People are beginning to realise that climate change is a serious issue which, without a ‘magic technological bullet’, can only be solved by political actions.
However the issue is of such magnitude that I think it is beyond the capabilities of our current political parties.

People with concerns for environment/climate change range over the whole political spectrum. i.e.’ you don’t have to be left to be green’
Because political parties have environment/climate change as just one policy in their raft of policies, a voter must accept possibly unacceptable policies along with a chosen climate change policy, something they are loath to do. As an example, the Greens may have a climate change policy acceptable to the mainstream voter but their other policies appear to far left progressive for about 90% of the electorate.

This means that the environmental/climate change vote has been and is fragmented. This lack of a unified vote has meant, over the years, that the environment has suffered through lack of representation

Our political system described above has sort of worked to decide political issues but this climate change issue is different. It is much more important than issues of the past and cannot be left to the politicians to sort out, to trade with their own interest groups, to use as their ‘loss-leader’at election time …. playing politics as normal.

We must have a unified vote to force the issue.

What the environment and climate change needs is a political party dedicated to it alone, attracting support across the whole political spectrum.
Such a party would not have to run the country but would need to have the critical mass to force the climate change issue beholden only to the environment.
Without such parties we will waste precious years, courtesy of the current parties, with point scoring, flawed emission trading schemes or low and ineffective carbon taxes and lack of funding for the very sector that will solve the problem of climate change, the sciences.

You are right about the point scoring game
now it seems that the labor party is and greens are comming together

Well no wonder i created The Australian Peoples Party
www.tapp.org.au

Climate change is a global issue and the belief that any political organisation in Australia will some how fix it is fanciful. Climate change caused by human activity, if it really will occur to the extent the IPCC would have us believe, can only be addressed on a global scale. In particular, it needs the combined efforts of all countries, especially the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases EU, North Asia, USA, &c. It might make Australians feel good by dotting wind farms all over the countryside and taxing carbon, but without a global effort, our climate will keep getting warmer and drier anyway (again if you credit the IPCC). I reckon if everyone went out and did something like plant trees (I planted 6 out in the street last night), and spent less time waffling on these forums we might get somewhere.

Robg

You are not the only poster on this site, "waffling" on who is doing something for the environment.

Goeff - I believe you are correct. The major political parties do not intend reducing anthropogenic CO2.

I believe we should give the vote to the Greens, come election time.

Whilst I have not voted for Greens in the past, I believe it is the only option available. This may give the Greens the balance of power in the upper houses where they are able to hinder the major parties from creating more environmental degradation.

One matter for concern though, is who the Greens will give their preferential votes to? I believe they could do quite well in future elections by not giving that vote to either of the major parties.

However, it is virtually impossible for the Greens to hold government, therefore, we have nothing to lose and perhaps a lot more to gain.

In addition, the Greens are the only party which have endeavoured to research and understand the devastating impacts of atmospheric pollution on human health and the planet.

So what you are going to do is give your vote to the greens.

Well that is a shame since the greens are now in bed with labor so infact you are voting labor.

www.tapp.org.au

For those that are considering giving their vote to the Greens.

I suggest you google up their website and check their policies.

they have some quite fancifull policies. Last time i looked they had things like decriminalizing of drugs, lower age of consent to 14 and no one need work unless one wants to.

Check it out and see if you agree then.

Thank you for your comments but I was hoping people would comment on my main point that the lack of unity of the environmental/climate change vote is degrading its representation rather than, as often happens, pick up on the example I used to illustrate why the this vote is under represented.

If the Greens get to exercise their potential balance of power, they will be pushing their whole raft of policies, many not accepted across the wider electorate. Any headway made on climate change will be welcome but without electoral support from across the whole political spectrum their efforts will be ephemeral.

So can you have some consideration for my position and that of many other voters? As political parties currently present their wares, my preferred vote for climate change comes with the baggage of policies I do not agree with.

The climate change vote is thus fragmented and is the loser.

Of course political parties are hopeless at addressing any issues that extend beyond the next election. No surprises there.They will spend obscene amounts of OUR money to garner our votes, when their previous record is all we need to judge their worthiness to govern. Getting re-elected is the most important issue affecting federal politicians today. Everything else is just waffle.

No Political party in Australia including the Greens can do anything to affect Global warming. The human effect on global warming is affecting only micro climates. Most of global warming is happening because of activity on the sun; ask any scientist observing the sun's behaviour. The Earth undergoes heat and cold changes without humans - ever heard of the Ice Age? What happens between Ice ages? It heats up by the activity of the sun. The Greens in NSW are really a political front for the Communist party using popular political issues to gain credibility. Their policy would create gross unemployment and social disorder. NO BORDERS, NO NATIONAL SECURITY, NO WAR. The greedy and violent heart of man must be changed first before these can be implemented.

Please explain what the Greens will do to create a more humanitarian society; their policies are merely negative and restrictive of human society. More oppressive laws to control productive people!

How will they reverse Global warming if they are in Government? Restriction on human activity will only affect micro-climate and local environmental change, which every Political Party is concerned about.

'..they have some quite fancifull policies. Last time i looked they had things like decriminalizing of drugs, lower age of consent to 14 and no one need work unless one wants to...'

Their policies are currently under revision and not available at the website. However, judging from the above, I'd say those are exactly the reasons I've always voted for them! (Except the age of consent one, I'm a little sceptical about that. I'll will wait until their policies are back on line for clarification.)

It is not suprising that you all keep saying that things wont change parties keep saying what you want to hear.

Maybe its about time you looked here

www.tapp.org.au

then go over your comments

Geoff has a fine idealistic idea here - a party supported by the great majority of people, dedicated solely to addressing climate change.
There are at least 2 whopping great problems with this.
The first is that you'd never get such a party together and garner the public support - in time to do anything - climate change would happen before you could.
The second is that there is no unified view on the answer to climate change, and indeed, quite bitter divisions exist regarding what course of action to take. In particular, vested interests of the mining and military-industrial complex are powerfully lobbying for nuclear energy as a solution. Environmentalists know that nuclear power would be too late, too dirrty and too dangerous.
Meanwhile Philo wants us to somehow change “the greedy and violent heart of man”. That’s such a tall order – we might just as well go with Dr Pangloss’s do-nothing attitude “Everything for the best in the best of all possible worlds”

The underlying problem is of an over-populated world, with a predominant doctrine of endless growth and endless consumption. How to address climate change? Well, in any ways we can. In the words of an old Redgum album “If you don’t fight, you lose”

I think that the Greens come the nearest to a “climate change party” and I’ll certainly vote for them. Christina www.antinuclearaustralia.com

Political parties always follow the people in democracies.
They have to or they won't get elected.
I draw your attention to the following.
The Howard government has been spending money on actions to help against
global warming gases for some time, but at the same time not admitting
or talking about it, to the extent of being skeptical.

Now that the global warming seems to have public support, they have
come out of the closet.

Those of you familar with the Peak Oil scenario will recognise the
symptoms; the government just does not talk about peak oil and oil depletion.
However they are now handing out cash to get your car converted to gas.
They are still in the closet on peak oil, but if you note some of
Peter Costello's comments he is at least peeking out of the closet.

Regarding the comments on global warming, you have to remember that
there are warming and cooling cycles caused by the precession of the
poles and the precession of the earth's eliptical orbit around the
sun.
These two factors cause a cycle of six cold ages followed by a very
cold ice age. What we are talking about in global warming is that
we have shifted the whole waveform up.
As we are coming out of the sixth minor ice age and are about to enter
the next major ice age we should be burning all the fossile fuels we
can lay hands on to stop the next major ice age being so cold.
Well thats one theory anyway.

Anyway, if oil production peaks you won't have to worry about global
warming as the economic activity and CO2 production will fall steeply
enough to act faster than any anti CO2 GWG program could manage.

That’s right Bazz, but it is the sun that has changed its elliptical Orbit due to the Gravitational forces of Jupiter, which is perhaps the Irony of the topic Global Warming.
Politicians and a whole lot of people need to be sacked and removed from Public office and removed from any influential position and most definitely close Tax Funded Idiots routs. And the proliferation of Sludge sub Intellect.

It is these apparatchiks and Lobotomized clowns who pose the greater threat to this earth; you only need to ask why they proliferate falsehoods and propagandize beyond any reality comprehension to a point their Psychology is in serious question.
You have seen it before on several occasions in the last 100 years.

Hey tapp

If you want to keep waffling on about The Australian People's Party why not register the friggin thing with the AEC?

Until you do you are irrelevant, :)

Well steve getting closer all the time
and irrelevant well that is your waffleing

The thing is i am trying to do something and you

just winge

at least people are getting the point that this party is created by the people and we know what the problems are.
so you keep waffleing and i dont see any answers from you.

www.tapp.org.au

Stu

Politics is the art of the possible.

Given that your stated policies are unconstitutional, remove an independent judiciary, benefit one group of Australian's over others, and remove common law rights. I suggest it is you who is waffling. :)

Well steve the only thing i see as unconstitutional is those political parties who are in power who ack for the greater good of themselves and not the people.

Maybe you would like to also point out which policy and where and see who else is in agreement.

I am one of the people an everyday person just trying to do something that most just stand back from due to people trying to bully and lie about something new or is it change that you are scared of.
Policies are people policies not union, not backroom, not big business but people policy that can be understood and this party is not scared of you or anyone else who will try to harass or degrade this party.

So steve facts, quotes bring it on.

Stu

A few pointers :)

The legislature cannot purport to predetermine the legal outcome, or to change the direction or outcome, of a court case.

Powers of government are divided between the Commonwealth and the State governments, with certain powers being exclusive to the Commonwealth, others being concurrently exercised, and the remainder being exclusively held by the States

Your Policing and Crime policy would need a referendum to amend the constitution. Unlikely.

Your veteran's policy is biased in favour of Service personnel, (reflecting your personal circumstances). Why should these people be treated as a special case? Should not this apply to all who have sustained injury or impairment as a result of their employment?

"If a person thinks that injury is of no concern then so be it, thus this person or persons are responsible for their actions."

Sorry this is crud. People, corporations and governments have a duty of care.

Sorry to hijack the topic but Stu needs to sort out his conflicting policies (And I am trying to help him) :)

May I suggest http://www.leukaemia.org.au/web/index.php as a good place for your membership fees :)

Re policing and crime nothing wrong with that unless you are the one commiting the crime
unconstitutional no
the right thing and what the public keep saying needs to be done, i for one being one of those public.

As for veterans bias no respect yes.
Remember it was labor that screwed the compensation with the compensation and rehabilitation service, what to save money.

It seems steve must be close up someones backside in pollie land, i didnt recall allowing these pollies to have free flights,drivers,cares free fuel and offices after they got kicked out, how about we change their super to what is 62.

Our diggers volunteer to protect Australia maybe we should dismantle this and you should look after your own yard instead

Willing to take up arms or just pathetic as an excuse.
I remember being their for the newcastle earthquake, the floods in warren and the bushfires in the blue mountains,lithgow,bell area and the worst thing about that was the mess we had to fix due to incompetent state and local goverment.

So no probs here oh and by the way you must have mist how Mr Sartor in NSW is being a dictator all over the front page of the telegraph so one would say clean up you own corrupt and branch stacked back yard before complaining about anyone elses.

Also facts
state part of constitution or is this just ravings of a looney

Stu.

I have tried to point out some inconsistencies in your policies, some contradict each other.

Given that in the last Federal election 91.2% of the people voted for the major parties:
Liberal 40.5%
Labor 37.6%
Greens 7.2%
Nats 5.9%

and this has been consistent over most elections, you have about 8% to play with.

House of reps? Forget it. Senate even harder.

Try standing as an independant for your local council, no won't work your policies aren't local.

In other words I am getting a bit tired of your posts on OLO, promoting your fallacious party (4 members on your PHP forum is not a good advertisement).

Sorry everyone else, back to climate change. (Seeing Stu has no policy on this subject). :)

If the people dont have choice and how they get their prefrences
no wonder you dont account for anything.

Oh by the way i am not the one in government those is government, oh have you seen their policies or they just a fairytale.

Maybe our government will just keep acting in a corrupt and unconstitutional way towards the people.

THAT RIGHT UNCONSTITUTIONAL, THAT WOULD MAKE IT UNLAWFUL

WOULDNT THAT MEAN THEY SHOULD BE SACKED, THEIR PARTIES DEREGISTERED AND NO ONLY THE MAJORS BUT ALL IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

YOU ALL SHOULD UNDERSTAND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BELIEVES IT CAN DO AS IT PLEASES

Steve for nutting this out go to www.tapp.org.au and go to forum tell me how you would change it

stu