It seems that Rudd is likely to back a $122 billion per year ‘climate change fund for poorer countries’, propose by UK PM, Gordon Brown. (‘The Australian’ 8/7/09).

No other developed country has backed the idea, but Brown already believes that our Kevin will go with it.

And, surprise, surprise, the idea has been praised by green groups, the United Nations and several ‘poor countries’.

Who’s going to pay? Well, obviously not the ‘poor countries’.

You guessed it. The good old West, including Australian taxpayers, according to one carbon sceptic.

So, on top of the massive increases in the cost of utilities for Australians, there will be another cost to help out undeveloped countries

OMG Call out the militia. Man the barricades.
We are going to help poor people. How awful.

In what way will it help poor people?

leigh your revealing...not a lot of knowledge..of the way things are[you must know that..all overseas aid../goes to the country of origens ngo's...

and they..occasionally spend the ''aid'' on projects they run..[usually most of the money..comes straught back home..for consulting fees/materials/proffits and wages[for the ngo's]

so dont be sweating..australian mates will be getting most of the ''aid'...but your right..it will come from the tax payers...

though the best..[cheapest aid would be to give them a few carbon credit handout's...like the big business mates/poluters are getting

that they can then..cash in to the new carbon credit money changer's[carbon credits/commodities trader's..owned and controled by leigman/sax..obama and al gore...and no doudt quite a few of them greenie economists..selling us on cap and trade..to set up the next carbon/credit tax/bubble

Spot on Leigh.
Kevvy hasn’t woken up to the consequences yet – he’s still basking in his fifteen minutes of fame.

There have been related stories in the AFR over the last couple of days about how China , India , & Brazil ( the latter famous for divining that "the global financial crisis was caused by white people with blue eyes." ) intend to make the USA fund any climate change initiatives they endorse.

They cite official ‘evidence’ that the emissions that have done the damage have come from the West -- the Climate Change Movement told them so-- the West has an obligation to pay up.

Not a word mind you, about the other side of the ledger -- how they might just owe the US for its disproportionate & generous contributions to medical and scientific research!

But you cannot blame the developing world too much since the leading disco-lights in the political side of the climate change campaign have been always eager to sell Western liability – why should the developed world make genuine commitment when they have been told a thousand times –its all the West doing!

OUG,
This is not about aid via NGOs –though, that will no doubt continue( growth industry that one!).

--Its about the West losing industries who move off shore to countries who decide not to participate in climate change initiatives—and double whammy, at a later date these non- participating countries claiming compensation because the west --foisted-- dirty industries on them –heads we lose, tails they win!
--Its about the West funding any clean technology some of them may chose to adopt, while they pump their money into better things, like um… maintaining large standing armies, and even larger breeding populations

The Pied Piper,

It won’t help poor people anymore than money spent in Australia in the vain and arrogant attempt to ‘stop’ climate change, a totally natural and unstoppable event we can only adapt to. It’s just going to cost more, that’s all. Only the despots at the head of these countries would gain.

one under god,

I take your point; there is always scepticism about overseas aid. My concern, however, is the cost of a totally useless exercise to the Australian taxpayers and consumers.

Horus,

Thanks. I see that our globe-trotting PM is a little down in the mouth this morning: he ‘fears’ that there won’t be enough cooperation with Ruddism at the Copenhagen chat-show.

"Come home Kev and stop waving our grandchildren’s money around."

(Senator Ron Boswell, 10/7/09)

Dear Leigh,

According to the article you cited in The Australian
newspaper, and I quote:

"The Australian Government has not made a
public response to Britain's proposal for
the huge fund..."

It seems that the British Prime Minister, Gordon
Brown believes he has Mr Rudd's "in principle,"
support.

As the article says, "The Kyoto treaty expires in 2012,
and the talks could fail unless the wealthy nations
come up with some sort of circuit-breaking agreement
or new momentum at this weeks meeting and the UN sponsored
summit in September..."

The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon feels that
"this could be a potential breakthrough that could
save the struggling attempts to sign the global
agreement in Copenhagen in December..."

However, we need to wait and see what our PM finally
decides, (and the reasons for that decision).
He hasn't as yet "rushed," into anything.

Rudd is very generous with other's money.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Kevin Rudd is the current PM and he's doing
what he's been elected to do. He's not spending
the money on himself.

However John Howard is still running up bills
of $8,560 a week in travel perks, staff,
magazine and office costs all picked up by taxpayers.
It cost the taxpayer $404,583 in the past year for this
ex-Prime Minister. Which did not include the $330,000
a year pension that he receives.

Malcolm Fraser - cost taxpayers $508,882 including
claiming $702 for the hire of indoor plants.

In total the five living former PM's cost the tax
payers - $2,004,657 in 2007-08.

Perhaps you should start a thread on whether taxpayers
should continue to fund ex-PM's?

Just a thought.

phase two
[your certainly going to doudt this one]

Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson: Obama Czar’s Nightmarish Sterilization Plan
http://www.prisonplanet.com/alex-jones-paul-joseph-watson-obama-czars-nightmarish-sterilization-plan.html

The Alex Jones Channel
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Alongside John P. Holdrens advocacy for a global planetary regime to enforce forced abortion, government `seizure of children born out of wedlock, and mandatory bodily implants designed to prevent pregnancy, Obamas top advisor also called for, “Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.”

http://www.prisonplanet.com/liberal-website-claims-source-of-holdren-controversy-is-radical-right-wing.html

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, July 13, 2009

http://www.newshounds.us/2009/07/13/fox_nation_cites_radical_right_wing_source_to_paint_obama_science_advisor_as_radical.php

Liberal website News Hounds attempts to giggle and guffaw at the controversy of Obama’s top science advisor John P. Holdren’s plans to mass sterilize the population and carry out forced abortions by claiming that the entire story is an invention of the “radical right wing,” when in fact it comes straight from Holdren’s own 1977 book Ecoscience.

If you visit our original article,
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor-called-for-planetary-regime-to-enforce-totalitarian-population-control-measures.html

you will find screenshots of the book in question...Not Fox News,.Not Horowitz,..not the “radical right wing,”

Holdren’s own book,that he co-authored in 1977 ..you know,..the one he wrote...That is the source of the story...Get it?

Shocking proposals to mass sterilize the population by artificially medicating municipal water supplies, which were outlined by President Obama’s top science czar in his 1977 book Ecoscience, are already in effect as global sperm counts drop and gender-bending chemicals pollute our rivers and lakes.

As we highlighted on Saturday, alongside John P. Holdren’s advocacy for a global planetary regime to enforce forced abortion, government `seizure of children born out of wedlock, and mandatory bodily implants designed to prevent pregnancy, Obama’s top advisor also called for,”Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods.”

Holdren added that the sterilant must meet stiff requirements in that it must only affect humans and not livestock.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/water-supply-will-stay-poisoned-with-gender-bending-chemicals-due-to-carbon-footprint-of-filtering-systems.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-czars-plan-to-sterilize-population-through-water-supply-already-happening.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-population-reduction-agenda-for-dummies.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1092638/Evolution-threat-gender-bending-chemicals-turning-males-females.html

Foxy,

The 5 ex PM's cost $2m. p.a. in "pension". Incl Keating and Hawke.

The present one is costing $50bn p.a.

Which one am I concerned about?

There are lots of little drains on the tax payers purse, but a couple of very large ones.

Rudd is wasting my money, and the cash splash and projects go mostly to labor strongholds, so pretending that he is doing it for me will fall on deaf ears.

Howard's gov was disliked but financially very prudent.

Rudd is well liked but incompetent. We are going to pay heavily for this feel good economics later.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Let's wait and see
and judge our economy and where exactly we end up
further down the track -( compared with the
rest of the world ). The country will have a chance
to change things at the next election
if it's dissatisfied. The previous Government
may have been prudent as you claim - but at whose
expense? Most of us were overtaxed - and human
services - such as health, hospitals, schools,
et al - suffered dreadfully