Wholesale theft in the name of carbon
By Jo Nova
Imagine a third world nation was mired in corruption so deeply that the ruling class were able to stealthily steal the rights to vast acreage of private property from landowners without paying any compensation.
Imagine that one of the victims of this injustice had approached every court of the land and had not even had his case heard, even after more than 200 attempts. In desperation, and with no other avenue available, having officially “lost the farm”, he starts a hunger strike, which has now gone for 28 days unbroken, threatening to starve to death if he has to.
Welcome to Australia — right on track for Third World Status.
Get ready to be shocked. This is an moving example of why “policy by accident” is a dangerous way to govern. In this case, innocuous feel-good laws end up crushing upstanding citizens. Peter Spencer is still alive (though he may only have 12 – 20 days to go) but how many other farming men were put through the environmental-ringer, and drowned themselves in brandy, picked up a gun, or crashed the car into the only tree near the road? None of these deaths would be recorded as victims of bureaucracy.
Peter Spencer bought a farm south of Canberra in the early 1980’s. In the mid 1990’s new laws rolled into action that prevented land clearing. That meant, even though the land belonged to him, Peter could no longer clear the regrowth. Eighty percent of what he paid for was effectively confiscated. He received nothing in return and there was no way out. He couldn’t sell the property — who would buy a piece of land they have no right to use?
But Peter still had a mortgage to pay, and no way of earning the money to do it. Recently, his last legal avenue was exhausted, and the sherriff gained a warrant to take the farm off him. That was the final straw…
Peter Spencer has issued the Prime Minister of Australia with a letter of his demands. He wants a Royal Commission and compensation for all the farmers who have lost the right to use their land.
Compensation would cost billions. But Kevin Rudd’s “stimulus package” (spend-for-the-sake-of-spending), was 42 billion dollars big.
This is what happens when big government gets your money. It gives a “free” handout of $950 per tax-payer to randomly “stimulate the economy”, and uses the rest to build school halls, even in schools which already had a hall, or in schools which desperately needed a library.
…
Spencer points out that the land-grab by the Australian Government meant the nation met it’s Kyoto commitments, a target that would otherwise have been blown away. The carbon stored in confiscated land amounts to about $10.7 billion in carbon credits. Probably the total value lost (with interest) from the productive use of that land would be many times higher.
Read the rest of this tragic story here at Jo Nova’s website.
=============================
Here’s the most important question: How does the Australian Government account for sequestered carbon when much of this land is prone to bushfires? Do they reset their Kyoto carbon sequestration tally for that land back to zero when all that carbon goes back into the atmosphere?
I’m reminded of this story, also from Australia, where even clearing land to save your home from imminent fire is met with fines and legal issues by the government:
“We’ve lost two people in my family because you dickheads won’t cut trees down…”
The whole carbon scheme is insane.
NOTE: I’ve made a change to the title, based on some commenters objection to the use of the word “retarded”. While some saw it in the context of “mental retardation”, that was not my intent. I was thinking of the use of the word in the context of retarding enterprise and freedom. They have certainly “retarded” the ability of people to use their land. I’ve changed the word to “restrictive”. I apologize if this offended anyone. It was a poor word to use. – Anthony
UPDATE: News just in this evening via WUWT commenter “helvio”: ABC Australia says the Mr. Spencer has ended the hunger strike. Details here
Richard Henry Lee (11:35:11) :
“This story could have been written by Franz Kafka.”
Existentially impossible.
Spencer is a human and a land owner. The left and the media are trying to tell his story for him.
They are trying to coerce him and threaten him. If he doesn’t wan to sell, they can hit the road.
This kind of travesty and usurpation of individual freedoms and rights is happening all over the world. Here’s part of the reason and background: By the UN: The Year of Biodiversity. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8449506.stm
For some background on this: http://discerningtoday.org/wildlands_map_of_us.htm
And: http://www.twp.org/cms/index.cfm?group_id=1000
I saw this story a couple of days ago and found it difficult to believe. The impact he could have had from cleaning the land is zero yet what he would have planted would have have had a positive impact.
This is a bit out there but imagine if he had decided to increase the land he had left by excavating it to a depth (resulting surface area) equivalent to the lost land.
The drop in elevation could also be used to gravity feed irrigation?
Domed underground silos are an interesting idea for increased land use?
Dougal McFoogal (12:06:25) :
I don’t see how the farmer’s financial situation has any bearing on whether the issue he is protesting is a just one or not. It is not, so I believe that this is a character assassination.
Is fair and just to render his farm land useless without offering compensation? If so, why?
Peer-to-Peer Review (Part III): How ‘Climategate’ Marks the Maturing of a New Science Movement
http://bigjournalism.com/pcourrielche/2010/01/12/peer-to-peer-review-part-iii-how-climategate-marks-the-maturing-of-a-new-science-movement/
Pascvaks,
Yes, all these treaties and regulations are pushed from the UN down to the municipalities to be implemented (i.e. comply). They are just a means to the end you describe. Ultimately, the big boys want to force everyone off the land and into the cities ala Soilent Green…I mean Agenda 21. From there, us mere serfs will be easier to control so that they can really have their way with us.
There’s a larger agenda going on, as you seem to be well aware. AGW is just one weapon in the war chest they’ve thrown upon us.
“It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.
.
.
.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
– Club of Rome, First Global Revolution
Be aware
Peter is the victim of a remote bureaucracy, a remote legislature, a remote judiciary and an even more remote journalism.
The people in these estates that are supposed to represent people like Peter and his family would not be able to comphrehend the injustice that has befallen him.
The lesson here in Australia is do not allow political parties to create carreer paths for the people who are supposed to represent your community in a democracy. They soon team up to manipulate information and silence dissent, protecting their access to the trough.
I fully agree Rudd’s government has been retarded. The timing is off, the response has been sluggish, leading to an ongoing waste of energy and poor performance by this government.
The Australian government is in need of an immediate tune up!
The basic premise is that if the government slaps on some new land use rules which financially disadvantage the farmer then compensation should be paid. The government of the day can act on that.
In this case there are various issues with the individual – but it doesn’t change the above premise.
I think theat the Rudd Government are political opportunists, chamealeons that will change their colours at the drop of a hat if it suits them. They have decided that there are more votes in being seen to act on the environment but their parroting of Gore and Hansen one liners may bite them if the cooling accelerates and an election next year but you watch them blame the scientists and walk away, the Rudd goverment stands for nothing.
Whilst this is a tragic story, I believe that it is being wrongly characterised by the media as a land grab by the Commonwealth in order to meet Kyoto emissions targets.
As a solicitor as well as a scientist, I have thoroughly reviewed the legal proceedings that Peter Spencer has been through. I summarise them briefly here.
I also looked at the NSW Native Vegetation Laws under which decisions on land clearing are based here.
Having done so, I am yet to be convinced that the kind of conspiracy that is being touted actually exists. But if someone can provide evidence to the contrary, I would be very interested to see it, as there is nothing I would like more to see the Rudd government brought down by such conduct.
Simon
Australian Climate Madness
In case you haven;t noticed Australia is the most overregulated, overrated, overgoverned country in the world. basically lives off coal, mineral exports thats about it. Its lucky its got any tourist going there the service is about the worst in the world as well.
There comes a time in all countries when the people need to make their displeasure against the government of the day felt. Normally this is done through the ballot box, but unless the opposition parties offer real choices, then the people need to act.
Time, perhaps, for all Australians who believe in freedom and justice to stand together in support of Peter Spencer. Civil disobedience is a good first step, but failing this stronger measures may need to be taken.
When talking to friends and acquaintances here in the UK, they are all sick of our major political parties. None of them have policies that vary by a hairsbreadth and de-facto will live in a dictatorship, the Labour, Conservative and LibDem cabal (LCLC).
Many members of the LCLC fiddled their expenses.
No vote on the EU Treaty allowed by the LCLC
War in Iraq and Afghanistan agreed by the LCLC
Carbon tax on UK population agreed by the LCLC
Golden cushion for corrupt bankers agreed by the LCLC
The list goes on…
I just hope that people here are willing to try civil disobedience first, and that Australians do the same.
Some more Australian flavour from the State of Queensland –
There was a comment printed in the Ringers Column of Queensland Country Life some time ago about the Queensland Vegetation Management Act which went:-
What is the difference between the N1ger1an scam and the Queensland Vegetation Management Act?
Nothing really, except that the Vegetation Management Act requires the legal participation of all landholders.
Peter Spencer is the focal tip of a very large iceberg IMO
Paul Vaughan (11:40:07) : Canada’s current government is not far right unless you are a communist. It’s moderate at best.
John Hooper (12:10:45) “It’s sad that the integrity of this site has become increasingly defiled by political tribalism.” John, I agreee to a certain extent and I wish we could just stick to the science, but it’s not right to ignore (almost put deny, but thought better of it :P) the political realities that exist. The governments of the world have taken this from a science issue to a policy issue as we’ve seen here in this post. Just look at the recent Cap and Trade vote and you’ll see that there is a big right/left divide on this issue now. I don’t think tribalism is being displayed here. It’s just the poeple on “our side” happen to be on the right side of the political spectrum which, I’m sure, makes a lot of people uncomfortable.
Anthony, I appreciate your word play in your title explained above, but I don’t think most visitors will see your explanation and could be turned off by the word choice. Might be better to plead “No Contest” and change it.
Anthony, big fan here, but:
Skimming over the comments, I see you’ve been asked, asked, and asked again. Please change the #@ur momisugly(*@ur momisugly#& headline now (and the URL…), even if there’s still a discussion about whether the article is worth posting at all.
Using people with MR as an analogy for being crap is something the President does. Yet another characteristic of his worth avoiding.
What you write matters, lots of people read it and are influenced by it. I see already see people in the comments using you phrasing. No, it’s really not OK, even if (otherwise terminally wrong) lefties are jumping on it as an opportunity for indignant criticism.
The only common uses of the word without much context are mental retardation, and as an epithet based on that. (In addition to verb uses in full sentences, there’s e.g. the ‘retarder’ engine brake, perfectly OK, but there would be a context if somebody was talking about trucks.) Retarding enterprise and freedom? Sure, except the adjective modifies the noun ‘government’, so it’s totally the epithet.
Do I need to explain?
Every use of the epithet describing something/somebody stupid leads to more listerners/readers thinking its use is just fine. That alone is really hurtful. Being a parent of a chil with MR, hearing somebody described as “so retarted” when the person is question is really just #@ur momisugly(*@ur momisugly#& stupid, is really rough.
Furthermore, there is the increased thinking/feeling that its actual meaning of MR (as opposed to just being #@ur momisugly(*@ur momisugly#& stupid, without a diagnosis/reason) is actually something worthy of criticism or derision.
And where does it end up? As the reverse, a lot of people (especially children) with MR having “retard” thrown in their face (especially by other children).
My daughter gets enough of that.
The president certainly added to it with his Special Olympics comment.
Don’t add to it.
As another reader wrote:
“Anthony, I’ve got a brain damaged member in my family. The term ‘retarded’ really bugs me. You are free to express yourself however you choose. I’m just saying, as one of your loyal readers: dude…”
Indeed, as another loyal reader: Dude, really…
as for the people suggesting that the word “retarded” be changed – would you be asking it to be changed if the word was “insane” instead, on behalf of the mental health sufferers out there? Retarded has a meaning in the English language apart from referring to someone with some form of intellectual disability.
Moderator – my comment might have hit the spam filter as it isn’t coming up?
I see it has just been changed, so my comment above is now moot.
OK – ignore above
“John Hooper (12:10:45) :
It’s sad that the integrity of this site has become increasingly defiled by political tribalism.”
John, the very subject is a man’s rights and government.
Since when is government not political?
I think a second “Climate Gate” will help. Hey hackers come on, give us the second chapter!
There does seem to be a backstory, including both “Native Vegetation” laws and CO2-stupidity that are claiming “the first carbon bureaucracy victim” . The most fundamentalk problem for all citizens is when any government can “take away” in the future what an individual has a right to expect from his/her honest investment in the present.
At the same time, I like Paul Vaughn’s warning that I reinterpret as meaning that a global elite, under financial and global corporate leadership, is taking away job possibilities, earnings, savings, and retirements from those in the middle classes for the old saw “power and greed” in whatever form. Today they use CO2 and Carbon Credits. (Examples imho: 1a) Republican — Bush economic bubbles, encouraging a consumer economy instead of a producer economy, energy “trading”, and relaxing financial regulations; 1B) Republican — John McCain a full on supporter of Global Warming and open borders; and 2) Democrats — the entire take-over of the Democratic Party by fraudulent means funded by financial corporations, including the gangster Chicago way, marxists (under the moniker of “Progressives”), supporters of Islamist- extremists, and ACORN-SEIU.)
I am a liberal and I do not want my California developed out of its beautiful existence by (usually Republican) developers/corporations; at the same time, a contract is a contract. Most important is that Liberals and Conservatives must begin talking together about how we (and those in Australia and the UK) become producer nations again living with limits to expansion and development. And all CO2 rules and regulations must be deep-sixed immediately.
Apologies for going O/T, but I had to get this off my chest…
While I’m sure the use of the word retarded was not meant to offend those with genuine mental challenges, I want to point out something to those who see objection to the use of the word retarded as being “PC”.
If anyone really wants to see PC at it’s finest, they need only read something economic news. They spin “depression” into “recession” or, worse yet, into “the recovery”. THAT’S what PC language is all about. It’s all lies, damn lies, used to alter the perception of reality.
Using other words to soften the impact of meaning when refering to a person is…
But come to think of it, if all people have challenages of one sort or another, then they are truly no different from anyone else. So even the term “special” or “mentally challenged” is ill-conceived. They are people, and that is what they should be refered to as, simply because it is the truth.
And that is the difference between empathy and political correctness. The two things have absolutely nothing in common.
(steps off the soapbox)
I’ve made a change to the title, based on some commenters objection to the use of the word “retarded”. While some saw it in the context of “mental retardation”, that was not my intent. I was thinking of the use of the word in the context of retarding enterprise and freedom. They have certainly “retarded” the ability of people to use their land. I’ve changed the word to “restrictive”. I apologize if this offended anyone. It was a poor word to use. – Anthony