Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on April 29, 2012 at 1:13pm

This extract from Tim Wison’s “Green Bullies on the Warpath” outlines some of the reasons why alliances with ENGO’s like WWF are probably not in the best interests of Australian beef producers.

Cattle Council (CCA) can repeat as often as they like that any scheme must be voluntary but once they become involved they have legitimized the scheme and they lose control of it.

Clearly McDonalds and Walmart have been targeted by WWF because of their strategy that “100 companies control 25 per cent of the trade of all commodities . . . affecting around 50 per cent of all production” and it is much easier to target them than to change the habits of six billion consumers. WWF’s objective is to have “75 per cent of global purchases of WWF priority commodities sourced from WWF priority places”.

And that won’t occur voluntarily; government regulation is the next step.

http://www.timwilson.com.au/articles/green-bullies-on-the-warpath

 

 

A bill to promote the use of certified timber products is before the parliament and has been the subject of a Senate Inquiry. The Inquiry into the Illegal Logging Prohibition Bill reported 27^th February 2012. http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Comm...

 Australia’s Illegal Logging Prohibition Bill is the world’s first dedicated illegal logging Bill.

The due diligence for furniture and timber importers will be difficult with some products having multiple unknown origins and this will act as a trade barrier. You can probably kiss goodbye to reasonably priced, imported furniture.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hutcho on April 30, 2012 at 11:04am

But it's not only beef producers, fisheries and timber in the NGO's (read WWF and Greenpeace) sights.

I have just read about a campaign against Baker's Delight, a false claim about GMO wheat.

More good guy - bad guy, certification scheme push ?

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/Not-a-grain-of-truth-in-sneaky-...

Why can't these NGO's have their tax status reviewed ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pamela Davis on April 30, 2012 at 12:11pm

I just spotted last night in Sunday Telegraph dated 15 April that the Coles 'face' Curtis Stone was in Sydney town, Woolloomooloo, to promote the supermarket chain's sustainable (wash keyboard!) seafood camaign and its work with the WWF.

I am writing to some politicians to see why these ENGOs should not have their tax status reviewed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jan Courtney on April 30, 2012 at 3:24pm

Whilst I think Jackie French is funny in TV sitcoms,  I'm darned if I am going to pay inflated prices for some items just for Coles getting her to advertise for them -  Won't be shopping at Coles.  Will go just a liitle further to IGA.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on April 30, 2012 at 4:12pm

Jeff and Pamela

I agree that they should have their tax status withdrawn and also be subject to some of the other regulation that companies are subject to such as telling the truth.

Some of the certification programs also amount to trade barriers and should be regulated as such and subject to overview by appropriate agencies such as ACCC. As much as we may hate imports, it is no small thing for producers in a third world country to be able to comply with a certification scheme and it excludes and ensures continued impoverishment of the smallest and poorest producers. 

Jan

I wish some-one would give her another sitcom series.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pamela Davis on April 30, 2012 at 5:12pm

Well yes Joanne, telling the truth would be a start, they are full of alarmist nonsense like telling us we need to protect a 'critical' species habitat, so that when the next measure to protect the environment becomes law, we can all feel good for being a part of that, and all this protection is necessary for our survival. 

And they say that thousands of supporters visited their election website and sent letters to politicians, urging them to put a price on carbon pollution...and it goes on and on, four pages of extreme alarm about climate change  and about how we may find it hard to keep our jobs and provide for our families and stay out of poverty - hypocrites.

They are responsible for making mostly profitable businesses in Australia collapse.  They are surviving and thriving by promoting their own organistion, and policies we do not want, at our expense.

They should get their noses out of our trough.

Jan, that is good your not shopping at Coles - the message should be, where possible - Don't Buy Climate Change

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on April 30, 2012 at 5:39pm

Pamela

Their supportes are them talking to themselves. They are responsible for the myth that agriculture aand grazing are responsible for 90% of the pollution of the Reef? What about cities, towns and mining companies that have authorised and unauthorised releases of contaminated water into the river systems? What about industrial discharges? They just hang on and create a roll for themselves even when there isn't one such as a beef sustainability programme.

If they were a company they would be subject to rules to ensure that they did not deliberately lie.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page