The Copenhagen Agreement - Australia to lose sovereignty?

[sails]

Thanks Prawn for the link to Barnaby Joyce's website and petition. I found his senate speech on ETS on the site: http://barnabyjoyce.com.au/Newsroom...cleView/articleId/939/ETS-SENATE-CHAMBER.aspx

What is so scary is that we really don't know Rudd's real agenda on this issue. Nor do we really know for sure the impact this will have on us and our future generations - Barnaby doesn't paint a pretty picture. Whether he is right or wrong is not the issue. It's the apparent lack of information and confusion on something that potentially has an enormous negative impact on us - that is worrying.

IMO, this isn't something that Rudd should be committing Australia to without full disclosure and transparency. Why something as serious as this isn't being debated by the main line media is puzzling.

On the basis of the apparent smoke and mirrors, surely we need to voice our concerns urgently. Here is the petition link which takes one straight to the petition page.
http://barnabyjoyce.com.au/Issues/Petition/tabid/99/Default.aspx

2020, if you are thinking of replying - PLEASE keep it on topic...

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Thanks Prawn for the link to Barnaby Joyce's website and petition. I found his senate speech on ETS on the site: http://barnabyjoyce.com.au/Newsroom...cleView/articleId/939/ETS-SENATE-CHAMBER.aspx

LOL, from the above URL..."It is Kevin from heaven””the Prime Minister from heaven, I apologise, Acting Deputy President””who is going to develop a new tax to change the climate!"

"It is interesting today we open up the papers and we see: ‘Food Prices Set to Surge Under ETS’. Isn’t that amazing? We have been saying all along that food prices are going to surge"

Australian food prices have already surged by an average of 44% (saw the survey the other day, can't remember where)

The "working families" catch phrase has been all but abandoned by Labor and in it's place is the ETS and a brand new tax to support the Climate Change Police (aka New World Government)

 

[Julia]

You are the supreme optimist Julie. You are inviting the master of obfuscation to be helpful?

Whatever do you mean, Calliope? That is very negative on your part.
I strongly believe 2020 to be misunderstood by many, perhaps even including myself at times, and you should, along with the rest of us, be eagerly awaiting the undoubtedly erudite explanation of the workings of the ETS that 2020 must be about to provide.

I see Sails, too, is seeking more information. Given the lack of any clear explanations from the government, as she has observed, it seems we are dependent on the fans of Mr Rudd's scheme to explain it to us.

And have you noticed how he is trying to hijack the thread from "The Copenhagen Agreement - Australia to lose sovereignty" back to his pet subject. even though he started his own thread on this subject and there is also the climate change hysteria thread.

I notice that Sails too has suggested there could be a possibility 2020 - in his forthcoming reply - might not adhere rigidly to the topic.

I'd suggest to both of you that you are being uncharitable and unkind and that you should be following my initiative in encouraging 2020 to be genuinely helpful.
You should both go and wash your mouths out.

 

[Smurf1976]

2020, since you are apparently convinced that climate change is a product of CO2 , and that we must have an ETS to save the world,
and since you are obviously au fait with all the detail, could you kindly explain to us how our ETS here will work to reduce CO2, with particular reference to the free permits which will be issued, and the purchasing of permits to pollute?

Further, if Australia is the only country employing such a scheme, how is the climate going to be affected, either locally or globally?

In theory it's simply a matter of gradually reducing the number of permits available over time thus reducing the legal limit on emissions. Since they are tradeable, they will have a market value (just like shares) and polluters are free to choose to buy permits from the market or cut their emissions.

If we're going to limit CO2 then I don't have a problem with that principle and I'd argue it's not too bad a way of going about it. Let the polluters and the market work out how best to cut emissions rather than banning this, regulating that and putting restrictions on something else. Let the market find the cheapest way to cut emissions - all nice in theory and I don't object to the principle there.

BUT the problem quite simply is this. Australia is not a closed economy. There are completely FREE "permits" available in unlimited quantity from any country which is not part of the scheme.

Now, if I owned a steel works (for example) then why would I contemplate paying for increasingly expensive (as supply is gradually reduced) permits in Australia when I can avoid this cost completely by relocating my operations overseas? I wouldn't pay and nor would any rational business.

Just how global is the energy-intensive industry market? Best I can say there is to understand that individual Australian states (notably Tas and Vic) were competing in that game right through the era of high tariffs, quotas etc. In Tasmania's case since 1916, in victoria's case since the 1960's. In latter years Qld and NSW had a go at it too.

It's very much a global market where we're up against South Africa, South America, various Middle East countries etc. It's not some closed shop market between the states or between Australia and the EU or US. It always has been global, at least for the past century.

So an ETS in principle could work, as long as there are no free permits available anywhere. And that means we need every country to be part of it - we'll be economically bleeding rather heavily if we try to go it alone with zero benefit to the environment.

 

[Julia]

BUT the problem quite simply is this. Australia is not a closed economy. There are completely FREE "permits" available in unlimited quantity from any country which is not part of the scheme.

Now, if I owned a steel works (for example) then why would I contemplate paying for increasingly expensive (as supply is gradually reduced) permits in Australia when I can avoid this cost completely by relocating my operations overseas? I wouldn't pay and nor would any rational business.

Thanks, Smurf. That's my understanding also. If some of our best businesses relocate then obviously there will be an adverse effect on our economy as well as the individual tax every individual is going to be faced with in everything we do and buy.

I'm still hoping 2020 - or another fan of the scheme - will be able to come up with a more positive take on the scheme and how Australia's lone adoption of it will benefit the world.

 

[Smurf1976]

If some of our best businesses relocate then obviously there will be an adverse effect on our economy as well as the individual tax every individual is going to be faced with in everything we do and buy.

The really big problem is that the sorts of businesses that would be leaving are the largest exporters - here comes a balance of payments crisis.

The economic importance of these companies is very much misunderstood. It's not that they employ x people but that they export $ millions per year. Even in Tas there are individual processing plants creating $1 million a day + in exports and there are a lot more of that type of thing in the other states.

Take that out and we've got an instant crisis as a country that imports everything and exports nothing.

 

[Calliope]

.
So an ETS in principle could work, as long as there are no free permits available anywhere. And that means we need every country to be part of it - we'll be economically bleeding rather heavily if we try to go it alone with zero benefit to the environment.

In other words you need World Government to make it work, (which means giving up our sovereignty), in the same way as Marx and Lenin needed world government to make Communism work. It was called the Comintern.

Posted by Julia
I'd suggest to both of you that you are being uncharitable and unkind and that you should be following my initiative in encouraging 2020 to be genuinely helpful.
You should both go and wash your mouths

You are right. I forgive him for all the nasty things he said about me when I was a novice at this game. It upset him that an upstart could have the temerity to criticise the Forum's Gun Poster and his host of followers. I wish they were still around so that I could forgive them too. Thanks for putting me on the right path Julia.

 

[Calliope]

The big worry about Copenhagen is that the man representing Australia is a psychopathic liar. He is as cunning as a sewer rat and it is doubtful if he has firm beliefs in man -made GW or any other global issues, apart from his obsessional belief that he is a world leader, a modern day messiah who is destined for high office in world leadership.

One thing is certain about Rudd. He will sell out Australia's interests to advance his own personal interests. His motives as always are ulterior.

 

[brty]

The news out of APEC appears to be they can't agree on anything to do with climate. It sort of says that Copenhagen will be dead in the water for anything meaningful.

http://www.theage.com.au/environmen...-emission-cut-target-china-20091115-ig0b.html

brty

 

[Julia]

Brty, that exact same conclusion was discussed in an interview with Tim Costello on ABC Radio this evening. He suggested it is now widely accepted that Copenhagen will be a complete waste of time and that nothing will be decided.

 

[Julia]

One thing is certain about Rudd. He will sell out Australia's interests to advance his own personal interests. His motives as always are ulterior.

Just try telling that to the fans. The memory of the $900 is still fresh in their minds, and the potential impost of the ETS is yet to register.

 

[noco]

It looks like Copenhagen will be a complete flop and a gigantic set back for our fearless leader particularly if his scheme is rejected by the Senate.

 

[Calliope]

It looks like Copenhagen will be a complete flop and a gigantic set back for our fearless leader particularly if his scheme is rejected by the Senate.

The Senate won't reject it. It will only take a few soft liberal votes to get it up. I don't see how Turnbull will surviive the chaos of this capitulation to the alarmists.

There is no point in having another election, it would be a waste of money. Rejection of the Bill would have, at least, given a large minority a banner for unity, and with the right advocates, who knows?

 

[Calliope]

Mr Rudd's dreams of becoming the major player in the World Government to be set up in Copenhagen have taken a severe blow.

It all started at the weekend in Singapore. Rudd tried his hardest to corner the Indonesian President on the boat issue. It was beautiful the see the brush off that Bambang Yudhonono gave him. Rudd tried his hardest to maintain his cordial grin on his prissy mouth.

It would be interesting to know who Rudd took his rage out on later. Perhaps it was the hapless Stephen Smith, after all he is the Foreign minister.

The main point is that all the major Asian nations have now got Rudd's measure, and he is not going to be able to jerk them around on global issues like Copenhagen.

Asians can spot a phony much quicker than Europeans and Americans, but it is only a matter of time before these leaders wake up to this prissy mouthed upstart with the comical Southpark head and riding boots, and realise (as discerning Australians know) that he is just a bureaucratic windbag.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Brian Wilshire at 2gb.com has been talking for years about the global governance agenda. I hope he is wrong. He also wrote 2 books about it and just listening to him he said what he was talking about in the 80's is now happening.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Brian Wilshire at 2gb.com has been talking for years about the global governance agenda. I hope he is wrong. He also wrote 2 books about it and just listening to him he said what he was talking about in the 80's is now happening.

Not only is it true, it's been openly discussed by many of those in the know for years...(Rudd and Howard have in the past refrerred to the new world order in their speeches) and more recently by the newly elected president of the EU....

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...copenhagen_to_give_us_global_management#63675

 

[Aussiejeff]

Brian Wilshire at 2gb.com has been talking for years about the global governance agenda. I hope he is wrong. He also wrote 2 books about it and just listening to him he said what he was talking about in the 80's is now happening.

May I suggest we all bend over and smile wide as we get what we snivelling sycophants well and truly deserve....

 

[Calliope]

Not only is it true, it's been openly discussed by many of those in the know for years...(Rudd and Howard have in the past refrerred to the new world order in their speeches) and more recently by the newly elected president of the EU....

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...copenhagen_to_give_us_global_management#63675

By "global management of our planet" the new EU president means, of course, the global management of the planet's inhabitants, i.e. you and me. The Communists had a similar agenda and it took nearly a century to discredit their ideology.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

An updated summary of podcasts from 2GB's Alan Jones on this crazy agreement:

Alan Jones talks to Herald Sun journalist Andrew Bolt regarding climate change NEW
http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjonesbolt121109.mp3

Senator Barnaby Joyce joins Alan Jones in the studio to discuss emissions trading.
http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjonesjoyce041109.mp3

Alan Jones talks to Lord Monckton, British climate change sceptic, who says the Copenhagen treaty is about creating a world government
http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjonesmonckton261009b.mp3

Malcolm Turnbull joins Alan Jones in the studio to talk about climate change, boatpeople and Peter Costello's new government job.
http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjonesturnbull021109.mp3

Alan Jones talks to Dr Richard Lindzen - Massachusetts Institute of Technology – atmospheric physicist – regarding the global warming scam.
http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjoneslindzen301009.mp3

It seems that there are only a few in the media that are reporting the reality of the ETS, Copenhagen Treaty scandal and the recent Climate email scandal. I would have thought that this would have been front page news - and a story of a lifetime for the investigative journalist who breaks it open. Some more examples of the few who continue to drive informed info against one of the world's greatest hoaxes:

Alan Jones talks to Herald Sun journalist Terry McCrann regarding emissions trading. http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjonesmcrann231109.mp3

Alan Jones talks to the Reverend Fred Nile about the Stop The ETS rally being held at the Roseville Returned Services Memorial Club on Friday, 20th November. http://www.2gb.com/podcasts/alanjones/alanjonesnile181109.mp3

 

[dbcok]

I would have thought that the world's greatest hoax was WMD's in Iraq.Interesting that the nearly same supporters of that dishonesty are climate change deniers.Andrew Bolt is a prime example-so trusted by the coalition that he was entrusted with confidential government information to discredit Andrew Wilkie.A contrarian Bolt is not !
Think back how any doubters of WMD's in Iraq were dealt with.This time the vested conservative interests ,and their political sympathisers have the roles reversed on them a little.
The closer any potential agreement at Copenhagen the more desperate the vested interests will become.