Letters to Politicians and others

To Nick Smith from Peter F 2009

 Dear Dr Smith

I am appalled at the decision to proceed with an ETS. The scientific evidence is now in and very clear. CO2 is not a driver of climate change.
The definitive evidence that shows that CO2 is not responsible for climate change was published on 26 August in a paper by Professor R Lindzen (Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 36, No. 16. (26 August 2009), L16705.)

To the Select Committee from the Centre for Resource Management Studies 21 May 2009




Further Submission by the CRMS to the Select Committee: Review of the Emissions Trading Scheme. (As requested by Dr Paul Hutchison.)


1.         Background
Both the US and the New Zealand governments are pondering their commitment to an Emissions Trading Scheme and how best to implement it – or even whether to implement one at all.
Agriculture is a major issue in both countries. New Zealand’s agriculture is our major export earner while US agriculture is a major beneficiary of the internal trade in which farm subsidies are exchanged for votes.
However, while New Zealand farmers are faced with buying carbon credits because our ruminants belch methane into the atmosphere, US farmers are selling carbon credits because their grasslands sequester carbon into the soil.

To John Key and others from Michael D 7 October 2009


I did meet you with PeterVavaour a few years ago when you were kind enough to give us half an hour of your time in Parliament buildings
I have voted for and supported National all my life (I am now 64)
The passing and pursuit of the ETS is a farce. You must know there is no correlation between global warming and CO2
IPCC is a joke and we will soon be the laughing stock of the world.
If National passes the ETS National will NEVER get another vote or support from any of the five people in my family.
Very very sincerely
Michael D

From John Key to Maureen C 6 October 2009


On behalf of the Prime Minister, Hon John Key, I acknowledge your recent email.
Thank you for taking the time to write to the Prime Minister and share your views.
Briane Smith
Private Secretary, Office of the Prime Minister

To John Key from Maureen C 16 September 2009

Good afternoon Mr Key


“Today's debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.”


Vaclav Klaus

President Czech Republic 2003 and re-elected 2008

from his book Blue Planet in Green Shackles.


We can only hope this man attends the Copenhagen conference.


To the Select Committee from Maureen C 6 October 2009


I submit that this Bill should be withdrawn, the current Emission Trading Act be repealed and the Government of New Zealand take no action in Copenhagen.
The introduction of this scheme and the previous scheme will impose costs onto the NZ economy at a time of recession with no measurable beneficial outcome.
Whether the costs are imposed on the taxpayer or onto industry emitters, the outcome will be the same. New Zealanders will pay the price for ill-conceived legislation as any increased costs incurred by producers will be passed on to consumers.

To the Select Committee from Donald O 1 October 2009


I represent no organisation and submit as a voter and tax payer. I am opposed to the ETS concept completely, as there is little sensible scientific evidence that CO2 had anything to do with the 1 degree of warming we had last century. 
From about 1998 we have entered a cooling period while the CO2 continues to climb. A sensible approach would be to stop the headlong rush to destroy our economy and instead set up a watching brief. a royal commission perhaps? 

To the Select Committee from Paul T 12 October 2009


I am submitting this in my own name. I have no quantification of the number of people who would support my viewpoint, but I know that it is considerable and increasing.
I do not wish to appear before the select committee to speak on this submission.
My educational qualifications include a double-major in Accounting and Economics from Auckland University. I am now retired and have had more time to devote to this issue than most. I have had a life-long interest in mathematics and science and have better than a school-leavers competence in both subjects, sufficient to be able to weigh the arguments from both sides of the debate without having to rely entirely on the say-so of someone else.

To the Select Committee from Andy W 12 October 2009


The IPCC is not a reliable scientific body. Grave concerns about the review process and content have been raised by respected scientific commentators and climate scientists, including IPCC expert reviewers - several of them New Zealanders!

To the Select Committee from Alan S 6 October 2009


My submission opposes both this bill and the old bill.
I am sure you are aware of the following information, but my submission requires a degree of background to put it into context.
1.      Temperature has been cooling since the beginning of the 21st century. One of the lead authors for the IPCC, Prof Mojib Latif, is now predicting cooling for the next ten to twenty years despite the increase in CO2 levels. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/09/20/u-s-media-ignoring-about-face-leading-global-warming-proponent This is called a pause in the warming, although others have called the warming a pause in cooling. It does appear to be confusing because it depends on what time scale you choose to use.


Subscribe to RSS - Letters