Friday, 22 May 2015

COP21 - India and China hold out.


Australia's Foreign Minister, Ms Julie Bishop has an "Extravagant solution to a non-existent problem"

News.com.au reports that Foreign Minister Bishop announced that she will waste Australian Taxpayer's Money.
AUSTRALIA will contribute $200 million to a global fund to help poorer nations tackle climate change. 
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has announced the funding for the Green Climate Fund at the UN climate summit in Lima on Wednesday. The money will come out of the foreign aid budget. 
The fund will help developing countries to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
However Ms Bishop had a rider: (link)
Ms Bishop has said Australia would determine its actions on the basis of what other nations agreed to do. 
I hope that Ms Bishop is keeping up with the latest news. China is not signing on for years.
China, the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, has agreed to cap its output by 2030 


 India will not give up coal - coal that helped the developed world develop:

Indian Tells UN:
India has told a high-level energy meeting here that it will not be fair to expect it to move away from coal to meet energy requirements of millions of Indians, underscoring that coal will continue to remain the "mainstay" of its energy needs for the "foreseeable future. 
"Our energy challenge is truly huge. The numbers speak for themselves," said Minister for State for Power, Coal and New & Renewable Energy Piyush Goyal at the First Global Energy Ministerial SE4ALL Forum Meeting yesterday. 
India has 56 million homes or 280 million Indians, almost the size of the population of the US, who lack access to basic electricity and more than 500 million are still deprived of access to clean energy fuels, he said.
As the Man Made Climate Change "science" fails, the pushers of the hoax, the alarmists, are getting shriller.

WE hope the Abbott Government are listening and do not sign any "Kyoyo 2" agreements.

Submission to the Third party certification of food Enquiry

Submission by Anthony Cox

Halal means what is permissible under Sharia which is Islamic law. It does not just apply to foods and beverages but every aspect of life. If something is halal it is part of Islam. Making things, foods, actions etc halal means they become part of Islam.

Halal is the process by which Islam replaces the social, economic, political and legal structure of a host society.

Other ways Islam subsumes the host society are through the building of Mosques and visible symbols such as the burqa.

There are over 370 mosques in Australia which, per capita, is more than six times the number of Buddhist and Hindu temples. It is much more than the conventional (sic) religions such as Catholicism and Anglicanism. The Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stated: 
A mosque is our barracks, the domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets and the faithful are our soldiers."
In 2010 France banned the burqa based on a Parliamentary Commission to Study the Wearing of the Full Veil in France. This Commission had found the burqa was an infringement of the principle of freedom, a symbol of subservience and a negation of the principle of equality.

In 2014 the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld France’s banning of the burqa. In addition to the principles found by France the ECHR also found the burqa was an an affront to the country's tenets of secularism and a security risk, preventing the accurate identification of individuals.
Other European nations have followed or plan to follow France’s lead in banning the burqa but a limited ban in Queensland has failed.

The building of Mosques and the wearing of the burqa as well as food certification are part of the halal process.

Section 116 of the Australian Constitution says:
The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
Section 116 has four limbs. The first three limbs prohibit the Commonwealth from making certain laws: laws "for establishing any religion"; laws "for imposing any religious observance"; and laws "for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion". The fourth limb proscribes the imposition of religious tests to qualify for any Commonwealth office or public trust.

The first limb is of relevance to halal. In Attorney-General (Vic); Ex Rel Black v Commonwealth ("DOGS case") [1981] HCA 2; (1981) 146 CLR 559 (2 February 1981) the High Court found that Section 116 did not encompass laws that benefit religions generally; it only proscribed laws that established a particular religion.

Islam is a particular religion. Halal certification is the process by which Islam establishes itself. In Quick and Garran (1995) [1901]. The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth. Sydney: Legal Books. ISBN 1-86316-071-X establishment means "the erection and recognition of a State Church, or the concession of special favours, titles, and advantages to one church which are denied to others."

Allowing halal to continue could be construed as conceding special favours, titles and advantages to Islam.

It would seem that there are 2 possible legal principles affronted by halal. The first is described by the French banning of the burqa. The second is described by S.116.

Anthony Cox
21 May 2015

= = = = = = = = = =


http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Food_Cert_Schemes

On 13 May 2015, the Senate referred an inquiry into third party certification of food to the Senate Economics References Committee for inquiry and report by 30 November 2015
Submissions close 31 July 2015.

Committee Secretariat contact:

Senate Standing Committees on Economics
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Phone: +61 2 6277 3540
Fax: +61 2 6277 5719
economics.sen@aph.gov.au






  

Vale John Harborne

Anthony Cox


I met John about 10 years ago. We shared a common scepticism of man-made global warming. John came from a solid science background. One of his 2 degrees was a BSc and he was a qualified metallurgist.

They don’t make metallurgists anymore and if John was typical when they did make them they made them well. One of his articles on the myth of clean coal was published at On Line Opinion. It’s excellent and I referred to it often.

After a distinguished career at BHP’s steel wire plant he continued his extensive network which included being affiliated with the Institution of Engineers Australia (MIEAust, CPEng) and the Institute of Materials Engineering Australasia (IMEA). He was very active on 14 technical committees of Standards Australia for 20 years, representing both BHP and IMEA, positions he relinquished only in early 2008.

He was a good man to have your back and when I didn’t seek his advice I usually regretted it.

After we struck up our friendship we had many adventures together at numerous talks, presentations and meetings. We met the famous and infamous and had a few narrow escapes. Such as the time I received an invitation to an energy meeting at Lake Macquarie City Council. LMCC was well known as a firm supporter of global warming and I thought I had better have back-up. John readily agreed.
The meeting was as we feared and we took a dressing down before escaping like two school-boys leaving the Principal’s office unscathed.

On another occasion John came with me to a talk I was giving at Singleton. I started well and was critiquing the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and its most recent report, AR4 which came out in 2007. The IPCC had published three previous reports, FAR in 1990, SAR in 1995 and TAR in 2000.

I had not sought advice from John before the talk and had somehow thought that AR4, stood for Annual Report 2007. On this basis I was making fun of the IPCC and its inability to count with only four annual reports being published in 17 years.

During the talk I looked down to see John with his head in his hands. In retrospect it was at this moment I lost the audience.

After the talk he came up to me and patted me on the back and said “never mind, there’s always next time”. I said “why”, and he replied AR4 stands for Assessment Report 4; FAR, First Assessment Report, SAR, Second Assessment Report and TAR, Third Assessment Report.

It was me who could not count not the IPCC.

I always took John’s advice thereafter.

John had an extensive list of email acquaintances and always sent out regular and interesting material. He remained active in PROBUS and whenever I rang him was his cheerful and thoughtful self.

He maintained his enthusiasm and interest in the science of global warming during his final illness.
John leaves his wife and 2 daughters, Cecily, Suzanne and Lyndal and grandchildren about whom he was very proud.

John was old school, a decent man and I’ll miss him.