G20 summit airport vetoes 'climate guilt' billboard

The rejected billboard tries to guilt G20 into talking about climate change. All the usual NGO suspects are involved.

Eric Worrall writes: A prominent “climate guilt” billboard which was to have been displayed in Brisbane Airport, presumably somewhere global G20 meeting delegates could see it as they arrive over the next few days, has been vetoed by airport authorities.

According to the Brisbane Times;

“BAC [Brisbane Airport Corporation] told Fairfax Media the billboards were rejected last Wednesday because they were deemed to be “political”.

World Wildlife Fund, one of the nine groups asking for the billboard to be in place, said they were surprised the billboard was rejected by Brisbane Airport Corporation.

Fairfax Media was told BAC had a “long-standing policy” to reject advertising which it deems political.


I guess making G20 delegates feel bad about air travel, as they disembark to attend the big international policy setting conference, was a step too far, even for a modern environmentally friendly airport authority.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 4, 2014 2:08 pm

As if there is not already talk about it 24/7 to the detriment of good public policy and competent climate science process and input to informed public policy.

Joe Prins
November 4, 2014 2:12 pm

We now have independent confirmation that CAGW is political. Slow progress is being made.

Reply to  Joe Prins
November 4, 2014 3:09 pm

A forum I visit often, the MacResource Forum, has two ‘sides’, one for general discussion (Tips and Deals), and the other for ‘Friendly’ Political Ranting. Any discussion of CAGW will immediately get banished to the political side, and a skeptical signature will not be allowed at all (I haven’t tried a Warmist one). I think it is becoming clear even to the lay public that the issue of ‘climate change’ (née ‘global warming’) is mostly political.
/Mr Lynn

November 4, 2014 2:14 pm

These groups could loose huge amounts of funding if the CAGW meme is found out! The sycophants are running scared!

Reply to  ConfusedPhoton
November 4, 2014 2:40 pm

Sadly these groups are going to get a sudden boost in funding before the end. Big Wind subsidy farmers are chronically exposed to the collapse of the CO2 hoax. Their shale gas propaganda is failing and they have millions to spend on propaganda to keep their ponzi schemes running. Soon those NGOs will be showered in Big Wing dollars to pump up their last option, the “Ocean neutralisation” scare.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  ConfusedPhoton
November 4, 2014 7:11 pm

Huge amounts of funding have already been loosed.
Oh, you mean “lose”. No wonder you’re confused. 😉

Ian W
November 4, 2014 2:23 pm

I would have thought that ‘climate guilt was spending vast sums on ‘climate change’ research when a “child dies every 5 seconds from hunger and related causes”. Or perhaps Mr Cameron, providing huge subsidies to windfarms increasing heating costs, when 5000 of your country’s less well off die of cold in fuel poverty every winter month. Or perhaps Angela Merkel, when several hundred thousand of your country’s less well off are living g off grid as you have forced electricity costs so high they cannot afford to pay. Not to mention all those grant seeking academics who have happily sold their ethics to funding politicians. There is plenty of guilt to go around.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Ian W
November 4, 2014 2:44 pm

Actually, a billboard stating the affect on the poor of the CAGW gang green wasting vast resources on subsidized windmills, solar, expensive safaris to climate festivals, fieldwork as a basis for lying about the status of polar bears and other critters, tens of thousands of funded political science research CO2 control knob projects, hundreds of agencies duplicating each others’ work (even Mann stated that there have been dozens of hockey stick papers), etc. The massive tomes of the IPCC with thousands of scientists coming out with exactly the same story for 25years even with a pause that isn’t far from a quarter of a century. I think the public need a little support for their growing suspicions. The billboard project is a must!!

November 4, 2014 2:29 pm

Reblogged this on SasjaL and commented:
That WWF is surprised, don’t surprise me …

Bruce Cobb
November 4, 2014 2:32 pm

“Political” might be one description. “Looney” and “whacko” are better ones though.

M Courtney
November 4, 2014 2:35 pm

What the airport has done is stated that they judge G20 summits to be political occasions. They are obviously correct.
And therefore lobbying of G20 summits is also political.
So are NGOs who lobby G20 summits political parties?
Are pressure groups merely political parties without votes?

Col Klink
November 4, 2014 2:59 pm

Is it just me, or are 99% of these “concerned activists” required to have gray hair and beards?

Rhoda R
Reply to  Col Klink
November 4, 2014 3:19 pm

97% percent. Including the women.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Rhoda R
November 4, 2014 3:28 pm

“…there are no dwarf women…”-Gimli

Mr Green Genes
Reply to  Col Klink
November 5, 2014 1:36 am

Couldn’t say. Fortunately though, the converse, that 99% of people with grey (!) hair and beards are “concerned activists”, is certainly not the case.

November 4, 2014 3:03 pm

Yeah, we don’t have enough communication about the climate apocalypse. And so-called NGO’s don’t spend enough money on lobbying and politics instaed of actually helping the causes they claim to serve.

Reply to  hunter
November 4, 2014 3:33 pm

Exactly. Put up the %#@*!& billboard and take the money. The G20 is going to sweat over this?

November 4, 2014 3:12 pm

No freedom of speech in Oz?

Reply to  Speed
November 4, 2014 4:22 pm

I am a believer in free speech. Let them have their billboard.
I am also a fan of free enterprise. Let them pay for their billboard.

michael hart
Reply to  PaulH
November 4, 2014 5:24 pm

If they like their billboard, then they can keep their billboard.

Reply to  Speed
November 4, 2014 5:11 pm

I see it as a commercial decision, not a free speech issue. The airport corporation want people to feel good about using the airport. Commercial ads are OK, but political ads are a no-no because typically they upset about half of the people that see them. Allow one and you end up allowing them all and upsetting everyone.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
November 4, 2014 6:30 pm

Absolutely correct. I work for the Airport in question and it is very careful to be apolitical.

Reply to  Speed
November 5, 2014 2:24 am

My mistake.
Brisbane Airport Corporation (BAC), the operator of Brisbane Airport (BNE), is a proud, private, non-listed Queensland company …
… BAC has assumed ultimate responsibility for the operations of BNE including all airport infrastructure investment with no government funding.

Privately owned. They can post what they want and not post what they don’t want.

Reply to  Speed
November 5, 2014 3:56 pm

Rather that we don’t like political advertising near our airports.
Queensland especially is a “Tourist” State and we prefer that our visitors not be bombarded with political messages as soon as they get off the plane. Them’s the rules. They can have their billboard anywhere else they want, but not on airport property.

Tom J
November 4, 2014 3:37 pm

What’s good for me is not good for thee.
What’s good for thee is not good for me.
You got a problem with that?

November 4, 2014 3:49 pm

But aborting human life at a stage in its evolution when it’s uniquely vulnerable is perfectly acceptable, even considered decent, by these same folks. Perhaps they have an ulterior motive to their selective exploitation of science, or something that closely mimics it.
Anyway, the end is nigh. Buy your indulgences while they are cool. Or is it warming? While they are changing.

Reply to  n.n
November 4, 2014 4:06 pm

It’s probably less about killing people and more about gaining power.
Otherwise, more would have already died.

Reply to  n.n
November 5, 2014 10:43 am

May I politely suggest that abortion – yes or no (or somewhere in the middle) – is not a usual subject of these posts.
Many who pass by here will have opinions on abortion.
I do, too. I will not burden you, or the mods, with mine.
Can I sound off on Road Safety?
Or the obscene proliferation of legislation in, for example (and certainly not limited to), the shipping industry?
Well, the odd whinge may have crept in.
But are those as emotive as abortion?
I suggest not.
Perhaps no more, here, on this.
A link, if those who come by may wish to follow – for me – Off Thread, but, occasionally, no objection.
All in the best collaborative spirit, I remain,

Michael John Elliott
November 4, 2014 4:33 pm

Hello, whats the betting that even if “Climate Change” is not on the agenda, that President Obama will bring it up. He is a Greenie through and through, and the US economy is struggling to survive. The last thing they need is two more years of Green Obama.
Michael Elliott.

Reply to  Michael John Elliott
November 4, 2014 5:12 pm

“He is a Greenie through and through,”
No he’s not, he’s a rabid socialist, bent on the destruction of the American economy.
Whoops.. ok , he is a Greenie. !!!

Reply to  thegriss
November 4, 2014 11:55 pm

Except he is now a lame duck. Looks like the republicans will win the US senate, so both houses of parliament will oppose the president, now he can’t dodge his obstructiveness, as congress sends legislation it’ll be veto after veto until the US public is sick of the word veto. Personally I prefer our system where parliament (the representatives of the people decide) and the crown has no power to legislate at all. What the people want should be followed, the President represents noone, he can never represent all the people.
The us need to amend their laws so the president is more easilly censured or removed if he fails in his duty to uphold what congress have ordered him to do, or exceeds his authority. The president should not be allowed to legislate or even regulate (Propose legislation or amendments) that’s the people’s representatives job.

Reply to  Michael John Elliott
November 5, 2014 10:49 am

I believe the definitive term is “Watermelon” – green exterior, concealing a bright scarlet interior.
And, possibly, a hankering after Lenin and/or Stalin and/or Mao (of the 100,000,000 dead in his various ‘Leaps Forward’ and ‘Cultural Revolutions’.
Maybe not the best exemplars for a modern Western Leader, I suggest, [Miliband, E. – please note.]

Reply to  Auto
November 5, 2014 11:38 am

The bracket problem again for me, I see.
Please imagine there is a closing bracket – ) – after
(of the 100,000,000 dead in his various ‘Leaps Forward’ and ‘Cultural Revolutions’
thus –
(of the 100,000,000 dead in his various ‘Leaps Forward’ and ‘Cultural Revolutions’)

November 4, 2014 5:19 pm

Grateful for small mercies. It is bad enough that our city is going to be inconvenienced by the massive “security” these gutless wonders require for their beanfeasts.

November 4, 2014 5:37 pm

Far better that they meet the people they piss off face to face rather than hide behind barricades or look at posters. They might take their decisions seriously then.

Reply to  RoHa
November 5, 2014 2:26 am

First they used places that were exotic, Rio, Mexico, Japan etc. ( and a great holiday but expensive to the tax payers), now more and more they show up in far away, rather hard to reach for the Media and the average traveler places. such as Brisbane ( seems to be a way for them to restrict access to the media and to the average person). And if you ask, truly most people would not have a clue where Brisbane is. The answers would probably range from Alabama to Canada, Norway, Russia, Africa. Etc. Now that they have been “found out” they hide. I hope the Brisbane media will keep us informed on the next set of shenanigans they try to put over on us I know you guys will and thanks!

High Treason
November 4, 2014 6:10 pm

Was thinking of going to Brisbane to have more esoteric placards up to expose the UN and their cronies like G 20, but restrictions would have made them invisible to those G 20 gravytrainers. Thus ,a bit of a waste of time.Bit like the G 20 , the IPCC and the UN.

R. de Haan
November 4, 2014 6:12 pm

Obviously they didn´t pay enough. The green money machine sending us back to the stone age: http://iceagenow.info/2014/11/exposing-green-money-machine/

F. Ross
November 4, 2014 6:34 pm

“BAC [Brisbane Airport Corporation] told Fairfax Media the billboards were rejected last Wednesday because they were deemed to be “political”.
BAC staff clearly need to be “re-educated.”

November 4, 2014 7:55 pm

The absence of the billboards at Brisbane will allow delegates to arrive, having ignored fantasies and concentrate on dealing with real problems and allocate monies to worthwhile causes instead of pipe-dreams. Warmistas are directing vast sums of money to useless ‘climate change’ research, wind farms, etc, and subsidies for the Rich, while children die of hunger and disease.and elderly people die of hypothermia in houses that they cannot afford to heat. .

Reply to  ntesdorf
November 4, 2014 11:57 pm

Babies die in those unheated houses too!

November 4, 2014 8:16 pm

The Saudi’s are keeping the price of oil low so everyone can fly without guilt?????

William R.
November 4, 2014 10:35 pm

Why weren’t there climate guilt billboards at any of the IPCC taxpayer-funded parties? Oh, I forgot, the ends justify the means.

November 4, 2014 11:15 pm

I don’t recall a similar billboard campaign being set up to question the literally thousands of IPCC delegates arriving at the ever multiplying number of climate conferences.
At least some sanity is now returning to Australia. Good on ’em !

Jimmy Haigh
November 4, 2014 11:43 pm

We need a new word because “irony” doesn’t do this justice.

November 5, 2014 12:50 am

And we are providing cars and trained drivers to cart the world leaders around on designated roads that have had all the potholes filled. (Potholes on the other roads can just get bigger.). If I had my way, I’d make the buggers run from one place to the next, naked, through a gauntlet of citizens armed with wet towels.

Reply to  RoHa
November 5, 2014 4:44 am

nah, take em for a swim
is it stinger season yet?

Reply to  ozspeaksup
November 5, 2014 9:43 pm

Nah, we hardly ever get stingers this far south. Now, if the conference was to held anywhere north of Mackay, that would be entertaining. 🙂

November 5, 2014 2:34 am

Lewis P Buckingham above …Re Brisbane dam Fiascoes… very interesting, I had no idea that this was still being pursued. As I recall the then Labour Government of Bligh followed the silly advice of Tim Flannery who maintained it would never rain again in Australia so they should maintain the water in the dams. (or something to this tune). I cannot believe Australia has not taken away his Australian of The year title. Its actually a complete disgrace. Cheers

November 5, 2014 3:40 am

Actually I would like to see all billboards banned, commercial or otherwise, they are an obnoxious blight on the land. Eyesores of excessive stupidity and proportion. Yeah I know free speech, the public square and all that – just dreaming…

November 5, 2014 3:57 am

Sort of related: Not only have the Republicans won both House and Senate, Inhofe will be in charge of the climate chair!

Steve from Rockwood
November 5, 2014 5:18 am

Not sure if anyone else appreciates the irony of an environmental group trying to shame G20 delegates who are arriving in droves by airplanes to discuss reducing CO2 emissions.

November 5, 2014 6:00 am

The Freedom of Speech does not guarantee a podium from which to speak.

Reply to  tadchem
November 5, 2014 10:47 am

It speaks from the Podium of Responsibility.

November 5, 2014 4:04 pm

Am I the only one that sees incredible irony in the WWF and Greenpeace joining others to complain about international organisations?

November 6, 2014 1:25 am

It looks like the BAC managers understand that climate alarmism is highly political, and that green organzations are really just political lobby groups hiding behind the banner of saving the planet. Good for the BAC.
The vast majority of the public do not understand this.
Climate alarmism and these green groups have done tremendous damage to the environmental movement. They have made environmentalism a laughing stock, they have sent it back to the 1970’s.

%d bloggers like this: