I had a look at the NSIDC long term arctic ice record; see attached copy. The 30 year graph by NSIDC (Word file) doesn't look flash, but that's because the bottom line is not zero, it is 14 million square km. I plotted this graph with a zero sq km bottom line and it changes the picture dramatically, it does not look anywhere near so bad, the 30 year decline is about 7.8%, which in geological terms is not at all big. The trend could easily reverse (as it has in the Antarctic) and increase the ice cover dramatically.

Yes, this really is the SAME Nick Smith....!!!!!!

ACT New Zealand Climate Change Spokesman John Boscawen today called on Climate Change Issues Minister Hon Dr Nick Smith to explain why the Government is pressing ahead with its ETS, causing irreparable harm to the New Zealand economy, when he’s acknowledged it’s likely to be significantly reworked in 2011.

"Nick Smith admitted today that the Government probably won’t proceed with the ETS if our major trading partners haven’t followed suit by 2011.  With the stakes so high it makes you wonder why we are ‘betting the house’ for something that’s not a sure thing," Mr Boscawen said.

Mr Speaker,

It is a privilege to take a call on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk Pricing Methods) Bill, and as I do so at six minutes to midnight, I wonder how many people are listening into this debate?  How many New Zealanders are following a debate on the pricing of raw milk at six minutes to midnight?

The reason that I am taking this opportunity is, as we have heard this evening, the dairy industry is a very, very important part of New Zealand’s economy.
The Hon Dr Nick Smith told the House that over a quarter of New Zealand’s export earnings come from the dairy industry.  It is the single biggest contributor to our export earnings – no other New Zealand industry is as important.

Well Mr Speaker, I would like to raise a very important issue to the dairy industry – the price of inputs, and one input in particular – the cost of the new ETS tax to dairy farmers.

The Emissions Trading Tax will affect all New Zealanders and dairy farmers in particular from 1 July this year.

Press Release by Employers & Manufacturers Association (Northern) at
11:15 am, 08 Apr 2010

The introduction of the Emissions Trading Scheme must be delayed, the
Employers & Manufacturers Association (Northern) says.

"The New Zealand economy is in no state to lead the world with an
emissions trading scheme covering the entire New Zealand economy," said
EMA's chief executive Alasdair Thompson.

"In these circumstances EMA recommends the government legislate to align
the entry of our industry sectors into the ETS with those of our trading
partners, once they have their schemes in place.

"Our financial situation is far too fragile to absorb the extra $255
million the government calculates the ETS will cost all of us.

"The cost is effectively another tax that will impact on every family.

"It will come on top of changes to GST, and also higher ACC levies which
are cutting into the take home pay of all employees right now.

"The ETS will also hit hard the competitiveness of many of our leading
industries, including all our major food producing exporters.

"They will face cost increases that their competitors overseas and in
the New Zealand market do not face.

"It will cost jobs.

"New Zealand is the only country in the world to be introducing an ETS
that covers all sectors and all so called greenhouse gases.

"It was disingenuous of Minister Nick Smith to say on Radio New Zealand
this morning that the EU has an ETS in place - theirs covers only four
percent of EU output; ours covers 100 per cent of output.

"His main reason for proceeding now was that not to would lead to
perverse outcomes in the forestry sector.  However forestry could be
incentivised to keep planting under a low level carbon tax which could
be used to give them a credit though not part of an ETS.

BACKGROUND
United Nations countries belong to an organization called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which publishes a report every six years. Often referred to as the "climate bible" these reports are relied on by governments around the world.

The latest was released in 2007. Sometimes called the AR4 (the Fourth Assessment Report), it contains 44 chapters and is nearly 3,000 pages long. Written by people organized into teams - Working Group 1, 2 and 3 - it consists of three smaller reports bundled into one.

The chairman of the IPCC has repeatedly said the report relies solely on peer-reviewed literature to support its findings. He has said research that hasn't appeared in peer-reviewed journals should be thrown "into the dustbin" (see the last line of this newspaper article). But our audit has discovered almost 5,600 non-peer-reviewed references in this report.

In elementary schools in the United States, students are assigned grades ranging from an A to an F, based on the mark they've achieved out of 100 (see Wikipedia's table here). Most parents would be alarmed if their child brought home a report card similar to the one received by the IPCC.

"Earlier today Nick Smith said that ‘New Zealand would face a deficit of 22 million tonnes, or $446 million without the ETS’.  This is misleading.  Unlike the very real costs that will be imposed on all New Zealanders due to the ETS from July 1, the $446 million figure is purely hypothetical," Mr Boscawen said.

 Pastural Farming Climate Research newsletter- 14 April 2010

by Robin Grieve

The Herald on Sunday ran an editorial “Meat the good and bad news”

It related to the finding that our sheep meat has a lower carbon footprint than European sheep meat when sold in Europe, despite the food miles.

This was the good news.

The AgResearch analysis bears out what farmers have long been saying: that food miles are only a small part of the equation and that European and American sheepmeat production techniques have huge energy costs that farming of pasture-fed animals does not incur.

Then the bad news.

But the figures tell a darker story: 80 per cent of the carbon emissions are generated before the animals are even trucked out the farm gate.

The editorial concluded

there is no getting away from the fact that we all need to eat less meat.

Where does one start? People who call for us to eat less meat based on carbon emissions but do not make the same call for a reduction in rice consumption, which is also a significant producer of methane, have I believe questionable motives. A number of vegetarians, Paul McCartney and Dr Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC, to name a couple have been very vocal in trying to get people to eat less meat.

Windfall Profits To Our Power Companies And Govt Because Of NZ's ETS

John Boscawen MP, ACT New Zealand
Speech to New Zealand Grey Power Federation Annual General Meeting, College House, Christchurch, Wednesday, April 14 2010.

Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to address your AGM this morning.

To President Les Howard, and your executive, I sincerely appreciate your adjusting your programme to accommodate me and the very important issue of power prices and the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme.

Before turning to the ETS may I briefly acknowledge your former President, the late Graham Stairmand.  I had the pleasure of working with Graham when he joined me, on behalf of Grey Power, in my legal challenge against the previous government's Electoral Finance Bill.  In the short time I knew Graham, he struck me as a man of principle and integrity who was committed to fighting for the interests of Grey Power and its members.  I know that Graham was very concerned about electricity prices, so it is fitting that I am speaking on that subject this morning.  Graham's passing was a great loss to Grey Power and New Zealand.

Let's turn now to the Emissions Trading Scheme:

In just under three months time, on 1 July, New Zealand's ETS is to be extended across most sectors of our economy:

The ETS is deliberately intended to make energy - both electricity and petrol - more expensive and Treasury forecast its immediate impact will result in a five percent increase in the price of electricity and a four cents per litre increase in the price of petrol and double again in 2013.

Foxnews.com

8 February 2010

NEW YORK —  Before the United Nations can save the planet, it needs to clean up its own house. And as scandal after scandal has unfolded over the past decade, from Oil for Food to procurement fraud to peacekeeper rape, the size of that job has become stunningly clear.

But any understanding of the real efforts that job entails should begin with a look at the long and murky career of Maurice Strong, the man who may have had the most to do with what the U.N. has become today, and still sparks controversy even after he claims to have cut his ties to the world organization.

From Oil for Food to the latest scandals involving U.N. funding in North Korea, Maurice Strong appears as a shadowy and often critically important figure.