It’s important for the big-government-dependent parties to deny the power of the Convoy.
Less than a week ago, there was a rally at Parliament House with around 3,000-5,000 people. And today there was another one, this one with around 600 vehicles according to Matt and Janet Thompson, and this one by people who have gone to extraordinary lengths, driving up to 5,000 kilometers from all corners of the country.
The convoy is a rolling protest that involved thousands of people across the nation. In Sydney, people switched their headlights on in sympathy, and Andrew Bolt records at least one witness suggesting half the cars on the road had their lights on.
Feelings and support for the convoy are widespread and running high. One of the convoy supporters from near Clermont reports: ‘In only 24 hours, we gathered 300 signatures for the petition, local beef producers had organised fuel donations of over $13,000 and the CWA had organised food and drinks for everyone on the convoy. This support from a town of only 2000 was amazing and a testament to a united effort.’
Dale Stiller’s comment is typical on Just Grounds:The convoy has experienced nothing but support. There have been flags, balloons & ribbons on gates, signs & fences all the way from Rockhampton to Goondiwindi. Other trucks as they pass on the highway are on the 2way, wishing the convoy well and of course often accompanied by a blast of the air horns.
The bottom line is that the nation supports the Convoy: There are over 100,000 votes on the NineMSN poll and 80% are with the trucks.
Photo: A convoy of trucks protesting against the Federal Government's proposed carbon tax make their way through the Canberra CBD (User submitted: Michael Sherwood)
So what do you do when hundreds of cars, trucks and vans descend on the Parliament in a historic move, from all over the country, demanding an election? If you are the ABC, you call it “200 trucks”, don’t mention the cars, feature those who have an interest in putting down the protest (Bob Brown), and make sure you mention how it was “smaller than expected” when actually, it started as one driver, and thousands of people joined in. The ABC coverage is so shamefully biased, a government PR agency could hardly have done a better job. They carefully avoided selecting any of the key messages in the speeches or petition (but they put in any odd unconnected grievance they could find); they didn’t interview the organizers, instead just showing a snippet of a song and a truckie tooting. They didn’t mention how far the trucks had come, how much expense they had gone too, or that the Convoy had gone to great lengths to make sure they didn’t inconvenience the people of Canberra.
That ABC report didn’t ask a single driver why they had felt it was necessary to take such extraordinary action.
Unless I missed it, the 6pm ABC radio news in Perth found time to mention there was backburning around Broome (it is a big wildfire up there), but not enough time to mention that thousands of people are so angry with the government they drove all the way from Broome to protest.
The Convoy organizers staged their entry so carefully, coordinating it with the Federal Police. They meticulously planned everything so as not to put out the average Canberran, even starting at 5.30am so as to avoid the peak hour traffic. They were scrupulously considerate. (Perhaps too much so.)
HFC-23 is 15,000 times as potent as CO2 in the greenhouse gas stakes. It’s only made by six factories in the whole of Europe.
Given that, you would think that they’d have this one esoteric compound completely tracked, measured to the nth, audited and cross checked, right? After all, how devastating would it be if governments can’t report something as simple as HFC-23 accurately, how could they possibly expect to run a global trading scheme on a gas like CO2, which is not just made in hundreds of factories, but thousands of cities, millions of cars, and billions of animals. Well, if you thought someone somewhere had a handle on those numbers, get ready to be corrected. Not only did people think it was a good idea if countries self-assessed their emissions, but they trusted those countries to accurately report numbers that millions of dollars of payments rested on, and nobody was looking too hard over their shoulder.
Who has been emitting twice as much HFC-23 as they admitted? That would be the whole of Western Europe. Italy, apparently, has snuck out 10 times as much.
So what does a “binding target” mean exactly? Not much. When we can’t measure the emissions easily, a “binding target” only binds governments to making reports stating that they met the binding target. (Even if they blew that target by 1000%.)
How emblematic of the whole enterprise. It’s like they don’t really care about the results, only that the appropriate bureaucratic machinery be in place and appearances established — which is “consistent with” (as they say) the whole theory being a front for an expansion of government and a boondoggle for banks, renewables, bureaucrats, climate “scientists”, Greens, etc etc.
The modern version of “green” is so tame. When it comes to recycling material, living without disposable goods, and leaving a smaller carbon footprint, the real experts are the long lived people who’ve been there, done that, and did it so much better, so long ago.
Jo
Eco-friendly TV anyone? (via Amberley Working Museum, England). Photo: By Les Chatfield
The Green Thing
The original low carbon lawn mower. Photo: Kallerna
In the line at the supermarket, the cashier told an older woman that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags weren’t good for the environment.
The woman apologized to him and explained, “We didn’t have the green thing back in my day.” The cashier responded, “That’s our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment.” He was right — our generation didn’t have The Green Thing in its day.
Back then, we returned milk bottles, soft drink bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. But we didn’t have the green thing back in our day.
We walked up stairs, because we didn’t have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn’t climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right. We didn’t have the green thing in our day.
Back then, we washed the baby’s nappies because we didn’t have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 240 volts — wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that old lady is right; we didn’t have the green thing back in our day.
Fifty cars, trucks and vans, and there were at least four helicopters watching the action as the North Queensland Convoy headed through Charters Towers. Images like these will make the Labor Party break into a sweat.
These pics from the You tube of the aerial shots as the convoy went through Charters Towers.
The Convoy travels through Charters Towers
Over 100 in the convoy in the NT last night!
ANNIE HESSE Katherine Times (via Carbon Sense Coalition Blog)
18 Aug, 2011 09:17 AM
A Convoy of more than 100 vehicles – including road trains, campervans and utes – rolled into Katherine last night to show their support for the Convoy of no Confidence, a convoy heading to Canberra to raise a voice against recent government decisions.
Rashida Khan, who led a trail of vehicles from Darwin to Katherine yesterday, said she was on her way to Canberra to speak up for “some of the toughest people” she knows, who “have been pushed to the edge by the decision to ban live export”.
Have a look at the convoy passing through Ingham: (H/t Val Malkus). Send in those links!
UPDATED: Former CSIRO researcher talks about the lack of freedom to speak against the government.
See Angry Anderson’s speech and Art Raiches speech about the decline of CSIRO: Art Raiche on CSIRO Canberra Protest. Dr Raiche talked of the days when the CSIRO was a world class organisation and worked for Australia, Agriculture and Industry.
“Management learned how to bring the most senior climate scientist under their control. It was OK to think independently…as long as Management approved of it.
We were given very strict, VERY strict guidelines on not publishing anything or publicly discussing any research that could be seen as critical to Government policy.If we did not do it, we would be subject to dismissal.
We had now become a Government Enterprise. We were told by the Chairperson that we Scientists no longer worked for Australia, we had to learn that we worked for the CSIRO.”
Destination Canberra – nearly 4000 km away
This is a protest to set records. For these vehicles in Perth, it’s 4 days of driving nearly every waking hour (and another 4 days minimum to return). The cost of petrol, accommodation, wear and tear and camper-hire, not to mention time-off-work, mean you need to be very very motivated to take part in the Convoy of No Confidence from so far away. We were pleased with the turnout in the darkness this morning!
All filmed by Phil Cole and edited by Sean Morris.
August 16th, 2011. It’s just another huge rally at Parliament House.
There was a crowd of 3000 according to the ABC report, but Nick Bryant from the BBC estimated 4,000-5,000, and significantly he also admitted that the crowd was not a red-neck, ute crowd, and that for many it was their first protest. For others, like one doctor, it had cost them dearly to get to the rally (see the quotes from his piece below). Such is the passion of the protesters.
And they filled the lawns. Photo: Dr Jim Sternhell
This is mainstream Australia talking
A few things struck me about crowd. Many of the protesters were old and retired, as one would expect from a protest in the middle of the week. Many were attending their first ever protest rally, which is more significant. Rising energy bills was something that had got these first-timers out in force. Nobody that I spoke to at the rally thought the Gillard minority government had any legitimacy, let alone any mandate. Most thought it incompetent, and said the carbon tax had crystallised broader fears.
A surprisingly high number, curiously, were Brits who have settled in Australia. Many were farmers and blue-collar workers. But I also ran into a GP, who had given up $2000 in consultation fees for the day to drive down to Canberra from Sydney. In other words, this crowd could not be written off as a “red-neck mob”, tempting though that caricature might be to supporters of the carbon tax. This was an Audi estate crowd as well as a “ute” crowd.
The local state Liberals (the conservative party, who are in government in this state of Western Australia) voted overwhelmingly in favor of a Royal Commission on climate change science. Now that is a news story all by itself. It could have had headlines like: “Liberals demand climate scientists be put to the test”, “WA Liberals demand answers from Climate Science”.
Instead the ABC makes its headlines from almost the only person in the room who disagreed:
Actually, he wasn’t even in the room. As it happens, Mal Washer didn’t attend the conference last weekend, and sums up his total insight into why this motion was passed overwhelmingly:
” I don’t know who brought it up and I don’t know who would be silly enough to support it.”
“I don’t know how many were there when this, I was not there when this happened, right, so I don’t know how many people were there”
“... I don’t know how that slipped through. Whether they’re a bit battle fatigued at the end of the day….”
Since I hear practically the whole party supported it (apart from Leader Colin Barnett, and possibly a couple of young libs), and Mal Washer wasn’t even there, it seems the ABC sought out the one person who knew the least to ask him the question he was baffled by. With this technique of interviewing the people who don’t know the answers, it’s obvious why the ABC are ten years behind on climate reporting. They could have interviewed anyone, anyone else from the Liberal Party ranks, and learned more. Indeed one member wrote to me to describe the meeting, and said there was virtually no dissent in the room, and support for the idea was loudly vocal. It wouldn’t be too hard surely to find someone else to interview?
Tomorrow, a road convoy will set off from Port Hedland in Western Australia for a journey across the country. Two more convoys will leave Perth and Cairns on Thursday. By the end of this week, 11 convoys will be in motion, all heading to a single convergence point next Monday. This is the ”convoy of no confidence”. [SMH]
FOR some it’s climate change alarmism; for others too much wasted taxpayers’ money on boatpeople, school halls, or pink batts; and for others still it’s the importation of Chinese apples, the temporary ban on the live cattle trade, or same-sex couples rearing children.
But the common thread in what is emerging as a national Tea Party-style revolt in the form of a “Convoy of No Confidence” to Canberra is a burning conviction that politicians of all persuasions have lost touch with the real-life needs of the common man and woman they are supposed to represent.
What began as a truckies protest against the carbon tax has grown into a mass alliance of those outside the urban elites who feel they have lost their voice.
It’s an amalgam of butchers, bakers and candlestick makers who are mad as hell and not going to take it any more. [Australian]
These are good stories, well written and capturing some of the spirit of the moment, albeit, weeks after the news broke on the new media.
When is enough enough?
Today the editors of The Australian (Convoy of Discontent Rolls On) claim “There is no justification for the early election its organisers want”, but what would be justification for an early election?Do people have to wait for the businesses to go broke before asking? Do they need to wait for the government to legislate a major transformation of the economy that it promised it wouldn’t do? When is government failure big enough to warrant a new election?
More evidence of the backlash against the dominant Green-memes. (There’s a rich field of possibilities there for the taking.) Funny or Die do a pretty good job. UPDATE: hilariously I hear, these are “warmer” personalities, thanks Bananabender and Curt, but if they thought they were poking fun at skeptics, it only shows how badly this has backfired. (The warmer-team are the ones who not only suggest we can control the climate, and they’re already asking us to pay up now for the service.)
"Stop the Environment", Funny or Die video snapshot.
Warning: Coarse language. (They’re saying, “F U,” to Mother Nature) This is a Funny Or Die creation by Thomas Lennon, Ben Garant, Ed Asner and Mindy Sterling.
It’s hard to believe, but not long ago, people used to write to me to tell me not to use the word “skeptic” telling me it had a bad name. “Use the word realist” they said. But I wasn’t going to let the forces of darkness get away with destroying the English language. I’m proud to be a skeptic. I wasn’t giving that word up. And besides, I had a feeling that if we stuck with the truth, the distortion the-newspeak-team had set up would come back to bite them, and I rather wanted to whip them with that.
After all, what’s not to like about the word skeptic (or sceptic):
1565–75; From the Latin scepticus, meaning thoughtful, inquiring
From the Greek : skeptikós, means to consider or examine (akin to skopeîn, meaning: to look, “scope”)
“Skeptic” is a prize worth having.
In Nov 2009 I pointed out the bleeding obvious truth: What’s the opposite of skeptical — gullible. It caught on(if I do say so myself).
And if we are the skeptics, then it followed that they are the Unskeptics and who wants to be an Unskeptical Scientist?
Bitten by their own propaganda campaign, the apologists-of-authority rushed to make out that they are skeptics (who just coincidentally always happen to agree with authority), and say pat-truisms like “all scientists need to be a bit skeptical” and “true skeptics are useful”. Which meant of course they had to call us odd things, like quote-unquote “skeptics”, contrarians, naysayers, or else resort to their favorite ritual insult: “deniers”. (Which is the richest of all, really when you think about which side of this debate is saying that red equals yellow. See the missing hot spot, and Spot the real denier).
The “debate” meme is falling
For twenty years they’ve said “there-is-no-debate”. Al Gore was doing it back in 1990. But things have changed since then and while this is a work in progress, some are backpedalling. Prof Stefan Lewandowsky said “there is no real scientific debate about climate change” in 2010, so we laughed at him for throwing tenets of science out the window. Now, without admitting he ever got it wrong, in 2011 he’s seen the light and says: “Science is Debate“. (And, you cynic, you think they never listen?)
Climate is a non-problem. What is happening is Cooling
Archibald Speech Rally Canberra 16th August 2011
My first duty to you today is tell you what is happening to the climate. What is happening is cooling. The oceans started cooling in 2003, and the atmosphere is following. There has been no warming since 1998.
In fact, the temperature of planet today is almost the same as it was when satellites first started measuring it in 1979. No one under the age of 32 has experienced global warming. Some of us predate that and remember the heavy frosts of the nineteen seventies. Those frosts are returning, and worse. Solar activity is weakening, and will remain weak for another 22 years.
We in this blessed country will be spared the worst of it, but a large portion of the grain belt in the northern hemisphere will have crop failures due to longer winters and early frosts. Canada will go from being a large exporter of grain to becoming a frequent importer. As long as Australia remains a net food exporter, we will benefit from the shorter Northern Hemisphere growing season.
For us, climate is a non-problem. Carbon dioxide’s heating effect is real, but minuscule. The one hundred parts per million that we have added to the atmosphere in the last one hundred years has heated the planet by one tenth of a degree. We will add another hundred parts per million over the next fifty years. The total of two tenths of a degree will be very welcome by mid-century.
In fact, the more carbon dioxide we add to the atmosphere, the better. During the ice ages of the last three million years, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere got as low as one hundred and seventy-two parts per million. Plant growth shuts down at one hundred and fifty parts per million. Life above sea level was almost snuffed out due to a lack of carbon dioxide. We were only twenty-two parts per million from extinction. We came so close to dying out due to a lack of carbon dioxide. And, for those amongst us who like plants and animals, they would have died out too.
The more we can increase the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere, the safer life on this planet will be.
The more we can increase the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere, the safer life on this planet will be. For those amongst us who feel for the Third World, increasing the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere is like giving them free fertiliser. Their crops will grow faster. Who amongst us would be so heartless as to deny the Third World that benefit at no cost to themselves? The Government hunkered down here in front of you is that heartless. But then, they don’t care about Australians either.
This fake problem of climate is distracting us from real problems. The first of which is the fact that our oil self-sufficiency is declining rapidly. It is 40% now. It will be down to 25% by 2015. We now import oil from as far afield as Azerbaijan, Algeria and the Congo. We are forced to rely upon their kindness to keep our farms and factories running.
Ladies and gentlemen, it’s obvious (to anyone who knows there’s no free lunch) that one way or another this Festival of Funny Money was going to end in tears. And so it flows… but let’s not forget what lead us to this, the problem that lies under all others.
The government can print (base) money from nothing, and they can set interest rates artificially low so as to encourage private banks to create (bank) money from nothing. And governments keep doing it, because it’s so much easier to be elected handing out loaves and fishes, and grants and solar-rooftop-subsidies, in a froth of easy money and rising asset prices. Any fool can spend someone else’s money, especially when the sucker doesn’t even know it was their money.
Thus does inflation steal from all and sundry. Silently.
Watch them print money… say hello to inflation.
In the real world, we have to repay our debts. But the world of the ruling class never has to make ends meet. Alan Greenspan admitted that this weekend — effectively announcing that the US is the United States of Wonderland, where no matter how high the debt is they can never default — because they can print money. Helicopter Ben to the rescue!
There is a pot at the end of this rainbow. And it works as well as any superhero or perpetual motion machine.
As soon as money is blinked into existence, it starts to redirect economic activity away from the things that people-who-earned-money thought were useful. Instead the behemoth of mass activity swings towards producing things that those-who-blink-money want… and they come up with unlimited ways to waste money: like giant windmills that stop floods, bicycle paths that prevent cyclones, and ten top techniques to stuff a fertilizing gas down a mineshaft where nothing will ever grow.
Nice. The CanDo team have printed thousands of sticky notes with a message for consumers everywhere. Australian’s can order them and pop them on items that will cost more under The Carbon Tax (ie. that’s everything except subsidized Chinese solar panels, and bird-blending windmills.*)
Take a photo of your most inspiring spots and send it in to CanDo. People are using these sticky notes in restaurants, airports, petrol pumps, at home and in the office.
This is a chance to remind Australians that the Carbon Tax will cost them, and we will never know exactly how much.
Are you losing sleep because of the Carbon Tax? (Click to see a large version. Thanks to MaxL)
It used to be that being Green was assumed to be the done thing in any advert promoting something, especially something that aimed at the professional set (like a herbal sleeping tablet). So I was surprised to see an advert, on the front page of The Australian a few days ago (August 3rd) which unashamedly played to those-who-don’t-welcome-The-Carbon-Tax.
At least one herbal supplement supplier thinks the tax is the hot topic stressor of the moment, keeping business people awake at night.
I wanted to keep this turning point for posterity, for the poor PhD student in 2035 analyzing how the Great Global Warming meme went from Nobel prize winning grandeur in 2007 to well-known-scam status five years later. This is a point along the way. As far as I know, it’s a first in the Australian print media.
In some towns closer to Canberra there will be so many vehicles that the AFP, and local councils have been called in to help. Some convoys are so large that up to five separate ovals and fields are being arranged per town to accommodate all the traffic overnight.
The final petition has been put together. Many thanks to commentors here. I was not involved in writing it, but I did connect together the people who did, and they found the feedback here useful. Thanks 🙂
“When you go and talk to any audience about climate, you hear them washing back at you the same crap over and over and over again,” he continued. “There’s no longer a shared reality on an issue like climate even though the very existence of our civilization is threatened. People have no idea! … It’s no longer acceptable in mixed company, meaning bipartisan company, to use the goddamn word climate. It is not acceptable. They have polluted it to the point where we cannot possibly come to an agreement on it.”
He’s uses all his science degrees to come back with an erudite answer to his critics:
It may be volcanoes.’ Bullshit! ‘It may be sun spots.’ Bullshit! ‘It’s not getting warmer.’ Bullshit!” Gore exclaimed.
Professor Murry Salby is Chair of Climate Science at Macquarie University. He’s been a visiting professorships at Paris, Stockholm, Jerusalem, and Kyoto, and he’s spent time at the Bureau of Meterology in Australia.
Over the last two years he has been looking at C12 and C13 ratios and CO2 levels around the world, and has come to the conclusion that man-made emissions have only a small effect on global CO2 levels. It’s not just that man-made emissions don’t control the climate, they don’t even control global CO2 levels.
CO2 variations do not correlate with man-made emissions. Peaks and falls correlate with hot years (e.g. 1998) and cold years (1991-92). No graphs are available from Salby's speech or paper yet. This graph comes from Tom Quirk's related work (see below).
The higher levels of CO2 in recent decades appear to be mostly due to natural sources. He presented this research at the IUGG conference in Melbourne recently, causing great discussion and shocking a few people. Word reached the Sydney Institute, which rushed to arrange for him to speak, given the importance of this work in the current Australian political climate.
The final petition will be released NEXT WEEK. Thanks to commenters for feedback here, it’s been very useful and passed on to all the people that matter. It’s been decided that the petition will be redone. The preferential voting point has been dropped and I think the rest of the petition will be carefully reconsidered too. Time is short, so that’s a shame, but Mick Pattel wants to do this properly. And oh my goodness, but the plans for this Convoy are becoming bigger than Ben Hur. You should hear behind the scenes! They are looking for 4 or 5 ovals in some towns in order to accommodate the trucks and cars and caravans… HUGE! — Jo
The Convoy to Canberra protest is generating a massive response. Organizers have been astounded at the number of cars and trucks joining in. Gobsmacked! It is shaping up to be a historic event! Remember, even if you can’t drive the whole way, you can show you support and join the convoy just for an hour, especially at the start to send them on their way! 🙂
“The petition is to be given to the convoy leaders of the Coalition of Industries Convoy of No Confidence in the Federal Government. It must have real signatures – the future is in your hands now.”
based on an idea and research by Anton Lang (who writes as TonyfromOz at PAPundits)
It’s the paradox that will torture the Greens. What if the best way to achieve their environmental aims as well as providing jobs and power was to build more coal fired power stations? Imagine if we could reduce CO2 emissions by more than 5%, supply 24 hour baseload electricity, create jobs, and save thousands of square kilometres of Australian bush from industrial domination. Imagine if “New Coal” turned out to be the lowest cost alternative as well? Anton Lang has researched it, and Tony Cox has confirmed that the big numbers make sense with an Australian electricity company (who shall not be named). Selling the Carbon Tax in Neverland is already a public debate that’s pretzel tied in impossible contradictions, so what’s one more unlikely twist? Possibly, just enough to get us out of a knot, or at least enough to expose the real aims of the carbon reduction plan. Old existing large scale coal fired power plants in Australia are all twenty to forty years old. Major advances have been made in coal-powered technology, and new coal plants are, incredibly, much more efficient, so much more efficient that they produce up to 30% less CO2. Who would have thought there was such a bonanza-cherry there, ripe for the picking?
“New large scale coal fired plants have generators that can produce considerably larger amounts of power, they use better turbines to drive the generator, have better boilers to make the steam to drive the turbine, and have better furnaces to make the heat to make that steam, and most importantly in this case, they burn less coal, do that more efficiently, and in the process emit less CO2.
They are already using these new coal fired plants, especially in China, where large scale plants of this nature are being brought on line delivering power for consumers at the rate of one new plant a week.
So, if those older plants here in Australia were to be replaced with these new plants, there will be an overall reduction in the current emissions of CO2, and the most surprising thing in all of this is that those reductions could be in the vicinity of 25 to 30%.”
Those who want to reduce CO2, could have their low-carbon cake mix, and the electricity to cook it with too. You can see here that a new coal fired plant produces about 30% lower emissions than a conventional one, it costs $4-$5 billion to set up (instead of $20 billion… or $200 billion!) and uses less coal to run. Comparatively, wind costs something like 2- 5 times as much and solar, a budget breaking, hock-the-nation 5 to 20 times as much (or worse). Not only that but solar and wind occupy vast areas, and don’t produce base-load reliable power. (See here for the lower best case estimates of renewables costs from the Victorian Auditor General.)
Comparing the cost of different power generation plants. Cost “A” is the initial capital outlay, Cost “B” is the lifetime cost. TWH: TeraWatt Hours.
For the notes (see the end of the post), and for more info on the table: See Climate Sceptics.
Why aim for 5% when you could get 13%?
The Greens would accept a 5% reduction in Australian emissions by 2020 (and due to our high immigration rates that’s harder than it looks). Because coal produces about 40% of our emissions, so a reduction of 30% of those emissions from all our major coal fired stations would give us a total national reduction in emissions of 13%. It’s possibly achievable by 2020 with proven technology). According to Tony Cox, the word from the local industry is that an upgrade costs about $2 b, and a new modern station about $4 billion.
This single idea solves all the ineluctable paradoxes of Neverland Economics at once
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
Nice. The CanDo team have printed thousands of sticky notes with a message for consumers everywhere. Australian’s can order them and pop them on items that will cost more under The Carbon Tax (ie. that’s everything except subsidized Chinese solar panels, and bird-blending windmills.*)
Recent Comments