UN wants us to shut up and pay
WOULD you turn up to a meeting where you weren’t allowed to speak?
I don’t think there’s any greater humiliation and made worse by the fact you’re then asked to pay billions just for the privilege.
But that’s what Australia is expected to do at the UN climate summit next week, now that Australia has been banned from speaking.
So why is Foreign Minister Marise Payne going?
She should save the $50,000 and instead send a strongly worded message that Australia wants no part of any climate policy that’s a racket for big emitters and a giant income redistribution program.
Personally, I’d never put reducing emissions ahead of protecting jobs and preserving our standard of living.
But even believers in the climate cult should be disgusted that Australia (which emits just 400 million tonnes of CO2 a year) is going to be lectured-to by China (that emits 20 times as much) and by India (that emits six times as much).
You see, China and India are regarded as “developing” countries and want to be the beneficiaries of a $100 billion a year fund that so-called “developed” countries are supposed to pay for.
Malcolm Turnbull promised $5 billion to this fund, but Scott Morrison has said “no more” which makes me think our silencing has more to do with dollars than degrees centigrade.
Publicly, at least, we’ve been put in the naughty corner because of our reliance on coal for nearly 70 per cent of our electricity.
Yet our emissions will fall by 26 per cent by 2030 while China’s and India’s emissions will increase.
A third of the 197 parties to the Paris Agreement are not allowed to speak which goes to show what I’ve said many times — we turn our economy upside down and impoverish households with high power bills for what? Watch Peta Credlin on Sky News, weeknights from 6pm.