Letters to Politicians and others
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 07/04/2010 - 15:54
National has a goal to lift the productivity of NZ. Putting the ETS into place will work against this goal.
Comments made by John Key & Tim Grosser suggest that the main reason for our continued pursuit of an ETS is so that NZ does not become isolated from its trading partners.
This is weak. An ETS should be considered based on good scientific data. If this is not available, then an ETS should not be considered.
I voted for National at the last election because I was of the opinion that National was staffed by thinking people. National had stood against the ETS.
If the ETS is implemented, I and many others WILL NEVER VOTE FOR NATIONAL AGAIN.
Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 27/03/2010 - 17:02
Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 27/03/2010 - 15:03
Honorable PM Key
Honorable Bill English
Honorable Dr Nick Smith
Sirs
You can expect farm impact statements such as this to be circulated every week throughout New Zealand. The uncertainties dumped on rural New Zealand by the ETS are real, and these are people who supported placing the National Party into office - and who are now being damaged.
The fact that National is going to get a backlash is most unfortunate, because there is much important work to be done. Trashing New Zealand's primary export sector means to Kiwis that promises of 'catching up' with Australia are as hollow as when they were previously made by Helen Clark. Furthermore, the ETS belies the claimed intent of this government to reduce red tape and bureaucracy - and you all know that.
Why is the National party doing this to it's own flock???
Sincerely,
Ken S
Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 27/03/2010 - 15:00
Dear John,
I am a Helensville electorate voter and supporter of the National Government. However I am becoming increasingly alarmed by the ETS legislation soon to come into effect. Worldwide the ETS is a shambles. France has backed off; we don’t know what Australia is going to do (originally we were going to align ourselves with Australia); there are huge question-marks around the AGW science; the scheme does not reduce emissions, it just transfers them from one country to another; the effect of the scheme on our economy is at best uncertain and most likely very harmful. I urge you and your government to repeal the ETS legislation or at least delay its introduction until there is some certainty about what the rest of the world, and in particular Australia, are going to do.
Yours sincerely,
Graham C
Submitted by climaterealists on Sat, 27/03/2010 - 14:57
Dear Prime Minister,
I write to you because I am concerned that the advice you have been given in
respect to the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming scare is not based
on sound science and because my original query put to my local MP well over
a year ago has remained unanswered. My emails to Heatley were never even
acknowleged. Two further emails were copied to Nick Smith and yourself. My
original question was,"Who will be held accountable when the science
surrounding CAGW is shown to be flawed?"
Submitted by climaterealists on Fri, 26/03/2010 - 11:27
The following letter to John Key has been slightly edited by the operator of this site.
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 17/03/2010 - 15:19
Submitted by climaterealists on Wed, 10/03/2010 - 14:15
Mr Key,
Recent events must have you questioning why you rushed the Emissions Trading Scheme (Extra Tax Scam) through parliament. This bill was bulldozed through in direct contradiction to your own assertions of what you would do. In particular aligning with Australia to maintain parity between our two nations, this is now shot to pieces. The continuing discreditation of the UN’s supposedly scientific conclusions must also be giving you concern, especially with Phil Jones’ recent admission on BBC radio that all warming in the 20th century was natural in origin and for the last 15 years no warming has taken place. In fact cooling has happened for the last 9 years. There are scientific predictions based on sunspot activity that cooling will continue for up to 20 years. These conclusions I would suggest carry far more weight than the nefarious conclusions of the UN’s IPCC which are based on falsified and manipulated computer models which bear on correlation to what is actually happening.
Submitted by climaterealists on Mon, 15/02/2010 - 20:55
Climategate ; The Biggest Scandal to Ever Hit The Scientific World ; Yes ! 2009 Goes out with a roar as some of us start to realise the full implications we now face . Thousands of politicians starting to realise that they have been sucked into the biggest scam the world has ever seen . Politicians who have believed the false evidence put to them by a small number of influential scientists . Scientists who have sucked millions of dollars out of the public purse, to safeguard their positions of trust within the research and educational systems of the world .
Submitted by climaterealists on Thu, 04/02/2010 - 17:02
Good morning
We listened to your interview with Mike Hosking yesterday morning in relation to the serious errors in the IPCC so called evidence and was interested in your comment that you would not tolerate such flawed advice from your advisers.
Pages
