By Jo Nova
The Seismic Rift continues as conservative politics fractures over Net Zero and mass immigration.
Astonishing polls in the AFR today point to a wipe-out of the old centre-right
The message is clear, the voters on the right side of politics don’t want to pander to the climate police and they don’t want mass immigration (which is also true of some voters on the left). It ought to be a snap for the Liberals and the Nationals to figure this out and win them back, but they are not even trying.
One Nation could win a blockbuster tally of between 46 and 59 seats in the Australian Parliament. The Liberal Party would be reduced to between 7 to 21 seats and the Nationals to zero.
It’s the Blob versus The People, but the Liberals are on the Blob’s side. One Nation voters know this is a fight for the country against corruption and globalist power, and they’re hardly going to be won over by a team that says they’ll stick with the UN because they’re a bit busy to just say “No”.
What is Angus Taylor thinking?
The Coalition’s half-pregnant policy position is that Net Zero absolutely has to go, but the Paris Agreement absolutely has to stay. This leaves Angus Taylor, the head of the Coalition telling us he won’t pull out of the Paris Agreement because it’s… irrelevant? How is he going to sell that — We’re sticking to all the international agreements that don’t mean anything? If a law achieves nothing, we will leave it on the books? There is no principle here except something else is going on and the Liberals don’t want to tell us what it is.
Does he think anyone will be fooled by this?
“We will get rid of net zero,” Mr Taylor told Sky News host Paul Murray. “We’re not proposing to get out of the Paris Agreement because frankly, it’s not going to change anything we’re going to do.
Taylor doesn’t even try to explain any miniscule theoretical benefit. Like maybe we get to sell more cheese to the French? He’s so unconvincing the only point he mentioned was: “I’m not a big believer in being dictated to by any international organisation…” he said, lamely giving us a reason to get out of it.
And poor Matt Canavan looks like a turkey, because he has to eat his own words. In the past he’s said we should get out of the Paris Agreement but now suddenly, it’s just a piece of paper:
“‘Net Zero is not in the Paris Agreement at all. We signed up to the Paris Agreement in 2015. Net Zero didn’t come along until years later … it’s just a piece of paper.’ — Matt Canavan to Lee Hanson from One Nation.
Senator Malcolm Roberts of One Nation explains that “No, Angus Taylor & Matt Canavan, it is not just ‘a piece of paper'”. That’s just a word game, and it’s clear the spirit and intent of Net Zero lives in there.
The monstrous reach of the Paris Agreement
By Senator Malcolm Roberts
The phrase ‘Net Zero’ was deliberately left out of the Paris Agreement, as it was deemed too politically charged. Instead, they inserted the legal definition of Net Zero into Article 4.1:
Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible … so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century…
According to Onassis, Farhana Yamin is credited with ‘getting the goal of Net Zero emissions by 2050 into the 2015 Paris Agreement’ and was a key IPCC architect. She later joined Extinction Rebellion. Even Wikipedia says, ‘Net Zero was basic to the goals of the Paris Agreement’ with the IPCC’s follow-up to Paris, the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5*C, popularising Net Zero as a short-hand for the phrase already used in the original document.
This is not in dispute by anyone except, perhaps, the Coalition, who are afraid that admitting the Paris Agreement’s role in tying Australia to Net Zero weakens their political chances against One Nation.
It’s a legal weapon
The Paris Agreement is a legal tool to pave the way to cement the intent in domestic legislation.
As we already know, groups of malcontents and foreign interests use these international agreements in lawfare as a weapon to wring out more money from the hapless taxpayer, or delay useful projects. If we have signed The Paris Agreement, they will say, and we are not living up to our own agreements, somehow, somewhere there will be an aggrieved party who will sue to win millions for their favourite island charity or grifting business.
Leaving dud legal bombs set in our legislation is inviting foreign adversaries to use them to their own advantage. China was caught funding eco-lawfare suits in the USA to sabotage American energy dominance. Do we want to make it easier?
The UN has told Australia (but not China) that digging up our own gas might be a breach of “international law”. In another instance, a Blobocrat Court has ruled that perfect weather is a “human right”. That court was the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), whatever that is — it’s more legal noise and propaganda to wade through. But each quasi legal statement gets used in a higher court, or in parliament, as a precedent, and thus the nonsense ratchets its way up to arenas that matter.
Even if the UN hasn’t succeeded yet in legally bombing a nation back to the stone age, we know it wants to.
Is any One Nation voter going to be converted by this (below)? If the Liberals keep pushing these contradictory messages which are obviously hiding their true intent, they look weak. If they are just doing this so the Liberals in Teal seats have a safety line, it isn’t worth it. Give the Teal voters the full force of the UN quagmire and failures and the fence sitters will be all yours.
This is the sort of Uniparty waffle that will lose even more voters to One Nation.
Image by Julius H. from Pixabay
Waiting for Dennis to have his say.
My view is the Liberal wets are still powerful in what remains of the Liberal party. People like the shadow the shadow treasurer Tim Wilson. That is why Angus Taylor and Matt Canavan have such a hard time trying to come to grips with Climate Change.
530
The Libs/Nats have all the ‘ammo’ that they need. They are just too timid to use it.
So One Nation will take their place.
520
Correct. Maybe Angus Taylor can steer the Libs along a valid path, but from where I’m lookong he hss to break the Libs apart in order to put them togethrr again with bits missing (the bits that won’t be missed).
440
The wets in the Liberal Party were responsible for the demise of Tony Abbott. People like the “prancing poodle” Christopher Pyne. That led to PM Turnbull, the very worst Coalition PM ever. The Liberals have been going downhill ever since and caused the rise of the Teals.
Polls consistently tell us that the conservative vote is bigger than the socialist vote, much like the result in the Voice referendum. I agree that Taylor and Canavan must ditch the Paris agreement if they are to convince electors that Net Zero is “dead, buried and cremated”. While ever it remains on the books there will be a temptation by another government to re-introduce the main driver of Australia’s current demise. Those within the party who want to keep it should be made to understand that they will never hold government while they hold that policy. If Taylor and Canavan began telling voters the true cost of Net Zero, the subsidies they are already paying, how much they could save by dumping it, who is benefitting ( that would be the Teal puppeteer, Holmes-a-Court among others) there would be a great awakening. The upside is far better than the downside.
The conservative side has to recognise that the enemy is Labor not one another. Pauline is keen to take seats from the Coalition ,not so keen to tackle Labor seats. There is no better time to work together to destroy a rotten government that has just delivered the worst budget ever.
490
Abbott to be elected unopposed as Liberal Party president, wets knee capped.
191
“Wets knee capped”
Tony is one of the smarter, nicer politicians about, and should have been a top PM, but does he have enough mungrell to oust the wets? They beat him last time.
200
‘ … does he have enough mongrel to oust the wets?’
With good strategy Abbott can unify the party and he is quite capable, they say he is already working out of Taylor’s office.
I see a loose coalition of Liberal, Nationals and One Nation getting us back into government.
91
I hope you are right.
70
Malcolm Turnbull undermined Prime Minister Abbott using similar tactics he had used to replace their first after Howard Government Opposition Leader Dr Brendan Nelson (2007-2008). Opposition Leader Turnbull (2008-2009) was replaced by Opposition Leader Abbott who led the Coalition to defeat Gillard Labor 2010 election forcing them into an alliance minority Labor government. At the 2013 election the Abbott led Coalition defeated Rudd (second time PM) Labor in a landslide defeat and gained all the seats Coalition lost in 2007 when the Howard Government was defeated by Rudd Labor.
Opposition Leader then Prime Minister Abbott remained leader from 2009 to 2015 when again Turnbull’s bag of tricks managed to pull out the final decider.
On the day he was replaced Tony Abbott told journalists at a media gathering that they must not accept leaked information from anonymous sources unless the source is willing to be named and is named. It’s not difficult to guess who this leakers from Abbott Cabinet were is it. And the common complaint used against Nelson then Abbott was opinion polls and of course leaking from shadow cabinet and later cabinet relentless negativity influenced.
At the 2016 election the Liberals lost all the seats they had gained at the 2013 election and the Coalition was saved from defeat as government by one National seat gain.
By 2018 the Liberal MPs had again had enough of the Turnbull LINO faction influence and replaced PM Turnbull with PM Morrison late 2018, and the record shows that Morrison Government as well as dealing with Labor States out of control COVID-19 pandemic period and relentless negativity from Labor Premiers and Federal Labor Opposition, and too many voters could not determine the powers and responsibilities of the Federation of States and Constitution as compared to the Commonwealth or Federal Government powers and responsibilities.
And this a a very short history of the LINO left damage to the Coalition brand especially the Liberal Party of Australia.
As I have posted with a number of references Rudd Labor committed Australia to Kyoto COP 1997 emissions reduction agreement it after forming government from November 2007. Rudd and Gillard Labor (and of course primary responsibility for electricity supply, development application approvals, environmental protection and so on, and states privatised power stations and transmission grid that were public assets (see former State’s Electricity Commission) from about mid-1990s (Coalition inherited the privatisation plan and first tranche of sales completed by Labor) and Rudd Government pushed hard transition to renewable energy and away from fossil fuels. Abbott Governmemt was blocked from repealing Rudd Gillard Labor legislation by a hostile Senate opposition, but they did agree to abolish carbon tax.
133
Paris is sort of non-binding. Realistically and targets proposed can be deflected if it is not in that countries interests. I can understand that politically you would not want to make a target of yourself and complicate matters by giving ammunition to groups who would make doubt in the minds of voters. A proper reckoning and a debate as times mature will (maybe) resolve things somewhat.
70
The EU made Paris Agreement (net zero) a condition of the trade agreement recently, and I suspect there are other levers from international orgs pulling the Australian pollies into Net Zero.
This is the time for principles to come to the fore and Canavan and Taylor need to stand up and be counted on to abolish Paris. As it stands now, the longer they procrastinate, the harder it will be to trust them when they say that Paris is finished. They are no different to the other mob in that sense.
Btw, how long will it be before Canavan comes onto The Outsiders and face the music?
150
100
It’s absurd.
Until Liberals agree to get out of the Paris Agreement they can’t be believed on Net Zero or indeed anything.
It again goes to prove that the Liberals believe in nothing and fight for nothing.
Australia’s future is with our only significant conservative party, One Nation.
It’s One Nation or No Nation. It’s that simple.
631
Agreed. And if the Libs know what’s good for them, they will ensure preferences from all conservative parties flow to each other before Labor as it’s the only chance of breaking the stranglehold. It will be interesting to see if they choose survival or annihilation as it will clearly show where the power behind the party lies. Do they choose the Uniparty or the people? The party’s very future depends on this choice.
401
Jo could you please reverse the “thumbs down”
for LittleDavey above….. I tried valiantly but can’t.
It was mean’t to be a “THUMBS UP”!!
40
The Libs have lost any trust they once had.
It’s going to be tough to regain it.
I’ve said before that the only way they can regain trust is to win an election – (without my vote), and implement policy change that the people want.
Only if that happens will I consider returning to the Liberal fold.
However I am a proud DELCON and would probably be considered a rusted-on One Nation voter now. It would take a lot to change my voting choice in the future.
350
Despite the superficial appearance of the conservative faction of the Liberal Party now running it (Federally), the far Left wets, now rebranded as the “moderates” are pulling all the puppet strings of the fake conservatives like Taylor.
Taylor doesn’t even sound convincing when he speaks. Indeed, he mightn’t even believe his own BS. I don’t think he’s electable as is.
520
The liberals have only partially learned their lesson after the last federal election. Dutton announced his nuclear power policy to make a distinction between them and Labor on energy during the election campaign. But when the expected attacks from MSM and political opponents came, he dropped the policy like a hot potato. He didn’t entirely commit to the policy and stay the course. As a result, he further distanced swinging voters from the Left for daring to suggest nuclear in the first place and he appeared weak to conservative voters because he seesawed on the issue.
Taylor and Canavan can’t just dip their toes into the pool- they need to dive in headfirst.
290
Dutton nuclear power stations Plan carried over from Morrison Glasgow 2021 “aspirational goal” based on new technology and not damaging the Australian economy (also Howard Government Kyoto 1997 terms and conditions (Kyoto ratified by Rudd Labor after November 2007).
Seven nuclear power stations including five large multiple generators and two single generator plants, to be installed on existing locations replacing the original coal fired power stations and connecting to existing transmission lines at each site.
Nuclear is new replacement and additional installed capacity, not to replace existing coal fired power stations while they can continue to operate.
And utilising all technologies already installed in the shorter term, no subsidies and penalties against power station competitors.
90
It’s easy. You transfer Net Zero from carbon to immigration.
530
No increase in people while increasing carbon combustion would translate to prosperity. The reverse of the current impoverishment, which is becoming evident to many more.
Where is the AI revolution in government departments? This is the next big step on the productivity ladder. The foundation layer of AI is energy. The lower the cost of energy the faster the growth in AI.
I wonder who One Nation will appoint as head of Australia’s DOGE? I wonder if Elon would send a team for free.
230
Have you seen that AI just settled a significant open question in mathematics?
https://openai.com/index/model-disproves-discrete-geometry-conjecture/
“If a human had written the paper and submitted it to the Annals of Mathematics and I had been asked for a quick opinion, I would have recommended acceptance without any hesitation” – Fields medallist Tim Gowers. The Fields medal is the equivalent in mathematics of the Nobel Prize.
Perhaps we shall soon know whether there are any odd perfect numbers. (A perfect number is equal to the sum of all its divisors, such as 28=1+2+4+7+14.) That has been an open conjecture since the ancient Greeks. Obviously nobody has ever found one. Then there is Goldbach’s conjecture from 1742, that every even number is the sum of two primes, which is still open (and obviously nobody has found an exception).
30
Even Dr Hansen said the Paris agreement was BS and fra-d and Lomborg also said it was a joke and would make SFA difference to the climate or temperature.
So what are Taylor and Canavan waiting for and why are they helping Labor to another win in 2028?
381
Is Labor vulnerable on Net Zero and the Paris agreement?
The Libs are dithering but Labor is locked in!
Labor voters may be tribal but if another 5 seats are lost from Labor to ON conservative forces can form a minority government.
If a day is a long time in politics the two years is an age.
230
Neville, Perhaps they figure if they can undermine One Nation enough to remain as opposition they get to keep their cushy tax payer funded salaries and continue to participate in whatever grift and corruption Labor are doing. (and they’re doing a lot)
170
People don’t understand that there is a cascade of legislation which has its foundation in The Paris Agreement. Cancel that an the money machine stops. All the stack of cards fall down.
Take the 2011 Carbon Credits(Farming Initiative Act) . And the 2022 Safeguard Mechanism relies on these Carbon Credits to launder the CO2 theft. They all take their legal framework from international agreements, not Science.
(2) The first object of this Act is to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, and avoid emissions of greenhouse gases, in order to meet Australia’s obligations under any or all of the following:
(a) the Climate Change Convention;
(b) the Kyoto Protocol;
(c) the Paris Agreement;
(d) any other international agreement.
And every politician understands this. You have to get your authority from somewhere. No one has actually proven the man made CO2 (fossil fuel CO2, not just breathing of all life on earth) has produced the slow steady linear increase in CO2 since 1750. So as to pretend it’s true, the gnomes of Canberra invented this obligation and pushed Prime Minister after Prime Minister to agree to their ‘international legal obligations’. No harm done if you just sign this meaningless piece of paper. So Scott Morrison signed.
Since 2001 and John Howard, the overpaid internationalist minions of Canberra have looked after their UN overlords with those wonderful international consulting jobs and created 25 years of binding legislation based on ‘agreements’.
These ‘agreements’ are the entire and sole basis of perhaps 20 CO2 Acts of Australian parliament. Of course Angus Taylor and friends don’t want to kick out the stool. They would all hang themselves and their UN friends.
460
And “international agreements” is how the country is governed extra-territorially and extra-judicially without the will of the people.
The globalist Lib/Labs say something like “we can’t do that, we have international obligations to meet”.
TRUMP understood that was also happening in the United States which is why he is withdrawing from as many as possible.
The globalist governance started in 1983 after the High Court ruled in Commonwealth v Tasmania, the “Tasmanian Dams Case”, that the Federal Government could block construction of a dam under the Constitution’s “external affairs” power.
290
The minions in Canberra have never stopped generating these laws and updates and amendments since 2001. Each creates news government jobs, departments, careers. Carbon money flows like a river, if not in the budget, but to supervise the huge CO2 dependent business, like Snowy II, now twice the cost of the Panama Canal and comparable to the English Channel tunnel. For nothing at all. It’s only relevant to wind and solar. And may never work or be finished.
Destroying carbon based electricity moves all power to a National grid controlled by Canberra because state governments have exclusive control of minerals and on shore gas under the Constitution. Canberra, Washington, Whitehall are out of control, inventing their own jobs and all looking to the octopus which is the 80,000 people strong UN for leadership in world socialism/communism.
Rip up the Paris Agreement and tens of thousands of jobs in Canberra would vanish overnight as laws which created the jobs would be invalid.
440
All good. Has anybody ever made a list of what global Warming/Climate Change is costing Australia? We read of the cost of individual projects but no running total of what has been spent. Compare that cost to the cost of building the replacement coal fired stations plus the extra needed for AI and manufacturing. We know the former far exceeds the latter, just take the Snowy project on its own.
The NSW Treasurer just said during the week that the only expenditure preventing NSW from slipping into recession was spending on renewable energy projects. That is a disaster. Properly prosecuted the cost of renewables could bury Labor, the Greens and the Teals. It would make the Liberal wets think again as well.
300
I would love to know the projected cost of the 35% CO2 tax. But it’s not going to be reported as all this is off budget. Increasingly Australia is being run in the room out the back and the Treasurer claims to have balanced the budget, because most of the big money is reported to no one publicly.
250
If you spot “Carbon Neutral” beef or pork in your supermarket, be aware that you can become a participant in the generation of carbon credits, via the chemical Bovaer 20, which is added to the animals food. Me, I choose not to participate in medical/climate experiments.
200
“Destroying carbon based electricity moves all power to a National grid controlled by Canberra because state governments have exclusive control of minerals and on shore gas under the Constitution.”
TDF, you nailed it! This is what our “global elite” are really systematically planning and implementing (while Australians are asleep at the wheel).
When we see nations committing economic suicide and deindustrialisation on a grand scale it is not about climate or “planetary boundaries”. It is about power. The power that comes with global governance…unelected, no appeal, no recourse. Raw, naked power. The power to control the military of every country. The power to “collapse industrialized civilizations”, reducing them to 19th century agrarianism with modern soft-tech monitoring and control. The power to replace ownership of property with conditional stewardship. The power to replace freedom with serfdom. The power to fear monger populations into the belief in a climate crisis and the belief that CO2 is the control knob for climate, while in reality it is the control knob for humanity. Heady stuff for sure. Total power… the dream of every tyrant who ever lived. A nightmare for every one else.
Detailed question and answer analyses:
https://gemini.google.com/share/bf49081b7edd
50
Tell Taylor & all the “ moderates, Jane Hume included “ that if the net zero handbook, instruction manual, orders, UN agreements on mass or other 3rd world immigration
issues are not going to be definite policy changes, then we, the conservatives voters will hand the LNP their asses when election day comes around. The LNP should not try any deflection , obstruction or outright “ misinformation “ to put off the inevitable because we’ve had plenty of that nonsense from the ALP & it’s easily recognisable!!!
Enough is far more than enough. Stop behaving like spoiled kids & get it done!!
221
For example the 2022 Safeguard Mechanism
Safeguard Mechanism reforms
This Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) analyses options for reforming the Safeguard Mechanism to contribute to
meeting Australia’s Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement
220
The Paris agreement allows these people to pass legislation which has no basis in reality or science or law in Australia. There has been no decision by any scientific body that fossil fuel CO2 is (adversely) responsible for the climates of the world. And 38 years after Al Gore discoverd it, Climate Change is the fake science which pays millions of salaries, starting in the Holy Grail UN jobs and conferences.
After all, what’s the harm in a little piece of paper?
280
Angus Taylor. LLB(Hons) Superbly qualified. He knows full well the value of the Paris Agreement to the energy sector.
A former management consultant and Rhodes Scholar, his career spans two decades in the private sector and senior roles in federal politics, (Turnbull & Morrison Governments) notably serving as Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction.
Private SectorBefore entering politics, Taylor had a prominent career as a management consultant.McKinsey & Co: Worked as a partner at the global consulting firm, advising clients across the energy, resources, and agribusiness sectors. He was in the Morrison Government as Energy and Emissions minister when Net Zero was signed! He was likely behind the signing of the Net Zero agreement!
Port Jackson Partners: Served as a Director at the boutique Australian strategy consulting firm.
Political CareerTaylor entered federal parliament in 2013 and has steadily risen to the highest levels of the Coalition.
Education University of Sydney: Graduated with a Bachelor of Economics (First Class Honours, University Medal) and a Bachelor of Laws (Honours).
University of Oxford: Studied as a Rhodes Scholar, earning a Master of Philosophy in Economics
And we are to believe he doesn’t understand the foundational legal obligations of the Paris Agreement? Pull the other leg! Whole businesses would come crashing down.
As for Tony Abbott’s removal, Angus Taylor “refused to publicly disclose who he voted for in the ballot when Malcolm Turnbull successfully challenged the Prime Minister” but was a minister in both the Turnbull and Morrison governments. So we can guess.
I would have thought Taylor was totally compromised as a senior career consultant in the Energy consulting sector and then minister for energy and emissions? And Net Zero.
390
If not Taylor then who? First he has to either convince the wets in the Liberal party to drop the Paris Accord or have them leave to be replaced by true conservatives. That will take time. The elevation of Tony Abbott to president of the LP should speed up the process as he has always supported the importance of representatives and candidates being selected by the membership. The current rot set in when people like Photios by passed the membership and installed the elites favourites. Everyone of those people have been failures, many replaced by Teals.
100
In fact, now that I have looked at Angus Taylor’s profile, there is no one in parliament more vested in Net Zero. LLb(Hons), M.Phil(Economics)(Oxford), Rhodes scholar (Like Abbott and Turnbull) than Angus Taylor.
It looks like he has built his private consulting “energy and emissions’ consulting business on Climate Change and his parliamentary career on Net Zero!
And likely to have been the person who convinced Scott Morroison to sign us up for Net Zero. As well as the most senior remaining member of Turnbull’s group who betrayed and removed Tony Abbott. Rewarded the ministry on Energy and Emissions!
In the assassination of Julius Ceasar, it was not just one Brutus. With Tony Abbott, there were other trusted people. Two of whom were also Rhodes scholars.
If Malcolm Turnbull was Brutus, Scott Morrison was Junius Brutus and Taylor was Brutus Alibinus. Ceasar was stabbed 23 times. No wonder Tony Abbott dropped his bundle! Taylor was the energy and emissions McKinsey consultant who rode Abbott’s coattails to parliament in 2013. Except his motives were the exact reverse of Abbott’s.
Marcus Junius Brutus: Once a trusted friend and ally of Caesar, whose betrayal is famously immortalized in history.Gaius Cassius Longinus: A key political mastermind behind the plot to murder.
Gaius Cassius Longinus: A key political mastermind behind the plot to murder the dictator.
Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus: A highly trusted military commander and close comrade of Caesar, whose betrayal ensured Caesar attended the Senate meeting that day.
Et tu Brutus? Turnbull, Morrison and Taylor!
Now it’s Tayolor aka Brutus Albinus vs Albo Akhbar.
Morrison’s Emissions Minister Taylor is the last Brutus left standing from the Ides of March brutality in 2015 and only one step away from being Prime Minister following Turnbull and Morrison.
Long live Climate Change! The Liberal party is doomed.
260
Paris!! I would be pulling out of any international agreement, no matter how old, that forces Australia to reduce either CO2 or CH4 emissions. Any trade deals that mentions “emissions reductions”, do not sign them. Australia’s emissions of CO2 are barely 1% of total, the Southern Hemisphere is a sink and our country is huge sink. It’s totally illogical virtual signalling.
340
All CO2 goes into the water where 98% of all CO2 lives. And what was 1% pa in the air becomes 0.02% in the ocean and vanishes. Australia’s contribution to total world CO2 is 2% of 1% of 2% or 0.004%. And we signed an international agreement to reduce our CO2 output? To save the planet, of course.
300
Or to put it another way, even if fossil fuel Co2 stayed in the air, Australia’s annual contribution is only 2%. In fact 40% of fossil fuel CO2 is from China which opens a new coal power plant every week.
So 98% of the (fossil fuel CO2) in our air is foreign. And we have to pay other countries for carbon credits? We should start with punitive CO2 taxes on China. Nearly half the new CO2 is Chinese.
260
We should just announce that we will decarbonise at the same rate as China, end of story.
110
Ok, I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, but that Senate Parliamentary report of 2013, which is no longer in the library as it was, said that Australia’s Co2 emissions were 545,000 tons and Australia’s Co2 absorption was approximately 2 million tons. Where the hell have the “conservatives” and assorted “experts” been/are on the use of this information?
Why don’t the “conservatives” hammer Labour and their running dogs to prove that Australia is not already a net zero sink?
310
The response to my usual exercise investigating the level of cool aid in grok training material…
Overall Rating: Solid 7/10 for skeptical commentary. It effectively calls out political inconsistency and voter frustration but leans more polemical than analytical. Jo Nova’s strength is cutting through establishment messaging; her weakness is sometimes binary “fight the Blob” framing.
—
I then went on to ask about the ratcheting provisions preventing signatories from reducing commitments. Although I can’t follow grok’s line of argument that the Paris nonsense is better fought from within than cleanly exiting, I pass it on FWIW…
The ratchet is more of a political norm than an ironclad legal trap. Ambitious governments treat it as binding in spirit; skeptical ones treat it as flexible. This is why critics call it a “piece of paper” — it relies heavily on goodwill and domestic politics rather than enforceable obligations.
In short: Winding back is possible and has been done, but it’s easier politically if done while remaining in the Agreement with adjusted (weaker) NDCs rather than full exit. Full exit removes the procedural obligations entirely.
100
As I pointed out before, as none of this is proven science, every single Australian Act relies wholly on these ‘worthless’ international agreements for authority.
Otherwise the government is passing nonsense legislation without any purpose except to punish Australians. And these Acts refer to each other for support. The 2022 Safeguard mechanism relies on Julia Gillard’s 2011 Agricultural Carbon Credits Act. Remember “there will be no Carbon Tax in a government I lead”. She lied.
270
Indeed. The entire house of klimate kards is built on anti-scientific non-falsifiable hermetically sealed pretending.
And I remember with a chill running down my spine the day I learned in constitutional law lectures that signing a treaty compels Australia to pass supporting legislation. That was the day I realized that those who drafted our constitution had either deliberately or unwittingly built a mechanism for the destruction of national sovereignty.
The question of course is what we all do now. Thankfully there are many here and elsewhere who are determined to set things right.
160
Every signed agreement by the ultimate elected representative of the people is in effect an unlimited IOU. And no one thereafter has to justify the spending. As for ‘non binding’, who cares?
Which is why no one has commissioned a report on whether man made CO2 driven rapid Global Warming is proven science. (a tautology). Because it isn’t. But we Australians have guaranteed to fix it, even if we are the only ones stupid enough.
190
The politics is much easier for One nation than is it for the Liberal or Labor parties.
Lets back a full exit and get rid of the Paris Agreement forever
230
As Trump found, these agreements are designed to have fine print which means you have to take a year to exit.
Of course you could just ignore it, but the UN will not. So Trump categorically rescinded Paris last time but the bureaucrats kept going until Biden(Obama) took over and instantly put it back because he had not legally withdrawn at all. It’s how lawyers work.
120
Yes, how IS Brexit going….
30
I have recently become a One Nation voter having been a lifelong (now 76) Liberal voter, primarily due to their half-hearted opposition to the policies destroying the Aussie traditional lifestyle.
Yes, get out of the Paris Agreement and destroy both Net Zero ambitions PLUS stop subsidising and building all solar/wind generation unless there is a demonstrable economic benefit to using it. Very little would be built under those conditions, I suspect.
One Nation and the Libs should also be loud about the other influences of the United Nations (e.g., WHO) and be willing to do as Trump has done in cancelling memberships and/or not funding them. There is too much obeisance to unelected overseas influences that would have us all pandering to their vision of the future – them in charge and us following their dictates to our own destruction.
360
LNP are heavily conflicted in the Climate Change™ scam. Turncoat is a prime example; making money from the scam with his family wind farms.
Has anyone looked at the investments of the current LNP members and their backers?
One nation offers a refreshing change of personnel in government with life experience beyond career politics. Imagine if we have more Malcolm Roberts, Chantelle Thommases, Pauline Hansons etc. and more of the unconflicted LNP members with life experience beyond politics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJF4gyWAReE
270
Ok, I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, but that Senate Parliamentary report of 2013, which is no longer in the library as it was, said that Australia’s Co2 emissions were 545,000 tons and Australia’s Co2 absorption was approximately 2 Million tons. Where the hell have the “conservatives” and assorted “experts” been/are on the use of this information?
Why don’t the “conservatives” hammer Labour and their running dogs to prove that Australia is not already a net zero sink?
70
Wasn’t it Jane Hume who declared prior to the last election that concern about the erosion of women’s rights and privacy by the transgender nonsense was a “fringe” issue, or something similarly arrogant and dismissive?
Now look at the libs/nats scramble to get aboard that issue and demand correction to the Sex Discrimination Act that the Gillard government amended to exclude any reference to actual sex!Seems it IS a mainstream concern after all.
The same realisation might just hit them on the backside eventually.
Maybe they’ve noticed that PHON have good policies after all.
240
The Libs had nearly nine years in power after Gillard and did not correct the Sex Discrimination Act.
Perhaps that’s because they did not oppose or indeed actively voted for the 2013 Gillard amendments.
So they fundamentally believe that a woman is a man who claims he is a woman.
210
It’s part of whittling down what we believe. Religion, history, our heroes, our values and even our biology. Captain Cook was a monster. Our VC was a murderer. Our scientists agree with man made Global Warming. No scientist ever wrote a paper on why women don’t have …. Now we are told biological sex is a choice. And become confused rabble who cannot see the wisdom of using our own coal to heat our homes or power our factories.
280
You can expect more & more of similar obfuscation from the LNP regarding net zero & the Paris Accords, should they regain power. That’s the reason Taylor WILL NOT DUMP the accords. Australia cannot afford to have Labor Light in power any more than a full blown ALP government!
Taylor will simply play down the importance of the accords & never mention them again whilst employing ALL the accords requirements!
That’s treason in my book!
230
It’s almost certain that as the Minister for Energy and Emissions, it was Taylor who told Morrison to sign up to Net Zero. As a lifelong energy and ’emissions’ consultant, Taylor is likely the real problem.
220
Over 40 nations pledged to phase out coal use within the 2030s (and within the 2040s for poorer nations). This includes major coal-dependent nations such as Poland, Vietnam and Chile. However, some of the world’s largest coal-consuming nations, such as China, the US, India and Australia, did not sign up for the pledge.
20
You can tell when a politician is lying. His lips are moving.
30
If a politician was lying about not signing Kyoto net zero one would produce the paperwork and signature as evidence.
10
Or maybe the Libs realised that they’re losing votes to One Nation because of their dismissiveness of what a lot of people know is a common sense issue which affects all women/girls. Nobody needs to have a PHD to understand the inherent differences between males and females and why segregation is needed in dressing rooms and sports.
I really do not trust the Libs.
190
So that’s it then! The Coalition’s still got a ‘bun in the oven’ with the Paris Agreement. A vote for them will mean that Australians will have to look after the ‘Frog’ baby that will turn into a conniving, ‘warts and all’ UN toad.
120
I fear that we are seeing the Conservative version of the DLP split and it will take 20 odd years for the two parties to get their sh!t together. Imagine how much damage Labor will have done by then.
130
That was a religious schism and in some ways so is this, climate change has become a religion.
121
They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords,
Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords.
They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;
They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.
And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,
Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs.
We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,
Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.
It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,
Our wrath come after Russia’s wrath and our wrath be the worst.
It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
But we are the people of Australia; and we have not spoken yet.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.
– G.K. Chesterton, with one change.
140
Nice. People wrote well once. Now it’s sound bytes and canned opinions and hate speech laws if you disagree. Especially in the UK where one woman went to jail for three years for a tweet stating her obvious. With which millions agreed, which was the problem.
150
Having been officially cancelled on Quora and all my thousands of comments instantly deleted for a ridiculous made up reason, the internet gate keepers are powerful. Censorship is now the way of the land. Silence and utterly delete the voices of dissent, especially if they know too much. I’m suprised there are not more attacks on this blog.
180
TdeF,
I am in the process of being banned by Facebook.
Geoff S
30
Clearly you have transgressed the unwritten law.
00
Recently, being within the last two weeks, news leaked at Albanese Labor have quietly dropped their since May 2022 RET82% agenda and the latest news is – “Jim Chalmers’ net zero silence in the Budget speech is further evidence Labor is dumping, or at the very least watering down, its green energy rhetoric as quickly as it decently can, writes Nick Cater.”
So much for signed up to net zero Glasgow COP 2021, EU Trade Agreement etc
70
MIT Advice;
How are countries held accountable under the Paris Agreement?
The short answer is that there is no hard enforcement in the Paris Agreement. But all the members regularly meet, share progress, and renew their pledges of climate action, encouraging every country to step up its commitments.
Updated August 8, 2025
The Paris Agreement is a diplomatic agreement that brings the world together in a common effort to combat climate change. The most important piece of this agreement is that all members must make pledges of action every five years to lower their greenhouse gas emissions. Those pledges are called their “Nationally Determined Contributions” (NDCs). For example, the European Union’s most recent NDC pledges to cut emissions to at least 55% below 1990 levels by 2030.
But while countries are required to submit these pledges, the content is up to them: Members get to decide for themselves what to promise in their NDCs. So what would make a country make a strong pledge and then stick to it?
The short answer is that there’s not much formal accountability. Instead, says Michael Mehling, Deputy Director of the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, the focus is on accurate reporting. “Every country has to send periodic reports on what they’re doing,” says Mehling, “in the form of national emissions inventories and progress towards achieving their NDCs.” The main formal consequence for a member failing to meet its targets is a meeting with a global committee of neutral researchers. The committee will work with struggling members to create new plans.
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-are-countries-held-accountable-under-paris-agreement
20
And what happens when emissions are cut (except in places like China, India, Indonesia etc) and the climate doesn’t change?
I guess you want another ice age so you can claim that these nonsense ideas actually worked.
50
How are countries held accountable under the Paris Agreement?
The short answer is that there is no hard enforcement in the Paris Agreement
10
Australia’s emissions reduction target under the Paris Agreement, which aims for a 62-70% reduction below 2005 levels by 2035, falls short of the necessary cuts to limit global warming to 1.5°C, risking severe climate impacts. The reliance on carbon offsets and continued fossil fuel projects undermines the effectiveness of these targets, potentially breaching international obligations.
010
Are you joking?
Or are you a closet climate botherer?
120
I have explained I am not a member of any political party, you have posted that you have been a One Nation member follower for years.
This is your second complaint directed at my comments, I respect your democratic rights so please pay me the same courtesy. Of course my comments and links are not fitting well with many criticism comments of Coalition parties but surely readers want to read wide ranging opinions, as I enjoy doing?
08
Net zero is complete nonsense! No scientist came up with this.
It’s not about the politics, parties, opinions, agreements, legalities. Mankind does not control carbon dioxide. And we are being charged trillions to fix it? China produces most of the world’s CO2 and pays nothing.
Our economic crucifixion is reminiscent of Monty Python’s crucifixion internview.
We are already on an island.
Whatever the UN insists is wrong legally is not our fault and we should not be paying.
150
Of course it is nonsense.
20
Paris Climate Deal Gives Countries Options;
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/paris-climate-deal-gives-countries-options-leaving-isnt-meant-be-one
10
Nett Zero is the dream of all klimate kult members. A Nett Zero IQ that is universal and achievable. There is hope among the Children, some see it for what it is, the theft of their future. Lets hope some of the “adults” wake up too.
10
The leftist structure that runs the Liberal Party is completely untouched by Taylor being elected as leader or indeed Canavan. The the power brokers will remove them when they feel the time is right. One Nation is probably the only hope. ( An ex-liberal Party member.)
30
There is something in the Paris agreement that’s important. I don’t know what it is. At a Qld state LNP regional conference some years back, when somebody asked the particular speaker on the stage why or when we would exit the Paris agreement, Scott Morrison raced back up onto the stage to declare that we would never leave the Paris agreement. I think I need to read it.
00
The Paris Agreement (2015) is a legally binding international treaty under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), but its core emission targets are flexible and not rigidly enforced.
unfccc.int
It was adopted in Paris in December 2015 and entered into force in November 2016. As of early 2026, nearly all countries (194 parties) remain in it. Its main goal (Article 2) is to limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5°C.
unfccc.int
Key Features (Why It’s “Important” and Sticky for Countries Like Australia)Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) — Article 4: Each country sets its own emission reduction targets (e.g., Australia’s original 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2030). These are not legally binding in the sense that you can’t be forced to hit exact numbers or face penalties like fines/sanctions for missing them. Countries must prepare, communicate, and maintain successive NDCs every 5 years, with a requirement that they represent “progression” and “highest possible ambition.” There’s a transparency/reporting framework (Article 13) and global stocktakes.
unfccc.int
Flexibility is the point: Unlike the earlier Kyoto Protocol (which had binding targets for developed countries), Paris lets nations choose their path based on national circumstances. You can adjust NDCs upward, use markets/cooperation (Article 6 for carbon credits), or emphasize adaptation/finance.
news.stanford.edu
Binding procedural obligations: Reporting, accounting to avoid double-counting, and cooperating on finance/technology (developed countries “should” lead on providing support to developing ones, though it’s often voluntary in practice).
Withdrawal rules (Article 28): You can’t withdraw in the first 3 years after it enters into force for your country. Then, notify the UN depositary; it takes effect 1 year later. This creates a delay and diplomatic cost.
en.wikipedia.org
No “gotcha” clause traps countries forever or imposes massive automatic penalties. The U.S. has withdrawn (twice) and others could too.
nrdc.org
Why Scott Morrison Said Australia Would “Never” LeaveFrom reports around 2018 (when there were internal Coalition calls to exit, especially from conservatives), Morrison pushed back strongly. He argued:It wouldn’t lower electricity prices or change much domestically (“not going to affect electricity prices one jot”).
Little to gain from “ripping it up” — Australia was on track to meet (or beat) its targets anyway, like with Kyoto.
Diplomatic and reputational damage: “Our word is our bond.” Exiting would hurt Australia’s standing, especially with Pacific island nations (key partners on security/trade who see climate as existential). It could complicate trade deals (e.g., with Europe) and international cooperation.
theguardian.com
Political optics in a divided LNP: At events like the QLD conference you mentioned, moderates/business voices saw staying as pragmatic for investment, exports, and avoiding being painted as climate deniers. Morrison intervened to shut down exit talk to maintain unity and project stability.
theguardian.com
Critics (including some in his party and think tanks) said staying locked Australia into ever-ratcheting ambition and indirect costs (e.g., via policy signals affecting investment/energy). Supporters noted the flexibility means you can set weak NDCs if you want, as long as you report transparently. Australia under Morrison committed to net-zero by 2050 later on but kept coal/gas exports strong.
theconversation.com
Full Text RecommendationYou can read the full official English text here: UNFCCC Paris Agreement PDF. It’s only ~16-20 pages of actual agreement — straightforward once you skim the preambles. Focus on Articles 2-4 (goals/targets), 13 (transparency), and 28 (withdrawal).
unfccc.int
In short, the “something important” is likely the combination of international reputation costs + procedural stickiness + domestic political signaling. Exiting signals unreliability to allies/trading partners without immediately freeing you from much, given the voluntary core. Many countries stay for the forum, finance flows, and soft pressure to act. If you’re after a specific angle (e.g., Article 6 markets or finance), let me know for more details.
00