An extract from Peta Credlin’s column in today’s Sunday Telegraph. The one thing Credlin didn’t mention when writing about handing over $4 billion to the Global Climate Fund, is that because of our $500 billion debt, that $4 billion, by necessity, will be borrowed money.
“….Forget all the language about rising sea levels in the Pacific and saving polar bears, the real purpose of international climate change agreements is to move money from the developed world, rich countries like Australia and the US, to poor countries in the developing world. The Paris Agreement is not about the environment; it is about de-industrialising the West and imposing a ‘moral tax’ on nations that used fossil fuels to build wealth over the past two centuries and key in facilitating this is the new $100 billion global climate change fund.
At Bangkok, Australia and the US were accused of stalling negotiations on the fund because they demanded greater transparency for how their billions would be spent. Quite rightly, the growing scepticism of taxpayers in both our countries is forcing a rethink on money being given away, hand over fist, to these global entities for little or no environmental gain.
But it gets worse, because this week, the climate change shame police came knocking on Australia’s door again. Despite our minuscule contribution of 1.3 per cent of global emissions, as a nation, we’re now told we’re expected to pony up some four billion dollars — that’s more than four thousand million of your money — as part of our promises at the Paris Conference in December 2015.
To big note himself at the Paris conference, Mr Turnbull promised “up to a billion dollars” for this UN green climate fund that was supposed to total no less than one hundred billion dollars each and every year. Now, something called the World Resources Institute says this week that Australia should be the sixth biggest donor to this fund — behind just America, Britain, Japan, Germany and Canada — because of our wealth, and because of our historical contribution to carbon dioxide emissions — and what was initially supposed to be a one-off contribution, of billions, could even be converted to an annual tax at the December meeting in Poland..”