February 16, 2005

Reform BC Says No To Kyoto Accord

February 16, 2005 - The date Canada chains its Citizens to Kyoto.

A Reform Party of British Columbia government will not permit Kyoto debts, taxes or penalties to be placed, directly or indirectly, on its Citizens or Businesses or Public Assets by any jurisdiction outside the province of British Columbia. We have absolute proof that the Kyoto carbon-driven climate model fails to explain climate change.

A Reform BC government will not participate in any federal or international trading of carbon-emission credits. We predict participating provinces or territories will find their Kyoto-compliance costs make the price of the Liberal Party's $1 billion Gun Registry or the $100 million ADSCAM in Quebec look like a parking ticket.

REFORM BC offers prospective voters and candidates five issues for the May 17, 2005 election campaign. We invite you to explore the texts and links below as they relate to the first issue, the repudiation of "odious" debts linked to the Kyoto Protocol. Subject to citizens' input, Reform BC will publish its final election platform by early April to allow for the selection of candidates who can understand our principles and deliver on our promises, one issue at a time.

Issue 1 - Reform BC will REPUDIATE "odious" debts linked to the Kyoto Protocol:

A Reform BC government will enact legislation to repudiate "odious" debts, penalties or liabilities linked to the Kyoto Protocol when such debts are attached at any time to the personal property of provincial citizens, taxpayers, communities, businesses and industries or attached to public equity in the custody of B.C.'s public servants, especially including the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

Reform BC accepts that, to lawfully repudiate a "Kyoto" debt, the province's cabinet ministers and scientific, business and legal advisers must prove the debt was incurred without public knowledge and consent, that it is not in the public interest and that the creditors were aware of these facts.

Following these proofs, the onus will be upon the creditors to show that the funds were utilized for the benefit of British Columbia. If the creditors cannot do so, before an international tribunal, the debt is unenforceable.

Kyoto debts were incurred without public knowledge and consent: Reform BC believes the public did not know of or consent to a 1999 scheme by the BC Treasury Board to legalize joint ventures between off-book partnerships of the kind that would, by 2001, destroy Enron and wipe out Enron's shareholders. The Board has allowed off-book entities to hide debt, pump profits, enrich insiders and launder money with partners compensated through some combination of user fees, government subsidies, service payments or concessionary rights. Joint ventures are structured as public-private partnerships or among public sector bodies only. Reform believes that joint venture projects such as Kyoto will rely on concealed user fees, penalties or other non-taxpayer supported revenues to recover the off-book partners' debt service payments and return on equity. Reform believes these non-share capital corporations, wherein no single partner or member owns or holds a controlling interest in the corporation, are designed to keep odious debt off the province's Summary Financial Statements and outside the scrutiny of the B.C. Legislature. http://www.davidhawkinsresearch.com/source/sw-july16.html

Kyoto debts were incurred not in the public interest: Reform BC's advisers will apply deductive computing methods to climate science and data to invalidate the Kyoto carbon-dioxide-driven climate model and prove that Kyoto "debts" cannot be in the public interest.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Glaciers.htm
http://www.davidhawkinsresearch.com/index.html#Anchor-DCM-23522

Kyoto debts were incurred when creditors were aware of the facts above: In the early '20s, a new Costa Rican government passed a law to renounce odious debts entered into between the previous government and the Royal Bank of Canada. The law was challenged in Great Britain vs Costa Rica and heard before Chief Justice Taft of the U.S. Supreme Court sitting as arbitrator. The challenge failed and the law of odious debt was upheld in a 1923 ruling with the decision depending not on the mere form of the transaction but upon the good faith of the bank in lending the money. The Royal Bank failed to make out a case for lending the money to the government for legitimate public use. The bank knew however that the loan was to be used to enrich the retiring president after he had taken refuge in a foreign country. Reform BC notes that present or future government insiders are often enriched by the Royal Bank of Canada which has provided lines of credit to Paul Martin to buy Canadian Steamship Lines, to public employees to finance a union takeover of NAVCAN and to CNR's public union shareholders to acquire BC Rail.
http://www.davidhawkinsresearch.com/source/cafe-002-2003.html#Anchor-For-44867