We do not need an election, most Governments in the World can immediately legislate for OLT; it is only one line –

'Tax all the money turnover at 0.001% to 1%.'

I have ended my researching; now I must edit, print and sell.

JR’s Living Brilliantly with Hung Parliaments in US, UK and Australia

Visionary Concepts from Permatricity

Author John Robertson

Email: jrslivingbrilliantly@gmail.com

You, the reader, can see that in writing this e-book I have stumbled upon a perfect conclusion - 5. End Afghanistan and Iraq wars.   If that conclusion is correct then it follows that the whole of my book is correct.   I am an inventor and it is time to try out my OLT invention.

Why are politicians and the media ignoring OLT one line tax? 

Politicians are not frightened of making the tough decisions that hurt the old, the disabled, the unemployed, the young and the everyday workers!  They copy one another.  New ideas meet with a wall of silence.

I am doing my best to inform the Decision Makers – but I think their staff Trash my emails.   If Decision Makers know of OLT we have a more serious problem – it means they are causing the damage to us on purpose!  That is malicious.  It would be Malfeasance.  

When government staff mistakenly Trash important information they should show to their managers that would be Misfeasance.   When staff or management ignore important information they should act upon, that would be Nonfeasance.

Is my OLT information important?

The claim is that if UK and the US use OLT:

1.    the Deficits will be more speedily paid off

2.    there will be full employment

3.    OLT can achieve the same results in Iraq and Afghanistan.   

Most Nations can immediately improve their economies with OLT and permanently provide jobs for ourselves, our children and their children.  

 The OLT Equation is:   T = mr + 14br  

OLT is a superior tax system designed to eliminate the Deficit, VAT, GST, Income Tax and unemployment.  To be in Government and knowingly ignore OLT is Nonfeasance.  

Almost all citizens, except those in the US, are being damaged by cuts and austerity.   The US citizens were damaged by the banks. Using OLT now would greatly assist the US recovery.  The US, with OLT, could fix its own economy now, in 2010, and then put OLT into Afghanistan and Iraq to also fix those economies; so ending those conflicts with a positive result.

I received an email from the White House; my problem is to have my outgoing emails get past the staff to be read and understood by Decision Makers.   Today I give up.  I quit!   I will start printing my e-book to put it in the World’s Libraries and onto the Internet. 

The OLT invention can easily be tried out in the UK, the US, Australia and N Z; most other Nations would also be OK for OLT.

With the Cameron/Clegg/Osborne Emergency Austerity/Cuts Budget the UK has overnight lost all claims to world leadership; the world must again turn to the US.   Australia and New Zealand may become leaders.   Interestingly, as I researched OLT, and found it was a river in Romania, I noticed that Romania is in the EU and has a 16% flat rate income tax and a sound economy.  Bulgaria has a 10% flat rate income tax.   So perhaps they are the present leaders.  (OLT is much better still).   Spain has joined Greece; both Nations should use OLT and get to work paying off their deficits.

 To fix Energy, Climate Change, the Economy, the Wars and everything else we must first fix the Money and to do that we must fix the Tax.  Calculating net income is a monumental waste of National time; taxing gross money turnover (OLT) is automatic and will take almost no time at all.

Orbital Economics - it's a numbers game.   The bankers, hedge fund managers, Forex Dealers, media, politicians, economists, lawyers, accountants and government officers have played with their numbers to fool us everyday people - but we have the numbers to vote them out!  We need to get organized!   Every political party should be offering One Line Tax (OLT); throw the old tax law books in the rubbish dump!    
1. Pay off the Deficits: OLT at a very low rate on all bank and finance house transactions will not be noticed by most people.  OLT will be a substantial tax on big money movers and will be sufficient to pay off the deficits.  Big money movers caused the Deficits and with OLT, they will eliminate the Deficits.

2. Double Old Age Pensions: When a Deficit is sufficiently reduced the OLT rate will be increased to about 0.3% (but not above 1%) so that all people notice the tax.  OLT will then be unfairly high for the poorest people and for the richest people; so pensions and benefits will be doubled and big taxpayers will be paid bonuses to halve their tax rate.

3. Provide full Employment: Pensioners will spread the money around to cause more businesses and employment.  Big taxpayers will receive incentives to expand green industries, particularly geothermal electricity generation and heat pump heating; green   expansion will cause a great many new jobs.

4. Abolish Income Tax, VAT, GST: Full Employment will greatly increase the amount of tax collected so VAT, Income Tax and GST will be an unnecessary waste of time and should be cut right out.

5. End Afghanistan and Iraq wars: When the US uses OLT they will be able to pay for a much better Health Scheme, and pay for all other things that the Obama Government wants to do.

When the US has full employment, the citizens of the US will become wealthier than they have ever been; they will only need to introduce OLT to Iraq and Afghanistan, to end those wars.

Troops will enjoy patrolling in Bushmasters with a fair amount of safety, to find and destroy roadside bombs; they will be a new type of tourist!   Iraq and Afghanistan will have full employment based on tourism – instead of having poppy growing and bomb-making as the main industries.

O L T      >< ?         NOW to Infinity

As I edit my book and feel satisfied with the ideas I give you, I wonder where the profit is for all of the work and inventive ideas.    How can all who are interested make a profit?   

Answer: we only need to spread the word faster - because OLT will benefit every person in every Nation that uses it.  Nobody is overlooked.

OLT ONE LINE TAX  is taxing all bank and finance house transactions at 0.001% to 1%.  …     129

Contents                                                                     …...         135           

Introduction      …………………..                                       …………             136                                                                             

Chapter 1 T = mr + 20br?     the fairest tax on the widest base …. 148    

Chapter 2   Using More of our Brain .…………….………                             156  

Chapter 3.  Entering the Leisure Age with unprecedented prosperity ……  158

Chapter 4  No Bushmasters = Bad judgment                     …………….       161

Chapter 5   Seashore Democracy     ……………………..167                                                  

Chapter 6 Strategy Proposed to Nick Clegg (Greece)………     

Chapter 7 Earn personal income OR campaign funds.....    175

Chapter 8 Australian Governor General resigned May 2003..    175

 Chapter 9  The MPs who voted against the Iraq War……….     179

 Chapter 10 Proof the UN knew that Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction were destroyed in 1991                                             ………………..  183

Chapter 11  MPs knew the cost price of Iraq oil was US$1 per barrel   ………………..189        

 Chapter 12  South Australians are risking legal claims from people in equatorial Nations…...                                                           200 

Chapter 13  The Clacton Town Centre Area Action Plan…….  213 

Chapter 14  Clacton-on-Sea leads the world with Shore Protection.216           

Chapter  15  Working Notes       ……………………………. 223   5892674

Introduction:  Every Dream Can NOW Become Reality

One Line Tax (OLT) is my invention.  I first thought of taxing the money turnover, not incomes, goods or services, in 1990.  With computerised banking it was possible – the politicians saw that the finance sector was against my idea so nothing happened.  In 2008 the banks started crashing; some very ignorant bankers had overdone their high gearing (leverage) and the credit rating agencies made huge blunders.  I was thrilled, my time had arrived.

I emailed the UK Government, the media and various MPs for little or no response. When the UK General Election produced a hung parliament I continued my emailing and on 25^th May 2010 thought of moving a decimal point but otherwise leave taxes where they are.  This decimal point adjustment removed the reason for the finance sector’s objection.

The only problem remaining is that the tax rate is so low – to cover the large transactions – it is not worth the cost of collecting from small transactions.  Cash is taxed when it is deposited and withdrawn from banks.   Credit cards are taxed when money from a bank account is paid into them, thus grouping small daily transactions into one monthly transaction.  

It is the multitude of small transactions that will spread the money around to expand businesses and employment.   The objective is to raise the tax rate (r) as soon as OLT is operating smoothly with the actual results being evaluated and fine tuned.

Every person is encouraged to become a Forex Dealer and large taxpayer.   Education and University Tuition will be free.   Each time a large taxpayer pays £1m of tax, half will be paid back as a bonus.   Much of present government tax policy actually encourages many people to not work and to not succeed.   Cascading tax is the opposite, the more the money moves the better, and those who move the most money will be encouraged to move even more.

I now claim to be the World Expert in paying off Deficits and I invite comments.   The World is now ready for perfect taxing and banking.   OLT (One Line Tax) will help ALL citizens - because money paid out by the Government will be returned to the Government by the cascading tax to be lent out again and again etc. to provide - For the poor:  Doubled pensions and benefits. For the workers: Full employment + overtime.  For small business: 5% overdraft rates to small LTD companies that use their shares as security for their borrowing. Small LTD companies will be fully considered for all government contracts and generally encouraged.  Real Estate will no longer be the preferred security for business loans and overdrafts.     

The Real Estate Industry plus the Banking Industry are the cause of the massive Deficits; the Governments let it happen.

Land prices have doubled or more because banks preferred real estate to lend against.  Many buildings are not used.  All buildings not fully used will be treated as cash and a monthly cascading tax will be applied on the combined value of the buildings and land.  The purpose is to provide good quality affordable housing.  To assist the land owners to adjust, all purchases of material for refurbishment and maintenance will be free of VAT and loans at no more than 5% will be granted by banks or by the Treasury.  This will cause much employment.  (To have massive amounts of empty and unfinished buildings and unemployment in Spain is ridiculous – OLT would fix it.)

Small LTD companies converting an unused building (house. flats, offices, barn, factory, shop, church, etc) into good standard housing will be granted bank loans at no more than 5%.  The small LTD companies will be encouraged to grow into big companies and big taxpayers. The £500,000 bonus every time £1,000,000 cascading tax is paid is the proposed 'wholesale discount' - some other form of bonus may be even better. 

Real Estate profiteering has been the main cause of general hardship for the past 40 years; the older people have plundered the younger.  The Banks and Governments have assisted the land pirates.  Some low level inflation is good, but prices are now too high and that is why people need housing but cannot afford to buy housing.  Tax and Banking are the causes.   OLT will easily fix it.

A good supply of land for affordable housing can come from areas threatened with flooding and from coastal erosion.  The Environmental Agency can be expanded and mandated to purchase homes and land with the purpose of creating flood plains, levees and canals to prevent all flooding of dwellings and work places.  New homes will also be built and sold or rented out. Coast Protection Authorities (CPA) will identify ALL land likely to be lost to the sea during the next 50 years, such as Jaywick, with its parallel sea wall, and where possible, buy that land at its present depreciated value.  The Authority will then build sea defences based on the adjacent Martello Bay Y shape breakwater at Clacton-on-Sea and with Biorock Technology (see Chapter 14).  The safeguarded land will be developed for high quality affordable eco-housing and for tourism.     

OLT One Line Tax will first of all pay off the Deficit and then be raised to eliminate both Income Tax on the people who work, and Value Added Tax on their production.  The land threatened from floods and coastal erosion is so extensive that full employment (with overtime) is assured for a generation.  For OLT One Line Tax to work, it is essential to only use British rocks and other material.

 Some UK emails

Most of the Tories wrongly voted for the Iraq War and their names remain on the public record. 

Now, only two Liberal Democrats, Bob Russell, MP for Colchester, and Mike Hancock, MP for Portsmouth South, voted against George Osborne's Budget to put their names permanently on the public record. The vote was 346 to 270, majority 76.    Thirty nine more Liberal Democrats would have given us a Labour / Lib Dem Coalition with no increase in VAT and a perfect plan to pay off the Deficit.

To save Britain from absolute economic disaster we need a new Lib Dem Leader to join with a new Labour Leader.  All of the leading Tories, except for Ken Clarke, proved they have bad judgment by voting for the Iraq War.  Those Tory bad decision makers are now twisting the knife by destroying what is left of the UK economy - savaged by the fighting of two wars at the same time.   If the Tories had acted like a proper Opposition in 2003, Blair and Brown would not have taken us into Iraq with Bush and our Deficit would now be much smaller.

Diane Abbott, Ed Balls and Ed Miliband have said the Iraq war was wrong so would be good to work with.  All Lib Dems are against the Iraq war and VAT - only voting for the 20% VAT to please their Whips.   The VAT vote has already turned many Lib Dem Party Members towards Labour - where, in a Jeremy Paxman interview, Brown promised Labour would not increase VAT if re-elected.

Brown is now gone and Clegg should follow.

Cameron and Osborne should go too.

With a clean sheet, a fair deal for the Lib Dems dumping Clegg to make way for a Lib Dem / Labour Coalition Government, would be  for the new Lib Dem Leader to become Prime Minister.  Caroline Lucas would also be a widely accepted Prime Minister.

Simon Hughes, Bob Russel, Mike Hancock and the Previous Lib Dem Leaders would also be acceptable Prime Ministers.

A fair deal for Labour is for Lib Dems to agree that Labour provide the Prime Minister in 2015.  The Tories have shown their true colours and should be kept safely in opposition for a very long time.  This will only be possible if Lib Dems use OLT as per the email I sent to Bob Russell (see below).

For the Tories to be an Acceptable Party they will need to vote for the OLT Amendment AND apologise for being conned by Blair to vote for the Iraq War.  If they do that, then we can all immediately settle down to a very happy lifestyle, with the Present Coalition remaining as the government.

Not only can Lib Dems immediately make most of Britain very happy to be saved from George Osborne, but they can also show the US how to use OLT to fix the Iraq and Afghanistan disasters - turning lemons into lemonade.    

Last Friday I emailed Bob Russell to state the budget is wrong and on Sunday a Nobel Prize Winner also stated the budget is wrong. 

There is now no excuse for LibDems, nor any others, to not amend the Osborne Budget as set out below.  

The Amendment will, on its own, not only pay off the Deficit but also give us full employment and bring the Iraq and Afghanistan disasters to an excellent conclusion.     John Robertson

The George Osborne Budget is wrong

Dear Bob Russell MP

You are my nearest Lib Dem MP, I live at Clacton.  The Emergency Budget is unfair and wrong.  

The Prime Minister says; “Don’t hold back. Be innovative, be radical, challenge the way things are done. If you think you can make things better for less money don’t just complain to your colleagues about it – tell us about it so we can make it happen

In response I submit to you::

To Parliament,
22 June 2010    UK Emergency Budget Day

Proposed  Amendment:

that 0.001% cascading One Line Tax (OLT) be levied on all withdrawals from - and on all deposits into - banks and finance houses and be gradually raised to first of all fully pay off the Deficit then to replace VAT and then to replace Income Tax.  The tax rate must never rise above 1%. 

 One Line Tax (OLT) cascading tax is absolutely essential.  With OLT, the more money spent the better; that is why the Greek, Spanish, EU and UK economies are easy to fix.

The Osborne Budget is better than expected – but is still wrong!   Only incompetent MPs could know of OLT and not use it!  An Amendment to add One Line Tax to the George Osborne Budget would give the UK the best economy in the World.

Alternatively, a Coalition of astute UK MPs should vote the Emergency Budget down and form a 'Seashore' Coalition Government to stop coastal erosion and do all the other sensible things that a Great Nation should do.  To plan for four years of self-inflicted pain is negligent and cruel.

Assuming we start from today, you should make public announcements that 0.001% cascading tax, on all withdrawals from - and on all deposits into - banks and finance houses, will be phased in to replace VAT.  The OLT cascading tax should first of all go fully towards paying off the Deficit.

 Once the OLT is phased in and all avoidance and evasion schemes are identified and eliminated, the 0.001% rate can be gently raised.   VAT was easy to use to adjust the Emergency Budget and OLT will be even easier to use to adjust the future revenue collected.   After the Deficit and VAT are both eliminated with OLT, the next target for elimination is Income Tax.
   
OLT is an efficient and fair Treasury tool that should be used in all advanced societies; it would soon resolve the Greek and EU Deficits etc.   UK can lead the way.

Osborne Budget is Based on False Premise

On Newsnight I watched an interview with an economist from Japan.  I am a retired Australian export consultant and I also saw that the UK is to raise a huge amount of money from increased UK exports.   You cannot do it!

UK's manufacturing base is now in China.  UK's big industry now is 'funny money.'   The UK can fiddle some more and devalue the £ some more to make exporting easier - but that will not work because many other nations will also be trying to export their way out of deficits by devaluing.

UK can hold its share of the world market, but it will be impossible to increase UK net exports by 40% - so the Osborne Budget is absolutely wrong.  If UK proceeds with a wrong forecast something will be blamed for the giant black hole when it comes.   The hole will then be plugged with more cuts or more tax or more time to meet the targets or all of those.

To honestly claim now that UK Net Exports will be greatly expanded can only be done by increasing VAT to about 25% to further reduce imports.   . 

UK should help Third World Countries, NOT be one!

OLT added to George Osborne's Budget is the quick and permanent fix.   The big export product for UK is OLT.   I can be consultant and we could start putting a software program together next week.

UK can launch the world into the Leisure and Space Ages with permanent prosperity to gradually make the world happier and more peaceful. 

Cheers     John Robertson 

Nobel prizewinner confirms The George Osborne Budget is wrong

The Independent UK    Sunday, 27 June 2010

Osborne's first Budget? It's wrong, wrong, wrong!

Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel prizewinner who predicted the global crisis, delivers his verdict on the Chancellor's first Budget and tells Paul Vallely it will take the UK deeper into recession and hit millions – the poorest – badly.

Chancellor George Osborne announced his first Budget this week

George Osborne will probably not be very bothered that there is a man who thinks he got last week's emergency Budget almost entirely wrong. But he should be. Because that man is a former chief economist at the World Bank who won the Nobel Prize for Economics for his work on why markets do not produce the outcomes which, in theory, they ought to.

Professor Joseph Stiglitz, who has been described as the biggest brain in economics, is distinctly unimpressed by George Osborne's strategy. This, he predicts, will make Britain's recovery from recession longer, slower and harder than it needs to be. The rise in VAT could even tip us into a double-dip recession.

Stiglitz, who was once Bill Clinton's senior economic adviser, is now professor of economics and finance at Columbia Business School. He was in the UK this week at the University of Manchester, where he chairs the Brooks World Poverty Institute, but he lifted his head from the detail of international development to scrutinise the economic strategy of the Conservative Chancellor whose Liberal Democrat partners recently reversed their judgement that massive public spending cuts now would endanger the economy and joined in the Tory slash-and-burn strategy. They were deeply wrong to do so, he believes.

It would be a mistake to ignore Stig-litz on this. He has a track record of getting his predictions right. He was one of the few economists who predicted the global financial meltdown long before it occurred.

"What happened was very much in accord with what I expected," he tells me when we meet for a coffee outside the Blackwell bookshop in the centre of the university. "The data was pretty clear about that." And the scale of the crash? "That wasn't a surprise," he adds, in a matter-of-fact manner. "The bigger the bubble, the bigger the burst.

"The thing most economists did not fully grasp was the extent to which the banks engaged in murky risk-taking activities. They were taking a risk with our money, their shareholders' money, the bond-holders' money," he says. Banks were demanding up to 40 per cent of the corporate profits, saying their innovative financing was adding value. But "all this talk about innovation was a sham" because it did not relate to any real increase in the economy's productivity, he says.

"There was a prima facie case of something screwy going on [with all the] perverse incentives that would lead them to take excessive risk. But there was no way anyone could know or believe that the banks were [conducting themselves] at that level of stupidity. I predicted that there was going to be a collapse because of the information asymmetry problems that were being created." His Nobel prize was given for exactly that – showing how markets fail because different people in them hold different levels of information.

Yet there is no hint of I-told-you-so about Stiglitz's tone as he asks the waiter for coffee. He orders decaffeinated, but suggests the British economy needs the opposite: a stiff stimulant rather than the "fiscal consolidation" which is George Osborne's economic euphemism for cuts.

Fiscal stimulus is out of fashion now. World leaders embarked on that strategy – injecting money to re-energise the economy – after the banking crash three years ago. It was widely perceived not to have worked because the money governments pumped into the banks was not passed on to ailing businesses or individuals in trouble with their mortgages.

"The problem was that, in the US, the stimulus wasn't big enough," he says. "Too much of it was in tax cuts. And when they gave money to the banks they gave it to the wrong banks and, as a result, credit has not been restored – we can expect a couple of million or more homes to be repossessed this year than last year – and the economy has not been restarted." Instead of producing a consensus that the government should have done more, it has created disillusion that the government can do anything, Stiglitz says.

The result is that, following the attacks by the financial markets on Greece and then Spain, everybody is now in a mood of retrenchment. "It's not just pre-Keynesian, it's Hooverite," he says. By which he means governments are not just refusing to stimulate, they are making cuts, as Herbert Hoover did in the US in 1929 – when he turned the Wall Street Crash into the Great Depression. "Hoover had this idea that, whenever you go into recession, deficits grow, so he decided to go for cuts – which is what the foolish financial markets that got us into this trouble in the first place now want."

It has become the new received wisdom throughout Europe. But it is the classic error made by those who confuse a household's economics with those of a national economy.

"If you have a household that can't pay its debts, you tell it to cut back on spending to free up the cash to pay the debts. But in a national economy, if you cut back on your spending, then economic activity goes down, nobody invests, the amount of tax you take goes down, the amount you pay out in unemployment benefits goes up – and you don't have enough money to pay your debts.

"The old story is still true: you cut expenditures and the economy goes down. We have lots of experiments which show this, thanks to Herbert Hoover and the IMF," he adds. The IMF imposed that mistaken policy in Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Argentina and hosts of other developing countries in the 1980s and 1990s. "So we know what will happen: economies will get weaker, investment will get stymied and it's a downward vicious spiral. How far down we don't know – it could be a Japanese malaise. Japan did an experiment just like this in 1997; just as it was recovering, it raised VAT and went into another recession."

Then why have we not learned from all that? Because politicians like George Osborne are driven by ideology; the national deficit is an excuse to shrink the state because that is what he wanted anyway. Because the financial market only cares about one thing – getting repaid. And because other European governments are panicking because of the market's wild attack on Greece and Spain, and they don't want to be next.

"But cutbacks in Germany, Britain and France will mean all of Europe will suffer. The cuts will all feed back negatively. And if everyone follows this policy, their budget deficits will get worse, so they will have to make more cuts and raise taxes more. It's a vicious downward spiral. We're now looking at a long, hard, slow recovery with the possibility of a double dip if everybody cuts back at the same time. The best scenario is long and hard ... and the worst is much worse. If any one of these countries is forced into default, the banking system is so highly leveraged that it could cause real problems. This is really risky, really scary."

So what should we be doing? "The lesson is not that you cut back spending, but that you redirect it. You cut out the war in Afghanistan. You cut a couple of hundred billion dollars of wasteful military expenditure. You cut out oil subsidies. There's a long list of things we can cut. But you increase spending in other areas, such as research and development, infrastructure, education" – areas where government can get a good return on the investment of public money. "I haven't done the calculation for Britain, but, for the US, all you need is a return on government investment of 5 to 6 per cent and the long-term deficit debt is lowered."

Taxes also need to be restructured. Osborne has increased capital gains tax for high earners from 18 to 28 per cent. "There's absolutely no reason why you couldn't tax speculative gains [from rising house or land prices] by 40 per cent. There's no social return on it and land is going to be there whether people have speculated or not. But you lower the tax on investment in things like R&D."

Stiglitz has one more practical solution to offer. Governments should set up their own banks to restart lending to businesses and save struggling homeowners from repossession. "If the banks aren't lending, let's create a new lending facility to do that job," he says. "In the US, we gave $700bn to the banks; if we had used a fraction of that to create a new bank, we could have financed all the lending that was needed."

Indeed, it could be done for far less. "Take $100bn, lever that at 10 to 1 [by attracting funds from the private sector] and that's a trillion-dollar new lending capacity – more than the real economy needs."

Such a move would help ordinary people more than all Osborne's rhetoric about being tough but fair. Stiglitz is sceptical, too, about the moral underpinning of a Budget which claims that "we are all in this together", but then hits the poorest hardest.

Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies has suggested that the Chancellor's Budget will cost the poor 2.5 per cent of their income, while the rich will lose just 1 per cent. "I've not made an independent study on that point, but cuts in public services will have a disproportionate effect on the poor," Stiglitz says. Osborne's Budget "may be well-intentioned, but it takes an enormous amount of work to make sure that a package of public spending cuts of that magnitude doesn't hit the poor disproportionately".

His big fear is that overseas aid, which has been protected in this first round of cuts, will not escape a second. "Developing countries have redirected themselves towards Asia, and China in particular, in recent years, so growth in Africa will be more robust than one might have expected, given the severity of the downturn," he says.

Even so, aid remains vital to poor countries. "If aid is cut back, growth will be badly affected," he says. "China is providing aid, but its aid is all in infrastructure, whereas aid from the US and Europe is mainly in education and health – areas in which ordinary people will suffer most if there are cuts."

Joseph Stiglitz has come full circle. What the world needs now – developing and developed – is not retrenchment but greater economic stimulus. It is not a message many are in the mood to hear. But they didn't listen to him last time, either. And he turned out to be right, and they were wrong – and at what a cost to us all.

Dear Ed Miliband,

You were good on Daily Politics today and that prompts this email.   I am writing a book and will print proofs later this week.    This email will be in it.

I believe that  (OLT) will be a profound book.   I invite you to write your views for publication.   The pages below show the scope.

I believe the Cameron/Clegg/Osborne Emergency Budget is wrong, just as the Iraq War was wrong.    You have the public stage and you could use my ideas to speak to Moving an Amendment to the Budget.  You are not tied to Blair or Brown and could appeal to the Lib Dem MPs who see the Budget is wrong.   I think you should be acting to form a coalition with all except the Tories   It is clear that Gordon Brown did not have enough Labour Party support to form a coalition, but now that the horror Emergency Budget is facing us, perhaps you can cheer all of us by speaking to immediately amend that Budget.

In writing this book I have found that MPs will not answer in detail and often, will not answer at all. 

At the weekend G20 Meeting, President Obama confirmed that the US would continue with the Gordon Brown type of economy and not switch to austerity and cuts.

Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling did not answer my emails; I do not think they ever saw them.   OLT would have won for Labour and through you, can still win.  Imposing four years of austerity and cuts on us is wrong.
Regards
John Robertson

Chapter 1   T = mr + 14br? the fairest possible tax on the widest possible base!

It will all start with OLT (One Line Tax), where every person and corporation in a Nation pays the same rate of tax - which is never above 1%.    This tax is a form of Compulsory National Saving. 

Australia’s Reserve Bank prevented Australia’s banks from lending extremely badly and the Mining Industry kept Australia’s exports high. The US and the UK fell into giant economic holes excavated by bank and real estate fraudsters – the bank regulators let it happen.

But those fraudsters and regulators have created an economic climate that is almost unbelievably good; but few of us see it. Catch up here!

China now has huge reserves of money; Australia is supplying minerals to China and could commence lending to other Nations.  (Orbital Economics)

Britain CAN be Great Britain again.

The UK can immediately start paying off its Deficit to qualify for the proposed 1% loans from Australia.  Australia has a General Election in 2010 so this is a perfect time to introduce OLT.

There is no logical reason for UK and Australia to ignore OLT and 1% loans.

Flashback: April 22, 2010. 

The UK General Election Campaign was in full swing, the 3 Leaders debated on national TV.   They did NOT fully inform the voters. 

The TAXATION SYSTEM IS WRONG; Pensions CAN be doubled; NHS can have more funds, not be cut.   We CAN have FULL EMPLOYMENT!    How?   It’s all in the Maths.

Read yesterday’s emails:

Hi John

I agree with many of your points and you clearly appreciate what a dreadful system of taxation we have. Your transactional based model is very interesting and one that needs to be explored. If I get into Parliament I would be delighted to explore it further. (No Independent got into Parliament)

On 21 Apr, John Robertson <robertsonj32@tiscali.co.uk wrote:

I need some help to contact good independent candidates so we can get some media coverage and win some additional independent seats.
First, the present tax system is legalised corruption, and is only retained to control the citizens.

My 1 Line Tax would throw away all existing Income Tax and VAT laws and instead simply tax all debit and all credit money movements.  Taking NHS as being representative of all necessary government expenditure, below is the mathematical equation. 

Using Cascading Tax to increase funding for the NHS etc and pay off the National Debt.

T = mr + 14br?

T = total tax collected
m = total money turnover of UK
r = rate of tax on every money transaction (0.001% up to 1% - to be adjusted by the Treasury, Bank of England, or Parliament, as required)
b = money lent to the Banks by the Government for 20:1 overdraft high gearing/leverage to businesses

The UK is in its best ever position and poised to enter the Leisure and Space Ages; Gordon Brown fluked to create a great foundation – now the opportunity is being squandered.  It appears to me the Government and the major parties want control of the people more than they want fairness, efficiency and prosperity.  Probably they just cannot see it!

Say the tax rate (r) was set at 0.001% - I think that with London's huge banking, hedge fund and Forex sector - that would be about the starting point.  The UK would become almost unbelievably prosperous and much safer.   Cascading Tax collects from every transaction - the bank's computers would be set to instantly send the tax to the Treasury.   When fully implemented no more time would be wasted filling in tax forms and no tax records will be needed.

Criminal computer wizards would try to evade the Cascading Tax and Government computer wizards would catch them for the Government to jail for very long periods.  

When implemented, the increased pensions and benefits will be spent to live and so create full employment and booming businesses.   Cascading Tax collects all the time - there are no exceptions - the Queen pays and so does the poorest pensioner.   All the poor people will become the ‘engines’ for economic growth – from the moment of birth to the moment of death.  The present engine for growth is war - as it always has been.  It is easy to see that war is the perfect way to expand an economy and that is why wars are popular – but leave us with Deficits.  

Sick and old people, with cascading tax, can replace wars.   Sex is popular so we have an endless supply of births, ill and old people; if we look after them properly, we no longer need wars to expand our economy, nor do we need Deficits.            

The 3 main parties should have already adopted 1 Line Tax and should have debated (r) and what they are going to do with all the government money collected so efficiently.

Somehow we need to inform all thinkers and so find a way to tell the decision makers and the public.  I will, if invited, travel to answer all questions at meetings with media present; email is best for me but you are also welcome to phone me on 01255 223181 and Mobile 07867 727879.

On Monday 12 April 2010 I was admitted to Colchester General Hospital and for 8 days experienced Britain’s magnificent NHS.  The care and treatment was unbelievably good.   All remaining thoughts of standing as an Independent Candidate evaporated.

An Independent Candidate emailed:

Hi John
Your 1 Line Tax policy sounds fascinating. A single tax would certainly cut out most of the costs associated with collection of taxes and allow a substantial reduction in the civil service. It could also be sold as a method for proportional distribution of tax burden since those on the lowest incomes transact most of their business in cash. Financial traders, bankers and the like are by reputation the "second-hand car dealers" of today and the tax would hit them hardest.
 
The only problem would be that the new taxation system would have to be phased in (starting at 0.001% will phase it in) to avoid massive job losses in the public sector. I would be interested in seeing the basic figures and wonder how you would deal with the transition from the existing system. (small business and employees will not notice (r) 0.001%; big business will be annoyed but will be able to borrow from the Treasury at about 1% - so should make more profit.  After everyone sees how it all works (r) can be raised to eliminate Income Tax and all other obnoxious taxes)
 
Of course there is the risk that there will be job losses for accountants, tax advisors and in the legal system if there are no loopholes to exploit!
 
On the face of it your 1 Line Tax policy would move the country into a new economic phase. In simple terms how much tax could be raised for a 1% cascading tax?  (Answer:  infinity)
 
If the figures add up I would like to take this on-board.
I look forward to hearing from you further.

The Maths (r) Right

 Rt Hon George Osborne, Dear Chancellor,

Following Newsnight tonight I alert you to:   

1 LINE TAX, a tax that would go direct from banks to the Treasury the very moment there is a deposit into, or a withdrawal from, a bank or finance house. Taking NHS and BBC as being representative of all necessary government expenditure, below is the mathematical equation. 

Using Cascading Tax to increase funding for the NHS, BBC, etc and to pay off the National Debt.

T = mr + 14br ? 8 (infinity)

T = total tax collected
m = total money turnover of UK
r = rate of tax on every money transaction (0.001% up to 1% - to be adjusted by the Treasury, the Bank of England, or by Parliament, as required)
b = money lent to the Banks by the Government for 20:1 overdraft high gearing (leverage) to businesses

id = to increase or decrease m

id = pi
p = existing pension/benefits rates
i = 150% up to 300% of all pensions and unemployment benefits (to be adjusted by the Bank of England or by Parliament, as required)

To start immediately, the lowest cascading tax rate (r) would be 0.001%. The Treasury will first learn how to stop all forms of evasion and avoidance and how to best adjust (r).

Then to cause large cascading tax payers to want to pay a higher rate (r) The Treasury will lend money at 1% to those large cascading tax payers  provided the Treasury Loan Money is used to buy good Green Shares to secure the Treasury Loans.   The objective is to raise (r) to about 0.3% (but not above 1%) to enable Income Tax and VAT to be abolished while pensions and benefits are doubled.

The spreading around of money by old and ill people and the big capital investment into Green Corporations will cause permanent prosperity with full employment.  Every Nation can pay off its Deficit with 1 LINE TAX.

Cascading Tax, in various forms, has been used for about a century but mostly it has been replaced with Value Added Tax (VAT).   An email sent to me in June 2009 from a Treasury Officer treated my proposed cascading tax on money transactions at less than 1% as if it was a 15% VAT transaction tax on goods and services.   I replied to say they were nothing like each other, but that ended the matter.

The Coalition is now the Government and has the whole of the Treasury at its disposal.  I do not expect you to personally fully investigate my proposal, but I do expect to receive a Treasury email that properly addresses my 1 Line Tax, so that a fatal flaw may be identified, or it may be used (no reply has been received).

I am plainly stating that a 0.001% cascading tax can be immediately introduced to:

1.     take the first step needed to painlessly pay off the deficit,

2.     do all that is needed to combat climate change and

3.     create full employment.  

Once the 0.001% tax is in place the Government can learn how to be the paradigm for world peace and prosperity; our children need it.
John Robertson  

On June 21 2010, a party was held at Stonehenge to celebrate the longest day of the year and use temporary toilets at this world-famous tourist site.   George Osborne’s cuts on such a big income earning asset is very bad judgment.

1 LINE Tax (OLT) is designed for 100% full employment and for the creation of lasting assets.   Nothing prevents George Osborne from immediately adding 1 Line Tax to the other taxes and for the Treasury learning how to use it.    

April 6 2010… The UK Election was called, a Coalition Government resulted; we grey haired Clacton-on-Sea citizens have a unique opportunity to use our grey matter to make the World a better place for all.  Better for ourselves, our children and theirs and for everyone else.  Efficient and fair, 1 Line Tax will end tax evasion and tax avoidance.  Then there will be plenty of Government Money to double all pensions - for free University Tuition, for Stonehenge permanent toilets and for permanent Sea Defences!     

ü      Pensioners will spread the money around and businesses will boom, there will be full employment.  Youth will have an exciting Leisure and Space Age Future.  Gang killings will end.         

ü       In 1993, Alexander Downer, once a possible Australian Prime Minister, discussed my idea with me for half an hour and said, ‘Your Maths are right’.

ü      My Maths ARE right, so why has 1 Line Tax not been used?

ü      I call it 1 line Tax (OLT) because all existing tax books would be thrown away and replaced with one line;

ü      ‘Tax all money movements at less than 1 %, no exceptions’

ü      With no room to move anyone evading this fair tax will be stupid.

ü      Cash trading and using credit cards are encouraged as everyday people would only pay tax as they deposited or withdrew cash from a bank.   Debit cards will be treated as if they are cheques.

ü      Government computer wizards would catch those who use computers to evade tax; Parliament would decide on their penalties – they would be very severe.   Parliament would also decide on the eventual Tax Rate which could be about 0.3 % but never above 1% or below 0.001%.

ü      There would be no tax forms of any sort for anyone to fill out.  The efficiency of the UK would soar and herald in the Leisure Age and Space Age.   Good business people will make more money than ever. Those in the tax dodging business will need to apply their talents elsewhere.

ü      You have not heard of this before because the Political Parties are funded by people who are Tax Avoiders; just as you fiddle tax forms in a small way the big people do it in a big way.   Income Tax is constructed to be fiddled, it is legalised corruption. The Income Tax Acts should be dropped in the Thames, VAT too! They are taxes for working and for producing.

ü      The Electioneering debates on TV are useless and boring, the same old faces with same old cut cut cut stories.  1 Line Tax would change that to expand expand expand.

ü      We need to get Mathematicians on TV debating the less than 1 % Cascading Tax. We need to network and apply pressure on the BBC and other media.

ü      The Maths will hold up and then we need Computer Wizards to debate how the 1 Line Tax will be evaded and other Computer Wizards to debate how the Tax Evaders will be caught.

ü      Some of it will be above our heads but scrutiny of the transcripts by experts will find the truth. This will be the greatest TV Reality Show of all time if we finish up with doubled pensions, full employment, reduced crime, etc.

There are no fatal flaws in 1 Line Tax.   There has been no BBC or newspaper coverage.   DO NOT be satisfied with the present Tax System you have!

No Independent Candidates had time to introduce 1 Line Tax and none won a Seat in May 2010.  Caroline Lucas, Leader of the UK Green Party, won a Seat and can speak for an immediate UK economic recovery if she chooses to.    

Perhaps we need a new Seashore Party dedicated to fixing the Deficit and Unemployment.  We would need a Leader, a Treasurer, a Nominating Officer, Candidates, Volunteers and Supporters - but we do not have to have a Party at all!    

The Labour Party is in trouble – some still claim it was ‘Right’ to invade Iraq.  David Cameron is badly informed too - he recently said it was right to invade Iraq.  In 2010 probably more sitting Tory MPs than Labour MPs, think the Iraq war was right.  What about the Law?   They all should have followed Clare Short’s lead and said they were conned by Tony Blair; they proved they have bad judgement.  The pro-Iraq War MPs make the laws but do not follow the Law.  They should be dumped if they do not properly justify their Iraq Vote or admit their error of judgment.

LibDems, Greens and other Parties are not tainted with the bad judgment of Iraq. 

 email:  robertsonj32@tiscali.co.uk 

To read more background, you may buy my hard cover book May 1984 to NOW with an Insert for £10 (collectors copy - only 60 left) from Studio Book Shop?, 19 Pallister Road, Clacton-on-Sea.   CO15 1PQ     01255 427 290?   

OLT – One Line Tax will be printed soon.

OLT  >< ?         NOW to Infinity

Chapter  2   Using More of our Brain 

ü      A long time ago I made a decision to deliberately follow my intuition.   The internet and emailing are extensions of our brains.  We can mentally travel anywhere on Earth or in Space that we choose to visit.

ü    If we had a real Tardis to travel in, like Dr Who, we could do little more than we can already.   Our brain can already experience the sensation of visualising Mars by watching a documentary and loading it into our photographic memory, so why go there?   Of course the real trip would be best, provided you like long flights.   Going to the stars is already mentally possible with cameras and giant telescopes.

ü      We all need to use more or our brain; most of us are strong on the left side of our brain.  It looks to me that politicians have strong left brains.  I believe the politicians have strong left brains and weak right brains and that is why they are not showing the people what a brilliant life we should all be having.          

ü    We should all try to balance our brains.  The rest of this book is my best effort to put forward a balanced solution to all problems.  It is only a guide book for you to improve upon. 

If we balance our brain and use some right side logic we see that the Osborne Budget is deliberately false for the private sector cannot possibly provide the jobs and revenue to overcome the cuts.

Why write such a Budget?   The good thing is that the City likes the Budget.  That is why the only adjustment needed is to add OLT to the Osborne Budget.   Then Decision Makers will learn how to use it with calculation and analysis.

Using our right brain we use the expanded economy to create many new activities to employ many more people to create much more cascading tax.  

It is right brains that slavishly follow Whips; that is why Lib Dems will vote for the stupid Osborne Budget as it is, even though that can only bring misery to Britain.  The Lib Dems should dissolve quickly and reform as the Seashore Democracy Party.

Stick to your Lib Dem principles, just change your name and elect fresh leaders.  Britain is heading for the Third World under the Tory / Lib Dem Coalition.   You must follow your intuition and act! 

 Chapter 3    The Brits CAN enter the Leisure and Space Ages with unprecedented prosperity                                      

On 12^th March, 2010 I found I am eligible to stand for UK Parliament as Rt Hon Ian Paisley, MP is older than me and I qualify because I am a citizen of a Commonwealth country (Australia) who has indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

 Now I can tell the people of Britain how to lead the Universe.

I already have Permatricity Limited, a dormant company waiting to be used and a Website http://permatricity.com/ where people may contribute their ideas.

Newsnight reports:  Where will the jobs come from for our children?  What kind of economy?   People can succeed in ‘The City’ and in Law.   London is a micro economy – ‘everywhere else the jobs have gone’. Where will the decent jobs come from?  We do not want to maximise profits -  biomimicry -  optimise  opposite to the old era  -  blue sky thinking  - Something different   

The Solution  -  Tax the Money Movements, not Employment (Income Tax) and not Production (VAT).

Businesses will be happy as there will be no more time-wasting tax forms to fill in – all businesses will automatically be more efficient.

Old people will be happy as the Old Age Pension will be Doubled.

Young people will be happy as there will be Full Employment and Free University Tuition.

How will we do it?

OLT would tax all money movements at less than 1%.   The banks, etc computers do the job.   There are absolutely no exceptions – then we do not need a Tax Collecting Office.

The Government will overflow with money coming in every split second.    

The Government debts will be paid off and then the Government will lend instead of borrowing.   The £ will become much stronger.   We will be able to afford overseas holidays again.

FOREX Traders and Hedge Fund Managers have paid big money to be able to talk to David Cameron…. They do not know that with OLT  they will be lent very large amounts of money at very low interest rates; they will be our ‘golden head boys’ as they will be giant earners and giant taxpayers.  £500,000 bonuses will be paid to large Taxpayers.   Everyone can become a large taxpayer.

The Old Age Pensioners will be our new engines driving the economy, they will pay the less than 1% cascading tax, just like everyone else, and they are the money movers.   From their doubled pension they will pay carers and others for their needs and that will spread the money around and create the full employment.

All good business people will make more profit.   That is why the UK will enter the Ages of Leisure and Space.  We will work less for more money.  

Political Parties should all adopt OLT and instead of debating cuts in government services; they should debate the best use for this easily collected and perfectly fair tax.  

It is not Rocket Science - it should have been offered to the Voters in the UK May 2010 Election.   I feel that I am up against a brick wall!

The Present Tax System is like an office using fountain pens, paper, typewriters and slide rules instead of computers.

UK MPs got bogged down with the illegal Iraq War and their own expense accounts.  There is one excuse for their economic doom and gloom; they are nearly all Left Brain People and are incapable of creating growth.  The Left Brain MPs listen to Left Brain Big Donors and Left Brain Civil Service.

The Voters cannot vote in the candidates who endorse OLT as there are no such candidates.  The sky stays grey and will not be blue for us to seriously be in the Space Age and the Leisure Age.   Right Brain People will see in a flash that OLT is the way forward for the next 1,000 years; but where are those people?

When I first thought of ‘Tax the Money’ I burst out laughing.   When I phoned a radio talkback finance expert he too burst out laughing and said, ‘Of course!’ when I said, ‘Scrap income tax, instead, tax the money’.  

The Balanced Brain MPs who voted against the Iraq War should be returned to Parliament - as they have proven they have good judgement.   I found most had left Parliament.   20/5/2010   Two Anti-Iraq War MPs, Diane Abbott and John McDonnell, said they would contest the Labour Leadership!   The betting odds for both was 100:1.     The odds for Diane Abbott fell to 25:1 overnight.   John McDonnell stepped aside for Diane Abbott.

Those Left Brainers who voted for the war showed bad judgment and all of them should be dumped out of Parliament by the voters.  I see many of these bad judgment MPs are still in Parliament!    Some of them want to be the new Labour Leaders!  Read Chapters 8 to 11 and you must wonder why MPs voted against Robin Cook’s view and why they remain in Westminster.    

Iraq was NOT their only bad judgment …...Read Chapter 4.

Now there are only 2 pro-Iraq War Leadership Candidates – David Miliband and Andy Burnham - they have further demonstrated their bad judgment – Dump them! 

Chapter 4.  No Bushmasters = Bad judgment!  

1.               Dutch Bushmaster with remote turret 2008.jpg

In Mach 2010 put the same identical question to the three men who wanted to be the next British Prime Minister in May - they failed the test (probably they were not shown my email). 

              
More British soldiers will die before the Bushmaster vehicle replaces the obsolete Snatch Land Rovers.  The test for the three Prime Ministerial candidates was to see what they do now to reduce those deaths.   Perhaps their staff did not even show their leaders my email; that will demonstrate that they are bad managers.  If the leaders read the email they should work out what they can do and announce it.  They owe that to the fighting soldiers, their families, friends and those of us concerned by the continuous deaths and maiming of the young men.   We will see.

Date: Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 2:42 AM .
Your message was sent with the following sender details submitted:
Name: John Robertson    robertsonj32@tiscali.co.uk
Postcode: CO15 1NQ
Your message was sent with the following text:

Bushmasters for Afghanistan

Dear Rt Hon David Cameron,
Copies to Rt Hon Gordon Brown, and Nick Clegg MP

With an election coming in May and British soldiers being killed now, are you going to immediately do something to get Bushmasters for Afghanistan from the Australian Army stock as the Dutch did in 2006?

The Snatch Land Rovers, which have been blamed for the deaths of 36 British soldiers, are to be replaced with more heavily protected models; but when and what with?

I Googled and found the United Kingdom purchased 24 Bushmasters in May 2008. Most of the vehicles will be used by the British Army in Iraq. (are they now in Afghanistan?)

You can get all the detail you need from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushmaster_IMV#The_Bushmaster_in_Dutch_service

1.1           
The Bushmaster is a mine protected vehicle and provides a high degree of protection against land mines, using its v-hullmonocoque to deflect the blast away from the vehicle and its occupants.

In July 2006 the Dutch Government announced an urgent purchase of 25 Bushmasters to equip Royal Netherlands Army units operating in Afghanistan. Due to the urgency of this purchase these vehicles were taken from Australian Army stocks. (Perhaps the British could immediately borrow some Bushmasters from the Dutch stock already in Afghanistan.)

The Netherlands has ordered additional Bushmasters on several occasions in 2007 and 2008. On November 20, 2007 the Dutch Defence Ministry announced that it would acquire an additional 10 vehicles. One vehicle will be sent to the Netherlands for training purposes, and the rest will go directly to Afghanistan. The Dutch ordered a further 13 Bushmasters in June 2008, taking their total order to 49 vehicles. At this time six Dutch Bushmasters had been destroyed in Afghanistan.

In January 2009, another batch of 9 vehicles was ordered. These vehicles will be fitted with cameras, sensors and a grappler to find and destroy IED's. A further 14 Bushmasters were ordered in June 2009. In August 2009, another 14 vehicles were ordered, bringing the total Dutch order to 86.

Yours sincerely,
John Robertson
==============================================

Light Weight Mine Roller Rolls On

Sales to USA Increase

The USMC has let a contract with Pearson Engineering for the supply of LWMR to be fitted to a variety of vehicles. The equipment provided will be a derivative of that already fielded by the US Army on STRYKER.

==================================================

As far as I know the Party Leaders did nothing on Bushmasters

Other examples of Bad Judgment

·        Most of us do not like the Taliban of Afghanistan but they did not invade us.   Saudi Nationals conducted the 9/11 attack on the U.S.

·        Bin Laden etc have mostly hidden in Pakistan.

·        It was not legal to invade Iraq and Afghanistan is questionable.

?        Our troops have been unlawfully killed by us putting them in Snatch Landrovers when the Dutch put their troops in Bushmasters and the Americans use Light Weight Mine Rollers.

?        The two wars are a diversion shifting public attention away from the long running Israel Palestine conflict.

To end the conflict the US and the UK need to convert ‘A tour of duty’ to ‘A tour in the desert.’

The odds are stacked against our troops; present tactics are wrong; casualties must be lessened.   OLT will provide plenty of money for the best equipment.  If the troops have plenty of Bushmasters the robotics would be used to seek out and destroy the IEDs.   Some Bushmasters would be destroyed, but with plenty of money for more, the troops will simply climb aboard a replacement.    Why rush our troops home to give the Taliban a propaganda victory?   Preserve lives by ending the foot patrols.   Give our troops a good safe tour so they are safe, except for accidents.     

Teach the Iraqis and the Afghans to use Bushmasters to clear away the IEDs and protect the oil.   Use the oil money to bring both Nations into the Developed World with full employment and free University Tuition.

Once the emphasis is on long term ‘adventure tourism’, and there is the money to support it, the Desert Tour could become a highly prized life experience.  That is the way to neutralise the Taliban and have a permanent victory.

To enable this strategy to be used the first step is to use OLT to provide the money.  The bad judgment is to not be considering OLT.       

UK Emails

Rt Hon David Cameron MP and Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP

Dear Leaders

Half an hour after I sent the email below to the Chancellor I watched the Prime Minister say the economy is much worse than had been thought and we are facing decades of austerity.

It is clear the PM's message is that those who created money out of thin air may keep that money while everyday people will need to foot the bill.    That is unfair and will not work in any event - unless the real objective is to retain the Deficit and general hardship.

I believe in using 'thin-air' bank money but you cannot fairly create thin-air money and then pay for it with real worked-for money.  Your advisers are wrong.  In my email to the Chancellor I have set out how to make a profit out of Gordon Brown's and Alastair Darling's apparent ignorance.
  
It appears that you have inadvertently set up an immediate wonderful opportunity for the UK and like Brown, you do not know what you have done.
To carry on without properly looking at One LINE Tax is either incompetent or malevolent.
Sincerely
John Robertson

incompetent = misfeasance    malevolent = malfeasance
07/06/2010 18:30 
Rt Hon George Osborne MP
Dear Chancellor,

I am writing a book, NOW to Infinity,  and I see that under Gordon Brown money was created out of thin air.   Then bankers and many others converted that thin air money into real assets and services.  Some or those assets are now off shore.

The Cameron - Clegg Government are now tackling the resultant thin air Deficit with real austerity and real cuts.  You cannot succeed that way.

To tackle Brown's thin air money Deficit you need to use thin air money of your own!   I can see that if you use my cascading One Line Tax (OLT) at its lowest rate, one thousandth of 1% (0.001%), it is almost nothing to people in the everyday real money world, but it would be quite substantial in the thin air world of £millions and £billions -  so the thin air people would start to pay off the thin air Deficit.   The everyday people will be paying off the thin air Deficit too - but will not have to suffer such severe cuts.

All existing taxes would remain as they are; the OLT would be dedicated to paying off the Deficit.  Once the cascading tax is settled down you may see that it should be raised.   When the Deficit is completely cleared you could use the experience gained to eliminate Income Tax, VAT and all other obnoxious time-wasting obsolete taxes.

You could export your OLT know-how to many other Nations.   You can immediately convert the present Deficit burden into a very profitable export product.
I would like to work for a short time as a consultant and can start immediately.   It is a simple and effective concept that does not clash with anything you propose - it will in fact cause your proposals to immediately be seen as effective and ensure you stay in Government for a very long time.  We could have it operating by July if you email me soon..

Yours sincerely

John Robertson

UK Emergency Budget  22 June 2010   Author, John Robertson

UK continues to blunder its way into the Age of Austerity. 

To Parliament,

One Line Tax (OLT) cascading tax is still essential. 

With OLT, the more money spent the better; that is why the Greek, EU and UK economies are easy to fix.

The Osborne Budget is better than expected – but is still ridiculous!   Only incompetent fools could know of OLT and not use it.  An Amendment to add One Line Tax to the Osborne Budget would give the UK the best economy in the World.

Chapter 5   Seashore Democracy  (can fix Greece)

Seashore Democracy  

Alternatively, a Coalition of Sensible UK MPs could vote the Osborne Emergency Budget down and form the Seashore Democracy Coalition Government to stop coastal erosion and do all the other sensible things that a Great Nation should do.  To plan for four years of self-inflicted pain is callous and stupid.

Assuming we start from today, the Cameron/Clegg Government should make public announcements that 0.001% cascading tax, on all withdrawals from - and on all deposits into - banks and finance houses, will be phased in to replace VAT.  The OLT cascading tax should first of all go fully towards paying off the Deficit.  Once the OLT is phased in and all avoidance and evasion schemes are identified and eliminated, the 0.001% rate can be gently raised.   VAT was easy to use to adjust the Emergency Budget and OLT will be even easier to use to adjust the future revenue collected.

After the Deficit and VAT are both eliminated with OLT, the next target for elimination is Income Tax.
   
OLT is an efficient and fair Treasury tool that should be used in all advanced societies; it would soon resolve the Greek and EU Deficits etc.    UK can lead the way……………….

I sent the email below to Deputy PM, Nick Clegg and to Caroline Lucas MP (Green Party)

Dear Deputy PM Nick Clegg

George Osborne's Budget is better than I expected.  Easier income tax for business and low earners is progressive.   Higher VAT is like an import duty as we import much from China instead of making it here.  So it is also progressive for the UK.   The City of London is satisfied.  …………

OLT  ONE LINE TAX   >< ?         NOW to Infinity

Seashore Democracy

Author, John Robertson ©   Launched June 13^th 2010

NOW  to Infinity   (Sequel to May 1984 to NOW) 

ONE  LINE TAX (OLT) is ready for governments to start using NOW.  The big change made is to phase it in gently – a cascading tax rate (r) starts at one thousandth of 1 %.   All of the politicians have got it wrong!   Grassroots Democracy is obsolete – let us try Seashore Democracy!     

 (Clacton-on-Sea)    Cutting spending is wrong, like allowing homes to fall to the sea is wrong.  Spending money on the right coastal protection is right, like spending money on better health and age care is right.  The development of the new economy will flow on from here and go to infinity. 

Eventually all Nations will change to – One Line Tax (OLT).

I started on the mathematical equation while reflecting in Colchester General Hospital and finished up devising a better taxation system that is a way to cause all Nations to be more Creditworthy and have AAA rating.

Greece is in trouble and in turn is troubling Germany and other EU Nations.   The UK has a huge Deficit that >< to  OLT One LINE TAX is designed to quickly pay off.   Australia has a small Deficit; easily clearable with ONE LINE TAX.    OLT would quickly fix Greece.

The US and the UK are in trouble with the BP oil damage; the dividend for pensioners is cut.

Turning our minds to Third World Nations we see that if they use OLT they would clear away corruption and gain AAA rating enabling them to buy more of whatever they need to be part of the developed world.

When (r) reaches about three tenths of 1%, all other taxes can be phased out and retirement pensions doubled or trebled.  The money spread around will enable businesses to prosper and expand.  There will be plenty of jobs and overtime available.

The Brits CAN enter the Leisure and Space Ages with unprecedented prosperity                                          

Tax the Money

On 12^th March, 2010 I found I am eligible to stand for UK Parliament as Rt Hon Ian Paisley, MP is older than me and I qualify because I am a citizen of a Commonwealth country (Australia) who has indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

Now I can tell the people of Britain how to lead the Universe.

Businesses will be happy as there will be no more time wasting tax forms to fill in.

Old people will be happy as the Old Age Pension will be doubled.

Young people will be happy as there will be full employment and free university tuition.

How do we do it?1 Line Tax is to tax all money movements at less than 1%.   The banks, etc computers do the job.   There are absolutely no exceptions – then we do not need a Tax Collecting Office.  The Government will overflow with money coming in every split second.  The Government debts will be paid off and then the Government will lend instead of borrowing.

FOREX Traders and Hedge Fund Managers have paid big money to be able to talk to David Cameron…. They do not know that with 1 Line Tax they will be lent very large amounts of money at very low interest rates; they will be our ‘golden head boys’ as they will be giant earners and giant taxpayers. 

The Old Age Pensioners will pay the less than 1% tax, just like everyone else.  The OAPs will be the money movers.   They will pay carers and others for their needs and that will create the full employment.

All good business people will make more profit.   That is why the UK will enter the Ages of Leisure and Space.  We will work less for more money.

All Political Parties should adopt 1 Line Tax and instead of debating cuts in government services; they should debate the best use for this easily collected perfectly fair tax.

The Present Tax System is like an office using typewriters and slide rules instead of computers.

MPs got bogged down with the illegal Iraq War and their own expense accounts.  There is no excuse whatsoever for economic doom and gloom.

Vote in the candidates who endorse 1 Line Tax and the sky will be so blue we will be able to seriously be in the Space Age and the Leisure Age.      

The MPs who voted against the Iraq War should be returned to Parliament - as they have proven they have good judgement.

Those who voted for the war showed bad judgment and all of them should be dumped out of Parliament by the voters.  That is NOT their only bad judgment …...  

 John Robertson wrote:    10 Mar. 10

I previously emailed Nick Clegg 1 February 2010

Dear Nick Clegg,

a strategy for you to win

You cannot win the General Election because, from a voters' viewpoint, you remind us too much of Tony Blair.

I do not expect a reply from Gordon Brown to the emails below.

If you are interested, I will freely think of a strategy for you to win and send it to you.

Wishing you all the best

John Robertson

1.2            Preview the Message You've Written

Your full name: John Robertson

Your subject: Blair look-alikes

Your message:

Dear Rt Hon Gordon Brown,

Blair's performance where he concluded by NOT saying he was sorry for the deaths and injuries leaves you in the clear. Cameron was chosen as a look-alike Blair and he voted for the war - when, being in opposition, he should have opposed it.

Clegg is another look-alike Blair.

You are still in power. You could clinch it by putting in Orbital Economics - the Transaction Tax to scrap Income Tax and increase old age pensions - and putting the bankers to work for the taxpayers.

You could walk it in at the next election - I would love to be a consultant for your Party.

There is no time to lose. If I could talk to your top people for a week we would finish up with victory for 1000 years to come. I entered the Virgin $25m competition to improve the environment for 1000 years, so I only need to explain that, plus Orbital Economics.

But someone needs to email me very soon.

(Note: No person answered this email and Gordon Brown lost)

Yours sincerely,

John Robertson

Reply from Nick Clegg  04/03/2010 19:15

Dear Mr Robertson,

Many thanks for your email to Nick Clegg MP.  Nick has asked me to contact you on his behalf.  I apologise for the delay in responding but I hope you’ll understand that, due to the sheer volume of correspondence that Nick has been receiving, it can take some time for us to reply.

We really appreciate your kind offer – and we’d certainly welcome any suggestions you can send us by email.  As a party, Liberal Democrats certainly believe that we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change politics in the UK for good and we will do all we can to fight the progressive cause in British politics, holding both the Government and the Conservatives to account and communicating our own policies to the electorate.  We firmly believe that Liberal Democrats are best placed to provide the reform and vision for change which Britain now desperately needs. Nick remains, as ever, fully committed to addressing the difficult issues which are deeply important to us. We are certain that our policies and vision for Britain are best placed to create a fair free and open society based on principles of equality and justice.

Thank you once again for emailing.   Best wishes,  Bess Mayhew

Office of Nick Clegg MP  Leader of the Liberal Democrats

05/03/2010 01:47---------------------------------------------

Dear Nick Clegg

If Bess Mayhew will immediately debate me via email we will have a winning strategy for you by the end of the weekend.  The Lord Ashcroft matter and the 3 way debate are windfalls for you.  This is your time and only you can lose it.  One comment from the public on TV tonight was that you are too weak.  

   
To win you must move out of the shadow of Vince Cable; we all know he was first to see the bust coming - but now he just looks and sounds like Cameron and Osbourne.   You need to take immediate control and announce the '1 line Tax' - 'Tax the gross Money Turnover at less than 1%'

The Bankers and  The City will scream like stuck pigs and that is how you win.   The People do not like those who grabbed their funny money bonuses.   To answer the Banker and City screams you announce, 'And for retired people and those planning their retirement we will double the Old Age Pension'

The Tories and Labour will shout, 'Where will the money come from!'   You reply, 'This is a cascading tax, everyone pays the 1% tax, including the pensioners and the richest in the land.  The pensioners move the money around just by living; there will be a return to full employment.  Tax revenue will rise.  We will pay off the National Debt'

The media will rubbish you.    You reply that when there is a hung parliament you will form a coalition with either Labour or Tories - (and others) - provided you are Prime Minister and Vince Cable is Treasurer.  They will say you are nuts.   You reply, 'Well Labour and Tories will have to join together and be the coalition!'    (Note: Clegg did not become Prime Minister and instead joined with Cameron and Osborne to increase VAT and throw people out of work with stupidly savage cuts in the Emergency Budget).

The point is, that  taxing  the gross turnover  of money is just like mining companies  paying royalties  or Casinos  taking  a small % of all bets - win or  lose.  It is clearly the fairest and easiest tax.   It is only not used because big income-tax dodgers support all the major political parties.  You cannot lose.   There are no policies at present before the public.   You will get in the first punch and the others will not recover.  The only way to lose is to not be strong enough to try to win.   This strategy will demonstrate your strength and put colour into the election.
 
But you have to be quick or the timing will be lost.   If you have any doubts, tell them to Bess and ask her to email me.

The alternative to you winning is horrible.  A few more years of trudging along and climate change and fossil fuel shortage will bring on the wars and starvation to kill off half the world population.  Only '1 Line Tax' can save us, as it will not only create full employment, but also pay for all green things that need to be done.  This is your moment.   Please do not desert our children.
Cheers     John Robertson

Note: Clegg joined a Coalition that put forward an even more horrible Austerity Budget than ever imagined. 

Chapter 7 Earn personal income OR campaign funds.....    175

Everyday people need not wait for their governments to fix the economy, I have started to email Australia and New Zealand, and as soon as I have some success selling advertising in English Speaking Nations, I will start translating into other languages.  People throughout the world will then be able to copy me and earn additional income to make up for the obsolete tax system imposed upon them by their governments.  First of all I need to sell in my own local area, Clacton-on-Sea. When I make a profit I will launch Permatricity Ltd for active people to join. Seashorers Ltd may be a better name; what do you think?   For politics what about Seashorers Party?    

This 1 LINE TAX shows how every good green idea in the World can be paid for, enabling all of us to lead happier lives.   We can stop protesting and start lobbying!    How?  

Advertise your message - Here   (include a local image)

- or select a different page.    Or just add your name or nickname to be a Supporter with £1 or more.  

The offer to all people who market ><?  1 LINE TAX is a 3 way split, a third for the sales person, a third to the Party/Person organising for campaign/general funds and a third for Permatricity Limited to publish the books, Seashore Democracy © ><?  NOW to Infinity and May 1984 to NOW. 

The Launch – To create our own Good News Advertising/Sponsoring Rates (will be increased when circulation grows) for permanent web space in www permatricity.com/ and in Seashore Democracy ©  May    1984 to NOW  book  and  in ><?  NOW to Infinity book.

• 1 line    £1
• 3 lines  £5
• 7 lines  £10
• Quarter A5 page £30
• Half A5 page ......£60
• Full page (A5) ...£100

Businesses and Candidates for elections are offered free editorial space and may also buy space to spread their message or sell space to gain more profit/campaign funds.  Supporters may also take some advertising space ‘on approval’ and if they do not pay within 6 months their message will simply be deleted from reprints.  When advertisers/supporters are satisfied they email me, and when they pay, Permatricity Ltd will pay the salesperson.  When payments are made, business will commence and staff will be employed.   Enquiries are welcome.

Chapter 8 Australian Governor General resigned May 2003..    175

Hi Nick Clegg

As far as I know, the 2000 Australian troops were kept away from active fighting zones.  In here you see I wrote that the rush to war was because Saddam was not mad and WAS disarming under Blix.  It turned out that he had already disarmed.

For Cameron and Brown to still maintain the war was right shows they are stupid and you should set out to demolish the Tories and Labour.   To have those 2 men as leaders shows that their parties are not fit to ever govern again.

Cheers

John Robertson

 ----- Original Message -----

From: John Robertson

Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 2:55 PM

Subject: the killing of Iraqi 10 year old soldiers

Open email to: 

His Excellency the Right Reverend Dr Peter Hollingworth AC OBE, Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia and to all Senators and all Members of House of Representatives 

Your Excellency, Senators and Members of Parliament,

There are now countless passages on the Internet that confirm that the US/UK/Australian Iraqi war will be illegal.  Prime Minister Howard spoke to the Press Club of all that we have heard before, but he did not address the legality of this war; he knows the war will be illegal or else he is of unsound mind.  

The Governor-General as Commander in Chief will become a war criminal if he commands our troops to become involved in the Iraq war.

Everyone of our 2000 troops will be a war criminal as they could not honestly believe this is a legal war.

I love the Yanks, the Poms and us Aussies and I don't like the French as they have adulterated their red wine a couple of times that I know of; but on Iraq, they are right. 

If you participate in any way in the killing of Iraqi 10 year old soldiers - and that is what will happen - you are amongst the lowest of the low.  When I was 10 our school trained us to get under our desks in the event of bombing and we were drilled with wooden guns to be ready to fight.  Prime Minister John Curtin brought our troops home from Tobruk and three were billeted into our family home.  Anti-aircraft guns were on our football oval 6 miles from Adelaide.  As the older boys in our scout troop reached 18 three joined the Army, two the Airforce and one the Navy.  I was ready to fight the invading Japanese when I was 10, but I don't suppose I would have lasted long.  The Yanks helped to save us from the Japs.  

Now we Aussies and the Yanks are going to be the invaders killing the women and children.   Howard's (John Winston) arguments are rubbish and not reasoned.  If we simply follow Blix's reports and get on with the real job, the disarmament will happen peacefully.  President Saddam Hussein is not mad, he will hold on to his oil if he can.  That means he will disarm under Blix.  That is what is probably troubling President Bush and making him rush to war.  If there is to be a war, we should wait until the Northern Hemisphere Autumn for better fighting conditions and we should do the right thing to make it legal.  

If the US goes ahead soon, let them go alone and be solely responsible.  You be part of the Iraq invasion order, then let it be for your soul to find peace when you learn of the killed children.  

Please act immediately to cause the replacement of Prime Minister Howard with a negotiating statesman.  I have read Howard's speech and I think he's nuts and dangerous.  He retells us the horror of terrorism and torture and sets us up to be a prime target for them!  Let us see how Australian Democracy works to save us from this mad warmonger.     John Robertson

06/03/2010 19:09

The Iraq War caused the Australian Governor General to be branded a War Criminal – he resigned in May 2003.

Now we need Nick Clegg to resign from the Coalition or from the Lib Dem Party!  Just like the Oz GG was led into doing the wrong thing, Clegg has been led into throwing a million or more out of work; he has converted victory into depression.  

 ----- Original Message -----

From: John Robertson

Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 2:13 PM

Subject: with the advice of his Ministry having the confidence of Parliament

Open email to

His Excellency the Right Reverend Dr Peter Hollingworth AC OBE, Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, 

Subject: Chief War Criminal and I believe that person is you

Copies to: Prime Minister John Howard, all Senators and all Members of House of Representatives 

Your Excellency,

I found Sir Ninian Stephens' opinion.  There is much more to it than war horses and moral support for our troops.

I refer you to:

 ‘It is useful to sum up this aspect by citing what those great contemporary commentators on the Constitution, Dr John Quick and Sir Robert Garran, wrote at the time in their landmark commentary published in 1901. They said of S.68 that the command-in-chief is "one of the oldest and most honoured prerogatives of the Crown, but it is now exercised in a constitutional manner", that is "with the advice of his Ministry having the confidence of Parliament".

Let us assume the above is correct, you may act upon the advice of Prime Minister Howard provided he has the confidence of Parliament.   The Senate is part of Parliament and the Senate certainly has no confidence in Prime Minister Howard. 

I refer you to: http://www.aph.gov.au/parl.htm#comparl 

(a)             The Commonwealth Parliament

The Parliament is at the very heart of the Commonwealth government. The Parliament consists of the Queen (represented by the Governor General and two Houses (the Senate and the House of Representatives.   These three elements make Australia a constitutional monarchy, a federation and a parliamentary democracy.

The House of Representatives is only one of the three elements of Parliament.

Your action in commanding our armed forces join with Britain and her former colony, the US, in invading Iraq, is illegal and immoral. 

Someone in Australia is Chief War Criminal and I believe that person is you.  Of course it may be John Howard or it may be the Howard Cabinet or it may be all of the Liberal and National Parliamentarians who are the Chief War Criminals.

The history behind the wording of:  68. The command in chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth is vested in the Governor-General as the Queen's representative. is of Governors personally taking armed forces to war in the 1800's.

Sir Ninian Stephens does not contemplate a Prime Minister giving a Governor-General advice to order our armed forces to be the initiator of the illegal and immoral invasion of a Sovereign State without the approval of the Senate.

I again urge you to take top level independent legal advice to prove that I am wrong; I don't mind if I am wrong, I'll then just set out to identify just who is responsible for our armed forces killing Iraqis.   This is Effective Law Reform in action.

History will show that initiating this Iraq War was Australia's day of shame and the start of increased danger to all Australian citizens.  An immediate recall of our troops, as per the Senate's wishes, will restore our honour and eliminate an element of terrorism against Australians.   

Chapter 9  The MPs who voted against the Iraq War

The MPs who voted against the Iraq War should be returned to Parliament - as they have proven they have good judgement.

Ayes    Labour anti-war

Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney North & Stoke Newington)
Graham Allen (Nottingham North)
John Austin (Erith & Thamesmead)
Tony Banks (West Ham)
Harry Barnes (Derbyshire North East)
John Battle (Leeds West)
Andrew Bennett (Denton & Reddish)
Joe Benton (Bootle)
Dr Roger Berry (Kingswood)
Harold Best (Leeds North West)
Bob Blizzard (Waveney)
Keith Bradley (Manchester Withington)
Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West)
Ms Karen Buck (Regent's Park & Kensington North)
Richard Burden (Birmingham Northfield)
Ms Anne Campbell (Cambridge)
Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley)
Martin Caton (Gower)
David Chaytor (Bury North)
Michael Clapham (Barnsley West & Penistone)
Mrs Helen Clark (Peterborough)
Tom Clarke (Coatbridge & Chryston)
Tony Clarke (Northampton South)
Harry Cohen (Leyton & Wanstead)
Iain Coleman (Hammersmith & Fulham)
Michael Connarty (Falkirk East)
Frank Cook (Stockton North)
Robin Cook (Livingston)
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North)
Jim Cousins (Newcastle upon Tyne Central)
Tom Cox (Tooting)
David Crausby (Bolton North East)
Ms Ann Cryer (Keighley)
John Cryer (Hornchurch)
Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)
Ms Valerie Davey (Bristol West)
Ian Davidson (Glasgow Pollok)
Denzil Davies (Llanelli)
Terry Davis (Birmingham Hodge Hill)
Hilton Dawson (Lancaster & Wyre)
John Denham (Southampton Itchen)
Parmjit Dhanda (Gloucester)
Jim Dobbin (Heywood & Middleton)
Frank Dobson (Holborn & St Pancras)
Frank Doran (Aberdeen Central)
David Drew (Stroud)
Huw Edwards (Monmouth)
Clive Efford (Eltham)
Bill Etherington (Sunderland North)
Mark Fisher (Stoke-on-Trent Central)
Paul Flynn (Newport West)
Hywel Francis (Aberavon)
George Galloway (Glasgow Kelvin)
Neil Gerrard (Walthamstow)
Dr Ian Gibson (Norwich North)
Roger Godsiff (Birmingham Sparkbrook & Small Heath)
Win Griffiths (Bridgend)
John Grogan (Selby)
Patrick Hall (Bedford)
David Hamilton (Midlothian)
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East)
Dai Havard (Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney)
Doug Henderson (Newcastle upon Tyne North)
Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow)
David Heyes (Ashton under Lyne)
David Hinchliffe (Wakefield)
Ms Kate Hoey (Vauxhall)
Jimmy Hood (Clydesdale)
Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North)
Ms Joan Humble (Blackpool North & Fleetwood)
Dr Brian Iddon (Bolton South East)
Eric Illsley (Barnsley Central)
Ms Glenda Jackson (Hampstead & Highgate)
Ms Helen Jackson (Sheffield Hillsborough)
Jon Owen Jones (Cardiff Central)
Dr Lynne Jones (Birmingham Selly Oak)
Martyn Jones (Clwyd South)
David Kidney (Stafford)
Peter Kilfoyle (Liverpool Walton)
Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North & Leith)
David Lepper (Brighton Pavilion)
Terry Lewis (Worsley)
Ian Lucas (Wrexham)
Iain Luke (Dundee East)
John Lyons (Strathkelvin & Bearsden)
Mrs Christine McCafferty (Calder Valley)
John McDonnell (Hayes & Harlington)
Ms Ann McKechin (Glasgow Maryhill)
Kevin McNamara (Hull North)
Tony McWalter (Hemel Hempstead)
Ms Alice Mahon (Halifax)
Jim Marshall (Leicester South)
Robert Marshall-Andrews (Medway)
Eric Martlew (Carlisle)
Ms Julie Morgan (Cardiff North)
Chris Mullin (Sunderland South)
Denis Murphy (Wansbeck)
Doug Naysmith (Bristol North West)
Eddie O'Hara (Knowsley South)
Ms Diana Organ (Forest of Dean)
Albert Owen (Ynys Mon)
Ms Linda Perham (Ilford North)
Peter Pike (Burnley)
Kerry Pollard (St Albans)
Gordon Prentice (Pendle)
Gwyn Prosser (Dover)
Ken Purchase (Wolverhampton North East)
John Robertson (Glasgow Anniesland)
Joan Ruddock (Lewisham Deptford)
Martin Salter (Reading West)
Mohammad Sarwar (Glasgow Govan)
Malcolm Savidge (Aberdeen North)
Philip Sawford (Kettering)
Brian Sedgemore (Hackney South & Shoreditch)
Ms Debra Shipley (Stourbridge)
Alan Simpson (Nottingham South)
Marsha Singh (Bradford West)
Chris Smith (Islington South & Finsbury)
Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent)
George Stevenson (Stoke-on-Trent South)
Dr Gavin Strang (Edinburgh East & Musselburgh)
Graham Stringer (Manchester Blackley)
David Taylor (Leicestershire North West)
Jon Trickett (Hemsworth)
Paul Truswell (Pudsey)
Dr Desmond Turner (Brighton Kemptown)
Bill Tynan (Hamilton South)
Rudi Vis (Finchley & Golders Green)
Ms Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North)
Robert Wareing (Liverpool West Derby)
Dr Alan Whitehead (Southampton Test)
Alan Williams (Swansea West)
Mrs Betty Williams (Conwy)
Mike Wood (Batley & Spen)
Tony Worthington (Clydebank & Milngavie)
David Wright (Telford)
Dr Tony Wright (Cannock Chase)
Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne & Sheppey)
One Labour MP acting as a teller also voted against the government.

Tory anti-war   Peter Ainsworth (Surrey East)
Richard Bacon (Norfolk South)
Tony Baldry (Banbury)
John Baron (Billericay)
Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe)
John Gummer (Suffolk Coastal)
John Horam (Orpington)
Edward Leigh (Gainsborough)
Humfrey Malins (Woking)
Dr Andrew Murrison (Westbury)
Richard Page (Hertfordshire South West)
John Randall (Uxbridge)
Jonathan Sayeed (Bedfordshire Mid)
Ian Taylor (Esher & Walton)
Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight)

Liberal Democrats (all opposed war)     Richard Allan (Sheffield Hallam)
Norman Baker (Lewes)
John Barrett (Edinburgh West)
Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)
Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington)
Colin Breed (Cornwall South East)
Ms Annette Brooke (Dorset Mid & Poole North)
Malcolm Bruce (Gordon)
John Burnett (Devon West & Torridge)
Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam)
Dr Vincent Cable (Twickenham)
Ms Patsy Calton (Cheadle)
Menzies Campbell (Fife North East)
Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland)
David Chidgey (Eastleigh)
Brian Cotter (Weston-Super-Mare)
Edward Davey (Kingston & Surbiton)
Ms Sue Doughty (Guildford)
Don Foster (Bath)
Andrew George (St Ives)
Mrs Sandra Gidley (Romsey)
Matthew Green (Ludlow)
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South)
Dr Evan Harris (Oxford West & Abingdon)
Nick Harvey (Devon North)
David Heath (Somerton & Frome)
Paul Holmes (Chesterfield)
Simon Hughes (Southwark North & Bermondsey)
Nigel Jones (Cheltenham)
Paul Keetch (Hereford)
Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye & Inverness West)
Sir Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh & Berwickshire)
Norman Lamb (Norfolk North)
David Laws (Yeovil)
Paul Marsden (Shrewsbury & Atcham)
Michael Moore (Tweeddale, Ettrick & Lauderdale)
Mark Oaten (Winchester)
Lembit Opik (Montgomeryshire)
John Pugh (Southport)
Alan Reid (Argyll & Bute)
David Rendel (Newbury)
Bob Russell (Colchester)
Adrian Sanders (Torbay)
Sir Robert Smith (Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine)
Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove)
Matthew Taylor (Truro & St Austell)
John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross)
Dr Jenny Tonge (Richmond Park)
Paul Tyler (Cornwall North)
Steve Webb (Northavon)
Roger Williams (Brecon & Radnorshire)
Phil Willis (Harrogate & Knaresborough)
Richard Younger-Ross (Teignbridge)

Others anti-war   Ms Annabelle Ewing (SNP Perth)
Elfyn Llwyd (PC Meirionnydd Nant Conwy)
Eddie McGrady (SDLP Down South)
Adam Price (PC Carmarthen East & Dinefwr)
Angus Robertson (SNP Moray)
Alex Salmond (SNP Banff & Buchan)
Dr Richard Taylor (KHHC Wyre Forest)
Simon Thomas (PC Ceredigion)
Michael Weir (SNP Angus)
Hywel Williams (PC Caernarfon)
Peter Wishart (SNP Tayside North)

Chapter 10 Proof the UN knew that Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction were destroyed in 1991                                  

The 1995 interview with Hussein Kamel

the text of the transcript is: here

Gen. Hussein Kamel, the former director of Iraq's Military Industrialization Corporation, in charge of Iraq's weapons programme, defected to Jordan on the night of 7 August 1995, together with his brother Col. Saddam Kamel. Hussein Kamel took crates of documents revealing past weapons programmes, and provided these to UNSCOM. Iraq responded by revealing a major store of documents that showed that Iraq had begun an unsuccessful crash programme to develop a nuclear bomb (on 20 August 1995). Hussein and Saddam Kamel agreed to return to Iraq, where they were assassinated (23 February 1996).

The interview was conducted in Amman on 22 August 1995, 15 days after Kamel left Iraq. His interviewers were:

• Rolf Ekeus, the former executive chairman of Unscom (from 1991 to 1997).

• Professor Maurizio Zifferero, deputy director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and head of the inspections team in Iraq.

• Nikita Smidovich, a Russian diplomat who led UNSCOM's ballistic missile team and former Deputy Director for Operations of UNSCOM.

During the interview, Major Izz al-Din al-Majid (transliterated as Major Ezzeddin) joins the discussion (p.10). Izz al-Din is Saddam Hussein's cousin, and defected together with the Kamel brothers. He did not return with them to Iraq in 1996, moving instead to Jordan and now to an unknown European country.

In the transcript of the interview, Kamel states categorically:

"I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed"
(p. 13).

Kamel specifically discussed the significance of anthrax, which he portrayed as the "main focus" of the biological programme (pp.7-8). Smidovich asked Kamel: "were weapons and agents destroyed?"

Kamel replied: "nothing remained".

He confirmed that destruction took place "after visits of inspection teams. You have important role in Iraq with this. You should not underestimate yourself. You are very effective in Iraq." (p.7)

Kamel added: "I made the decision to disclose everything so that Iraq could return to normal." (p.8)

Furthermore, Kamel describes the elimination of prohibited missiles: "not a single missile left but they had blueprints and molds for production. All missiles were destroyed." (p.8)

On VX, Kamel claimed: "they put it in bombs during last days of the Iran-Iraq war. They were not used and the programme was terminated." (p.12).

Ekeus asked Kamel: "did you restart VX production after the Iran-Iraq war?"

Kamel replied: "we changed the factory into pesticide production. Part of the establishment started to produce medicine [...] We gave insturctions [sic] not to produce chemical weapons." (p.13).

Despite the significance of these claims, it was not known that Kamel made this assertion until February 2003. Kamel's claim was first carried on 24 February 2003 by Newsweek, who reported that Kamel told U.N. inspectors that Iraq had destroyed its entire stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and banned missiles, as Iraq claims (Newsweek, 3/3/03). Newsweek reported that the weapons were destroyed secretly, in order to hide their existence from inspectors, in the hopes of someday resuming production after inspections had finished. The CIA and MI6 were told the same story, Newsweek reported.

However, these facts were "hushed up by the U.N. inspectors" in order to "bluff Saddam into disclosing still more", according to Newsweek.

CIA spokesman Bill Harlow angrily denied the Newsweek report. "It is incorrect, bogus, wrong, untrue," Harlow told Reuters the day the report appeared (Reuters, 24 February 2003).

On Wednesday (26 February 2003), a complete copy of the Kamel transcript -- an internal UNSCOM/IAEA document stamped "sensitive" -- was obtained by Glen Rangwala.

1.4            The Significance of Hussein Kamel

Kamel's departure from Iraq was the major turning point of the inspections saga. As UNSCOM said in their final substantive report:

" the overall period of the Commission's disarmament work must be divided into two parts, separated by the events following the departure from Iraq, in August 1995, of Lt. General Hussein Kamal".

(25 January 1999 letter to U.N. Security Council, Enclosure 1, para.12).

Kamel's defection has been cited repeatedly by President Bush and leading officials in both the UK and US as evidence that (1) Iraq has not disarmed; (2) inspections cannot disarm it; and (3) defectors such as Kamel are the most reliable source of information on Iraq's weapons.

• Prime Minister Tony Blair in his statement said  http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page3088   
• "It was only four years later after the defection of Saddam's son-in-law to Jordan, that the offensive biological weapons and the full extent of the nuclear programme were discovered."
• President Bush declared in a 7 October 2002 speech: "In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of killing millions."
• Colin Powell's presentation to the UN Security Council claimed: "It took years for Iraq to finally admit that it had produced four tons of the deadly nerve agent, VX. A single drop of VX on the skin will kill in minutes. Four tons. The admission only came out after inspectors collected documentation as a result of the defection of Hussein Kamal, Saddam Hussein's late son-in-law."

Vice-President Dick Cheney said Kamel's story "should serve as a reminder to all that we often learned more as the result of defections than we learned from the inspection regime itself".

Hussein Kamel was not in the process of providing excuses for the Iraqi regime. Much of the interview is taken up with his criticisms of its mistakes: "They are only interested in themselves and not worried about economics or political state of the country. [..] I can state publicly I will work against the regime." (p.14). And yet, when it comes to prohibited weapons, Kamel is unequivocal: Iraq destroyed these weapons soon after the Gulf War.

1.5            The Significance of the Kamel Transcript

The above quotes from President Bush, Prime Minister Blair and Secretary Powell refer to material produced by Iraq before the 1991 Gulf War. The administration has cited various quantities of chemical and biological weapons on many other occasions -- weapons that Iraq produced but which remain unaccounted for. All of these claims refer to weapons produced before 1991. According to Kamel's transcript, Iraq destroyed all of these weapons in 1991.

Kamel's statement casts into new light the claims made by the Iraqi government that it destroyed its non-conventional weapons in the period immediately after the end of the Gulf War. This topic remains highly potent, with Hans Blix declaring that "[o]ne of three important questions before us today is how much might remain undeclared and intact from before 1991. If Kamel is to be taken as seriously as the UK and US administrations have previously held him to be, then his claim that "[a]ll weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed" should be taken seriously.

This briefing was produced by Glen Rangwala. Thanks to Seth Ackerman of FAIR for his assistance in putting it together.

There are more pre-Iraq War documents to show all the WMD were destroyed.

The US and the UK wanted an Iraq War and so they fabricated WMD with words.

Chapter 11  MPs knew the cost price of Iraq oil was US$1 per barrel  

The MPs who voted FOR the Iraq War should NOT be returned to Parliament - as they have proven they have bad  judgement.   Those who voted for war should be dumped by the Voters - as The Australians did to ex Prime Minister, John Winston Howard.

Labour MPs for war

Ms Irene Adams (Paisley North)
Nick Ainger (Carmarthen West & Pembrokeshire South)
Bob Ainsworth (Coventry North East)
Douglas Alexander (Paisley South)
Donald Anderson (Swansea East)
Ms Janet Anderson (Rossendale & Darwen)
Ms Hilary Armstrong (Durham North West)
Ms Candy Atherton (Falmouth & Camborne)
Ms Charlotte Atkins (Staffordshire Moorlands)
Adrian Bailey (Co-op West Bromwich West)
Kevin Barron (Rother Valley)
Hugh Bayley (York, City of)
Nigel Beard (Bexleyheath & Crayford)
Mrs Margaret Beckett (Derby South)
Stuart Bell (Middlesbrough)
Hilary Benn (Leeds Central)
Clive Betts (Sheffield Attercliffe)
Ms Liz Blackman (Erewash)
Tony Blair (Sedgefield)
Ms Hazel Blears (Salford)
David Blunkett (Sheffield Brightside)
Paul Boateng (Brent South)
David Borrow (Ribble South)
Peter Bradley (Wrekin, The)
Ben Bradshaw (Exeter)
Gordon Brown (Dunfermline East)
Nick Brown (Newcastle upon Tyne East & Wallsend)
Russell Brown (Dumfries)
Des Browne (Kilmarnock & Loudoun)
Chris Bryant (Rhondda)
Colin Burgon (Elmet)
Andrew Burnham (Leigh)
Stephen Byers (Tyneside North)
Richard Caborn (Sheffield Central)
David Cairns (Greenock & Inverclyde)
Alan Campbell (Tynemouth)
Ivor Caplin (Hove)
Roger Casale (Wimbledon)
Ian Cawsey (Brigg & Goole)
Ben Chapman (Wirral South)
Dr Lynda Clark (Edinburgh Pentlands)
Paul Clark (Gillingham)
Charles Clarke (Norwich South)
David Clelland (Tyne Bridge)
Ms Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley)
Vernon Coaker (Gedling)
Ms Ann Coffey (Stockport)
Ms Yvette Cooper (Pontefract & Castleford)
Ms Jean Corston (Bristol East)
Ross Cranston (Dudley North)
Jon Cruddas (Dagenham)
John Cummings (Easington)
Dr Jack Cunningham (Copeland)
Jim Cunningham (Coventry South)
Tony Cunningham (Workington)
Ms Claire Curtis-Thomas (Crosby)
Alistair Darling (Edinburgh Central)
Wayne David (Caerphilly)
Geraint Davies (Croydon Central)
Ms Janet Dean (Burton)
Andrew Dismore (Hendon)
Jim Dowd (Lewisham West)
Ms Julia Drown (Swindon South)
Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe & Nantwich)
Ms Angela Eagle (Wallasey)
Ms Maria Eagle (Liverpool Garston)
Ms Louise Ellman (Liverpool Riverside)
Jeff Ennis (Barnsley East & Mexborough)
Frank Field (Birkenhead)
Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar & Canning Town)
Ms Lorna Fitzsimons (Rochdale)
Ms Caroline Flint (Don Valley)
Ms Barbara Follett (Stevenage)
Derek Foster (Bishop Auckland)
Michael Foster (Worcester)
George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock & Doon Valley)
Mike Gapes (Ilford South)
Barry Gardiner (Brent North)
Bruce George (Walsall South)
Mrs Linda Gilroy (Plymouth Sutton)
Paul Goggins (Wythenshawe & Sale East)
Ms Jane Griffiths (Reading East)
Nigel Griffiths (Edinburgh South)
Peter Hain (Neath)
Mike Hall (Weaver Vale)
David Hanson (Delyn)
Ms Harriet Harman (Camberwell & Peckham)
Tom Harris (Glasgow Cathcart)
John Healey (Wentworth)
Ivan Henderson (Harwich)
Mark Hendrick (Preston)
John Heppell (Nottingham East)
Ms Patricia Hewitt (Leicester West)
Keith Hill (Streatham)
Mrs Margaret Hodge (Barking)
Geoff Hoon (Ashfield)
Phil Hope (Co-op Corby)
Alan Howarth (Newport East)
George Howarth (Knowsley North & Sefton East)
Dr Kim Howells (Pontypridd)
Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley)
Ms Beverley Hughes (Stretford & Urmston)
Kevin Hughes (Doncaster North)
Alan Hurst (Braintree)
John Hutton (Barrow & Furness)
Adam Ingram (East Kilbride)
Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore)
David Jamieson (Plymouth Devonport)
Brian Jenkins (Tamworth)
Alan Johnson (Hull West & Hessle)
Ms Melanie Johnson (Welwyn Hatfield)
Ms Helen Jones (Warrington North)
Kevan Jones (Durham North)
Ms Tessa Jowell (Dulwich & West Norwood)
Eric Joyce (Falkirk West)
Gerald Kaufman (Manchester Gorton)
Ms Sally Keeble (Northampton North)
Alan Keen (Feltham & Heston)
Ms Ann Keen (Brentford & Isleworth)
Ms Ruth Kelly (Bolton West)
Fraser Kemp (Houghton & Washington East)
Ms Jane Kennedy (Liverpool Wavertree)
Piara Khabra (Ealing Southall)
Andy King (Rugby & Kenilworth)
Ms Oona King (Bethnal Green & Bow)
Jim Knight (Dorset South)
Dr Ashok Kumar (Middlesbrough South & Cleveland East)
Dr Stephen Ladyman (Thanet South)
David Lammy (Tottenham)
Ms Jackie Lawrence (Preseli Pembrokeshire)
Bob Laxton (Derby North)
Christopher Leslie (Shipley)
Tom Levitt (High Peak)
Ivan Lewis (Bury South)
Ms Helen Liddell (Airdrie & Shotts)
Martin Linton (Battersea)
Andy Love (Edmonton)
Tommy McAvoy (Glasgow Rutherglen)
Stephen McCabe (Birmingham Hall Green)
Ian McCartney (Makerfield)
Ms Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham & Morden)
Calum MacDonald (Western Isles)
John MacDougall (Fife Central)
John McFall (Dumbarton)
Ms Anne McGuire (Stirling)
Ms Shona McIsaac (Cleethorpes)
Ms Rosemary McKenna (Cumbernauld & Kilsyth)
Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock)
Tony McNulty (Harrow East)
Denis MacShane (Rotherham)
Ms Fiona Mactaggart (Slough)
John McWilliam (Blaydon)
Peter Mandelson (Hartlepool)
John Mann (Bassetlaw)
Robert Marris (Wolverhampton South West)
Gordon Marsden (Blackpool South)
Michael Meacher (Oldham West & Royton)
Ms Gillian Merron (Lincoln)
Alun Michael (Cardiff South & Penarth)
Alan Milburn (Darlington)
David Miliband (South Shields)
Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port & Neston)
Ms Laura Moffatt (Crawley)
Chris Mole (Ipswich)
Dr Lewis Moonie (Kirkcaldy)
Ms Margaret Moran (Luton South)
Elliot Morley (Scunthorpe)
Ms Estelle Morris (Birmingham Yardley)
Ms Kali Mountford (Colne Valley)
George Mudie (Leeds East)
Ms Meg Munn (Sheffield Heeley)
Jim Murphy (Eastwood)
Paul Murphy (Torfaen)
Bill O'Brien (Normanton)
Mike O'Brien (Warwickshire North)
Martin O'Neill (Ochil)
Bill Olner (Nuneaton)
Nick Palmer (Broxtowe)
Ian Pearson (Dudley South)
Mrs Anne Picking (East Lothian)
Colin Pickthall (Lancashire West)
James Plaskitt (Warwick & Leamington)
Chris Pond (Gravesham)
Greg Pope (Hyndburn)
Stephen Pound (Ealing North)
Ms Bridget Prentice (Lewisham East)
John Prescott (Hull East)
Ms Dawn Primarolo (Bristol South)
James Purnell (Stalybridge & Hyde)
Lawrie Quinn (Scarborough & Whitby)
Bill Rammell (Harlow)
Syd Rapson (Portsmouth North)
Nick Raynsford (Greenwich & Woolwich) Dr John Reid (Hamilton North & Bellshill)
Geoffrey Robinson (Coventry North West)
Ms Barbara Roche (Hornsey & Wood Green)
Terry Rooney (Bradford North)
Ernie Ross (Dundee West)
Frank Roy (Motherwell & Wishaw)
Chris Ruane (Vale of Clwyd)
Ms Christine Russell (Chester, City of)
Jonathan Shaw (Chatham & Aylesford)
Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield)
James Sheridan (Renfrewshire West)
Ms Clare Short (Birmingham Ladywood)
Sion Llewelyn Simon (Birmingham Erdington)
Andrew Smith (Oxford East)
Ms Angela Smith (Basildon)
Ms Geraldine Smith (Morecambe & Lunesdale)
Ms Jacqui Smith (Redditch)
Clive Soley (Ealing Acton & Shepherd's Bush)
Ms Helen Southworth (Warrington South)
John Spellar (Warley)
Ms Rachel Squire (Dunfermline West)
Dr Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes South West)
Gerry Steinberg (Durham, City of)
David Stewart (Inverness East, Nairn & Lochaber)
Ian Stewart (Eccles)
Paul Stinchcombe (Wellingborough)
Howard Stoate (Dartford)
Jack Straw (Blackburn)
Ms Gisela Stuart (Birmingham Edgbaston)
Gerry Sutcliffe (Bradford South)
Mrs Ann Taylor (Dewsbury)
Ms Dari Taylor (Stockton South)
Gareth Thomas (Clwyd West)
Gareth Thomas (Harrow West)
Stephen Timms (East Ham)
Mark Todd (Derbyshire South)
Don Touhig (Islwyn)
Dennis Turner (Wolverhampton South East)
Neil Turner (Wigan)
Derek Twigg (Halton)
Stephen Twigg (Enfield Southgate)
Keith Vaz (Leicester East)
Ms Claire Ward (Watford)
Tom Watson (West Bromwich East)
Dave Watts (St Helens North)
Malcolm Wicks (Croydon North)
Michael Wills (Swindon North)
Brian Wilson (Cunninghame North)
David Winnick (Walsall North)
Ms Rosie Winterton (Doncaster Central)
Shaun Woodward (St Helens South)
Phil Woolas (Oldham East & Saddleworth)

Tories for war

David Amess (Southend West)
Michael Ancram (Devizes)
James Arbuthnot (Hampshire North East)
David Atkinson (Bournemouth East)
Peter Atkinson (Hexham)
Greg Barker (Bexhill & Battle)
Henry Bellingham (Norfolk North West)
John Bercow (Buckingham)
Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley)
Crispin Blunt (Reigate)
Tim Boswell (Daventry)
Peter Bottomley (Worthing West)
Mrs Virginia Bottomley (Surrey South West)
Graham Brady (Altrincham & Sale West)
Julian Brazier (Canterbury)
Mrs Angela Browning (Tiverton & Honiton)
Simon Burns (Chelmsford West)
Alastair Burt (Bedfordshire North East)
John Butterfill (Bournemouth West)
David Cameron (Witney)
William Cash (Stone)
Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet)
Christopher Chope (Christchurch)
James Clappison (Hertsmere)
Tim Collins (Westmorland & Lonsdale)
Derek Conway (Old Bexley & Sidcup)
Sir Patrick Cormack (Staffordshire South)
James Cran (Beverley & Holderness)
David Curry (Skipton & Ripon)
Quentin Davies (Grantham & Stamford)
David Davis (Haltemprice & Howden)
Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon)
Stephen Dorrell (Charnwood)
Alan Duncan (Rutland & Melton)
Peter Duncan (Galloway & Upper Nithsdale)
Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford & Woodford Green)
Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley)
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield)
Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks)
Mark Field (Cities of London & Westminster)
Howard Flight (Arundel & South Downs)
Adrian Flook (Taunton)
Eric Forth (Bromley & Chislehurst)
Dr Liam Fox (Woodspring)
Mark Francois (Rayleigh)
Roger Gale (Thanet North)
Edward Garnier (Harborough)
Nick Gibb (Bognor Regis & Littlehampton)
Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Chesham & Amersham)
Paul Goodman (Wycombe)
James Gray (Wiltshire North)
Chris Grayling (Epsom & Ewell)
Damien Green (Ashford)
John Greenway (Ryedale)
Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield)
William Hague (Richmond (Yorks)
Philip Hammond (Runnymede & Weybridge)
Nicholas Hawkins (Surrey Heath)
John Hayes (South Holland & The Deepings)
Oliver Heald (Hertfordshire North East)
David Heathcoat-Amory (Wells)
Charles Hendry (Wealden)
Mark Hoban (Fareham)
Michael Howard (Folkestone & Hythe)
Gerald Howarth (Aldershot)
Michael Jack (Fylde)
Robert Jackson (Wantage)
Bernard Jenkin (Essex North)
Boris Johnson (Henley)
Robert Key (Salisbury)
Miss Julie Kirkbride (Bromsgrove)
Greg Knight (Yorkshire East)
Mrs Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest)
Mrs Jacqui Lait (Beckenham)
Oliver Letwin (Dorset West)
Dr Julian Lewis (New Forest East)
Ian Liddell-Grainger (Bridgwater)
David Lidington (Aylesbury)
Peter Lilley (Hitchin & Harpenden)
Tim Loughton (Worthing East & Shoreham)
Peter Luff (Worcestershire Mid)
Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York)
Andrew Mackay (Bracknell)
David Maclean (Penrith & The Border)
Patrick McLoughlin (Derbyshire West)
John Maples (Stratford-on-Avon)
Michael Mates (Hampshire East)
Francis Maude (Horsham)
Sir Brian Mawhinney (Cambridgeshire North West)
Mrs Theresa May (Maidenhead)
Patrick Mercer (Newark)
Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield)
Malcolm Moss (Cambridgeshire North East)
Archie Norman (Tunbridge Wells)
Stephen O'Brien (Eddisbury)
George Osborne (Tatton)
Richard Ottaway (Croydon South)
James Paice (Cambridgeshire South East)
Owen Paterson (Shropshire North)
Eric Pickles (Brentwood & Ongar)
Michael Portillo (Kensington & Chelsea)
Mark Prisk (Hertford & Stortford)
John Redwood (Wokingham)
Andrew Robathan (Blaby)
Hugh Robertson (Faversham & Kent Mid)
Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury)
Mrs Marion Roe (Broxbourne)
Andrew Rosindell (Romford)
David Ruffley (Bury St Edmunds)
Andrew Selous (Bedfordshire South West)
Mrs Gillian Shephard (Norfolk South West)
Richard Shepherd (Aldridge-Brownhills)
Mark Simmonds (Boston & Skegness)
Keith Simpson (Norfolk Mid)
Nicholas Soames (Sussex Mid)
Mrs Caroline Spelman (Meriden)
Sir Michael Spicer (Worcestershire West)
Dr Robert Spink (Castle Point)
Richard Spring (Suffolk West)
Sir John Stanley (Tonbridge & Malling)
Gary Streeter (Devon South West)
Desmond Swayne (New Forest West)
Hugo Swire (Devon East)
Robert Syms (Poole)
John Taylor (Solihull)
David Tredinnick (Bosworth)
Michael Trend (Windsor)
Peter Viggers (Gosport)
Nigel Waterson (Eastbourne)
Mrs Angela Watkinson (Upminster)
John Whittingdale (Maldon & Chelmsford East)
Miss Ann Widdecombe (Maidstone & The Weald)
Bill Wiggin (Leominster)
John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)
David Willetts (Havant)
Mrs Ann Winterton (Congleton)
Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)
Tim Yeo (Suffolk South)
Sir George Young (Hampshire North West)

Others for war

Roy Beggs (UUP Antrim East)
David Burnside (UUP Antrim South)
Gregory Campbell (DUP Londonderry East)
Nigel Dodds (DUP Belfast North)
Jeffrey Donaldson (UUP Lagan Valley)
Lady Sylvia Hermon (UUP Down North)
Andrew Hunter (Ind C Basingstoke)
The Rev Ian Paisley (DUP Antrim North)
Mrs Iris Robinson (DUP Strangford)
Peter Robinson (DUP Belfast East)
The Rev Martin Smyth (UUP Belfast South)
David Trimble (UUP Upper Bann)

Before the 2003 vote I sent out the email circular below to make certain UK MPs knew of the cost price of Iraq oil was as low as US$1 per barrel.

EmailtoBritishMembersOfParliament

Date: March 4, 2003 

Subject: US Government info on Iraq oil - the question of conflict of interest   US/UK chemical warfare

The Australian Senate censured PM Howard, the House of Commons rebelled against PM Blair.

What is wrong with the French/Russian disarmament proposal?  From a US point of view the US will miss the opportunity to get control of oil for as little as $1 per barrel when the US cost of production is around $20 per barrel.

Part of Senator Harris' speech based on the US publication follows: 

(i)               One Nation challenges Senator Hill’s claim that US behaviour is not driven by a wish to take control of Iraq’s oil reserves. Senator Hill has stated: 

(ii)                                                      “if cheap oil supplies were America’s dominant motive, then years before now, the US would have done a deal with Iraq to lift the sanctions in return for plentiful supplies of low priced oil.”

(iii)            The fact is that there is a plentiful supply of low priced oil in Iraq. The Energy Information Administration - a division of the US Department of Energy - points out in it’s Country analysis brief on Iraq that 

(iv)                                                    “oil production costs there are amongst the lowest in the world, making it a highly attractive oil prospect.” 

(v)             This is because Iraq’s oil comes in enormous fields that can be tapped by relatively shallow wells, producing a high “flow rate.” Iraq’s oil rises rapidly to the surface, because of high pressure on the oil reservoir from water and from associated natural gas deposits. More than a third of Iraq’s current reserves lie just 600 meters (1800 feet) below the earth’s surface and some of Iraq’s fields are among the world’s largest. 

(vi)            The Majnoun Field, not yet in production, is said to hold at least 25 billion barrels. According to Oil and Gas Journal, Western oil companies estimate that they can produce a barrel of Iraqi oil for less than $1.50 and possibly as little as $1, including all exploration, oilfield development and production costs and including a 15% return. This is similar to production costs in Saudi Arabia and lower than virtually any other country. 

(vii)           By way of comparison, a barrel of oil costs $5 to produce in other relatively low-cost areas like Malaysia and Oman. Production costs in Mexico and Russia might potentially be as low as $6-8 per barrel (higher under current production arrangements by local companies). 

(viii)         Offshore production areas like the North Sea, with expensive platforms, can run to $12-16 a barrel. In Texas and other US and Canadian fields, where deep wells and small reservoirs make production especially expensive, costs can run above $20 a barrel. When world market prices dip below $20 a barrel, the North American fields yield no profit at all, and many are capped, while production in an area like Iraq proves extremely profitable in all market conditions. 

(ix)            As I have already pointed out, Iraq has the world’s second largest proven oil reserves. A gold rush of profits for international oil firms in a post-Saddam setting could be on the agenda. The four giant firms located in the US and the UK have been keen to get back into Iraq, from which they were excluded with the nationalisation of 1972. They face companies from France, China, Japan and elsewhere, who already have major concessions. 

President Bush has an interest in oil; there is an unacceptable conflict of interest when he organises a war to gain control of Iraqi oil. 

Question 1: Are US and/or UK oil firms paying or promising money or other benefit to UK political parties or people? 

Question 2: Does Foreign Minister Jack Straw’s warning to France and Germany ‘not to reap a US whirlwind’, by isolating the US, expose the US as the biggest threat to the World?

Hydrogen fuel is the medium/long term solution; why kill for oil? President Bush wants the oil; let him have it and the terrorist attacks that will go with it over the coming years.  Britain should opt out of the Iraq war and apply its wealth and brains to perfect Hydrogen technology to lead the World once more.

For unedited emails from thirteen Australian Senators and MP’s AND to read of Toxic gas, drugs in Bush arsenal where, ‘Leading experts and Whitehall officials fear that using even pepper spray and CS gas would destroy the credibility of the Chemical Weapons Convention, provoke Iraqi chemical retaliation and set a disastrous legal precedent.   Professor Julian Perry Robinson, an authority on the convention, said: "Legally speaking, Iraq would be totally justified in releasing chemical weapons over the United Kingdom if the alliance uses them in Baghdad”:

Question 3: What are you going to do to keep it illegal for the UK to be chemically attacked?

ReplyfromSenatorHarris  (scroll down)

Part of Senator Harris' speech based on the US publication follows: 

(x)              One Nation challenges Senator Hill’s claim that US behaviour is not driven by a wish to take control of Iraq’s oil reserves. Senator Hill has stated: 

(xi)                                                    “if cheap oil supplies were America’s dominant motive, then years before now, the US would have done a deal with Iraq to lift the sanctions in return for plentiful supplies of low priced oil.”

(xii)           The fact is that there is a plentiful supply of low priced oil in Iraq. The Energy Information Administration - a division of the US Department of Energy - points out in it’s Country analysis brief on Iraq that 

(xiii)                                                  “oil production costs there are amongst the lowest in the world, making it a highly attractive oil prospect.” 

(xiv)         This is because Iraq’s oil comes in enormous fields that can be tapped by relatively shallow wells, producing a high “flow rate.” Iraq’s oil rises rapidly to the surface, because of high pressure on the oil reservoir from water and from associated natural gas deposits. More than a third of Iraq’s current reserves lie just 600 meters (1800 feet) below the earth’s surface and some of Iraq’s fields are among the world’s largest. 

(xv)           The Majnoun Field, not yet in production, is said to hold at least 25 billion barrels. According to Oil and Gas Journal, Western oil companies estimate that they can produce a barrel of Iraqi oil for less than $1.50 and possibly as little as $1, including all exploration, oilfield development and production costs and including a 15% return. This is similar to production costs in Saudi Arabia and lower than virtually any other country. 

(xvi)         By way of comparison, a barrel of oil costs $5 to produce in other relatively low-cost areas like Malaysia and Oman. Production costs in Mexico and Russia might potentially be as low as $6-8 per barrel (higher under current production arrangements by local companies). 

(xvii)        Offshore production areas like the North Sea, with expensive platforms, can run to $12-16 a barrel. In Texas and other US and Canadian fields, where deep wells and small reservoirs make production especially expensive, costs can run above $20 a barrel. When world market prices dip below $20 a barrel, the North American fields yield no profit at all, and many are capped, while production in an area like Iraq proves extremely profitable in all market conditions. 

(xviii)       As I have already pointed out, Iraq has the world’s second largest proven oil reserves. A gold rush of profits for international oil firms in a post-Saddam setting could be on the agenda. The four giant firms located in the US and the UK have been keen to get back into Iraq, from which they were excluded with the nationalisation of 1972. They face companies from France, China, Japan and elsewhere, who already have major concessions. 

President Bush has an interest in oil; there is an unacceptable conflict of interest when he organises a war to gain control of Iraqi oil. 

Question 1: Are US and/or UK oil firms paying or promising money or other benefit to UK political parties or people? 

Question 2: Does Foreign Minister Jack Straw’s warning to France and Germany ‘not to reap a US whirlwind’, by isolating the US, expose the US as the biggest threat to the World?

http://www.robertsonj32.freeserve.co.uk/hydrogen.htm#Hydrogen fuel is the medium/long term solution; why kill for oil? President Bush wants the oil; let him have it and the terrorist attacks that will go with it over the coming years.  Britain should opt out of the Iraq war and apply its wealth and brains to perfect Hydrogen technology to lead the World once more.

For unedited emails from thirteen Australian Senators and MP’s AND to read of Toxic gas, drugs in Bush arsenal where, ‘Leading experts and Whitehall officials fear that using even pepper spray and CS gas would destroy the credibility of the Chemical Weapons Convention, provoke Iraqi chemical retaliation and set a disastrous legal precedent.   Professor Julian Perry Robinson, an authority on the convention, said: "Legally speaking, Iraq would be totally justified in releasing chemical weapons over the United Kingdom if the alliance uses them in Baghdad”:

Question 3: What are you going to do to keep it illegal for the UK to be chemically attacked?

The QC Opinion to Impeach Tony Blair -

I will email the original QC Opinion to all who request it.  

Not enough MPs voted for impeachment.

The MPs who voted for the Iraq War are arguably war criminals, as their votes caused the deaths of well over 100,000 Iraqis and led to the unlawful killing of badly equipped British soldiers.   Those pro-war MPs are proven to have bad judgment and are unfit to be in Parliament.   The known exception is Clare Short who later publicly stated she was conned by Blair.

In 2010, will people who vote for war criminals become war criminals themselves?   To say ‘Yes’, the argument is that by keeping Parliament loaded with MPs who wanted the illegal Iraq War, the Voters are maintaining the cover-up.  To say ‘No’, the argument is, the voters do not care about the Law.  

The ‘reasonable man’ argument for ‘No’ may have been OK in 2003 and even in 2007, but no ‘reasonable man’ can now look at all the evidence and say the Iraq War was legal.   Some MPs are showing no remorse for the deaths they caused - unless they publicly say they are sorry.

Chapter 12  South Australians are risking legal claims from people in equatorial Nations…... Free Australia is a minor political party that had candidates in the March 2010 South Australian Election.                                                           

11/02/2010   

 FREE AUSTRALIA POLICY DIRECTIVES

RESOLVING THE WATER CRISIS TO BE A NUMBER ONE PRIORITY

Nationally, we support the Bradfield Scheme, which is the idea of turning some of Queensland’s coastal rivers inland. It was first introduced in the 1800’s by the designer of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, Dr J Bradfield. He envisaged diverting water from the coastal northern Queensland Rivers across the Great Dividing Range, into rivers which would supply water for stock and other purposes in inland areas. To supply Adelaide, water would be pumped approximately 800 km south from the Cooper Creek. It is an immense project, but then, so was the Snowy Mountains scheme, which provided employment to many tradesmen throughout Australia. We agree with the Hon. Bob Katter, Federal Minister for Kennedy, that it is a necessary and viable plan, and one that needs to be commenced sooner rather than later.  At a time when State Governments can easily spend up to one billion dollars upgrading traffic infrastructure, expense ought not to be a consideration when it comes to ensuring a stable supply of water to the dying River Murray.

In March 2010 it rained. 

2010-03-08 ‘Beast of a storm’, record floods hit Australia

 (AFP) – 1 day ago

MELBOURNE — Melbourne was bracing for more bad weather Sunday after a "beast of a storm" ripped through Australia's second largest city, bringing with it hailstones the size of tennis balls.

The mini-cyclone which smashed into the regional capital with winds of up to 100 kilometres (62 miles) an hour was an event which had likely not been seen since early last century, Bureau of Meteorology forecaster Kevin Parkyn said.

"The weather system that brought the damage to Melbourne is known in meteorological terms as a supercell thunderstorm, an organised beast of a storm that once it gets going tends to last more than your average thunderstorm," he said.

The fierce storm, which flooded city streets, saw some 26 millimetres (one inch) of rain fall on Melbourne within an hour Saturday while other areas recorded up to 70 millimetres.

In the city centre the National Gallery of Victoria suffered flooding, while the Docklands Stadium was among those buildings damaged during the storm, which washed out horse races.

Bureau of Meteorology forecaster Wasyl Drosdowsky said the hail that hit in one suburban area was up to 10 centimetres (four inches) in diameter.

"(It was) tennis ball size roughly," he said. "As far as we can tell, that's close to the biggest hail we've seen in Melbourne."

More than 4,000 people contacted emergency services for help as the hail left the city blanketed in what looked like snow.

With more violent storms on the way late Sunday and Monday, Victorian Premier John Brumby urged people to be careful, particularity in areas hit by bushfires a year ago which have unstable trees weakened by the flames.

"There have been no reported fatalities or serious injuries. For that we are grateful," he said.

"People really should take great care... and make sure we put this focus on protecting life and protecting public safety because all the advice is that it will be a pretty difficult period."

As the city readied for further violent storms Sunday and Monday, once-in-a-century floods were peaking in the state of Queensland in the country's northeast, parts of which have been in drought for almost a decade.

Townships in the state's cotton-growing south were cut off by rising flood waters and in St George the Balonne River reached 13.5 metres (44 feet), its highest level since records began in 1890.

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh said the cost of the flooding would be in the hundreds of millions of dollars, as there had been major damage to highways and rail lines had been washed away.

"This is a massive water event which has smashed all the records known here in the southwest," she told reporters Sunday as she toured St George.

"All this water ultimately is going to mean great things for local (farmers) but there is a lot of pain to be felt in these communities before we can see total recovery."

In the nearby tiny town of Nindigully, residents were marvelling at the amount of water surrounding the rural outpost.

"Overall, we are happy to have experienced this flood because of the beauty of vast expanses of water through the bush that you never forget," Steve Burns, the owner of the 146-year-old Nindigully Pub told AAP.

The dying River Murray has been revived!  

Back to 11/02/2010 13:48<< Prev - Next >>
From John Robertson
G'day  Everyone
First some corrections.
Hon. Bob Katter, Federal Minister for Kennedy.   Bob is Member not Minister.   Bob was a Queensland State Government Minister.
The Bradfield Scheme was similar to the Snowy because it would use tunnels to connect the Herbert and Burdekin Rivers and gravitate the water to Cooper Creek.  The Burdekin Dam was then built too far downstream for the Bradfield proposal.

My Opal Lands Waterway scheme is not immense.   It should be started this year.  At the Port Augusta end a pump storage hydroelectric scheme would make a profit by selling peak load electricity.  The outflow would be into Lake Torrens and out of Lake Torrens to Lake Eyre in the North and back to Port Augusta in the South.   Mangroves could then be grown for sheep and goat food all the way from Port Augusta to Goyders Lagoon, North of Lake Eyre. 

At the Charters Towers end of the Opal Lands Waterway, wind turbines would pump the water up from the Herbert River and /or from the Burdekin Dam to a holding dam for a small pump storage hydroelectric scheme to supply Charters Towers with peak load electricity at a profit.     

The outflow would be channelled to Torrens Creek that flows to Cooper Creek and Goyder Lagoon.  Trees and plants would be grown along the waterway.  Sandalwood trees would be planted for their nuts to eat and eventually for their valuable heartwood.   There is a big potential profit here.

More rain will fall in the Darling /Murray catchments and that is how Adelaide will get its water.  Rann's desalination scheme is a money wasting stunt to impress BHP Billiton and to fool the public.

Note March 2010.   Nature has saved the Darling / Murray – the desalination scheme is now a waste of money.   There is now plenty of time to put in the Opal Lands Waterway – at no cost – because it will make a profit.   

Interestingly there is a proposal to float fresh water in giant bags from Tully, Far North Queensland, to Brisbane, The Gold Coast and Sydney.  http://www.solartran.com.au/tullywater.htm

Like my Opal Lands Waterway, their idea is far less costly than desalination plants.

‘Preliminary cost estimates for the supply of 120 ML per day to the Gold Coast indicate this method of water supply may be 30 times less expensive to implement than an equivalent supply by desalination plant and that the method may emit 60 times less Greenhouse gas. These figures suggest that the proposal may also be much less expensive than a pipeline from the Burdekin River to Brisbane. It may be useful to include consideration of this proposal within the scope of the pipeline feasibility study currently being made by the Queensland Government [2]. The above discussion has focused on the supply of water to South East Queensland where the need is acute. However, as the East Australian Current also connects the Clarence River to Sydney, a similar scheme could supply river water to Sydney. Recently the NSW Government approved the construction of a $1.76 Billion desalination plant at Kurnell to supply 125 ML/day to Sydney. In view of the fact that the drying trend in South East Australia is related to climate change the use of high emission desalination plants would seem to be very counterproductive.  Australia is a country of drought and flood, of El Nino followed by La Nina. This current drought has led to the investment of huge sums in constructing desalination and recycling plants.  The drought will end. When it does these expensive plants will sit idle. The investment cannot be deployed elsewhere. Conversely, the infrastructure of this proposal, the water containers, the tugs, the floating cranes, the dredge and the coastal trader can be usefully deployed elsewhere. The technology of this proposal could be readily exported to anywhere in the world where there is a need for fresh water and there is a favourable ocean current connecting to a river supply however distant that supply may be.’

South Australia is the cause of global warming.    SA writes of being the driest State in the driest Continent while they act to make it worse.  The ozone hole over Antarctica is allowing heat from Earth to escape.  When the ozone hole repairs itself Antarctica will warm up and that is when sea levels will rise.   There are 10 or 20 years to go.   South Australia is like a heating element sitting in between the Indian and Pacific Oceans.  South Australians are totally irresponsible and will be blamed when the sea level rises to cover the Island Nations.

March 2010.  South Australia is breeding more droughts, bushfires and floods.

The Opal Lands Waterway can provide everything Adelaide and BHP Billiton require and permanently restore the Murray as well.

Thirty years ago Premier David Tonkin called for ideas from the public.   Bannon got in and his advisers cast the Opal Lands Waterway aside.   Rann has followed Bannon's lead.   Dunstan started the decline of SA when he abolished the Miners Rights and favoured Western Mining.  (Now BHP Billiton)

The SA Public deserve their present second class life because they voted Tonkin out and are leaving Rann in.   Protesting about Rann being a bully will win him as many votes as he loses; people like a strong leader. 

Water is the way for you to beat Rann.   You will not be able to find a fault in what I have just written, yet the Rann Government will not discuss the Opal Lands Waterway - just like the earlier Bannon Government cast it aside.   You have time to win, if you decide to win!    Your FREE Australia Party looks like the best chance the World has for the coming ages of Leisure, Life sciences, Mega

materials, Atomic fusion and a New Space Age  

Rann has put SA into the Hopeless age. 

Cheers
John Robertson   (Rann won so SA remains hopeless.)

09/02/2010 07:42

Hello Dave

The email below just came in - The Bannon Government was negligent  30 years ago.    You have drought in SA because you deserve it.   Not only that, if global warming takes hold, displaced islanders would have a good claim against SA.

The Rann Government is even more responsible for climate change than Bannon.

I have much more info to send if you want it.

Cheers
John Robertson 

Dear John

On behalf of the Member for Stuart Hon Graham Gunn MP I acknowledge receipt of your emails outlining your concerns regarding climate change.  Mr Gunn has asked that I inform you he is retiring at the March State Election and has noted you have forwarded a copy of your proposal to Minister Maywald for her consideration.

Thank you for providing a copy of your proposal and for your interest in this important issue.

Regards

Catherine Battersby                    

Personal Assistant  

Hon Graham Gunn MP            

Member for Stuart

Tel:86423633                                                      

Fax: 86426402

catherine.battersby@parliament.sa.gov.au    

From: John Robertson [mailto:robertsonj32@tiscali.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, 11 January 2010 11:35 AM
To: Battersby, Catherine
Subject: Can you table this email in Parliament?

Dear Graham Gunn MP,

Thanks for your email of 22/12/2009.

I had finished writing the draft of this book attached and I sat back to reflect.   We are left with proof from records of the Black Death Plague that excessive global warming is man made.  Some global warming is good.

Some ‘climate science’ has been conjured up to give us doubts but it is undisputed that the earth spins around at 1000 MPH at the equator.  The centrifugal force takes the deep, cold, heavy salty seawater from Antarctica to the equator where it warms and rises to the surface only to be pushed back to Antarctica to melt the polar ice that become huge icebergs heading for Australia.  We can see those icebergs in TV news reports.

The water is always hot in the equatorial zone and always cold at Antarctica.  It is clear that Earth’s centrifugal force pump works non-stop, summer and winter.   Now that the huge icebergs can be photographed from satellites, global warming can be accurately recorded.

The Fraud and Negligence of the South Australian Government.  

 When Stan Konopka and I, as President and Secretary of the Coober Pedy Opal Miners Association, came to see you and Arthur Whyte in 1970, besides the loss of our Miner’s Rights, we protested that we would have to backfill our bulldozer cuts.  Our argument was that our cuts also served as small dams to catch scarce rainfall, provided nesting areas for birds and grew trees and plants.   The Dunstan Government held that the cuts/dams had to be filled in and the trees and plants destroyed; that did not make sense.

I can now see on the internet that in Melbourne, Western Mining planned their Roxby Downs testing for 6 years before commencing a test mine.   It is now crystal clear that 40 years ago, when you and I first met, the South Australian Dunstan Government had a secret agenda.  The Government did not want thousands of self-employed men with Miners Rights prospecting for opal wherever they wanted to try their luck; the SA Government wanted one big miner to negotiate royalties with.              

So under the pretence of protecting the environment those thousands of men were brought under government control by abolishing the Miners Rights, gained after Eureka Stockade, and confining them to designated opal fields.

But look what the South Australian Government has done and plans to do now.  BHP Billiton took over from Western Mining and will dig a huge open cut mine at Olympic Dam.   A huge desalination plant will use huge amounts of brown coal for electricity and huge amounts of diesel will be used by the mining machinery. 

South Australia did all of this, and over the past 30 years, from Bannon onwards, has refused to even talk about the Opal Lands Waterway that would have had fresh water permanently in Lake Eyre by now - and the River Murray would now be full (from the River Darling).

With all of the additional rainfall in Outback Australia, and the resultant tree growth, Earth would not now be as warm as it is.

What is done is done.  Now it only needs some clever engineers to decide to make use of the South Australian geography and dig their big hole at Olympic Dam and service it as much as possible with seawater canals, wind turbines, solar panels and pump storage.

We opal miners were kicked off all the land for digging tiny dams and working for ourselves.  That’s OK, provided the aboriginals, some of whom noodled for opal on our dumps, may now be employed in and around the open cut Olympic Dam, and go fishing amongst the new mangrove forests in their time off.

Tuvalu

I do not expect the Opal Lands Waterway joy put to Premier Tonkin, before Bannon replaced him, to ever happen.   So will Tuvalu have a legal claim against BHP Billiton and the South Australian Government for flooding them out of their lands?  

Well, I am sure that scientists will be able to verify we have global warming by recording the growth of icebergs.  (If they find no iceberg growth – so no evidence of warming - there will be no loss from flooding and no problem.)

I am sure that scientists will be able to calculate the amount of global warming done by BHP Billiton’s use of electricity and fuel.  

Tuvalu only needs to do all that it can for itself and then insure with Lloyds of London against BHP Billiton and the South Australian Government flooding them, pay a premium, and let the big boys figure it all out.

No Worries.

In a capitalist system we insure against man-made professional negligence and misconduct. 

The Maldives, Kiribati, Marshall Islands and the other Island Nations can likewise insure against the global warming that can be attributed to South Australia’s actions against opal miners, aboriginals and islanders.

Can you table this email in Parliament so Decision Makers can give the matter some thought?

Cheers ,   John Robertson

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

11/02/2010 20:59

Thanks for the suggested amendments to Bob Katter’s position John.  I will look into it.

 Regarding your opal lands waterway idea.  That will also be looked into when time is available.  At this stage not until after the elections.  Your input here is appreciated and will be further examined in due course.

 Regarding your assertion that SA is the cause of global warming.  That is an assertion that is not borne out by any science of which I am aware.  I would also contest the idea the population of SA (two and a half million?) would cause more impact on global warming than 6 billion people living elsewhere.  It does not add up.

Respectfully,     Craig Hendry Chair & Policies - F.R.E.E AUSTRALIA PARTY

Mobile:  0408 811 824 Snail Mail:  P.O. Box 694, St.Agnes, South Australia  5097

11/02/2010 23:33

Thanks for your input on global warming.   I have asserted my claim to the Minister and it has not been denied - I will send you the emails for your info - the density of population has nothing to do with my assertion. The people erred by voting Dr Tonkin out and putting Bannon in.   Bannon's advisers were not interested in discussing the idea.  Rann's government have not replied to follow-on emails. 

In May 1984 I paid to have the Opal Lands Waterway published in the Adelaide City Reporter.  Since then SA could have always put in a pump storage hydro-electric system to make a profit selling peak load electricity.   The seawater outflow could have been directed into Lake Eyre for the past 25 years.   The evaporation would have caused nightly dew and increased rainfall in the outback to grow more plants and trees to cool down the outback.  People driving around etc have nothing to do with it.   Lakes Torrens and Eyre would have been acting as giant evaporative coolers.

Australia was not farmed by the aboriginals because the natural winds had continually blown the fertile topsoil out to sea.   Australia would have been cooler and greener when it contained an ancient shallow inland sea.   If Island Nations are submerged in years to come they will be able to claim that South Australia has no excuse for heating the climate.  Climate scientists will be able to calculate the amount of climate cooling the Opal Lands Waterway would have achieved if used from 1984.

I am trying to alert South Australians that they may face claims for damages if nations go under the oceans.    About 10,000 people in Bangladesh have already been displaced, so a clever lawyer may already be engaging climate scientists to prepare evidence.

Irrigators in NSW and Victoria could also be looking at claiming against South Australia for being negligent.   Perhaps they will seek a court order to force South Australia to put in the Opal Lands Waterway that would gently moderate the climate.

Cheers,   John

South Australia is negligently destroying the future for our children

Put aside global warming, in any event we are burning our oil, gas, and coal reserves as if there is no tomorrow – and there won’t be a tomorrow for our children unless we change.   We can already end global warming: plant more trees, stop destroying the rainforests, no-till farming, have more wind turbines, etc.   But where will the bitumen come from for the roads when the oil and coal run out?  Fossil fuels are a great resource – wasted on wars and other consumable products.   South Australia should already be growing much bio-fuel, the sunshine, wind, big land area are all there.   Instead they burn more brown coal to speed global warming.

But global warming does not matter.  When we run out of fossil fuels we will kill most of us, and like the Black Death Plague, with perhaps half of us dead, a Little Ice Age will return to end global warming.   We should replace fossil fuel with bio-fuel while we still have some fossil fuel reserves left.  

But using Palm Oil to generate electricity is a crime against humanity.

Not using the Opal Lands Waterway is also a crime against humanity.   With the Darling / Murray River system restored the irrigators should concentrate on bio-fuel.  The Ord River should also be used to grow much bio-fuel. 

Sandalwood is a root parasite tree and should be used in a huge way to grow bio-fuel on marginal land.   

People already harmed by bad governments (Murray Darling Irrigators) should immediately sue the South Australian Government for all their losses.   South Australians should join with Victorians and New South Welshmen to put a claim before the Federal Court.   Do not go to the South Australian Courts.  First email each other to see if you agree with me.   

I believe the Rann Government has been reckless in spending nothing on the Opal Lands Waterway and around a billion $on desalination.  Just like thousands of citizens lost the Miners Rights under Dunstan we now have thousands of irrigators losing their income – both groups have lost out to satisfy BHP Billiton (but it’s not their fault).

What is the SA Government’s defence?   They would have to prove that putting seawater into the Lakes Torrens and Eyre would so obviously not increase rainfall every year in the Darling /Murray catchments that there was no reason to study the idea.    

They would try to say they did not know of the Opal Lands Waterway.    So look at the May 1984 Adelaide City Reporter, Tourism – our biggest asset.  Thousands were distributed in Adelaide.     The governments were so upset by the M20 Taxation segment they maliciously organised Simon Lane to fabricate a prosecution case against Robert Semmens and me and ignored the water scheme. 

Above is the case for SA’s water and bio-fuel negligence.  The oceans connect us all, SA’s negligence is threatening London, etc.    

Chapter 13  The Clacton Town Centre Area Action Plan    213

On May 15 2010, in the Clacton Town Square, there will be a Public Consultation.

Part 5 ‘The Opportunity Sites’ in the Action Plan is particularly applicable to my British Patent No. 07 14883.6 filed on 31 July 2007 by Rob Knight, patent attorney of Sanderson & Co, Colchester.  (International Patent Application is No PCT/GB2008/050647).   

Pages 104 to 114 of May 1984 to Now, partly covers this wind turbine housing invention. This is a Clacton-on-Sea invention to end global warming, climate change and rising sea levels.

The Iconic Building proposed for Clacton is the building invented right here in Clacton-on-Sea!

The building can be as high as the people want it to be.  Designers and architects can use their imagination to incorporate hydroponics, cardboard soil improvement, standalone electricity generation, cafes, restaurants, accommodation, shops, rainforest boardwalk, sandalwood, for bio-fuel and tourism to endangered tropical islands.  

Graceful, colorful vertical axis wind turbines will be at the centre of the building, three wind diverting structures will contain all of the people areas.  The wind turbines will pump water to tanks at the top of the building to supply hydro electricity as required. Water features will be illuminated with LEDs.

A display of Dr Who type fantasies will include the reality of proposed tourism to the Moon and to Mars. 

Clacton-on-Sea already has the ‘World’s best sea defence’ at Martello Bay and has the renowned Promenade Gardens.  The proposed Iconic Building and Promenade Biorock installations will demonstrate how Island Nations, threatened with submersion, can raise the level of their beaches to save their Nations.  (A global model will show South Australia is also threatening London.)

The Rainforest Boardwalk section will demonstrate how to grow sandalwood with mangroves to use seawater to produce bio-fuel from the sandalwood nuts.  (Palm Oil should be replaced with Sandalwood Oil.)

Destruction of Rainforests releases more CO2 into the atmosphere than all cars, planes and ships put together.  The Prince’s Rainforests Project free guide booklet, RAIN FORESTS THE BURNING ISSUE, from The Living Rainforest, Hampstead Norreys, UK, contains on page 44 an Eyewitness perspective from Vincente Riva, a farmer, who was encouraged by his government to clear the rainforest and who now wants to see zero deforestation. 

www.rainforestSOS.org 

Some people think wind turbines are ugly but it is possible to really like them.  Conventional ones are best suited to wide open spaces and offshore, where there's plenty of wind.  Vertical axis, is a better solution for urban settings.

The Queen seems to agree. XCO2, the UK company behind an unconventional design, has applied for planning permission to build one outside her London residence, Buckingham Palace.

XCO2 claims a "Quiet Revolution" turbine with 5-metre-tall blades can generate 10,000 kilowatt-hours of energy from a mean annual wind speed of just 5.8 metres per second. It also says they are much quieter than regular designs.
The helical turbines can even double up as futuristic video displays, because LEDs embedded in each S-shaped blade could be used to create images as the turbine turns. Apparently, the one at Buckingham Palace may be used to display a glowing union flag.

The Queen seems to be a leading advocate of renewable energy. Another of her (numerous) residences, Windsor Castle, is set to benefit from a hydroelectric plant that will be built on the River Thames.

Chapter 14    Clacton-on-Sea can lead the world with Iconic Shore Protection.

North of the Pier we have revetments and then it all degenerates.   We can install iconic ‘Royal’ vertical axis wind turbines to light the foreshore with LEDs and supply the very low voltage electricity to grow shore protection with:

- Biorock®/ Mineral Accretion Technology for Reef Restoration, Mariculture and Shore Protection

Biorock Technology, or mineral accretion technology is a method that applies safe, low voltage electrical currents through seawater, causing dissolved minerals to crystallize on structures, growing into a white limestone similar to that which naturally makes up coral reefs and tropical white sand beaches. This material has a strength similar to concrete. It can be used to make robust artificial reefs on which corals grow at very rapid rates. The change in the environment produced by electrical currents accelerates formation and growth of both chemical limestone rock and the skeletons of corals and other shell-bearing organisms.

The Biorock Process is owned by Biorock, Inc. and is licensed to GCRA for applicable projects.