Tag Archives: no mandate

Barnaby Fights For Us In The Senate

12 Oct

Again, with all thanks to helpful “insider”, barnabyisright.com readers get an early exclusive of Barnaby’s late afternoon speech to the Senate on the debate over whether the carbon tax bills should be introduced into the Senate (my emphasis added):

Senator JOYCE (Queensland—Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (16:37 ): I have had the joy — and that is a cynical way of putting it — of seeing some of this garbage that has been presented to our nation and that, apparently, we are to look at in globo. I would be fascinated to go through some of the details of some of these things because, apparently, we do not need to see them in seriatim—we are right across it. It is all a piece of cake.

This is interesting:

(1) A person who is or was required to provide a report under section 22E for an eligible financial year must keep records of the person’s activities that:

(a) allow the person to report accurately under section 22E; and
(b) enable the Regulator to ascertain whether the person has complied with the person’s obligations under section 22E; and
(c) comply with the requirements of subsection (2) and the regulations made for the purposes of subsection (3).

The civil penalty is 1,000 penalty units. It further states: ‘The person must retain the records for five years from the end of the financial year’ and on and on it goes. Look at it: it is like Kafka’s Castle. The place we have arrived at is amazing.

What about the EMEP test day? It is defined under section 63B(3) as follows:

In the income year of claim, this day is the day on which the claimant makes the claim for the payment. In subsequent income years, the EMEP test day is the anniversary of the day on which the claimant made the claim in a previous year, provided that, since the claimant made the claim, the Repatriation Commission has not determined that the claimant has ceased to be eligible for the payment. If the Repatriation Commission has determined that the claimant is no longer …

And on and on it goes. Apparently, the government are all across it. They are the absolute full bottle on this. It is all right — straight through. I would love to ask the Prime Minister about some of these details and I would love to ask Minister Combet. They would not have the foggiest idea, apart from what has been sent to them on their BlackBerries. They have the BlackBerry message all worked out, but they would not know about the legislation. You can bet your life that this will be an absolute and utter debacle. But this is what they are doing to our nation.

These are the redesigned plans for the nation of Australia, for our economy. Here they are, set up by the people who could not get fluffy stuff into the ceiling, without setting fire to 194 houses and, tragically, killing four people. This redesign of our nation’s economy is being undertaken by the same people who gave us the Building the Education Revolution. This redesign of our economy is being undertaken by the same people who conducted a war against obesity. Remember that? We are still wondering: did we achieve detente, did we win, did we lose? Or are we going to have a second war on obesity? This is what the Australian Labor Party has delivered to us via the Australian Greens, because the Greens are now running the show.

Some sections of this legislation could be terminal for them, because they have become so soulless and, once you start being guided by the Greens, you completely isolate yourself from your conservative working-class voters, who will just leave you. Look at all this! It is just absolutely amazing. Now come the nasty bits. I am just opening it up. Under the heading ‘Scheme to avoid future liability to pay administrative penalty — Intention’, it states:

(1) A person commits an offence if —

and we are seeing a lot of the word ‘offence’ in this—

a. a penalty is due and payable by a body corporate or trust under section 212; and

b. before the penalty became due and payable, the person entered into a scheme; and

c. the person entered into the scheme with the intention of securing or achieving the result, either … the body corporate or trust:

i. will be unable; or

ii. will be likely to be unable; or

iii. will continue to be unable; or

iv. will be likely to continue to be unable;

And on and on it goes. Then comes imprisonment for 10 years. This is a nasty little document you have got yourself here, which bangs you up in the can for 10 years, and we are just supposed to look at it in globo because, apparently, you are so over it.

Minister Wong looks totally competent. I would bet you London to a brick that the government have not read the legislation. I bet you London to a brick they have not a clue what is in the legislation. We might want to ask the government questions about who they are going to bang up for 10 years. I think a lot of Australian people would like to know the answer to the question: ‘Are the Labor Party about to bring in a piece of legislation which, if I get wrong, I could be in the slammer for 10 years?’ Also, ‘ I want you to more fully disclose to me what is on page 324 of the Clean Energy Bill 2011.’

And the Greens are part of this. They do not believe in transparency. They are sitting there with that stupid smirk on their faces. Their leader ‘Dr Brown’ thinks this is all fun and games and that this is what you do — you just let these things run through.

Here is another quote with respect to retaining records:

(2) The person must retain the records for 5 years from the end of the financial year …

(3) The regulations may specify requirements relating to:

(a) the kinds of records; and

(b) the form of records —

and how the records must be kept. The penalty is two years imprisonment. This is what we are getting! It is here, Australia; it has arrived. Aren’t the Labor Party wonderful people? In a brief perusal of this Kafka’s nightmare, I see you get 10 years in prison for one offence, two years in prison for another offence. This is the world the Labor Party live in. This is where we are off to, as they redesign our nation’s economy on a colourless, odourless gas. You better not lose any. Do not steal any. What is the price of breathing these days? It must become more expensive. Are we going to keep records on that? I thought this was 2011. It is starting to sound awfully like 1984, with this almost Orwellian type of Big Brother approach to every facet of our lives. The government can increase this tax, without it ever having to go back to this parliament. It does not have to go back to this parliament. They have got around that.

We cannot have the nation of Australia and its parliament having oversight of the tax! If they have to launch their attack against the climate, making the world colder from a room in Canberra, they can jack up the tax to rise to the challenge, and in rising to the challenge they make every person in Australia with a power point poorer. Every corner of their house will become a collection mechanism for the Australian Taxation Office. And of course they have to collect some friends along the way, so down the track they will have an emissions trading scheme. That is great, isn’t it? The banks will love that: moving paper here, moving paper there*. The banks are doing it tough; it is good to see the Greens looking after the big banks and giving them a multibillion dollar revenue stream from trading the permits.

The friends of big banks are the Australian Greens, because they are doing it tough and they need all the help they can get. You are about to do it. You have moralised and got it through your head that it is right to tax someone in a weatherboard and iron house out in the suburbs, that it is right to collect money from them and to funnel it to someone who is probably doing very well thank you very much, and God bless them and good luck to them, and probably does not need that person’s money. You are going to funnel that money to Martin Place. We do not need it in Mount Druitt when it can be in Martin Place. We do not need it in Cunnamulla when it can be in Martin Place. We do not need that money up in Bundaberg when it can be in George Street. This is a bonanza. I cannot wait to see who the geniuses are, the luminaries on the other side who will be able to answer some of these questions.

The way they are getting around it is that they are not allowing us to ask any questions. We had the first example of that today with the guillotine: they shall not ask questions on behalf of the Australian people. The job of the opposition in most instances is, naturally enough, to oppose, to see if you are prudent and across the facts. Because you are not, how are you dealing with that? You are launching yourselves into this guillotine. What is so nauseating is that we had to listen to the Leader of the Greens, Dr Bob Brown. He supported the guillotine with that stupid smirk on his face. Here is a quote from that same person:

Let there be no doubt about this: the government can —

Senator Milne: Madam Acting Deputy President, I raise a point of order. I draw your attention to standing order 193, ‘Rules of debate’:

A senator shall not use offensive words … all imputations of improper motives and all personal reflections on … members or officers shall be considered highly disorderly.

In the light of that, I would ask Senator Joyce to desist from making remarks of a personal nature about Senator Bob Brown and withdraw what he already has said.

Senator JOYCE: If he did not smirk, I am happy to. If there is anything that is offensive there I certainly—

Senator Milne interjecting —

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Crossin): Senator Joyce, I think the point of order is to be mindful of the words that you use during this debate when reflecting on senators in this chamber.

Senator JOYCE: I will quote Senator Dr Bob Brown. These are some of the things he has said in the past:

Let there be no doubt about this: the government can manipulate the Senate and is doing so. The government can dishonour the processes of the Senate and is doing so. The government may try to treat the Senate as it does the House of Representatives — that is, as a rubber stamp — and convert this country to executive government, but the government will reap the whirlwind of that. Fortunately, it cannot do away with elections.

That sounds very prophetic. Who said that? It was Dr Bob Brown on 28 November 2005. This is the same person who is removing our right in this parliament to have proper oversight of these documents, which even on the briefest perusal we can find predominantly that you are sending people to jail. For doing what? For mishandling something that was formerly free — that is, carbon dioxide. We now have this colourless, odourless gas becoming not only something that we have to buy but something that, if we do not administer it properly, can end us up in jail.

And why? What is it going to do? What is going to happen to the temperature of the globe? Absolutely nothing will happen to the temperature of the globe, but we will have this bureaucracy and these fields of policeman coming into every corner of our lives. We are supposed to be protecting, giving more liberty to the people and making them more free, not tying them up in this absolute lunacy. Has anybody over there read this? Does anybody have a clue about it? No, you do not have to; you can just walk it in here and ram it through.

What of the Australian people? Are they just happy with it? They are happy that those opposite have thrown a match into the building and walked out the door, that they have thrown a match into the Australian economy and walked out the door? The management that has brought us this bundle, this packet of poo tickets, is the same one that currently has us $211.3 billion in gross debt, borrowing $2 billion last week and $2 billion the week before. They cannot make their ends meet their resources but they can cool the planet.

We have not only a right but an obligation to the Australian people to look at this in seriatim, because I truly believe that if we do not look at it none of them will. Not Mr Combet, who is up there saying, ‘This is a great day,’ along with all the backslapping. They are all happy chappies, backslapping and saying: ‘Isn’t this marvellous? Isn’t it marvellous what we have done to the Australian people today? Aren’t we clever because, even though none of them wanted it, we showed the Australian people that we are so stubborn we would do it to them anyway.’ Because, you see, they are wiser than the Australian people. They are wiser and more noble, and that gives them the right to do this to you. And if you do not like what they are doing to you, be careful because in here they have the right to put you in jail. This debate has not finished. The Australian people will demand of us that we fight this all the way.

And we will attach this to every lower house member who has voted for it. It is now their problem. They are personally responsible for their actions today; they are personally responsible for bringing this in. And we will attach this to every senator who votes for it. We will attach it to the Greens and we will attach it to the Labor Party. If it brings you unstuck — and it will — that is something that you will have to deal with.

Isn’t it funny how the Greens talk about liberty and supporting the liberty of the individual? They want a more liberal environment for drugs, but they do not want a more liberal environment for carbon dioxide — oh, no, they cannot have that; they have to regulate that; they are going to throw people in jail over that. That is the new world. They want a more liberal environment for drugs; they want to reduce all the offences for drugs. But they want to make it a criminal offence to misappropriate the air that we breathe. Then they get some people out on the front lawn. I looked at it the other day. There were more placards than people. And they do not know about it. It is almost a cult. They go out there or GetUp gets them out there and they rant and rave and yak on. But they are not going to be held responsible for what happens to people.

I do not how we can explain this. What possessed you to do this? What possessed you to launch this on us? How many of you people over there understand or can explain to us the trading stock implications of carbon permits? When is it an asset? When is it trading stock? I do not know. You do not know; you do not have a clue. You have not even read it. There is so much in here. What about application to foreign ships? That is another little bit. Let us have a read of this:

This Act does not apply to the extent that its application would be inconsistent with the exercise of rights of foreign ships in:

(a) the territorial sea; or

(b) the exclusive economic zone; or

(c) waters of the continental shelf;

in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

That is interesting. That obviously means that it could apply to Australian ships. Oh, that’s right: it does. Australian things are evil! We have to have things from overseas; we cannot have a manufacturing industry anymore! Under this, if you want to fly to Fiji, that will be free of the carbon tax. But if you want to fly and support the Australian tourism industry, you will get taxed for that. And you had better obey the law, otherwise they will throw you in jail. This is the new world. Isn’t it marvellous? It even applies to shipping. We know who is getting it free: if you are a foreigner, it is free; if you are domestic, you pay the tax.

Down the track, you get the joy of sending $56.9 billion–$56.9 thousand million—a year overseas to buy carbon credits. That is the ultimate in social engineering: taking money off the working Australian family and then bundling it up and sending it to Mr Mugabe, to the people of Zaire, to the people of the Congo and to the people of South-East Asia. That is what the Greens want to do: social re-engineering. They want to send it to those people who warrant it; those people who are more noble than us! Not only can we re-engineer Australia through a penalty of going to jail; we can re-engineer the whole world! You will have so much to tell them at Durban. It will be a wonderful time. You will be able to say to them that not only are you saving Australia but you are saving the world — saving the world with carbon permits.

But some poor sucker out at Blacktown, out at Ipswich, out at Roma, is going to work to pay for it. They are going to come home to their power bill, and there is your tax. So they work some of their lives in the sun stacking bricks, stacking shelves, behind a counter, shearing sheep, welding or whatever — in whatever industries are left after you have completely and utterly botched our nation’s economy — so that you can go on your frolic of sending money here, there and everywhere around the world. This is absurd. Don’t you think that there is something not right about this? Isn’t there something in your stomach that tells you that there is something not right about this? Where did this come from?

The Australian people hate this. That is why before the last election you did not tell them the truth. You said that you were not going to bring it in. And now you have brought it in. If they had known that you were thinking about banging them up in jail they might have had a different view about voting for you. They might have thought differently. If they had thought that you were about to regulate the very essence of their existence, the air that they breathe, they might have thought about voting for somebody else. Gosh, I would have. But this is where we are.

And you think that we are going to lie down on this and go to sleep. You think that somehow next week it will all be better. We are going to chase you and chase you every day. We will be at the doors every day. We will chase you every weekend. Every time that we get a chance, we will chase you and we will say: ‘When you think about the Labor Party, think about the carbon tax; when you think about the Labor Party, think about your power bill; when you think about the Labor Party, think about your fuel bill; when you think about the Labor Party, think about the legislation that they brought in to bang you up in jail if you dare disagree with their worldview. When you think about the Greens, think about the money that they sent overseas; when you think about the Greens, think about the guillotine and how they shut down the debate so that the Australian people couldn’t properly ventilate their views on this mass of legislation.’ That will be the debate. We will pursue you and pursue you, and we will not relent until the next election. Then at every polling booth in every seat we will be reminding the Australian people about you.

If the global economy comes unstuck, you have created it so that you cannot get out of it — apparently, you do not want to get out of this. I have a rough idea how the punter works. I know how they are going to deal with this. I have seen this before. We have made mistakes like this before. We made a mistake called Work Choices and got smashed. This is your mistake. Here it comes: exactly the same outcome. They are going to absolutely slaughter you.

Hear hear!

* Barnaby is wrong. There’s no “paper” involved. It’s all a fraud … right down to the electronic numbers – mere bookkeeping entries – that are the carbon “units”. See Carbon Permits Do Not Even Exist.

Advertisements

Dear Reader … Pull Your Finger Out NOW!

8 Oct

Not happy about the carbon tax being railroaded into law?

Without a mandate from the people?

Then … what are you waiting for?!

Don’t bitch and moan.

ACT NOW to stop it.

Here is a simple, powerful action that YOU can take to stop it.

Parliament is going to vote on it this week.

So if you don’t act RIGHT now, to tell the bastards exactly what is Your Will, then you’ve only yourself to blame for the outcome.

Please dear reader … pull your finger out.

A Fine Rant

19 Jul

I was so amused and impressed by this insightful and eloquent rant from reader Fred in comments yesterday, that I’ve decided it deserves a wider airing.

Enjoy:

Oh Yeah! I heard Rob Oakeshot on ABC radio this morning! 702 I think it was. Thanks for reminding me; as I don’t mind a bit of tearing apart a stupid logical argument.

Rob went on about supporting the carbon tax and added that we need to trust the scientists on this matter, just as we need to, and often do, trust specialists like doctors or even an auto mechanic that are expert in their field.

Ahh, where to begin….

Firstly, on matters of grave irreversible importance you should not just trust your doctor. You should get a second opinion and possibly even a 3rd or 4th. And when the doctors opinions do not align, you’ve got to think carefully about the more invasive options espoused by some. And how many times has an auto-mechanic told me that I need to get some work done on the widget when it did not need it? Plenty.

Fail. There are plenty of second opinions on climate science and they ought to be sought.

Secondly, trusting your auto mechanic and even your doctor, and trusting climate scientists are not in the same league; with the impact of the former two limited pretty much to you and costing in the hundreds or perhaps thousands of dollars. The impact of the latter, climate scientists, will costs billions if not trillions of dollars and will greatly affect families, nations and industries, probably irreversibly. Even if a doctors choice kills you, it would be bad, but on the whole, at the economic level, it’s small potatoes.

Fail. Your sense of when and how trust should be applied is warped.

Thirdly, doctors and mechanics are doing their stuff day after day. It’s a trade. They get good at it, they test, they can see the good results and not so good results and they can adjust, learn and improve. By the time you see them, most are very good at diagnosing and rectifying. Comparing that to the carbon tax, we’ve never done it, the subjects are vastly different scale, the impact good or bad (of an ETS) will be huge and possibly irreversible, and the boof-heads in charge may be incompetent or worse.

Fail. Medicine and mechanics are pretty well proved. Fixing climate problems, and possibly fabricated problems, with financial tools is not proved. So they can not be compared.

Fourthly, that Rob would stoop to such ridiculous analogies that even plodders like me can make him look stupid by tells me that he ain’t thinking too straight, or he’s a little too cute or desperate or bought. Either way; your fitness for office now stinks.

Rob, I thought you were an OK guy until today. I had no problems with your political choice and I was pleased to see you shake up the lower house a little. But based solely on your idiotic and insulting rhetoric today on an important topic; you’ve lost me.

Barnaby: “Rob Oakeshott Needs To Explain Himself”

18 Jul

Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 18 July 2011 (emphasis in original):

This morning on ABC Newsradio Rob Oakeshott claimed that he had a “mandate” to support the carbon tax in Parliament.

“… I believe that the policy of an emissions trading scheme, as I have taken to the last two elections locally and been successful on and been given a mandate on, is the right policy for Australia and now is the right time to pursue it.”

Is this the same Rob Oakeshott who had this to say about the word “mandate” during his 17-minute speech to support a Labor government?

“This is not a mandate for any government. We should have a great big swear jar for the next three years and if anyone uses that word mandate they should have to chip in some money.”

While we are talking about mandates, what mandate did Rob have to support a Labor government?

Rob Oakeshott needs to explain himself to the people of Lyne. If it’s his policy he should defend it.

The member for Cowper, Luke Hartsuyker, has offered him the perfect opportunity, a debate in his local electorate.

Rob should explain his position to the people in his electorate not just the Canberra press gallery.

In the same interview Rob went on to complain about a newspaper that is run by some former Nationals staffers in his own electorate.

“There is a local newspaper here called the Port Paper which was set up by the press secretary of the Deputy Premier of New South Wales, you know the National Party and it is essentially now run by the National party. The editor is a former electorate staff member of the National party member for Cowper. So these are real issues that we need to look at not only at a community level, not only at a news limited level, but also why certain people are choosing to get involved in boards of, for example, Channel 10.”

Is Rob suggesting that some people should not be allowed to publish newspapers?

You are right Rob. It’s all just a huge clandestine plot. Every night we secretly rendezvous from all corners of Australia in Port Macquarie and talk into the wee hours of the morning about you (and where we are hiding the aliens in area 51) then we write editorials.

A Disturbance In The Farce

9 Jul

Hooray!

Thanks to the Green-Labor-Independent Alliance, our little battler nation from Down Under is going to save the planet.

Or is it?

Perhaps not.

Not when 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.

“Put simply,” said the briefing, “the third phase of the ETS will continue the same basic pattern of subsidising polluters and helping them avoid meaningful action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

“It is a fundamentally flawed system, setting up a system of property rights for continued pollution, and transposing environmental objectives into the kind of cost-benefit trade-offs that led to the problem in the first place.”

The farce is strong with this one.

Note carefully the sentence that I have underlined above –

Companies will still be able to use the excess permits given out in the second phase.

This points to the very heart of the argument made by your humble blogger, in his article on 27 June – “The Carbon Tax is Not A ‘Tax’ – It Is The Bankers’ CPRS By Another Name”.

And, to the heart of the argument made by your humble blogger, in his public stoush with Opposition Climate Action Onanist, Greg Hunt MP from June 29-30 – “Letter To Greg Hunt MP”.

Here is the key point of that argument, as directed to Mr Hunt (emphasis added):

The government’s openly professed intention, and the Garnaut Review’s consistent recommendation, is to issue carbon permits at a fixed price only for a temporary initial period, with said permits having the following key characteristics, specifically in order to “smooth the transition” to the ultimately intended fully-floating cap-and-trade scheme:

(a) Unlimited expiry date;
(b) Unlimited bankability, from Scheme commencement.

The implications of these parameters – stated previously as formal Policy Positions by Prof Garnaut and the ALP – are perfectly clear:

1. A “polluter” forced to purchase the initial “fixed price” carbon permits will be empowered to “bank” said permits, “from Scheme commencement”.

2. Due to their unlimited expiration date, the “polluters” will be enabled to trade said permits, after the temporary initial period has passed.

3. The “price” of carbon permits issued during the temporary, initial “fixed price” period, will be legislated to rise incrementally over that interim period.

Thus, it is patently obvious to any thinking person, that “polluters” forced to purchase carbon permits at (eg) the Year 1 “fixed price”, having been enabled to “bank” said permits, will be able to on-sell them after the temporary initial “fixed price” period trading restriction has passed, at the then going market rate.

Furthermore, as the price of permits will have been forced to rise by government decree during the initial period, this means that, absent a collapse in the market price upon the “floating” of the Australian carbon permit market, “polluters” will be granted opportunity to profit from the sale of carbon permits that they were forced to purchase – at lower prices – during the initial temporary period!

Indeed, those “polluters” who will be granted “free” permits will effectively be granted a free profit-making opportunity, directly arising from the nature of the proposed “initial fixed price” carbon pricing mechanism.

It’s as simple as that.

The government has been trying to con you with the idea that their scheme is “like a tax” for the first 3 years, and will then “transition” into a “market-based” Emissions Trading Scheme.

The real truth is, the scheme will be just as Trilateral Commission member Ross Garnaut has recommended, in its key details (below).

And in terms of its alleged goal of so-called “pollution abatement”, it will be just as farcical as the benchmark European CO2 “reduction” scheme. You remember – the great European system that the World’s Most Moronic Treasurer, Wayne Swan, has lauded loud and long.

The initial 3 year “fixed price” period will simply be a period in which 1,000 500 hand-picked “polluters” rent-seekers will be “forced” to buy X amount of carbon permits, at a “starting price” of $Y per tonne.

And … receive lots of free ones too.  To help “protect” our “trade-exposed” industries, you see.

These lucky “polluters” will bank some (or all) of these permits.  Doubtless in a new “independent” Carbon Bank, as recommended by Garnaut and the entire banking sector … along with those same banks’ “leading economists” (I can’t imagine why – can you?).

Each year during the 3 year “fixed price” period, the government will increase the price of that year’s permits.

At the end of the “fixed price” period, the government will “float” the scheme … Oh praise be to the gods of capitalism and “free markets” – we’re saved!

And those “polluters” will then be able to sell their “banked” permits on the open market. For a windfall profit.

A windfall profit on top of the windfall profits they’ll have already made during the previous “fixed price” period, by jacking up their prices, and using the cost of permits as their excuse for doing so.

Just like in Europe.

And the bankstering sector – the #1 drivers for global emissions trading – will make billions in fees and commissions.

Just like in Europe.

IT.

IS.

A.

SCAM.

I for one am quite looking forward to – not watching, heaven forbid – but reading the official documents from this Sunday’s grand announcement of the Green-Labor-Independent Alliance’s CO2 “pricing mechanism”.

For one reason only.

To confirm the two (2) key details.

The two key details that have been “recommended” in every Garnaut Review. In every Rudd-CPRS White/Green Paper. And in every Gillard government public policy document, as published on the climatechange.gov.au website.

(That is, until they removed all trace of the original CPRS documents from their website yesterday)

And the two key details are these.

Will the carbon permits:

(1) have an unlimited expiry date (or, an expiry date after the end of the 3 year “fixed price period”)?

(2) be bankable from the commencement of the scheme?

Dear reader, there is nothing else that you need to know about the final design of this scheme.

Nothing.

Compensation, blah blah blah … it’s all just noise to distract, and lull you into a false sense of security.

Because if the above two details are consistent with the recommended “design” from Ross Garnaut since the Rudd CPRS days, then you can rest assured of one thing.

Australia’s grand scheme to save the planet via economic planking, has exactly the same farcical, “fundamentally flawed” design as the European one.

And so, the results will be identical.

Huge profits for the few.

Raped wallets for the many.

And sweet FA impact on CO2 “emissions reduction”.

This blogger hopes that Australians will rediscover the spirit of our Eureka stockade heritage, and rise up against this scam.

For truly, if this Green-Labor-Independent Alliance is not stopped (and now, they have the numbers to do as they please), then you may rest assured that –

“The farce will be with you, always*.

* Because the Coalition can not – and I believe, will not – repeal it. See here, and here for reasons why.

UPDATE:

European’s warn of ETS perils, according to “their ABC” –

I Remember … Today Is Independents’ Day

4 Jul

Today is the Fourth of July.

That’s Independence Day for our American cousins.

The day that they celebrate their Declaration of Independence from the rule of tyranny.

Today, in Australia our Parliament is being taken over by a new rule of tyranny.

Green tyranny.

And who’s to blame?

The Independents.

The W.O.W.sers.

Spoiling every thing. For every one.

The Unholy Trinity.

Wilkie. Oakeshott. Windsor.

Eighteen months ago, we beat the Rudd CPRS scheme for the first time.

By swamping Canberra with our telephone calls, letters, and emails.

We demanded that the Opposition … oppose.

And they did.

Today, there’s no need to contact every Coalition politician.

There’s only three (3) men* in the country who need to hear your voice.

Wilkie. Oakeshott. Windsor.

Declare your independence from the Green-Labor-“Independent” tyranny … today.

Call them.

Tell them what you think of the proposed carbon “X” scheme.

And demand a new election.

Here’s their phone numbers again:

Parliament House Offices –

Wilkie – (02) 6277 4766
Oakeshott – (02) 6277 4052
Windsor – (02) 6277 4722

Electorate Offices –

Wilkie – (03) 6234 5255
Oakeshott – (02) 6584 2911
Windsor – (02) 6761 3080

Now you have no excuse.

Pick up the phone.

Do it.

Do it now.

Let’s give them an Independents’ Day that they will never, ever forget.

And remember.

You are an Independent.

And Every Day is Independents’ Day.

* If you wish to contact others too, right click and “Save as” on this link for a pdf file of the full list of MP’s contact details. Or visit the Parliament House website.

%d bloggers like this: