APP calls for submissions for Environmental policy

As a patriotic party, the Australian Protectionist Party recognises the importance of preserving and conserving our natural environment to ensure our children inherit a safe and healthy place to prosper.

The Australian Protectionist Party believes in promoting alternative energy sources such as hydro, solar, tidal, and wave at local and government levels, as appropriate, to help reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

The Australian Protectionist Party believes in promoting the use of electric vehicles, light rail and cycle-ways to ease congestion and pollution in our communities.

The Australian Protectionist Party does not believe that those pushing a ‘anthropogenic climate-change’ agenda have proved their case; indeed, a growing body of evidence is bringing to light alternative views. It is acknowledged that the Earth is subject to climate change and has been through several periods of global warming or cooling as part of natural function of Earth’s environmental systems. In this light, the charging of additional taxes or fees on energy use will not do anything to prevent ‘climate change’ and will simply unfairly burden Australian workers and put Australian families into ‘energy poverty’.

Therefore the Australian Protectionist Party would seek to implement the following measures:

1.   Promotion of light rail and cycle ways in major urban areas throughout Australia.

2.   Promotion of the use of electric vehicles. The creation of an electric vehicle design and manufacturing sector in Australia. To ensure the availability of public charging outlets for electric vehicles and an investigation into the feasibility of ‘battery swapout’ points at major service stations. To enable special measures or permits to assist the trialing of alternatively-fuelled vehicles, for prototypes in particular, on Australian roads.

3.   Promotion of the use of hemp for the manufacture of paper, cloth, building materials, etc., as an alternative or adjunct to existing materials such as wood pulp and cotton fibre.

4.   Promotion of decentralised alternative energy generation such as hydro, solar, tidal, and wave, instead of natural gas or coal-fired electricity generation plants.

5.   Rescind all ‘climate change’ tax grabs applied to energy usage.

6.   All government documentation (with rare exceptions) to be printed only in the national language of Australia, being English, thus saving paper and unnecessary expense. [See policy measures elsewhere for the promotion of English language abilities for migrants].

The APP wishes to extend an invitation to those who feel strongly about Australia’s environmental policies, to contribute any constructive criticisms or comments for due consideration. We invite lobby groups, government bodies, and members of the public for their input.

Comments

  1. geronimo says:

    Hi,

    As has been mentioned several times above, it all ties in with population.

    I'm unsure whether you've had any dialogue with Sustainable Population Australia?? But if not, they have a wealth of information that you might be able to draw from.

    Perhaps the most misunderstood thing about Australia is the belief that because of Australia's size, we can support a lot more people. Some will tell you we can easily support a billion. Yet, it's clear, these people have done no research – if you ask them how much arable land Australia has, you will never hear them say less than 10% – this is further exacerbated by the fact that our population is concentrated on the arable land and as our urban footprint increases, our arable land decreases. Some will say – desalination plants, science will save us – but instead of taking the option of looking at a sensible population size, we take this as license to increase population – and it would seem we've been at a point of diminishing return for several years now.

    It really isn't a question of whether we should stabilise our population, it's a question of whether we seek to stabilise willingly knowing that we have no alternative, or leave it up to nature or the universe.

    Paul R. Ehrlich and Albert Bartlett are just two of the names that are worth searching on – Albert Bartlett's video on youtube is a must see.

    We have some significant challenges that can only be made increasingly more difficult while our government mindlessly promotes increasing population size (people only need to look at the bureau of stats and do a quick calc to see how quickly our population is increasing) – and a side effect of this is increase in cost of living, more demand on urban infrastructure, health services, more pressure on our ecological infrastructure, more demand on arable land (including more and more good farmland going under the knife of the developer), loss of biodiversity – the list goes on and on – and the government cannot keep up. In the meantime, we are having to also face the challenge of growing sufficient food post cheap Oil which is not only used for transport and countless other things but more pertinently, fertilizer – while our government seeks to undermine the main tool we have – organic farming by kowtowing to the likes of Monsanto and their GM crops – which also kills Japanese and European markets.

    The key is in part educating and empowering women, but there are the obvious things such as cutting immigration significantly (and then only accepting culturally compatible migrants), eradicating that stupid baby bonus (the two aforementioned are a recipe for under-educated over-breeders – and this cycle needs to be broken). Adopting a similar policy as the UK where the illegal immigrations (arriving by boat or container etc) are stopped at their country of origin (the boat people stopped overnight when the UK implemented this policy). (It's not just the 15,000, it's their families ultimately soon follow or that their cultural values which are to have as many children as they can and their belief that Australia offers them a Golden ticket – it's also the precedent it sets – detainees rioting and growing support by those who've already settled here – we will soon lose the option of doing anything about this if we do not act soon and act decisively).

    Australia was sold the ageing population myth and many still believe it – perhaps education in this area to dispel this myth and making this apparent to any future migrants.

    Many Australian businesses use our loose migration regulations to import foreign labour citing skills shortages. This has the other side-effect that investments aren't being made in training our young. This is an insidious practice and something that needs to be addressed such that it is more beneficial to invest in our young – it is hard for us to perceive the benefits – but it goes right through to revenue loss due to crime. The APP is moving in the right direction by addressing the "free" trade shambles that has contributed to the loss of significant industry and broken the livelihood of so many farmers; not to mention surrendering of land and assets to foreign hands and along with it our sovereignty.

    My next thoughts are no doubt (more) contentious – but unfortunately, I've seen no evidence to the contrary. The Muslims that have moved to Australia/UK to get away from the extremism do not even understand why it's followed them.

    While perhaps not obviously contributing to population problems, it is in fact apparent that Ideologies such as Islam while they insist on not separating religion from education and governance hinder the freedom of choice we try to afford to all citizens. As such, Islam competes with democracy (and in fact uses democracy to destroy democracy) – perhaps it should actually be revoked of religious status and not be eligible for government funding and we should definitely not have Islamic schools because students emerging from these schools have been shown to come out less competitive academically, rendering disenfranchised generations who are often targets for more extremist groups – and this is where it ties in to population – have more babies at government expense and continue the indoctrination cycle. I think part of the curriculum could be studying all religions – contrasting belief's and history. While I understand that not all Muslims subscribe to this, unfortunately, they are not doing anything to resolve the growing problem and in truth, they subscribe to God first, Australia second – as such, their loyalty is not with Australian democracy.

    All the best APP – at last, a party interested in doing what a government's supposed to do.

  2. A well presented argument that ties in benefits is that if we were to reduce immigration to say 40,000 we would reduce the impact on the environment,reduce pressure on housing(I can't afford a Home) and reduce pressure on infrastructure.Merely bringing more people into the country to take over as the population gets older is not a proper solution, it is delaying the inevitable problem because eventually we will have to face the problem.

    • mike monroe says:

      Well said Mr Clifton, I hope you are telling your family and friends about this party, that's how we grow…before it's too late.

      Well done fellow Aussies.

  3. Trees, innovative ideas and a concentrated focus on renewable energy including "natural gas" are good places to start. The Australian people cannot absorb another tax. At the end of the week, most Australians can't even afford to have even a few little luxuries for their hard work.

  4. Warung Discussion says:

    oh c'mon. nuclear power? Australia does not need it. whose leg are you pulling? i will not join any party if that party advocates going nuclear. stupidity unleashed.

    look what's happened in ye olde Nippon

    otherwise the app's other policies go a long way to getting this country steered on the right track.

    IF the APP drops its nuclear stance it will gain a better following.

    Nuclear will turn people off APP.

    GET A GRIP mate!

    this is a weakness that can be easily used by the Govt to downgrade the APP.

    You want to wake people up?

    Australians do not want Nuclear. its a turn-off! how many votes you gunna get?

    reword and rework your policies!

    • R.M. Griffin says:

      Warung Discussion's comment, couched as it is, in the treminology of the illiterate, reminds me of a cartoon I encountered recently. It depicts a family of "cavemen" lounging in squalor and "celebrating" their freedom from the perils of nuclear power.

    • geronimo says:

      While this section is for comment on population policy, since there are comments of energy I felt they deserve some consideration. We may well have to resort to Nuclear power (and of the forms of power station, it's the one that carries the greatest risk and of course there are issues with safe nuclear waste disposal) – but perhaps we can avoid or minimise our dabblings in it. We shouldn't rule out Nuclear Fusion and some astonishing inroads are being made in solar energy technologies. One of the biggest issues with solar energy is in how to store the energy captured – but there are some clever ideas such as gas compression and molten salt technologies which are worth consideration. For anyone who's interested, the Beyond Zero Emissions site is well worth a look. There are also no technical limitations to a space solar power station.

  5. R.M. Griffin says:

    What Australia needs for the future is:

    The latest in nuclear powered electricity generation, (Now, more than ever!),

    Fewer cyclists, most of these are arrogant ignorant idiots and a menace to others and to themselves.

    Wind power and electric cars are total failures whenever they have been foisted on the public.

    The best thing the A.P.P. can do to preserve the best of Australia is concentrate on the elimination of the false "religions" of islam and 'Anthropomorphic Climate Change'.

  6. Your policies are sound, but wind energy?? Those awful wind farms that kill our birds? Nevertheless, I will still join your party.

  7. I have read a lot of books by Professor James Lovelock

    an English environmentalist. He is the Father of the

    Environmental Movement and he hates this global population

    excess. May be he could debate Bob Brown? He was on Lateline

    and he hates the Greens, as they have their own political

    agenda and it is not to save the world from over population.

    He started the Green Movement and it has been taken over

    by the Fabian Socialists/Communists. It is time Bob Brown

    was exposed as a fraud.

    • Couldn't agree more Jasmine, I had the same feeling about Kevin Rudd long before he became leader of labour, as for Brown nosed Bob, the feeling is even worse, they are psychopaths and like all psychopaths they stick together and form support groups, the Greens are their largest. Did you know that Perth's Greens leader 'Giz Watson' (Apparently she is a woman but you wouldn't know) wanted free 'ice' (crack cocaine) to be available for all that wanted to use it? As reported in 'The West Australian' earlier this year?

  8. The greatest threat that the world faces in regards to the environment is overpopulation.

    Where will it all end, we are becoming more and more like a virus every day. Moving into and area (the earth) breeding at an alarming rate, using all the resources of the host then finally dieing out when the host dies.

    Australia needs to take the lead on this, china as not at all, look at the growth figures.

    There are countries in the world who have positive economical growrth with a decrease in population. Why cannot Australia do this as well? (I do have answers to that but a lot of socialists/communist/green fascists wont listen).

    Why is population so dangerous? Because of Technology. 100 years ago when there was a war we killed a lot of people, but there were still people left to breed for the next war. Now, well, all I can say to that is when the population of the world reaches its peak …

    One flash and we are ash.

    • geronimo says:

      Hi Nathan, interesting comments.

      There are countries in the world who have positive economical growrth with a decrease in population. Why cannot Australia do this as well? (I do have answers to that but a lot of socialists/communist/green fascists wont listen).

      Yes, there are very strong economies e.g. Denmark with a 3rd of our population. I'd be very interested in hearing your answers to this, so be good if you could either provide them by way of comments or links

      cheers

  9. In my opinion, we need to re-create native forests in Australia. There is often so much focus on water that we tend to forget the vital importance of 'native' hardwood forestry. With trees and forest comes increased water also, as it attracts moisture. I think sometimes it's better to forget about waiting for the government to do something and look to the private sector to lead the way. Anyone who owns some land can create their own nature corridors. Grazing and cultivation can still co-exist with this system also and the prime land can be reserved for farming while some of the other land can be planted with trees which will ensure that farmers aren't losing their most productive land. It also adds value to land by having a reasonable amount of forest as more and more buyers are looking for this when purchasing land.

  10. localyokel says:

    Australian households should be rewarded for using environmental friendly products instead of being taxed and forced to pay more.

    Australian households pay enough taxes. Why should we have to fund and finance corporate greed?

Leave a Reply