United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda 21.

The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed onto by the Keating Government at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, 177 other Nations signed onto it. As far as I am aware the Australian people were never told about this, at the time, and we were certainly never given a vote on it.

The Howard Government were in power from 1996 to 2008, Howard never removed SD A21 nor did he tell the people about it, or give us a choice as to it's continuation. That part worries me the most.

Sectiion 44 of the Australian Constitution states: that any Federal Parliamentarian that pledges allegiance to a foreign power is an act of treason.

Sustainable Development Agenda 21  (Agenda for the 21st Century) is the Socialist Philosophy of the United Nations. One of the Co authors is a man called Maurice Strong, now in his 80's and a proponent of the earth religion Gaia, the same religion that Tim Flannery subscribes to.

AGW is in Sec. 9 of SD A21. The tentacles of SD A21 cover every aspect of our lives. It's ultimate goal is total control of all populations in the entire world. A very good web site to  gain more knowledge on this subject is: freedomadvocates.org. It is a US based web site.

I do not profess to be an expert of the UN SD A21, having only learned about it's existence at the end of 2010. But having heard about it, I have made it my business to find out all that I can. It has exceeded all my worst fears.

I very much welcome your comments and your knowledge on the subject. My personal view is that if the UN SD A21 program was removed from all Nations, in it's entirety, the majority of the Worlds problems would be eliminated. Same applies if the United Nations was completely and utterly obliterated from the face of the earth.

In the words of the United Nations Disciple, Maurice Strong, one of the authors of the UN SD Agenda 21

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” - Maurice Strong.

 (I cant find the link to this quote, but when I do I will put that up)

Background info and links

Development Agenda 21 and Land use according to Gov policy back to the Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements

From the n Human Settlements
Vancouver, Canada, 31 May to 11 June 1976
--------------------------------------------------------------

More information on this subject is available in our current publications.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Australia is a signatory to this below agreement.

The Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements

From the n Human Settlements
Vancouver, Canada, 31 May to 11 June 1976
The Vancouver Action Plan

report of Habitat:
United Nations Conference o

Below papers on United Nations agenda for land is interactive

HABITAT: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements,

10. Land is one of the fundamental elements in human settlements. Every State has the right to take the necessary steps to maintain under public control the use, possession, disposal and reservation of land. Every State has the right to plan and regulate use of land, which is one of its most important resources, in such a way that the growth of population centres both urban and rural are based on a comprehensive land use plan. Such measures must assure the attainment of basic goals of social and economic reform for every country, in conformity with its national and land tenure system and legislation.

--------------------------------------------------------

[Recommendations from the Vancouver Plan of Action, June 1976]

The Vancouver Action Plan. D. Land (extracts)

D.1 Land resource management
D.2 Control of land use changes
D.3 Recapturing plus value
D.4 Public ownership

Preamble:

2. Instead, the pattern of land use should be determined by the long-term interests of the community, especially since decisions on location of activities and therefore of specific land uses have a long-lasting effect on the pattern and structure of human settlements. Land is also a primary element of the natural and man-made environment and a crucial link in an often delicate balance. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable to its protection as an asset and the achievement of the long-term objectives of human settlement policies and strategies.

3. To exercise such control effectively, public authorities require detailed knowledge of the current patterns of use and tenure of land; appropriate legislation defining the boundaries of individual rights and public interest; and suitable instruments for assessing the value of land and transferring to the community, inter alia through taxation, the unearned increment resulting from changes in use, or public investment or decisions, or due to the general growth of the community.

4. Above all, Governments must have the political will to evolve and implement innovative and adequate urban and rural land policies, as a corner-stone of their efforts to improve the quality of life in human settlements.

Recommendation:

D.1 Land resource management

  1. Land is one of the most valuable natural resources and it must be used rationally. Public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means or improving the capacity of human settlements to absorb changes and movements in population, modifying their internal structure and achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits or development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered.

  2. Land is a scarce resource whose management should be subject to public surveillance or control in the interest of the nation.

Land is a natural resource fundamental to the economic, social and political development of peoples and therefore Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements throughout the whole of the natural territory. This resource must not be the subject of restrictions imposed by foreign nations which enjoy the benefits while preventing its rational use.

--------------------------------------------

Recommendation D.3 Recapturing plus value

  1. Excessive profits resulting from the increase in land value due to development and change in use are one of the principal causes of the concentration of wealth in private hands. Taxation should not be seen only as a source of revenue for the community but also as a powerful tool to encourage development of desirable locations, to exercise a controlling effect on the land market and to redistribute to the public at large the benefits of the unearned increase in land values.

  2. The unearned increment resulting from the rise in land values resulting from change in use of land, from public investment or decision or due to the general growth of the community must be subject to appropriate recapture by public bodies (the community), unless the situation calls for other additional measures such as new patterns of ownership, the general acquisition of land by public bodies.

  3. Specific ways and means include:

    1. Levying of appropriate taxes, e.g. capital gains taxes, land taxes and betterment charges, and particularly taxes on unused or under-utilized land;

    2. Periodic and frequent assessment of land values in and around cities, and determination of the rise in such values relative to the general level of prices:

    3. Instituting development charges or permit fees and specifying the time-limit within which construction must start;

    4. Adopting pricing and compensation policies relating to value of land prevailing at a specified time rather than its commercial value at the time of acquisition by public authorities;

    5. Leasing of publicly owned land in such a way that future increment which is not due to the efforts by the new user is kept by the community;

    6. Assessment of land suitable for agricultural use which is in proximity of cities mainly at agricultural values.



Recommendation D.4 Public ownership

  1. Public ownership of land cannot be an end in itself; it is justified in so far as it is exercised in favour of the common good rather than to protect the interests of the already privileged.

  2. Public ownership, transitional or permanent, should be used, wherever appropriate, to secure and control areas of urban expansion and protection; and to implement urban and rural land reform processes, and supply serviced land at price levels which can secure socially acceptable patterns of development.

  3. Special consideration should be given to:

    1. Measures outlined in Recommendations D.2 and D.3 above;

    2. Active public participation in land development;

    3. Rational distribution of powers among various levels of government, including communal and local authorities, and an adequate system of financial support for land policy.

Recommendation D.5 Patterns of ownerships

  1. Many countries are undergoing a process of profound social transformation; a review and restructuring or the entire system of ownership rights is, in the majority of cases, essential to the accomplishment of new national objectives.

  2. Past patterns of ownership rights should be transform 3 to match the changing needs of society and be collectively beneficial.

  3. Special attention should be paid to:

    1. Redefinition of legal ownership including the rights of women and disadvantaged groups and usage rights for a variety of purposes;

    2. Promoting land reform measures to bring ownership rights into conformity with the present and future needs of society;

    3. Clear definition of public objectives and private ownership rights and duties which may vary with time and place;

    4. Transitional arrangements to change ownership from traditional and customary patterns to new systems, especially in connexion with communal lands, whenever such patterns are no longer appropriate;

    5. Methods for the separation of land ownership rights from development rights, the latter to be entrusted to a public authority:

    6. Adoption or policies for long-term leasing or land;

    7. The land rights of indigenous peoples so that their cultural and historical heritage is preserved

Views: 7344

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by vivienne skeen on January 14, 2012 at 2:24pm

We will see how it goes. But I have to say I am disappointed you deleted that last 2 paragraphs. It is most important that people understand the roots of this thing in order to see and understand where it is going and the enormity of its implications on the Freedom of All Mankind.

Discussions always run away, that is the nature of a discussion. But in my experience it is only listening to others that we all learn, whether that is to learn or to instruct.

I would recommend to you and everyone if not already done so, to read the book. 'None Dare Call it Conspiracy'  By Gary Allen, written in about 1970/72. It is now on the internet in PDF form.

Vivienne

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hutcho on January 14, 2012 at 3:37pm

Hi Vivienne,

Yes, Agenda 21, Local Agenda 21 (LA21) and ICLEI are with us, and it may be near impossible to shift them.

That is unless the UN is also removed.

These items do have their uses, in the hands of responsible people, as they could help reduce damage to our environment, such as clear felling of trees, chemical pollution of air and water.

(Please note: No reference to CO2 or Climate Change meant or implied )

But with use by Climate Change believers, and those with their own financial and governing agendas, does change the scene.

The biggest danger to the general public is the implicit use by N.G.O.s of AG21, LA21 etc. as tools to pressure governments, councils and people at all levels.

Australia has a frightening array of NGO's, and as the acronym tells us, they are Non Governmental Organistions - non elected, quasi government officials ( quasi: having some resemblance usually by possession of certain attributes), that are controlling our lives.

Most, if not all, are operating under a tax free, charitable basis.

A good start would be as NZ did last year with Greenpeace - block their tax free basis due to Greenpeace's  political agenda.

In Australia's current political situation, with handouts of finance and position to friends of government, I think Mr Buckley had a better chance.

JeffT

Permalink Reply by Dale Stiller on January 14, 2012 at 3:53pm

This is a link to a good article explaining agenda 21 in the American context

http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2011/07/02/agenda_21...

 

It is easy to overlook local government since people are saturated with too much information in the internet age. Compounding this is the fact that Agenda 21is a dull topic, and it becomes understandable how it has been able to fly mostly under the radar since 1992, slowly working its way into our cities and counties.

Agenda 21, which reportedly means an agenda for the 21st century, is a United Nations program launched in 1992 for the vague purpose of achieving global "sustainable development." Congress never approved Agenda 21, although Presidents Obama, Clinton and George H.W. Bush have all signed Executive Orders implementing it. 178 other world leaders agreed to it in 1992 at the Rio Summit. Since then, the U.N. has mostly bypassed national governments, using Agenda 21’s International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (“ICLEI”) to make agreements directly with local governments. ICLEI's U.S. presence has grown to include agreements with over 600 cities, towns and counties here, which are now copying the land use plans prescribed in Agenda 21.

Some conservatives are trying to attract attention to Agenda 21 by labeling it a secret conspiracy to create a one world government. While that will wake some people up, it will turn off others. It does not matter whether it is a conspiracy or not. There are people on the left side of the political spectrum - who may even believe they have good intentions - working together to spread their vision for society worldwide. Whether they meet in dark rooms or openly in public meetings is irrelevant; they are having great success convincing local governments in the U.S. to adopt their socialist and extreme environmentalist programs under the guise of feel-good buzz words.

Permalink Reply by vivienne skeen on January 14, 2012 at 5:36pm

I just wonder how many of the Coalition parliamentarians know about this, I  met Sophie Mirabella and Senator Fifield together and they did not have  a clue about it. It certainly should not get tax free status, It should not be here.

Permalink Reply by vivienne skeen on January 14, 2012 at 5:41pm


Thanks for the link Dale, its excellent. If Local Councils are not part of legitimate Government how can they implement it? On the UN SD A21 document I have, the NGO's are talked about in Sec 27, it says, they are to be supported by governments if the are promoting SD A21.  Do you know if there is an organization in Australia actively fighting this and alerting the population to it?

Permalink Reply by Michaelng Clayton on January 14, 2012 at 9:13pm

Hello All

Did you know that the Labour Government is trying to make local councils a third tier Government so they can fully implement Agenda 21 They intend to have a referendum at the next election to try and achieve this. Bellow  is some information supplied by

Beware of the TREACHERY if councils are recognized as LOCAL GOVERNMENT!!!!
This will allow councils the authority to ENSLAVE us and create more bylaws to enable extracting more finances from us the people.
VOTE NO to recognize COUNCILS as LOCAL GOVERNMENT and

VOTE YES to RETAIN our COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT 1900 as it is the only PROTECTION WE HAVE.
Tom Isaac

Looks like they are at it again.

Came across this while doing some research.

Seems they want to ask  "we the people" to place "local council" in the Constitution yet again.

For some reason it seems important that they get it in.

Panel appointed on constitutional recognition of local government

The Gillard Government today appointed the members of the independent expert panel that will progress the recognition of local government in the Australian Constitution.

Led by former Chief Justice of the NSW Supreme Court, the Honourable James Spigelman AC QC, the panel members comprise representatives from a range of backgrounds and areas of expertise.

Mr Crean said the panel will consult with stakeholder groups and the community on options for recognising local government in the Constitution.

"Under the guidance of Mr Spigelman, the panel members appointed today have been asked to look into the level of support for constitutional recognition of local government and to identify possible forms that recognition could take," Mr Crean said.

"The panel will consult widely and the outcomes will help shape any proposal to put to a referendum.

"The Gillard Government is progressing the issue of recognising local government in the Constitution and this is a commitment that successive Labor governments have never wavered from.

"Just like the Whitlam and Hawke governments, the Gillard Government believes in recognising local government in the Constitution - our foundational document."

The panel members are:

    The Honourable James Spigelman AC QC (Chair);
    Cr Paul Bell AM
    Professor A.J. Brown
    Senator Bob Brown
    Fr Joe Caddy
    Mr Ross Cameron
    Mr Peter Clarke
    Mr Rob Hudson
    The Honourable Karlene Maywald
    Cr Genia McCaffery, Mayor of North Sydney
    Mr Greg McLean OAM
    Mrs Jane Prentice MP
    Professor Graham Sansom
    Right Honourable Lord Mayor of Perth Lisa Scaffidi
    Mr Sid Sidebottom MP
    Mr Jim Soorley AM
    Ms Lucy Turnbull AO
    Mr Tony Windsor MP

The Government's commitment to establishing the panel is reflected in its agreement with the Greens and Independent MPs Tony Windsor and Andrew Wilkie.

The panel will report back to the Government by the end of the year.

The Australian Government is committed to holding a national referendum on this issue during the term of the current government or at the next Federal election.

To succeed, the referendum must attract the support of a majority of votes nationally, and a majority of votes in a majority of states.

Biographies of panel members and its terms of reference are available at www.regional.gov.au/local/crlg/panel.aspx

http://www.localgovrecognition.gov.au/

Comments?


------------------------------------------------------------
* Know Your Constitutional and Common Law Rights
* Licenses are illegal
* Fines are unlawful (unless imposed by a jury in a court)
* Tax is Voluntary

Public educational meetings are held monthly on the last
Tuesday of every month from Februrary through to November.

Community Law Resource Group
http://www.CLRG.info
info@clrg.info
------------------------------------------------------------

You have received this email as a subscriber to the CLRG Mailing list. To unsubscribe or change your preferences, visit the link at the end of this email.

_______________________________________________
News mailing list
News@clrg.info
http://lists.clrg.info/mailman/listinfo/news


Permalink Reply by vivienne skeen on January 14, 2012 at 9:23pm

Hi Michaelng,

Yes I know that, I am sure other do as well. is that definite that we will have a referendum between now and 2013. I believe that the opposition have to agree to a referendum, do you know if that is correct.

Permalink Reply by Michaelng Clayton on January 14, 2012 at 9:30pm

Vivienne

I'm not sure about that but will try and find out. I suggest we all google the committee members get their contact information and forward to them our honest thoughts.

BIT HARD TO DO NOW ITS DELETED  Available here if this is not deleted

Did you notice Bob Brown Tony Windsor are on board.

vivienne skeen said:

Hi Michaelng,

Yes I know that, I am sure other do as well. is that definite that we will have a referendum between now and 2013. I believe that the opposition have to agree to a referendum, do you know if that is correct.

Permalink Reply by vivienne skeen on January 14, 2012 at 9:46pm

what do you mean on board?

Permalink Reply by Michaelng Clayton on January 14, 2012 at 10:18pm

Viviene

I mean they are part of the committee that make the DECISION to go ahead and list the amendment on the ballet paper for us to vote on.

Permalink Reply by Lynette McDougall on January 15, 2012 at 6:08am

Local Governments are legitimate already.  They existed BEFORE federation, therefore they are legitimate.  My local government at the time of federation was the Caboolture Divisional Board. The Constitution said nothing about them because there was no need to.  The different State Constitutions either already catered for them or they had legislation that catered for them.

 

The Constitution saw no need to spell out what the State's could do, only what they could not do - legislate for a number of things that were the sole right of the Commonwealth.  Existing State powers that were not transferred to the Commonwealth continued unabated under the Constitution and continue to this day, including the power to make laws about local government matters.

 

The intended referendum to add local governments to the constitution is to give the Commonwealth the power to directly fund local governments, not legitimise them, because they are already lawful under the various State laws.

Permalink Reply by Rory Donnellan on January 15, 2012 at 7:24am

Agenda 21 is part of the wider UN agenda of human population control - greatly reduce arable land under woody weeds and you reduce food supply, then the focus becomes massively reducing human "overpopulation" because of these contrived food shortages. The UN are already world-leaders in managing "the problem of human overpopulation".

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

Just Grounds Community is a social network

Members

Forum

The Galileo Movement 2198 Replies

Started by Geoff Brown in Climate Change. Last reply by Stephen Cox 3 hours ago.

Migrants, Terrorists and Social Service Payments. 149 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox 3 hours ago.

Wind Turbine Power - New Survey 22 Replies

Started by Geoff Brown in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox 4 hours ago.

Will Craig Thomson retain his seat ??? And will Slipper's slip up be the end of Labor ? 259 Replies

Started by Jan Courtney in General. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright 4 hours ago.

Just Ground’s Lampoons Governments. A free for all Sites for one and ALL to make a joke out of all Government related stupidities. Federal, State, Council, common Politicians and Political Leaders 43 Replies

Started by Robert William Nickisson in Politics. Last reply by Robert William Nickisson 6 hours ago.

Interview with Dr. John Colquhoun 3 Replies

Started by Sarah Lamonte in Health. Last reply by Sarah Lamonte 6 hours ago.

Authorities say 'Gladstone Harbour water is OK' - but nobody's told the fish 2739 Replies

Started by John Mikkelsen in Environment. Last reply by Jeff Hutcho 7 hours ago.

USA TROOPS IN TOP END AND DEEMED TO INCREASE 132 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox 7 hours ago.

China farm purchase sparks land-grab fears in New Zealand 3 Replies

Started by Rory Donnellan in General. Last reply by Barbara lee 8 hours ago.

What are you reading? 238 Replies

Started by Ian Macrae Yeates in General. Last reply by Jan Courtney 12 hours ago.

Voting does it need to change?. And letters from local member and emails about goverment news. 62 Replies

Started by Barbara lee in General. Last reply by Barbara lee 13 hours ago.

WWF to Tell Australian Cattlemen How to be “Sustainable” 414 Replies

Started by Joanne Rea in Agriculture. Last reply by Dale Stiller 13 hours ago.

PEOPLE'S EXPERIENCES WITH HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS: THE POSITIVE AND THE NEGATIVE (STREAM 1) 61 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Barbara lee 14 hours ago.

Play pen - come one come all for only fun! 568 Replies

Started by Cate Stuart in General. Last reply by Jeff Hutcho 14 hours ago.

Our Political Foundations 430 Replies

Started by Ian Macrae Yeates in General. Last reply by Ian Macrae Yeates 16 hours ago.

Who is Ron Paul? 155 Replies

Started by Dale Stiller in Politics. Last reply by Barbara lee 19 hours ago.

Barnaby Joyce - Water MP - Attention 214 Replies

Started by John C Fairfax in General. Last reply by Jeff Hutcho yesterday.

United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda 21. 802 Replies

Started by vivienne skeen in Politics. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

The Problem with Livestock Breeder Representation in Australia 182 Replies

Started by John Michelmore in Agriculture. Last reply by Rob Moore yesterday.

PEOPLE'S EXPERIENCES WITH HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS: THE POSITIVE AND THE NEGATIVE (STREAM 2) 27 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright yesterday.

Blog Posts

Some thoughts of ANZAC Day

Posted by Peter Malcolm Crawford on April 28, 2012 at 11:17am — 1 Comment

MAD COW DISEASE USA 4TH CASE DOCUMENTED ATYPICAL BSE CALIFORNIA

Posted by Terry S. Singeltary Sr. on April 25, 2012 at 8:05am — 4 Comments

Is wealth what it's about?

Posted by Ian Macrae Yeates on April 22, 2012 at 7:36pm — 5 Comments

Rockhampton National Farmers’ Federation (NNF) District Meeting Report;

Posted by Colin Uebergang on April 21, 2012 at 3:01am — 5 Comments

Do the Australian Farmers Have The Guts?

Posted by Colin Uebergang on April 20, 2012 at 5:17pm — 18 Comments

© 2012   Created by Rob Moore.   Powered by .

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service