The Australian carbon tax will be paid to the United Nations

Home » Carbon Tax & ETS » The Australian carbon tax will be paid to the United Nations

The Australian carbon tax will be paid to the United Nations

Posted by: wakeup2thelies Posted date: June 15, 2011 | 19 Comments

Tweet
Email

The Australian “carbon tax” will be paid in-part to the United Nations World Government not by choice but by law.

In February 2011 Paul Murray from the West Australian reported that:

Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s new tax will be used to allow Australia to meet its share of a $100 billion-a-year United Nations fund to transfer wealth from rich countries to help undeveloped nations adapt to global warming. The Gillard Government is party to a UN agreement which Climate Change Minister Greg Combet entered into in December at a meeting in Cancun, Mexico, under which about 10 per cent of carbon taxes in developed nations will go into a Green Climate Fund.

Julie Bishop (Lib) from the opposition has twice raised this in Question Time, as recently as 1/June/2011 see below.

and also on the 1/March/2011

The Carbon tax is being used as a “Trojan Horse” for World Government we must continue to expose and resist this UN takeover.

by Adam at wakeup2thelies.com

Advertisement

19 Comments

paul drewry

“When I was on a Sunday show on Sunday, I said this” …looks down and has to read what she had said on Sunday….obviously can’t remember her own BS

Allan Jones

I would like to know who will issue carbon credit certificates and if they will be a bill of exchange as they will represent a value in dollars or carbon and be suitable for trading and speculation, resembling the credit created dollar value of loans and debts (bills of exchange act).
As they will be based upon an impossible dream of achieving the $370 billion dollar solar and wind plans they will have to rise in value to $400.00/ton to achieve this amount of wind turbines and solar thermals plus subsidy for solar panels, all requiring gas or coal “backup”.
A switch to all Natural Gas will cost only $35 billion and according to treasury would cost $40/ton to get change so the two schemes will require a much bigger carbon credit to get either plan to 100% the difference being about 10 times dearer for solar and wind with lots of speculation in certificates and efficiency of technology.
As this scheme suggested by the Labour/green government is the most costly and the most inefficient it will encourage the most debt and speculation but going by the above costs it will never achieve its goal or we go broke trying (fraud running amok in Europe on carbon credits)
In the meantime the Banker’s will be lending overdrafts to pay for credits and the credits will be speculated upon increasing the asset value of portfolios of investors, electricity bills will be getting bigger to the taxpayer, compensation will be phased out and the Banker’s will have made a killing.
Banker’s need this new way of expanding the debts and therefore the money supply as they are all facing low interest rates and fees due to recovering from the last “subprime” ripp off where again the taxpayer came to the rescue, so how much have you got left to save the Banks?
Have we ever had before a need to pay corporations in order to change technology? we switched from steam trains to electric or diesil, we built the snowy river scheme, we made a Holden car all without the need to put a price on change so why now, have you smelt a rat yet?

trevor

it is quite obvious that bob brown is running the labour party when are they going to have the guts to admit it

Greg.

The only solution is supporting the Australian Sovereignty Party – the only political party that will fight fiercely against the UN/NWO. You must get the word out, and get as many people to become members so we can federally register.

klem

The only solution is to throw Gillard out of office and repeal the laws. That’s the only solution.

John Westman

Do we need a new political thought in Australia?

 Do we need to put Australians first?

 Do we need to put Australia first?

 Do we need a new kind of independent member in our Senate? A member that is not beholden to a political grouping? A member who respects and promotes the democratic process? A member who promotes the proper working of the Senate?

There appears to be a mood in Australia against giving too much power to politicians. Recently in the NSW state elections, Barry O’Farrell won a resounding majority in the lower house, but was unable to gain a majority in the upper house. Many people must have changed their vote for the upper house from that of the lower house.

We believe that people want to break down the power of politicians and are reluctant to give unqualified power to any party.

We are researching the idea of having an informal group of people run as independent candidates for the Senate, in the upcoming federal election.

Not having powerful forces behind us can in one instance be an advantage, as we want to be beholden to voters and not to powerful special interest forces, many of which are more interested in furthering their own ambitions, at the expense of the working people and taxpayers of Australia.

These independent senators would act as the Senate is supposed to act and that is as a house of review. The Senate, has at times, ameliorated the worst of some legislation, but basically has, too often, remained a rubber stamp for the main political parties.

The Independent Senators would be required to adhere to a list of “reality checks”, or tests, regarding any proposed legislation before agreeing to support any proposed legislation. There would need to be strong extenuating circumstances to bypass these “reality checks” or tests.

 Is there a need for it? Does Australia as a nation need this?

 Is it legitimate? Does the government of the day have a mandate to introduce this? (Was it part of their platform at the last election?) If there is no mandate what has happened since the election to create the need for this to be introduced now, and not after the next election, when a mandate can be claimed.

 Is it cost effective? What are the costs; what are the benefits? Do the benefits justify the costs? In other words a cost/benefit analysis.

 Does it have democratic support? Do a majority of Australians want this and not some noisy minority?

 Do outside treaties need to be closely examined for a clear benefit to Australians? Such treaties could carry a sunset clause to protect us, in the long term, from bad government decisions.

 Is there a curtailment of sovereignty? As an example, people in the EU are now subject to laws from an unelected bureaucracy. Do Australians want this?

 Will it do the claimed job without side effects? What are the intended consequences? What are the possible unintended consequences? Does the expected gain from the intended consequences outweigh the risk of the unintended consequences?

 Will the legislation impact property rights without fair compensation?
No Australian should be placed in a worse position than prior to the implementation of legislation. This is only fair. Eg. Native vegetation laws.

 Will the legislation impact on individual freedoms without good reason?

 Price? Regardless of how desirable and popular it may be, can we afford it at this time? This relates to the financial cost of proposed legislation.

We see such a grouping of independent Senators being a viable option for many voters. It is stressed that this grouping would not have policies as such, like a typical political party, but would work in accordance with the principles above, to keep the politicians and the government accountable.

If you are concerned about our country’s future, we strongly urge you to let us know your thoughts and opinions, by contacting John Westman johnwestman@bigpond.com

Feedback from you is essential for us, to consider whether or not we move to progress the cause.

steven

it make me sick to what theys people are doing to our country some thing needs doing today now

Albert hopkins Shirley.

What people do not realize that the greens are breaking constitutional law under sections 44 and 45.

44, ANY person who
(i) is under ANY acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a FOREIGN power.
The Global Greens are a foreign POWER and as the Australian greens have signed up to the global greens Charter then they must vacate their seats in both house under section 45.
Just read the Australian constitution.
Albert Hopkins Shirley.

Jo-Ann Markowski

Julia Gillard and 54 members of Parliament have been charged with treason a few years ago by Brian Shaw & a group of Victorian farmers for breaking the constitution but the courts won’t try the case. You can see him on UTube with a series of talks explaining this. Also our voting system is ridiculous – when you vote they don’t ask to see your ID and we vote in pencil not pen LOL LOl LOL!

anita earle

Concerned, intelligent and educated persons of conscience and good faith must be feeling extremely paralysed / disempowered, that these issues remain unchallenged, beyond these discussions. What is the next realistic step?

Evelyn Scott

Gillard, could’nt organize herself out of a wet paper bag, with out taking orders from the Greens, U.N. and from Foreign Powers. She is one eyed, self opinionated, self conceited and arrogant, her ways and views are not for the people or Australia, they are for the world stage. My faith in all Politicians is lower then a snake’s belly, and I would rather have Mickey Mouse for a P.M. I am disgusted with her, and her party, they are always back stabbing and not doing the job they are over paid to do.

Granny Scott

geo

That is giving her to much credit,she is a thief who got away with it and continues to help her COMRADES to get away with it

geo

The really sad thing is the CRIMINAL WASTE of MONEY and RESOURCES on a PROBLEM that NEVER EXISTED.Mr Combet has all the brains of a flea circus and is a TRAITOR to Australia

Nick Folkes

First time I’ve been to this site, I like what I see.

The Labor and Green parties have consistently worked against the national interest of Australia. The treason perpetrated by both parties should not be forgotten – never ever.

The left have an eco-fascist agenda to push and the truth will never be tolerated by such vermin. The bankrupt global warming industry has been debunked yet the charade continues.

Resistance is needed through people power. Australians can not afford to maintain the ‘she’ll be right’ attitude anymore. Grassroots citizens need to rise up and get involved with centre-right political parties and also become Candidates. The Parliament needs an infusion of Patriotic people to challenge the left.

Ben Hern

What is required, parlimentary wise, to simply cancel one’s membership of the United Nothing-doers?
The savings to the treasury (by not having to make the myriad annual ‘contributios’) should help repay the debt induced by Labour’s stimulus program to fight the recession we didn’t have to have far quicker than the planned tax on thin air.
From the US perspective: http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6173
The UN has been a demonstrable failure since being established, any sensible MP should be questioning the value of continued, expensive membership.

Climate summit confidence trick escalates « ECONOMIC SURVIVOR .NET

[...] into the intellectual desert of anthropomorphic climate change propaganda. But being told we must pay carbon taxes or pollution penalties to centralised global agencies remains perhaps the biggest confidence trick in this world’s [...]

Eve

Electricity is going to be a luxury for the few with the Carbon Tax ingredient. But who wants electricity anyway when its planned to monitor and control everyone.

Albert hopkins Shirley.

People have commented about the senate here and what they have done.
Well the Senate was Guillotined so that they could not debate the carbon tax or the petition that was coming to THE SENATE.
To which the government DID NOT WANT TO BE DEBATED.
Guillotined our freedom of speech with in the house of the Senate.
Now the Governor General has Assented to the bills in December knowing FULL WELL THAT THE GREENS HAD NO RIGHTS TO HAVE THEIR SEATS IN ANY OF THE HOUSES OR TO VOTE ON THE BILLS.
Sections 44 45 and other sections of the Australian Constitution.
Albert Hopkins Shirley.

Dudley Jones

There are concerns at the UN to base the Green Climate Fund in Australia.

Australia is leading the world in carbon taxation. The move to world governance has to start somewhere and it would make some sense if the Australian Government participated in a transition to UN governance of the Nation. This would ensure active participation of Australian politicians in future world governance.

Surely Austrailia can provide the UN with their required immunity to prosecution, investigation and need for transparency.

Upcoming anti bias/freedom of speech laws should fit ideally with UN requirements.

WAKE UP TO THE LIES