To John Key from Malcolm R 7 June 2010

Prime Minister,

 The past eighteen months started with some sense of elation . The first six months seeing actions taken which many agreed were right and proper actions. We believed that we had at last elected a government which was determined to right previous ill conceived actions . The introduction of the smacking bill and the petition to take it from the statutes being only one of what was to be several badly thought out decisions.
   It all turned to custard when you have persisted to progress the E.T.S. and pass the December 09 legislation. . Since first writing to you in November 2008 , I have continued extensive research into Climate Change ; or whatever you next decide to call it , and it has become very obvious that the advise you have received on the matter is not only wrong , but so manipulated that you are placing the lower income people ($30,000and less earnings )of this country in a penurious position . It is my belief that you and your fellow M.Ps. have lost all touch with reality . 
No one earning $3,000 or more per week can readily envisage what someone on $300 per week is made to struggle .   Your recent claim that households will only be disadvantaged to the extent of $ 3.00 weekly is a blatant manipulation of fact .It is becoming obvious to most people , that a sophisticated campaign of disinformation is being run in most news media .
    In more recent times there have been international conferences on climate change . The theme running through them is that climate change is indeed happening , but not to the extent that draconian legislation is needed to charge all citizens a tax on the emitted carbon. Correspondence with several M.Ps. gets the startling reply that this is not a tax . There is little doubt that this is but a manipulation of the truth , and as such , is slowly becoming acknowledged .
The first conference held in Times Square , passed the resolution ,’That world leaders reject the views expressed by the U.Ns. I.P.C.C.. That all taxes , regulations , and other   interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith .
Correspondence to Nick Smith has produced no coherent answers ; indeed his replies show that he has little understanding of the situation. In December 2005 , he stated that a carbon tax would make not one iota of difference to New Zealand's carbon emissions . Correspondence to other M.Ps. has also shown that there is indeed no consensus and your advisers are leading you into a path which could lead us into several decades of overwhelming debt .
The fact that this monstrous claim will not alter the carbon content is now acknowledged in the scientific community . You, yourself said in parliament in May 2005 , that climate change was a load of rubbish .
 Previous suggestions to you and other ministers could have led us into an almost pollution free fuel , a saving of billions of dollars in overseas spending and a much cheaper fuel to all users . This has been ignored , and millions of dollars have been handed to scientists for what has produced very little of value . It makes one wonder whether the actions of your government will indeed provide jobs for New Zealanders and a better retirement for those who have paid taxes for 40+ years .
   We now see that Australia will review its position in 2013 . Several E.U countries are backing off .. France withdrew its carbon tax bill only 2 days before it was to become operative .The state of Utah has requested the Senate to cease its E.T.S.   It will be followed by several more states . Scientists , Universities and research institutions are withdrawing their support for carbon tax . Even Britain has been advised to await more and better research . 
Not once , have you, or Nick Smith , or any other of your colleagues     been able to produce any proof that the E.T.S legislation is necessary for anything but to raise taxes . Taxes to try and repay some of the extensive debt you are incurring . From the replies I have received I must conclude that you do not have proof , but have made your decisions on manipulated and incorrect advise from your obviously biased advisers . I have asked for material proof on several occasions but the only answer to date is “ We have Robust proof “   . “ Multiple robust lines of evidence . “
I note that the other countries who signed the Kyota agreement are not proceeding with their commitments . Why are you rushing in where angels fear to tread ? I would suggest that this “Carefully balanced emissions trading scheme “ is there for only one purpose , to replace ,and more ,  the minimal tax breaks you gave to some tax payers .
Finally; I have previously supported the National Party at most elections . I have many friends and acquaintances who have been similarly inclined . Almost complete agreement now says ; National is a one term government ! Your attitude has developed into that of a dictator and I will actively campaign against National at the upcoming elections .
Malcolm R