Cathy McGowan is a Greens-like candidate of the far-left, but that's not the image the "independent" candidate wants out there in the electorate.

She is running in the Victorian rural seat of Indi, which takes in the towns of Wangaratta, Wodonga, Benalla and several others.

Apparently she has a chance to win.

Although she presents herself as a dinky-di local farmer who was recruited by a local grassroots organisation called "Voice 4 Indi", the reality is very different.

 

The "Voice 4 Indi" Committee

The origin of McGowan's campaign is a small group calling itself "Voice 4 Indi" (V4I), which was formed in September 2012. The group is full of activists of the far-left.

There's Anthony Lane, a green activist who was the inaugural chair of the Wangaratta Sustainability Network. The organisation is a recipient of taxpayer's money, and advocates a 100% renewable energy mandate. They even go so far as to say "It’s criminal to keep supporting non-renewable energy".

The current legislated mandate is 20%, so imagine what your electricity bill might look like on 100%.

Rowan O'Hagan is also a green activist, and was founder and secretary of the Wangaratta Sustainability Network. She believes lifestyles in first-world countries are "unsustainable" and pushes for cultural change to achieve "a more socially just global environment".

"Sustainability" is, of course, the buzz-word for Agenda 21 implementation.

Alana Johnson is a board member of the ultra-feminist Victorian Women's Trust, who were vocal supporters of Julia Gillard. When Gillard was overthrown, the organisation ran full page ads in several newspapers praising Gillard's "successful government", slamming her critics, and blaming her demise on sexism and misogyny.

Johnson actually went further on her twitter account and blamed the whole of Australia for Gillard's demise, saying she was ashamed of the country.

There is also a fellow called Ben McGowan, who I presume is related to Cathy McGowan.

He is a green activist, a supporter of "sustainability" (Agenda 21), and a believer in the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. He has tweeted his support for socialism, and also his opposition to free-market economics, calling it "nonsense". He has even praised the writings of Mark Latham.

And then, of course, there is Cathy McGowan herself who, with Mr Lane, was co-convener of the organisation. That's right, the "grassroots organisation" that chose to endorse Cathy McGowan, was started by Cathy McGowan.

What an amazing coincidence!

 

The "Kitchen Table Conversations"

"Voice 4 Indi" claim that during March and April a series of "kitchen table conversations" took place, hosted by members of the Indi community. Apparently, feedback was accumulated at these meetings and sent back to the organisation, who would then compile it in a report.

Even V4I's official numbers (which cannot be independently verified) say they only managed to get 55 people willing to host a "kitchen table conversation" with a total of 440 participants.

To put this into context, the federal electorate of Indi contains about 100,000 eligible voters. That means, at best, 0.4% of the electorate took place in these "conversations".

Community forums with voluntary participation will inevitably attract the most fierce ideological warriors, almost invariably from the left, and several of the "conversations" appear to be organised by the family and friends of V4I members themselves.

How can V4I seriously claim this is representative of the electorate of Indi?

Then there's the particular slate of issues that were supposedly emphasised by participants in these "kitchen table conversations". Somehow I don't think the primary concerns of your average farmer in northern Victoria include things like ...

  • Reducing carbon dioxide emissions
  • Stopping coal exports to China
  • The compassionate treatment of boat people
  • Encouraging multiculturalism
  • A new model of capitalism with low & sustainable growth
  • Solidarity with gays and lesbians
  • Abolishing States in favour of regional councils
  • Recognising aborigines in the Constitution
  • More national parks
  • Increasing foreign aid

But all these points appear in a "report" about the outcomes of the conversations, including quotes from the infamous Tim Flannery containing ominous predictions about catostrophic environmental destruction within 15 years.

The report was released by V4I on May 19, in conjunction with an announcement that (surprise, surprise) they had decided to endorse Cathy McGowan as an independent candidate for the coming federal election.

News reports failed to mention that McGowan actually started the very "grassroots" organisation that was now endorsing her, with green activists, radical feminists and perhaps even her own family, among its committee members.

Melbourne's Herald-Sun newspaper simply reported that:

"... she was drafted to stand by a group called Voice for Indi. This group wanted to "rebuild the relationship between politicians and the people""

 

Again, no mention that she actually started the organisation that "drafted" her, and endless media outlets have reported it in this way.

Laughably, the McGowan campaign have been putting out YouTube videos claiming that McGowan was chosen "through a selection process that was quite transparent and very open ...".

Rather than scrutinise these things, the left-wing media have been putting out what look more like campaign press releases for McGowan, than real journalism.

 

McGowan's Carpetbaggers

McGowan's campaign has emphasised local representation. The paradox is that McGowan's people admit that most of their donors and campaign volunteers are carpetbaggers from urban Melbourne. Indeed, McGowan has said the genesis of her candidacy was a phone call from young relatives at a Melbourne dinner party.

How appropriate that McGowan decided to become the champion of rural people after getting a call from a bunch of 20-somethings at a dinner party in inner-city Melbourne.

I think that tidbit gives you an insight into the true nature of McGowan's campaign. A foreign insurgency.

McGowan's team: Farmers or Fitzroy Flower-Children?

The Creepy Abortionist

Perhaps McGowan's creepiest supporter is dogged abortionist, Pieter Mourik (pictured right), who says he's been a "close friend" of McGowan's for 35 years.

"Doctor" Mourik, a retired Albury-Wodonga gynaecologist, is so extreme in his views on abortion, he writes screeching articles attacking the peaceful protests of Albury-Wodonga pro-life campaigners, calling them "vultures" and saying that they should not be tolerated.

These "vultures" Mourik speaks of are women like Anna von Marburg, an Albury mother so dedicated to saving children from abortion that she says she'll take unwanted children into her home.

Mourik certainly doesn't appear sympathetic to freedom of speech.

According to Pro-Life Victoria, Mourik was also active in Albury-Wodonga promoting the then Victorian Labor Government's 2008 abortion law changes which made it illegal for a doctor to conscientiously object to referring women for abortion and made it illegal for nursing and auxiliary staff to conscientiously object to involvement in abortion procedures. It also effectively legalised unrestricted abortion-on-demand, including late-term abortion, partial-birth abortion and perhaps even outright infanticide for babies born-alive following failed abortions.

 

Also fiercely campaigning for these abortion law changes was "Voice 4 Indi" committee member Alana Johnson, in her capacity as board member of the Victorian Women's Trust.

So excited is Mourik, about McGowan's candidacy, that he admits "this is the first time i've been involved in a political campaign".

Mourik is typical of the circles McGowan mixes in. She is liked by all the wrong people. The detestable duo, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott, think she's fantastic. Malcolm Fraser, the Liberal Prime Minister who wouldn't repeal the nightmare policies of Gough Whitlam, has endorsed her. And far-left former Sydney Morning Herald columnist, Margo Kingston has been shilling for McGowan from the beginning.

Given all this, it's not surprising that McGowan, after initially saying she had no policies, turns out to be a supporter of a carbon tax that will rip $1 trillion dollars from GDP growth, the white elephant national broadband network, and more black-hole spending on windmills and solar panels that are driving up electricity bills.

But if a green-in-disguise is what you want, then by all means, vote for McGowan.

 

#

The founder and lead Senate candidate of the Australian Sex Party, Fiona Patten, was inspired into politics by an infamous Australian communist, who was also her great aunt.

Jessie Street, or "Red Jessie" as she was often known, is repeatedly cited by Patten as her major influence and political mentor going as far back as 2000.

On the Sex Party website, Patten even refers to Street as "that great worker's and women's champ of yesteryear".

Street, who was a member of the Labor Party, has also been praised by Labor figures, including former MP Maxine McKew, Governor-General Quentin Bryce and Health Minister Tanya Plibersek, who is trustee of an organisation dedicated to Street.

So who is Jessie Street?

Jessie Street (née Lillingston) was born in British India in 1889, where her father was an imperial civil servant. In 1896 the family moved to Australia after inheriting a lucrative northern NSW property from Jessie's wealthy grandfather.

Jessie was sent to a "progressive" elite private school in England, and later enrolled in arts at the University of Sydney, graduating in 1912. She married barrister (Sir) Kenneth Street in 1916, who later became chief justice of New South Wales.

 

Prominent among Sydney's "elite", Street became heavily involved in several feminist organisations. She was an executive-member and president of the Feminist Club of NSW; Secretary of the National Council of Women; a councillor of Sydney University's Women's College; vice-president of the Australian Federation of Women Voters; founder and president of the ultra-radical United Associations of Women; and more.

She was an "internationalist", and a foundation member of the Sydney Branch of the League of Nations Union in 1918. She attended League of Nations Assemblies in Geneva in 1930 and 1938, as well as other international conferences throughout the 1930s.

The League of Nations was the first attempt at global governance following WW1.

Street was also involved in eugenics and "sex education", co-founding the NSW Social Hygiene Association, and, through her involvement with the NSW Racial Hygiene Association, helping to set up Sydney's first birth control clinic in 1933.

So maniacal was she in her feminism, that she forced her sons to knit and sew, as is recounted by her granddaughter in the following video:

Communist Conversion

She first visited the USSR in 1938, and became an advocate for the Soviet system of government. She believed the system squared perfectly with her other causes, and said the Soviet Union was a beacon of feminism and social justice.

Upon returning to Australia with her new-found love of the Soviet system, naturally, she joined the Australian Labor Party. She also joined the Society for Cultural Relations with the USSR and gave a series of pro-Soviet lectures at book clubs, union meetings and various other events. For this she was heavily criticised.

Recalling, in her autobiography, a man asking her about a rumour that she had met, and had discussions with, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, she said: "I just laughed and told him I would have given anything just to see Stalin, much less talk with him."

In August 1939 the USSR signed a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany, and key office-bearers of the Society for Cultural Relations with the USSR resigned. Jessie Street, though, was undeterred. As World War II broke out, she took over the organisation, and became its new president.

When the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, Street formed the Russian Medical Aid and Comforts Committee (RMACC), and became its chairman. She raised money, sometimes via shady practices, and organised the 'Sheepskins for Russia' campaign, which saw about 500,000 dressed sheepskins shipped to Russia to aid their war effort. Street's direct contact with Soviet officials helped facilitate her activities.

Street says so many people wanted to learn about the USSR that she started yet another organisation, called the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, dedicated purely to providing information about life and conditions in the USSR. There were screenings of films, lectures, fetes and other fundraising activities, with all proceeds going to the Russian Medical Aid and Comforts Committee.

Increasingly under fire for her pro-Soviet activism, Street lashed out at her opponents in speeches around the country, saying the real traitors were those opposing aid for the Soviets. She said it was time for Australia to "awaken from the grip of the prejudices" against communist Russia, and that "The real fifth columnists today are those people who are against help for Russia. They are the subversive element, and should be dealt with accordingly."

Her communist affiliations widely-known, the Labor government still found it fit to appoint Street to several government posts during the 1940s.

In 1943, Street won Labor pre-selection for the blue ribbon Liberal seat of Wentworth, which covered her own neighbourhood. The Australian Communist Party was so impressed with the pre-selection of Mrs Street, that they withdrew their own candidate for Wentworth, Phyllis Johnson. A Communist Party spokesperson was quoted saying "The Communist Party has withdrawn Mrs Phyllis Johnson because she might spoil the chances of Mrs Street." [Daily Telegraph, 3rd August, 1943]

The Communist Party then started campaigning for Street, and she only narrowly lost.

In 1945 the Curtin Labor Government selected Street to be an Australian delegate to the critical post-war San Francisco "Peace" conference. Protests erupted from both inside and outside the ALP, with Curtin forced to defend the appointment in Parliament under questioning from the Country Party's Larry Anthony. The March 2nd exchange was as follows:

Larry Anthony (Country): "Why was she given priority in selection over women members of Parliament, Dame Enid Lyons and Senator Dorothy Tangney, who might well be expected to better represent Australia?"

PM Curtin (Labor): "I regard Mrs. Street as a very competent and cultured woman, with a broad point of view,"

Larry Anthony (Country): "A Communist point of view."

PM Curtin (Labor): "Mrs. Street's point of view is shared by a great section of the people of Australia, as shown by the fact that she was chosen by a great organisation to stand for Parliament, and polled very well."

Street again visited the Soviet Union in 1945, staying for three weeks during October and November. While there, she was provided a tour of Moscow by Australian ambassador James Maloney. As Maloney (himself a Labor man and former trade union leader) pointed to practical examples of the dire economic consequences of communism, Street resisted him, claiming in her autobiography that he was brainwashed.

When Maloney showed her the black-markets and high prices for basic goods, like butter and milk, Street countered scornfully, claiming the scenario looked more like a "free market". It is quite amazing that, even in the heart of Moscow, the capital city of the archetypal communist regime, a socialist still manages to blame the problems on free-markets and capitalism.

While there she also received official recognition as the driving force behind the sheepskins campaign, and was presented with a Young Pioneers' neckerchief at a Soviet holiday camp.

Expulsion from the Labor Party

As the Cold War heated up, the Labor Party were coming under intense scrutiny over their links to communism and communist auxiliaries. They needed a circuit-breaker, and so, in 1948, Street, along with other ALP members, were given an ultimatum to jettison their affiliation with "communistic" organisations such as the Australian-Russian Society, the New Housewives' Association and the People's Council of Culture. Street refused, and in January 1949 she was forced to resign from the ALP.

Whilst admitting her organisations had communist members, Street protested, saying the policies of the organisations were consistent with the ALP platform.

When Labor's Clive Evatt, the NSW Minister for Housing, was forced to resign as President of the Australia-Russia Society in February 1949, Jessie Street replaced him.

Street's two-year term on the UN Status of Women Commission expired early in 1949 and she was not reappointed for a second term. In the December 1949 federal election, Labor lost office and Jessie Street wasn't offered any further government appointments.

World Peace Council - Another Communist Front

In 1950 Street co-founded the New South Wales branch of the Australian Peace Council, and organised a visit to Australia by the communist Dean of Canterbury, Hewlett Johnson. Known colloquially as the "Red Dean", Johnson was infamous for his praise of the Soviet Union, his glorification of Stalin, and his chairmanship of the British Daily Worker, a communist newspaper.

The British Telegraph newspaper recently said of him "No Communist outrage could put Johnson off his stride", and he even advised Australia to allow the Chinese to expand into our north.

Unsurprisingly, none of that soured Mrs Street, who literally described him as Jesus-like.

In June of 1950 she left Australia, and would not return for six years. During this time she became a leading figure in the World Peace Council, yet another communist-front organisation. She attended international conferences, and was a regular speaker at World Peace Council rallies.

Jessie Street addresses the crowds at the Budapest "peace rally", June 1953Jessie Street addresses the crowds at the Budapest "peace rally", June 1953

In June of 1951 Street, now based in London, tried to obtain a US visa, in order to meet Jacob Mailk, Soviet Ambassador to the UN, who had invited her to meet him at the UN Security Council in New York. Street was denied the visa by the US embassy based on her communist affiliations. She was also later denied entry to France, with French authorities saying she was listed as an "undesirable".

Street's weak attempts to deny she was a communist were laughable amidst her vigorous defences of the Soviet Union, her open advocacy of the Soviet system, her immersion in communist circles, and the flaunting of her membership of the Federated Ironworkers Association, a communist-controlled union. Indeed, in January 1952, when anti-communist forces wrestled control of the union, Street was booted out.

Her Love for 'Uncle Joe'

In March 1953, Street attended the funeral of Joseph Stalin in Moscow. She was the only Australian specially taken by the Russians, and in a 2004 ABC program called "Dynasties", former NSW Supreme Court Justice, Roddy Meagher, said of Jessie Street:

"She was infused with the message. And she wanted, urgently, to tell everybody in Australia that Uncle Joe Stalin was the greatest man on the earth." (video below)

 

Her autobiography, published in 1966, is devoid of criticism for Stalin, despite what was, by then, well and truly known about his atrocities. Even post-Stalin Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had denounced Stalin as a despot and mass murderer in 1956. But not Jessie Street.

In December 1956 Street finally returned to Australia, having travelled to Communist China, Russia, and all over Europe. Now based back in Australia, she continued to travel to international conferences and, according to Peter Sekuless in his biography of Street, "She unconsciously revealed her own philosophy in a speech to a disarmament congress in Stockholm in 1958" saying:

"Perhaps communism may be a new revelation of principles Christ expounded. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' is surely a principle more in conformity with Christ's teaching, than a society which accepts the principle of 'each man for himself, and the devil take the hindmost'."

Report in The Argus newspaper (Melbourne) 13th December, 1956

Street passed away in 1970, and in 1988 the Jessie Street Trust was formed. The organisation's website says they raise money and award grants to "assist activities Jessie championed".

There are 12 trustees in the organisation, one of which is none other than the current Federal Minister for Health, Tanya Plibersek, who says "Jessie Street will always be a heroine of mine” and that she "promoted values that are important today".

Others who have praised this Stalin-loving communist include:

#

 

The first two books in a new, educational, Australian children's book series have been published, and are now on sale.

The series will cover some basic concepts, truths and ideas, stimulating independent thought & further research.

The first book in the series is titled "The Story Of Money", and will cover the true historical origins of money, and how government has perverted it. Crucially, the book addresses some basics that are usually not taught to children, for instance, that real money isn't something that "grows on trees" or pops out of a "hole in the wall".

Although ostensibly targeted at children, the books could also prove useful for teenagers and adults who have no understanding of the monetary system, and the other topics covered.

The website is @ WiseOwlStoryBooks.com.au

The Facebook page is @ Facebook.com/WiseTOwl

Thank God for the existence of the bloated bureaucracy we lovingly know as the ACCC.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission costs Australian taxpayers over 200 million dollars per year, and boy, are we getting our money's worth.

The ACCC is looking out for your needs, Australia.

Indeed, were it not for these heroes, the average Australian would be completely unaware of the complex dangers posed by the use of ...

Hot Water Bottles.

What's that, you say?!

You think using hot water bottles is a matter of "common sense"?

You think the federal government shouldn't be wasting time and taxpayer's money dealing with hot water bottles?

Well ... think again.

Hot water bottles cause 200 hospitalisations per year in Australia. That's right, 200 hospitalisations PER YEAR! That's 0.0009% of the Australian population.

Clearly we have a serious problem on our hands.

Yes, the overwhelming majority of these 200 hospitalisations involve mere scalds that could be easily treated at home, but, by golly, a good handful of them are serious burns that require an overnight hospital stay, or perhaps even longer!

As we approach yet another horror hot water bottle winter season here in Australia, I know what you're thinking.

'When will the suffering end?' ..... 'How much longer can we go on?'

Lucky for us, the ACCC are on the case. They have created this helpful video, ominously titled "Hot Water Bottles - The Hidden Dangers", complete with scary music and dramatic re-enactments of hot water bottle tragedies.

WARNING: THIS VIDEO IS NOT A PARODY
THIS IS AN ACTUAL ACCC VIDEO

Thankfully, when federal Labor came to power in 2008, they began regulating the production of hot water bottles to ensure they are made of government-approved materials, with a government-approved rubber thickness and government-approved stoppers.

Phew!

So the question now is "who is to blame?". Who has wrought this devastation?

The answer is obvious ..... corporations.

Those evil, profiteering, hot-water-bottle corporations.

"Companies". "Businessmen". "The Private Sector". Call them what you will.

What they really are ... is pure evil.

Thank Heaven we have civic-minded people like ACCC Deputy Chairman Peter Kell. He protects consumers from these greedy corporations who care not for the consumer, but only for their hot-water-bottle profits.

All these corporations do is eliminate competition, raise prices and lower safety standards.

I mean, it's not like monopolisation, price rises and poor safety standards could ever be caused by the government itself. Right?

Indeed the ACCC are the very people making sure that the Australian public is well aware that these problems are the fault of businessmen, not government.

Last year, when the carbon tax came into effect, Peter Kell threatened to fine businesses a million dollars if they said the carbon tax was raising prices beyond the pre-determined, state-sanctioned amount "calculated" by bureaucrats in Labor's Ministry of Truth. You know, the same bureaucrats who "calculated" the 2012-13 budget surplus.

Let's hope the ACCC continues to focus on important issues, like hot water bottle safety, rather than wasting time pointing out that consumers are being smashed with price increases, small business shut-downs and reduced competition, as a result of the government itself imposing a massive tax and regulatory burden.

#

There is a concerted effort by the United Nations and our own federal government, to cut off recreational and commercial fisherman from sea fisheries around Australia. The mechanism for excluding fisherman, as well as other critical commercial enterprises (gas, oil and other natural resources), is the legislative creation of marine parks, justified under a cloak of green rhetoric.

Marine Parks are essentially the marine equivalent of terrestrial national parks, meaning areas where government legislation prohibits various types of human activity and sometimes all human activity. They are a manifestation of environmentalist ideology, which proclaims that humans must be incrementally cut-off from natural resources.

Serious efforts to thrust the marine-specific environmentalist agenda upon nation states can be traced back to the League of Nations Conference for the Codification of International Law which took place from the 13th of March to the 12th of April in 1930. At that conference, international maritime law was on the agenda and although there was a failure to reach agreement, one of the items on the agenda was ‘conservation of living resources’, despite the lack of scientific evidence suggesting any shortage.1

After the Second World War there were heightened efforts to formally codify a law of the sea. On the 24th of February 1958, the First United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea began in Geneva, Switzerland. It was attended by Representatives of 86 countries, including Australia. The official purpose is to bring into existence a new code resting not on informal custom (as it has been historically), but on binding treaty.

Four separate conventions were adopted by the Conference and opened for signature:

  1. Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone
  2. Convention on the High Seas
  3. Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas
  4. Convention on the Continental Shelf

 

Australia signed and ratified all four. The important one to note for our purposes is the Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas. This represents the first successful multilateral treaty containing environmentalist ideology with respect to the marine environment. Despite the noted lack of any scientific evidence, it proclaimed that marine resources, given technological innovation, are in danger of being “overexploited”. It stressed the need for “scientific” research to justify fishing practices on the high seas.2

Things then went quiet for a while, until environmentalism, previously unknown to pop culture, was somehow magically (tongue in cheek) injected into the counter-culture movement in the late 1960s. With the noted aid of narcotics, ‘tree hugging’ and ‘loving the earth’ were now popular things to do. This new wave of tree-hugging popular culture allowed the Australian government to begin its demagogic crusade to completely shut down the Great Barrier Reef to any economic development.

The crusade to shut down the Barrier Reef began with a joint Federal-QLD Royal Commission. It was called the Royal Commission into Exploratory and Production Drilling for Petroleum in the Area of the Great Barrier Reef. It was chaired by Sir Gordon Wallace and started considering submissions on the 5th of May 1970.3

The Commission reported on 30 October 1974. By this time globalist and left-wing extremist Gough Whitlam was Prime Minister, and he had already presided over the illegal, unconstitutional takeover of state waters, so he could push through his anti-development, environmentalist marine park agenda.4 The High Court, stacked with globalists, on board with the centralising, green agenda of the United Nations, would later rule in favor of Whitlam, in blatant opposition to the original intent of the Australian Constitution. Only Justice Gibbs, founder of the Samuel Griffith Society, would have the guts to stand up for the Constitution and dissent.5

Now Whitlam was free to run rampant on the Great Barrier Reef. He pushed the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act through parliament and it received Royal Assent on the 20th of June 1975, coming into operation on that day. The Federal Act defined the area known as Great Barrier Reef Region, and created the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, a green-shirt bureaucracy that would strike down any attempt at economic development and technological innovation within the designated region and preside over fishing with a Stalinist iron fist.6

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park was the first true marine park in Australia. There had previously been a couple of others (within the barrier reef itself) but they were associated with terrestrial island national parks.

In 1980 a new threat emerged. The Federal Government submitted the Great Barrier Reef Region for UNESCO World Heritage Listing under the international treaty known as the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. On the 26th of October 1981 the submission was accepted and the Great Barrier Reef Region was now officially a world heritage site. This means the Great Barrier Reef is now effectively controlled internationally, by UNESCO, under the terms of that treaty, which are extensive. In fact, the United Nations World Heritage designated area, is even larger than the domestically designated region.6

In the mean time, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority was progressively choking off more and more areas to development and constructive commercial activity, whilst more marine parks were being created around the country.6

In 1982, the new United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea treaty was open for signature and Australia signed on the first day, and later ratified. In 1994, having received the minimum number of ratifications, the treaty officially came into operation, superseding the 1958 set of four treaties, including the one regarding ‘conservation’. This treaty has massively compromised Australia’s national sovereignty and placed us under an even more draconian ‘conservation’ regime.7

The treaty defines a so-called EEZ, an Exclusive Economic Zone, which extends from territorial waters (now 12Nm from shoreline) to 200Nm from the shoreline. The problem is that economic development in the Exclusive Economic Zone is subject to ‘conservation’ and in a far more draconian fashion than the 1958 treaty. The United Nations effectively took ownership of the international seabed with its International Seabed Authority, which controls development of seabed and subsoil resources and can levy taxes, providing the UN with what it covets most, an independent stream of revenue not subject to any accountability in a nation state. The ISA would effectively be a world government, eco-dictatorship of the high seas.8

The United States has not ratified the treaty and for good reason, but Bush tried and Obama is trying. They have been stopped only by a few decent Senators who are blocking the ratification process in a US Senate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beb1YPSUX-c

Australia did not have a chance to reject this treaty, because our treaties are ratified by the executive alone, with no accountability. This is against the spirit of our Constitution, whose framers did not intend to allow what is now happening. It is why you need to contact your member of Parliament and tell them you want Australia to renounce this treaty.

Then we have to consider the so-called “scientists” providing “scientific research”. In 2003 Canadian “biologist” Ransom Myers and his student Boris Worm made front page news with their paper Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities. It proclaimed a 90% depletion of large fish species.9

Since it was published, it has been derided as ridiculous by fisheries scientists. Professor of Fisheries at the University of Washington, Ray Hilborn, refers to Myers and Worm as “faith-based” pseudo-scientists. He says:

“This faith-based fisheries movement has emerged in the last decade, and it threatens the very heart of the scientific process—peer review and publication in the top journals. Two journals with the highest profile, Science and Nature, clearly publish articles on fisheries not for their scientific merit, but for their publicity value.” 10

Professor Hilborn says that the Myers and Worm paper and many others like it...

“...illustrate a failure of the peer review system and lack of the basic skepticism needed in science, and are unfortunately but a few of the many papers now appearing with similar sensational but unsubstantiated headlines. The people who knew the data used in ... the Myers and Worm paper clearly were not involved in the review process, or the editors chose to ignore their opinions.”

Fisheries expert Alan Longhurst has also heavily criticised a 2006 paper by Worm, which misuses data to conclude that all sea fisheries could collapse by the middle of the century. Longhurst says:

“...this extrapolation has been taken seriously by the news media and the general public, though not by fisheries scientists.” 11

Many other fisheries scientists have issued similar critiques of the marine ecology establishment. However, despite their discredited status, these articles of Boris Worm and Ransom Myers are being used by Australians Greens Party leader Bob Brown to justify his demands for cutting off mass areas of Australian waters to fishing and economic development. Brown goes around telling news reporters that "We have lost 90 per cent of the great fishes including marlin, tuna and snapper” citing "Meyers and Worm 2003". Of course, the feckless reporters, void of any vestige of critical analysis that may have defined reporting in the long past, go along for the ride.

And so we end up here, on the verge of completely destroying fishing and economic development in Australian waters, whilst driving up unemployment, the price of food and the price of fuel. When will the madness end?

 

References:

  1. United Nations Documents Concerning Development and Codification of International Law 1947.
  2. Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas 1958.
  3. List of Federal Royal Commissions. Retrieved September 2010.
  4. Seas and Submerged Lands Act 1973 (Cth)
  5. New South Wales v Commonwealth [1975] HCA 58; (1975) 135 CLR 337 (17 December 1975)
  6. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. A Brief History of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. 2005.
  7. Australian Government. Continental Shelf Submission of Australia - Executive Summary. 2004.
  8. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. 1982.
  9. Myers, R. A., and B. Worm. 2003. Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature 423:280-283.
  10. Hilborn, R., 2006. Faith-based Fisheries. Fisheries 31, 554-555.
  11. Longhurst, A., Doubt and certainty in fishery science: Are we really headed for a global collapse of stocks? Fisheries Research (2007)

The cost of living crisis in Australia, particularly in our major cities, is killing living standards and causing mental illness. Millions of Australians are struggling. Some families can’t afford to put the air conditioner on in the heat, nor the heater on in the cold. Servicing a mortgage is becoming impossible for an average wage earner.

 
Professor of Economics at the University of Western Sydney, Steve Keen estimates that the minimum wage required to have some quality of life in Sydney is $150,000. Anything below $150,000 is Struggle Street for those trying to pay a mortgage in Sydney.
 
The proportion of your salary, after tax, that is required to service a home loan (principal and interest) has gone from 20% of the average wage to 80% of the average wage. A single person cannot even consider taking out a mortgage in suburban Sydney these days.
 
Think for a moment.
 
Isn’t the natural progression that life get easier and things get cheaper over time?
 
That’s how it used to be.
 
Last century, new technologies and mass production meant life got progressively easier as time went by. Products became cheaper, and better in quality. Standards of living improved. Things like cars, TVs, fridges, washing machines, heaters, air conditioners and mobile phones meant that life was easier, than previous centuries. The resources used to produce these goods got cheaper because of technological advances in resource extraction. The average life expectancy went from 30 in the Middle Ages, to 80 in most western countries, and a single wage used to be able to support a large family.

So why, in the past 40 years or so, did this situation suddenly change? Why did life start getting harder instead of easier? Why did housing, food and energy start getting dearer instead of cheaper?
 
The answer is simple, environmentalist ideology, and its pervasiveness in state and federal government policy.
 
Environmentalist ideology is killing the living standards of the Australian people and it must be rejected.
 
On housing, land planning regulations done under environmentalist justification, are strangling land availability and causing house prices to skyrocket. There are land release and zoning regulations, land preparation regulations, development and building approvals and additional taxes and building regulations. All of these things have resulted in massive artificial increases to the cost of home ownership. All the government has to do to massively decrease housing prices, is to get out of the way. Stop interfering in the marketplace.
 
On groceries, the federal government is using your tax-payer money to buy water from farmers, so they can pointlessly put it back into the river and let it flow into the sea. When farmers have less water, they produce less food. When that happens, food prices at the supermarket skyrocket, because supply reduces as demand increases, and we start having to import inferior food products from other countries.

 

Electricity prices in parts of Australia have increased at nearly four times the rate of inflation over the last 5 years. In Sydney they have risen 61.3%. In Melbourne they have risen 56.8%. In Brisbane they have risen 50.7%.
 
Australia has abundant sources of energy and yet we are paying more and more for electricity. State and federal governments are to blame. Renewable energy initiatives are hurting families because they push up the price of electricity and electricity generators are afraid to make new investments due to the “regime uncertainty” over a carbon tax, which produces the same effect.
 
The (now former) Victorian Labor government costed a dam on the Mitchell River at $1.4 billion. Such a dam would have produced a massive amount of water. It then disallowed that option under “green” ideology, and built a desalination plant that, at a minimum, costs $5.7 billion and doesn’t produce as much water.
 
In the last five years Australian households have had to pay up to 95% more for water bills, despite reducing the volume of water they are using. The price increase is due to government investment in unneeded expensive technologies, like desalination plants.
 
Melbourne Water have opposed dams on the basis that global warming will reduce rainfall, making dams a pointless enterprise. Well, if you’ve been around Melbourne in the past few days, you’d know that we’ve had record rainfall unheard of for nearly 20 years.
 
Unscientific environmental fanaticism, and the national Labor-Green alliance, are killing the basic living standards of all Australians, and are especially hurting the working poor, traditional Labor voters. All environmentalist policies must be rejected and expunged from government policy if we are ever to go back to a situation where life is getting easier, not harder.