Views on climate and energy legislation
THANKS to climate alarmism and resultant renewable energy targets, households, business and industry face crippling energy costs. As economist Judith Sloan explained: “the higher the proportion of renewable energy used to generate electricity, the higher the price of electricity”.
By 2030, taxpayers will have paid $60 billion in Federal renewable energy subsidies. This is approximately half what the crumbling car industry received in 15 years and about enough to build 10 large nuclear reactors.
By the 1970s, developing nations, with support from European Green parties, formed a majority in the UN and were calling for a New International Economic Order (NIEO). The objective was the transfer of “unfair” wealth from rich nations such as Australia to developing nations for perceived past misdeeds and as post colonial reparations.
This dream has lived on in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Under the Paris Agreement, the majority of nations will have to do northing to reduce carbon emissions. However, they will receive huge transfers in wealth from the richest nations to help them cope with alleged human-caused climate change.
The IPCC, the voice of human-caused climate change, is mainly composed, not of climatologists or even scientists, but diplomats and government officials. It reports on scientific publications in the field of climatology and in 2009 was exposed for manipulating data so as not to weaken its message. On the IPCC Australia’s vote counts the same as that of North Korea.
While reputable scientists question the validity of human-caused climate change, politicians cling to alarmism and implement policies that undermine our nation’s future prosperity.