now, power/energy) worldwide … and ultimately, as a direct result, to make yet another killing on those new ‘Death Derivatives’ they are selling, that we mentioned earlier.

Here’s a teaser –

Click to enlarge | Source: IATP

Click to enlarge | Source: IATP

Click to enlarge | Source: IATP

Click to enlarge |Source: IATP

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

We Will Not Forget This Betrayal

8 Nov

Senator Joyce’s speech in the Senate today, to the Orwellian-titled Clean Energy Future bills.

Bills.

How apropos.

Enjoy the fire and brimstone (h/t to a special, anonymous source, who knows who they are):

Senator JOYCE (Queensland—Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (11:20): Thank you very much, chair.

(Brown was trying to shut him down but it didn’t work …)

Senator Bob Brown: Mr Chair, I rise on a point of order. You know exactly what is happening here, which is that—

The CHAIRMAN: I have recognised a party leader, and that is in tradition with how the Senate has operated in the past. Senator Joyce is a party leader. He has the call over Senator Milne.

Senator Bob Brown: Yes. Given that recognition you have given, I ask you to ask the chair if that ruling by you is in order.

The CHAIRMAN: is practice and it is already documented by the Standing Committee on Procedure. Senator Joyce, you have the call. There is no point of order.

Senator JOYCE: It is a very sad day when Al Gore has more effect on the Prime Minister of Australia than the Australian voter. It is a very sad day when we have to cease this debate because the Greens have to go to Durban, where we now find out Leonardo DiCaprio will be there with Angelina Jolie, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bono. It is a very sad day when these people are more important than the people of Blacktown, the people of Ipswich, the people of the suburbs and the people of the regions. It is a sad day when we introduce a new, broad based consumption tax delivered to every house whether they like it or not, paid on the price of the heater that keeps them warm, paid on the price of the air conditioner that keeps them cool, paid on the food that sustains them.

It is a very sad day when we bring in a broad-based consumption tax which basically ignores the working families of this nation in favour of a conceit and a frolic. The biggest beneficiaries of this tax will be the big banks through the commissions* they will make on the future trading scheme over the will of working families and due to the actions of the Greens and the Labor Party, who have completely deserted their principles because they have now evolved into a higher being which lives in contempt of the Australian people.

This legislation is the height of foolishness for this nation, which as we speak is a mere $32 billion away from our next debt ceiling. When our nation’s credit card is presented, the attendant will say, ‘Transaction declined; please go see your bank.’ It is a very sad day when we start progressing down a path of reorganising our nation and our economy on account of a colourless, odourless gas. It is the height of foolishness

It is a very sad day when cheap power, one of our greatest competitive advantages, is given up. We have a choice here between cheap power and cheap wages; they have chosen cheap wages. They are opening the door so that those who compete against us can take away what remnants we have of a manufacturing industry. They will do it because they do not care. They have evolved into a higher organism; they do not care anymore. It is all theatrics—the theatrics of Bono, the theatrics of Schwarzenegger, the theatrics of Angelina Jolie and the theatrics of the Greens. That is what it is all about.

It is a very sad day when the weatherboard and irons and the bricks and tiles of the suburbs are subjugated to the will of the big banks. It is a very sad day when the Australian people find that they have been misled by a warrant which was made to them and on which they cast their vote—a warrant that said quite explicitly that there would be no carbon tax—and when the office of the Prime Minister is stymied and sullied and basically cast into the mud because of the will of a disparate corner of the chamber that has now, like a praetorian guard inside the Labor Party, taken control.

It is a very sad day when the minister responsible for the passage of this legislation is incapable of giving answers to any of the questions I ask because it does not matter—’you don’t need an answer anymore’; this is all about allowing Senator Brown and these people to have their time at Durban. It is absolutely absurd to believe that this legislation will do anything to the temperature of the globe. Nothing is going to happen to the temperature of the globe because of this legislation; it will stay precisely on the course that it is on now. Whether the temperature is going up, down or sideways, this legislation will make no difference. People will be poorer—that will definitely happen—but this legislation will do nothing for the climate, even according to the comparative analysis.

It is absurd to think that, with the passage of this legislation, Hu Jintao in China will suddenly wake up and say: ‘I’ve seen the light! I’m now going to participate in a carbon tax like Australia. I’m going to follow that lemming off the cliff.’ It is absolutely absurd to think that Manmohan Singh in India is saying to the Indian people, ‘No—you can stay on bikes; you can keep your standard of living so you can follow Australia.’ Is absurd to think that Barack Obama is tossing and turning in the middle of the night worrying about what our position is. We are doing this only to ourselves. It is the ultimate act of self indulgence.

The Labor Party have deserted their principles. The Labor Party have deserted the working families of Australia. The Labor Party should remind themselves of one thing: it is totally absurd for them to believe that the Australian people will not remember this at the next election. At the next election, they will be waiting for you. I have seen this before in recent political history. If you think they have forgotten, fool is you. They will remember it, and we will make certain that every day we come and present this argument to you. Between now and the next election will not be a reprieve; you will be constantly reminded of the deceit that each one of you have shown the Australian people.

It was not just Julia Gillard who got elected on a false promise. It is not just Julia Gillard who has let the Australian people down but every person who made warrant to the electorate that they were part of a government which would not bring in a carbon tax. Each one of them has gone to the electorate and basically not told the truth. Now, apparently, we believe in this chamber that it is not important to tell the truth; it is not important to be clear about key policy objectives prior to an election. How did we get to this position?

What was the debate that brought this legislation about? Why did you desert not only the principles of your own party but also the principles of the whole of the Australian people? Why do you think that there is that palpable frustration—that white fury—which will descend on you because of the decisions you have made? Are the Australian Greens going to save the Australian Labor Party the next election? No, they will not; they will crucify you at the next election. You have decided to walk away from faith, family and the Labor Party in order to allow the Australian Greens to run the agenda.

This legislation works on one false premise: you believe that carbon, as it is at the moment, is free—you believe that people get their power, their food and their fuel for free. People cannot afford things as it is now—they are struggling as it is now; life is hard enough as it is now—yet you have decided to desert them. You have decided to desert the people of Blacktown, to desert the people of Seven Hills, to desert the people of Ipswich, to desert the people of Rockhampton. You have deserted them for whom? You have deserted them for Dr Bob Brown, Al Gore, Angelina Jolie and Leonardo DiCaprio—and Tony Windsor, as a part-architect of this legislation, obviously also holds responsibility. The Australian people will not forget this. You have given us an arrow in our quiver which we will use against you time and time again.

This is a very, very depressing day for Australia, and you watch at the end. The end of this will show absolutely, in cast iron, how out of touch this is. When this vote goes through you will see backslapping, hugging and a kissathon going on. What are you going to say to the person who lives with Black and Gold in their cupboard because they cannot afford the power as it is? What are you going to say to the worker who loses their job for some ridiculous concept of a green job? There are only two types of jobs in Australia. There are real jobs and cheap jobs, and you are about to give them cheap jobs and let our nation down.

* Barnaby is wrong on this vital point. The banks will make far, far more from their trade in carbon derivatives:

ANZ’s head of energy trading said the value of the derivatives carbon market would dwarf the $10 billion initially raised by the government, according to the AFR.

Learn all about the Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax.

Tags: , , , , ,

Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax

1 Nov

 

Remember when the world’s 3rd wealthiest man, Warren Buffet, called out the exotic financial product named derivatives as “a mega-catastrophic risk”, “financial weapons of mass destruction”, and a “time bomb”?

Over the next two weeks, our minority Green-Labor government is railroading a set of 19 new laws through the Senate.

They like to call those laws our Clean Energy Future.

And to date, no one in either the political class, or the media – including our “expert” economics media – have called out the ticking time bomb called derivatives that is buried carefully in the 1,000+ pages of our Clean Energy Future.

No one, except your humble blogger.

Here, dear reader, is proof positive that the government’s “carbon pricing mechanism” is not about changing the climate.

Nor is it, as the government claims, to “give effect to Australia’s international obligations on addressing climate change under the Climate Change Convention and the Kyoto Protocol”.

Nor is it to “take action directed towards meeting Australia’s long-term target of reducing net greenhouse gas emissions to 80 per cent below 2000 levels by 2050 and take that action in a flexible and cost-effective way”.

Nor is it to “to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions in a way that encourages investment in clean energy, supports jobs and competitiveness in the economy and supports Australia’s economic growth while reducing pollution.”

How can I be so sure?

Because not one of those claimed “Objects of the mechanism” requires laws that specifically permit bankers to create unlimited quantities of wholly unregulated “financial weapons of mass destruction” called derivatives (or “securities”).

They are completely unnecessary. Moreover, the ongoing GFC turmoil proves that unregulated derivatives markets represent a clear and present danger to our government-propped banking system, and thus are a sovereign risk.

And yet, this is just what our Green-Labor government is doing right now in the Senate.

Carefully buried in their Clean Energy Bill 2011 we find the ticking time bomb (underline added):

109A Registration of equitable interests in relation to a carbon unit

(1) The regulations may make provision for or in relation to the registration in the Registry of equitable interests in relation to carbon units.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to an equitable interest that is a security interest within the meaning of the Personal Property Securities Act 2009, and to which that Act applies.

In other words, while the regulations may make provision for registration of equitable interests in a carbon unit, they specifically (subsection 2) do not make provision for registering a “security interest” in a carbon unit.

[A “security interest in” a carbon unit is, quite simply, a derivative or “security” that is based on the underlying “value” of the carbon “unit”]

It is clear then, that the government does not want to record carbon derivatives creation and trading.

They want to permit it. Just not record or regulate it.

Indeed, they wish to ensure “avoidance of doubt” that banks are legally allowed to immediately pull the pin on creating and trading these (wholly unregulated) financial weapons of mass destruction (underline added):

110 Equitable interests in relation to a carbon unit

(1) This Act does not affect:

(a) the creation of; or

(b) any dealings with; or

(c) the enforcement of;

equitable interests in relation to a carbon unit.

(2) Subsection (1) is enacted for the avoidance of doubt.

And just in case you missed the point – and your missing the real point is, in fact, the whole point of their using such opaque language – then the truth is spelled out more clearly elsewhere.

Where?

Way down in the fine print, of course. In the Explanatory Memorandum tacked on to the end of the Bill (underline added):

3.36 The bill does not affect the creation or enforcement of, or any dealings with (including transfers of), equitable interests in carbon units. [Part 4, clause 110] This provision has been included for the avoidance of doubt. In addition, the bill does not prevent the taking of security over carbon units.

Now I ask you, dear reader.

How does the scheme’s granting permission for banks to create a secondary carbon securities trading market (ie, “security over” carbon units) help to reduce CO2 emissions?

Indeed, how does a wholly unmonitored and unregulated shadow banking market in carbon derivatives help to create a single cent in extra government revenue, for the Senator Milne-championed Clean Energy Finance Corporation to pour down the toilet of otherwise commercially unviable “green” energy projects?

Answer: It doesn’t.

The government will never see any of the profits generated by banks from their multi trillion dollar trading in wholly unregulated carbon derivatives.

But you can be certain that they (and we) will hear all about it when the banks’ multi trillion dollar derivatives betting on movements in the market price of thin air blows up too. Because that’s when – just as with the global mortgage derivatives trade that triggered GFC1 – the bankers will (again) come running to government for a bail out.

Did I say “trillions”?

Sure did.

As we have seen previously, according to the RBA our Aussie banking system already holds almost $17 Trillion worth of derivatives.  Most of these are bankers bets on movements in Foreign Exchange Rates and Interest Rates. And these derivatives are all held Off the Balance Sheet:

In just 3 months from December to March, our banks’ exposure to Off-Balance Sheet derivatives “Business” has blown out by a whopping $1.99 Trillion, to a new all-time record total of $16.83 Trillion.  That’s the biggest 3-month increase in our banks’ history.

By comparison, at March 2011 the banks have “only” $2.68 Trillion in On-Balance Sheet Assets. That’s an increase of “only” $19.9 Billion. In the same 3 months, their Off-Balance Sheet derivatives exposure blew out by 100 times that much ($1.99 Trillion)

Click to enlarge

[That’s right. Derivatives are a toxic, wholly artificial and unregulated financial product, created and traded en masse by the banks; they are held Off Balance Sheet so that noone really knows anything about their real activities. It was toxic derivatives over mortgages that nearly blew up the world in 2008.]

We have also seen previously, that our Aussie banking system is not “safe as houses”, as we are led to believe. Instead, it is a huge disaster waiting to happen. Our banks are only staying afloat – and generating ever-increasing salaries and bonuses for bankers – because of the government wholesale funding guarantee introduced in response to the GFC. Indeed, Moodys Ratings agency recently put our government on notice that it will slash our banks’ credit ratings if the government guarantee is withdrawn.

What happens when banks blow up?

The government (ie, the taxpayer) panics, and bails them out. Putting both current and future generations on the hook to pay for it.

What we have with the Clean Energy Future legislation, is a scheme designed by bankers (and their cheer-leading economists).  For the benefit of bankers.

That’s why a scheme that purports to be all about reducing CO2 emissions, has a ticking time bomb called “derivatives” hidden inside.

While ever the scheme lasts, banks will make a killing.

Not just on fees and commissions for their role in buying and selling “permits”.

Oh no, dear reader.

That trade is just the surface of the carbon pricing scam.

The fees and commissions on the straight trading in carbon permits … is peanuts.

The real monster action is in the unlimited, unregulated derivatives market, that sits on top of the basic carbon trading market. Just imagine an inverted pyramid, with the trade in carbon permits at the bottom, pointy end.

What the banks really want – and what this blogger predicted and forewarned of time and again leading up to the release of the draft legislation – is a mechanism that allows them to create and trade carbon derivatives.

In unlimited, unregulated quantities.

And that is exactly what the Greens, and the Labor Party, in cahoots with Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott, and Andrew Wilkie, have given the bankers.

In just a couple of little clauses. Carefully worded and buried in 1,000+ pages of bullsh!t legalese, so that noone will find it (or simply not understand it if they do).

If you want to do something practical to stop the bankers, then here’s my suggestion.

Call the Coalition Senators for your state.

Right now.

Tell them that you want them to go into the Senate policy committee hearings next week, and demand that the government explain the following:

(a) WHY their Clean Energy Future legislation specifically includes clauses permitting bankers to create unlimited, unregulated “financial weapons of mass destruction” on the back of the carbon pricing scheme;

(b) HOW their permitting banks to create unlimited, unregulated carbon derivatives will reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

(c) IF the government will guarantee the public that no taxpayer funds will ever be used to bail out a bank/s that gambles in the carbon derivatives casino and later gets into financial difficulty.

[Senators contact information here]

We know that the banks are already gleefully gearing up whole new departments for their new carbon derivatives trading casino.

Indeed, they were publicly bragging about it within a few days of the draft legislation being released:

Australian banks are eyeing opportunities to cash in on the proposed carbon tax by developing new financial products and services that capitalise on a market seen to be worth billions of dollars annually, according to a report by the Australian Financial Review.

Australian financial firms that have experience in European carbon markets, such as Macquarie Group Ltd, Westpac Banking Corp Ltd and ANZ Banking Group Ltd are particularly keen to establish their presence in the Australian market.

The initial three-year fixed carbon tax period from 2012 will serve as time to prepare for the release of ETS permits by 2015, when opportunities will really open up for banks to capitalise on the carbon market.

ANZ’s head of energy trading said the value of the derivatives carbon market would dwarf the $10 billion initially raised by the government, according to the AFR.

What did I say about an inverted pyramid, with money/profit churn from the simple carbon permit trade being only the little pointy bit at the bottom … the thin end of the wedge?

The shadow banking casino in carbon derivatives is the huge bit at the top.

And just like every inverted pyramid, the carbon pricing scheme scam is inherently unstable.

The Green-Labor Clean Energy Future is an epic financial disaster, just waiting to happen.

When it comes to pricing carbon, all you need to remember is two words.

“Bankers”.

“Derivatives”.

Tick.

Tick.

Tick.

Tick.

Tags: , , , , ,

It Begins – High Court Challenge To Carbon Tax

18 Oct

Yesterday on radio 2GB, constitutional barrister Bryan Pape indicated that as the carbon tax will affect State-owned property – the electricity generators – there are grounds for the State governments to challenge the Commonwealth’s legislation (not yet passed into law) under section 114 of the Constitution.

Regular readers will know that your humble blogger recently launched Right On Our Side. It’s a movement focussing not on traditional protests and petitions, but on the law.  Our focus is on finding new and innovative ways for the voters to legally challenge and ultimately, change it.

Right here, right now is a window of opportunity for you, dear reader, to help us put an end to the Green-Labor carbon tax “law”.

There are two (2) simple actions that you can take today. Both involve properly expressing Your Will to the politicians who have a legal duty to serve you:

Once the election is over that is the end of ballot paper voting until the next election. However, under both Federal and State Constitutions and Statute laws you have certain implied legal duties and obligations.

The whole system of Parliament, and the SOLE reason for its existence, is to make laws for the people, with the clear Implication that those laws will reflect the WILL of the people on the subject matter of those laws.

It is only when you fulfil that lawful duty and obligation that your Member and Senators can properly fulfil their judicially defined function and duty in their houses of Parliament. If you do not fulfil your lawful duty and obligation, if you do not keep your Members and Senators fully informed of your will on any issue, then you cannot blame them for what they do. You have only your own laziness or indifference to blame.

Arthur A. Chresby, Research Analyst in Constitutional Law, and formerly Federal Member for Griffith (QLD) [1958-61] in the House of Representatives.

ACTION #1

Properly express Your Will to your state’s Senators in the Federal Parliament.

The Senate has not yet voted on the Clean Energy Future legislation. So there is still time to properly inform them of Your Will.

Here is a Sample letter that you can copy and send to each of your state’s Senators, expressing Your Will that they vote against the government’s Clean Energy Future (ie, carbon tax) bills in the Senate:

Dear [insert Senator’s Name],

I know that it is my duty to keep you informed of MY WILL on anything that comes before Parliament, or that should come before Parliament.

IT IS MY WILL that you vote against the passage of each one of the Clean Energy Future 2011 (ie, carbon tax) bills.

Yours faithfully,

[signed]

[insert your full name, address, and date, as legal evidence that you are a constituent.]

Should the Senator try to side step, or tell you what their party is or is not doing, simply write back immediately and say:

Dear [insert Senator’s Name],

I repeat that, in accordance with my lawful obligation to keep you informed of MY WILL, I again inform you that it is MY WILL that you vote against the passage of each one of the Clean Energy Future 2011 (ie, carbon tax) bills.

Yours faithfully,

[signed]

[insert your full name, address, and date, as legal evidence that you are a constituent.]

You can find the contact details for your state’s Senators in the Federal Parliament here.

ACTION #2

Properly express Your Will to your state MP.

Here is a Sample letter that you can copy and send to your state MP, expressing Your Will that they take immediate action to have your State government challenge the Commonwealth’s Clean Energy Future (ie, carbon tax) bills in the High Court:

Dear [insert state MP’s Name],

I know that it is my duty to keep you informed of MY WILL on anything that comes before Parliament, or that should come before Parliament.

IT IS MY WILL that you take immediate action to cause the [insert state Name] State government to challenge the constitutionality of the Commonwealth’s Clean Energy Future 2011 (ie, carbon tax) bills in the High Court.

Yours faithfully,

[signed]

[insert your full name, address, and date, as legal evidence that you are a constituent.]

Should the MP try to side step, or tell you what their party is or is not doing, simply write back immediately and say:

Dear [insert MP’s Name],

I repeat that, in accordance with my lawful obligation to keep you informed of MY WILL, I again inform you that it is MY WILL that you take immediate action to cause the [insert state Name] State government to challenge the constitutionality of the Commonwealth’s Clean Energy Future 2011 (ie, carbon tax) bills in the High Court.

Yours faithfully,

[signed]

[insert your full name, address, and date, as legal evidence that you are a constituent.]

You can find the contact details for your state’s MPs below –

NSW

VIC

QLD

WA

SA

TAS

NT

When you are done with that, why don’t you come over to Right On Our Side?

It’s a movement.

You should join it.

Tags: , , , , ,

Sign The Petition – Carbon Tax High Court Challenge

19 Sep

* The following submission to the Parliament’s Joint Select Committee will be forwarded on Wed 21st Thur 22nd September 2011. Please co-sign in Comments below.

UPDATE: Thank you to all … comments now closed.

The Secretary
Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Australia

22 September 2011

Dear Sir,

REFERENCE: Clean Energy Bill 2011, Clean Energy Unit Issue Charges Bills 2011, Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011, and the Australian Constitution s.51 and s.55

We the undersigned would draw the Joint Select Committee’s attention to the above mentioned Bills, insofar as they appear to represent breaches of the Australian Constitution s.51 and s.55.

Should the government press forward with passage of the above mentioned legislation in the Parliament, we the undersigned advise that injunctions will be sought preventing the issue and/or the auction of carbon Units, and also preventing the issue of Clean Energy payments (Household Assistance), until such time as the constitutionality of key points of the legislation can be tested before the Courts.

Sincerely,

Colin McKay
Concerned citizen
Registered voter
Electorate of Charlton
PO Box 6018
MOUNT HUTTON NSW 2290
Australia

Michele Kells
Bunbury, WA 6230

Lyndsay Farlow
Port Macquarie, NSW 2444

Jo-Ann Hildebrand
Perth, WA 6000

Meredith Thiessen
Dodges Ferry, TAS 7173

Sean Morrison
Greenacres, SA 5086

Hannah Jorgensen
Biddaddaba, QLD 4275

Colin Ely
Blackburn, VIC 3130

Laurence Wynen
Coffs Harbour, NSW 2450

Chris Foster
Adelaide, SA 5000

Justin Downie
Cooma, NSW 2630

Philip Hingston
Eastwood, NSW 2122

Veronica Sidhu
Camberwell, VIC 3124

Tracey Watts
Brisbane, QLD 4000

David Tan
Rowville, VIC 3178

Patricia Lightfoot
Armidale, NSW 2350

Shirley Cocks
Murray Bridge, SA 5253

Richard Eichhorn
West End, QLD 4101

Mike J Warr
Kirribilli, NSW 2061

Geoff Brown
Ourimbah, NSW 2258

Ben Williamson
Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153

Phil Schultz
Glenwood, NSW 2768

Sonja Schultz
Glenwood, NSW 2768

Phillip Cummings
Neutral Bay, NSW 2089

Neil Wilson
Epping, NSW 2121

Don Anderson
Sydney, NSW 2000

Vince Schultz
Maclean, NSW 2463

JR Edward
Glen Waverley, VIC 3150

Brian Haselum
Maclean, NSW 2463

Anthony Grizaard
Perth, WA 6000

Chris Kauffmann
Sunshine Coast, QLD 4518

Cliff Rogers
Brisbane, QLD 4000

Michael Petterson
Braunstone, NSW 2460

Philip Pitts
Melbourne, Victoria 3004

Philip Slade
Broome, WA 6726

Ess Grubb
Bribie Island, QLD 4507

Thomas Harnell
Fernvale, Qld 4306

Ian Darley
Davidson, NSW 2085

Pamela Davis
Gulgong, NSW 2852

Peter Heuscher
Cooroibah, QLD 4565

Clive Shepherd
Morayfield, QLD 4506

Betty Whiffin
North Turramurra, NSW 2074

Lorraine Tebbutt
Romsey, VIC 3434

Kerry Southerden
Welby, NSW 2575

Adam Davidson
Melbourne, VIC 3004

David Whately
McDowall, QLD 4053

Brian Newell
Bribie Island, QLD 4507

Russell Scott
Collaroy Plateau NSW 2097

Bob Jackson
Waterloo, NSW 2017

Ron Kleinschafer
Northern NSW
New England Electorate

David Cooke
Warradale, SA 5046

Andrew Johnson
Liverpool, NSW 2170

Lesley Brown
Blackett Mt Druitt, NSW 2770

Adrian Day
Blackett Mt Druitt, NSW 2770

Damien Jarman
Templestowe Lower, VIC 3107

Carol Edge.
Hervey Bay, QLD 4655

Robert Peterswald
Hobart, TAS 7000

Scott Hastings,
Tregear, NSW 2770

Anton Hardy
Brisbane, QLD 4000

Bill McAuliffe
Hocking, WA 6065

Stephen Harper
Mt Lawley, WA 6050

Ray Soper
Cammeray, NSW 2062

James Doogue
Leeming, WA 6149

Desmond Cooke
Bonnells Bay, NSW 2264

Val Majkus
Toowoomba, QLD 4350

G.C. Cross
Ulladulla, NSW 2539

Maree Baker
Sydney, NSW 2000

Beryl Raddatz
Brisbane, QLD 4505

Peter Howell
Wantirna, Vic 3150

Milton Collins
Modbury Heights, SA 5092

Tony Mack
Sherwood, Qld 4075

David Cliffe
Bracken Ridge, QLD 4017

Wayne Job
Kilmore, VIC 3764

Mark McGuire
Coolangatta, QLD 4225

Robert Massey
Morayfield, QLD 4506

Thomas Bourke
Cameron Park, NSW 2285

Majella Smith
Nowra, NSW 2541

David Wood
Minyama, QLD 4575

Max Larter
Galong, NSW 2585

Glen Bullen
Broadview, SA 5083

John Warby
Chatswood, NSW 2067

Allan Hinchcliffe
Kempsey, NSW 2440

Greg McGuire
Brisbane QLD 4000

Lisa A Mack
Sherwood, QLD 4075

Liz Penprase
Alexandria, NSW 2015

Margaret Turk
Indooroopilly, QLD 4068

Doug McIntyre
Crookwell, NSW 2583

Stephanie Martin
Beachmere, Qld 4510

Russell Chapman
Mitchelton, QLD 4053

Norma Penny
Wulguru, QLD 4814

Simon Ludborzs
Hewett, SA 5118

Robert J Malloy
Wallsend, NSW 2287

Gordon Hastings
Millswood, SA 5034

Grant Smith
Marangaroo, WA 6064

Steve Herczeg
Duffy, ACT 2611

Matt McLeod
Albion, VIC 3020

John Holliday
Tallai, Qld 4213

Thomas Reid
Brisbane, Qld 4172

Margaret Crooks
Tranmere SA 5073

Kevin Muir
Linley Point 2066

Mark Harries
Kulnura, NSW 2250

Clive Shepherd
Morayfield, QLD 4506

Fiona Meredith
Cygnet, TAS 7112

Nic Meredith
Cygnet, TAS 7112

Tony Fendt
Grange, QLD 4051

Phil West
Tamborine, QLD 4270

Bernd Felsche
Calista, WA 6167

Brett McSweeney
Charlestown, NSW 2290

Paul van der Zel
Castle Hill, NSW 2154

Phil Hopkins
Peregian Beach, QLD 4573

Andrew Young
Creswick, VIC 3363

Michelle Schultz
Glenwood, NSW 2768

Kareem Ah
Brighton VIC 3185

Jim Simpson
Five Dock, NSW 2046

Ian Coleman
Mitcham, VIC 3132

Robert Browne
Aberfoyle Park, SA 5159

Paul Gregory Morrison
Riverview, QLD 4304

Linda Slater
Bayswater, WA 6053

Phillip Bross
Kogarah, NSW 2217

Sharon Brown
Blackett, NSW 2770

John Trigge
Mt Barker, SA 5251

Marek Kiera
Newtown, NSW 2042

Ben Hern
Morphett Vale, SA 5162

Robert Mustac
Alfords Point, NSW 2234

Greg Buchanan
Niagara Park, NSW 2250

Robyn Williams
Burleigh, QLD 4220

M.S. Eggleston
Newcastle, NSW 2300

Jason Rennie
Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153

Merryn Yeo
Melbourne, VIC 3000

P. Rowlinson
Roseville, NSW 2069

Carolyn Lane
Gosford, NSW 2250

Jeff Radcliffe
Speewah, QLD 4881

D. Hill
Newcastle, NSW 2300

*****************

Tags: , , , , , ,

This Is How We Will Stop The Carbon Tax

19 Sep

Remember the “Malaysian Solution”?

Millions of Australians hated it. And rightly so.

And yet, the government pressed ahead anyway.

What stopped them?

No, not protests.

Not “people power”.

The Malaysian Solution was felled in the Courts.

And I suggest to you, dear reader, that it is the only way to fell the government’s carbon tax legislation too.

Regular readers will know that I wrote a blog nearly two months ago detailing the illegality of the government’s draft legislation – The Carbon Pricing Scheme Is Unconstitutional.

And the final legislation is essentially the same. Indeed, it includes additional key phrases effectively conceding the unconstitutionality of the legislation, and the government’s deliberate structuring of multiple bills in order to defeat circumvent the clear statement and intent of the Constitution.

So, I believe that it can be stopped in the Courts.

Although the government is presently railroading the legislation through Parliament, they have doffed their cap to the idea of “democracy” by appointing a Joint Select Committee to receive submissions on the legislation. Closing this Thursday … get the feeling they’re in a rush?

Below is a draft submission to the JSC that I have written.  Your comments, suggestions, constructive criticisms are invited:

The Secretary
Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Australia

21 September 2011

Dear Sir,

REFERENCE: Clean Energy Bill 2011, Clean Energy Unit Issue Charges Bills 2011, Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011, and the Australian Constitution s.51(ii) and s.55

We the undersigned would draw the Joint Select Committee’s attention to the above mentioned Bills, insofar as they appear to represent breaches of the Australian Constitution s.51(ii) and s.55.

Should the government press forward with passage of the above mentioned legislation in the Parliament, we the undersigned advise that injunctions will be sought preventing the issue and/or the auction of carbon Units, and also preventing the issue of Clean Energy payments (Household Assistance), until such time as the constitutionality of key points of the legislation can be tested before the Courts.

Sincerely,

*********
[Name]
[Address]

Thoughtful readers will see the strategic rationale behind this submission.

The government has included “poison pills” in their legislation in order to make it difficult to repeal.

As one example, by clearly stating that carbon Units are the “personal property” of the holder/purchaser, the government aims to confer a property right. One that may require compensation in order to remove.

Seeking a High Court injunction/s to prevent the issuing/auctioning of carbon permits (Units), and also preventing the issue of household assistance (compensation), will serve to neutralise the “poison pills” that the government has included in their legislation until such time as the constitutionality of the legislation can be tested in Court.

(UPDATE: And may serve to delay the carbon tax until after a new election is called, or triggered in May 2012 by Andrew Wilkie?)

If you wish to support this submission, please so advise and give your full name and location in Comments below.  I will add your details to the submission here.

If you are a lawyer/barrister and wish to assist with bringing a motion for an injunction/s, please so advise and provide contact details below.

Many thanks.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Like, The Incredible Case Of, Like, Julia And The, Like, 400 Shrinking Polluters

10 Aug

h/t reader Bamftiger

First, it was “1,000 of the biggest polluters”.

Then, it was “500 of the biggest polluters”.

Now?

It’s “more in the order of more like 400” of the “biggest polluters”.

Except … even that figure is “somewhat rubbery” (emphasis added):

Prime Minister Julia Gillard originally said the price would be paid by the top 1000 polluters in the country.

But when the $23-a-tonne carbon price was announced in July, that figure was cut in half.

“Around 500 of the biggest polluters in Australia will be required to pay for their pollution under the carbon pricing mechanism,” the Government’s policy documents released on July 10 state.

Now the figure has been revised downwards again.

“Under the previous (Kevin Rudd carbon pollution reduction scheme) package the number that we thought was going to be in the system was more in the order of 700,” climate change department secretary Blair Comley said today.

“(Now) the number of emitters that we think will be covered is more in the order of more like 400.“

Mr Comley was giving evidence in Canberra to a parliamentary inquiry into the proposed carbon tax.

The change of scope was due to the differing treatment of liquid fuels and synthetic gases under Ms Gillard’s carbon price mechanism, he said.

But the 400 figure is somewhat rubbery.

You don’t say?!

barnabyisright.com humbly claims credit as the first (and only) to break the true and complete story of the government’s massive – and perpetual – lying over the real number of so-called “biggest polluters”.

Read the story as broken right here on 25 July. Download and study for yourself the 1.6Mb spreadsheet results of my 3-weeks-work-in-1 research into the government’s “rubbery” (!?!!) National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting department’s official Register of “biggest polluters” –

The 500 “Biggest Polluters” Exposed – Everything The Government Is Not Telling You

“More in the order of more like 400″, they now say?

The government NGER department’s most recent report (April ’11) shows only 299 “polluters” reporting any emissions at all – a story also broken here on 13 July.

And their full Register (775 ABN numbers listed) is chock full of dodgy, unknown/unidentifiable, non-existent, ASIC-unrecognised ABN numbers, liquidated companies, blind trusts, double-triple-quadruple-quintuple-ups, and the “like”.

So Julia … from your own list of “like” 775 company names/numbers, of which only “like” 299 actually reported emissions in your most up-to-date official NGER Report … “like” exactly which “like” 400 “biggest polluters” are you actually going to “tax” in order to legislate the banksters’ carbon derivatives trading platform?

I’ve got the spreadsheet right here – just point out the “like” 400 “biggest polluters” for us.

Tags: , , ,

Mum’s The Word

4 Aug

My dear old Mum has a few choice words for her oceanfront-dwelling, interstate ring-in “local” Member of Parliament using another $4 million of taxpayers’ money to peddle warmageddonist propaganda.

One hopes that green cargo cult members everywhere will applaud her admirable demonstration of the most apropos method of recycling junk mail:

Tags: , , , , , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →

%d bloggers like this: