James Delingpole Raising Cash for Australian Climate Sceptic Think Tank

Wed, 2012-09-12 17:00Graham Readfearn
Graham Readfearn's picture

James Delingpole Raising Cash for Australian Climate Sceptic Think Tank

JAMES Delingpole is a UK columnist waging a long personal jihad against wind farms, environmentalists and climate science.

A resident blogger and columnist at The Daily Telegraph, Delingpole is probably best known for being among the first mainstream columnists to declare, wrongly as it turned out, that emails illegally hacked from an influential climate research unit showed scientists were trying to con the public.

So he is the perfect person to be appealing for people to donate their cash to the Melbourne-based Institute of Public Affairs, a free market think tank which has been working for about 20 years on a campaign to mislead the public about climate science and the impact of carbon pricing.

In the appeal, Delingpole lauds the IPA's campaign against climate science and action on climate change. Readers of the appeal might be forgiven for thinking the IPA is struggling for cash. Says Delingpole: “Their budget is always stretched. If you don’t give them money they’ll go broke.”

Yet the IPA's most recent financial returns to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission suggest that rather than scrambling around for spare change, the think-tank is in fact in rude financial health.

For the year ending June 2011, the ASIC documents show the IPA declared a before-tax profit of $217,000 with an income of $2.42 million. In 2010, the IPA's income was $1.72 million, with before-tax profit of $203,000.

The IPA's executive director John Roskam refuses to declare where the IPA's money comes from. In a story I wrote for the Brisbane Times about think-tank funding, Roskam told me that “the reason we don't reveal our donors is because unfortunately our donors - and people who were believed to be our donors - have been intimidated because of their supposed support for us”.

A similar excuse is given by the UK's Global Warming Policy Foundation, a climate skeptic group founded by its chairman Lord Lawson, a former chancellor in the Thatcher government.

Professor Bob Carter, the IPA's science policy advisor, is also an advisor to the GWPF (as well as at least seven other climate sceptic groups), alongside fellow Australian “sceptic” Professor Ian Plimer, who has also made personal appeals for people to hand over cash to the IPA.

As I revealed in a story for The Guardian in March, the only known funder of the GWPF is Michael Hintze, a UK-based Australian-born hedge fund manager, donor to the UK Tory Party, and a man with a personal fortune of $1.4billion, according to Forbes.

The IPA also has close ties to the billionaire set in the form of Gina Rinehart, the coal and iron ore mining magnate and world's richest woman. In an address to “IPA members and friends”, Rinehart recently declared her concern that Australia was becoming too expensive, given that “Africans want to work, and its workers are willing to work for less than $2 per day”. The comments prompted a Ugandan television personality to declare Rinehart was “removed from reality”. 

The IPA is currently working in partnership with Rinehart's lobby group Australians for Northern Development & Economic Vision, which wants a separate low-tax economic zone for the north of Australia to make it cheaper to run major mining projects. Roskam writes a regular “Ideas for a New North” bulletin on the ANDEV website.

James Delingpole is also a Rinehart fan. When on Twitter recently someone mischievously asked Delingpole if he was being paid by Gina Rinehart, Delingpole responded: “I totally LOVE Gina. She is a heroine of our age. Bludging scuzzballs like you are not worthy of her!”

The IPA paid for Delingpole to tour Australia in April and May to promote his book “Killing The Earth To Save It”, published by Connor Court, which has John Roskam on its editorial board.

Now back in wind swept England, Delingpole has announced he will run as an independent anti-wind farm candidate in a November by-election for the seat of Corby, which the New Statesman pointed out doesn't actually have any wind turbines.

The Daily Mail, one of the UK's best selling conservative newspapers, saw fit to run a hopelessly one-sided story written by Delingpole on the suggested evils of wind farms a few days after he had announced his decision to run.

In the story, Delingpole described a visit to Waterloo, near Adelaide, which he said resembled a scene from a “horror movie” with the turbines cast in the role as evil baddie. Delingpole is convinced that turbines make people ill, despite there being no credible evidence. Delingpole didn't declare in the story that he had been in Australia on the dime of the IPA or that he was currently running as an anti-wind farm candidate in a by-election.

Australian Federal MP Craig Kelly, the Liberal member for the New South Wales seat of Hughes, was nevertheless impressed by Delingpole's article, given that he cut and pasted chunks of it onto his Facebook page under the heading “MORE ON THE MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR WIND FARM SCANDAL”.

Kelly also declared on his Facebook page that wind energy was “useless” and “Liked” a comment declaring coal to be the “safest and cheapest” form of energy, and how increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere “accelerates crop growth and improves crop yields, as does warming”.

Perhaps some advice to Mr Kelly. Best not to repeat that “CO2 is plant food” myth to drought-stricken farmers in the US. Don't mention either, the Harvard-led study showing how that “cheap” coal was costing the US economy half a trillion dollars a year.

Also not advisable, it seems, is to politely decline Delingpole's request for cash for the IPA, unless you don't mind a return-serve of foul abuse. The University of Sydney's Professor Christopher Wright said “no thanks” to Delingpole. Here's how the IPA fundraiser responded.

Previous Comments

Delingpole is a prize wanker. An “interpreter of interpreations” as he has described himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36Xu3SQcIE0

In other words, take other peoples words, twists them and paraphrases them until their actual meaning is lost in Delingpoles mad paranoid worldview.

And Gina Rhinehart is living in such a deluded spoon fed world of which she has never known anything else, has the gall to tell other people to work hard instead of being lazy, when she inherited all her wealth off her father. She is not self made. Few people would be reduced to $0 an amount to nothing if they inherited a few billion $$.

She hasn't had to work hard for anything except trying to make the public swallow her bloated bullshit. 

And the IPA is the closest thing we have here in Australia to the Heartland Institute & Cato. Liars and deniers for hire.

 

Interesting… In court that is called 'hear say', and not admissible.  You either get it from the person's mouth or you got nothing.  I guess that means that deniers as usual got nothing.

Here's a great link that never gets old;  Gina Rinehard being instructed in how to do exactly what she's doing to manipulate the news by none other than Monkcton.

http://www.desmogblog.com/monckton-pitches-fox-news-australia-idea-minin...

Apologies for my appalling spelling there. Should have been “interpretations”. In that video, Delingpole really angles for the usual industry memes used ever since the smoking wars to attempt to dilute the power or importance of consensus and comes out with the ol strawman “science has never been about consensus”. Then goes on with a dog whistle statement and red herring by saying “this is one of the most despicable things I find about Al Gores consensus”. He cleverly inserts Al Gore into it,  which flags the statement to attract the attention of right wingers watching, to draw allegience against not just a consensus…..but Al Gores consensus. 

Consensus then becomes the anathema of the right because “it's Al Gores”, it's political. Somehow, scientists would never have come to any sort of agreement if not for Al Gore. Al Gore is from the left, so therefore, any “consensus” is not actually science ( no one said it was anyway, it's just an agreement) ….it's a political construct to “control us and intrude into our lives”. Right wing and libertarian hot button key words.

Here's a great link that never gets old;  Gina Rinehard being instructed in how to do exactly what she's doing to manipulate the news by none other than Monkcton.”

Luck our bird brain mate never saw that story, he would believe the following line hook line and sinker.

spread his conspiracy theories that human-caused climate change is a left-wing plot to bring down the West.

 

To be fair to Rhinehart she inherited a fortune and through hard work and ability turned it into a considerably larger fortune. She is probably better at project development than her father was.

But while ability and effort are always necessary to build a fortune they are they are never sufficient. You have to be in the right place at the right time and have the necessary support. But if you prize self reliance you are likely to blind youself to the role that good fortune and the help of others played in your success. Rhinehart has done this.

To be fair to Rhinehart she inherited a fortune and through hard work and ability turned it into a considerably larger fortune. She is probably better at project development than her father was.”

Hmmm, whats the chances of someone growing up in the mining industry, making dozens of mining contacts, inheriting dozens of mines and billions of $$ in a country like Australia full of ore……and not making more money?

I would have more respect for her or accept that, if she made it from nothing, or even inherited money from say a parent in manufacturing or retail and then made it big in the mining industry. But she was already in the industry all her life. It wasn't like she was starting from nothing.

As much as I don't like the man. I have far more respect for people like Clive Palmer (Australia's richest coal mine owner) , as he is self made. He made his billions from nothing. Now that is business acumen, not Rhinehart who was handed it all and just improved on it.

 

Delingpole may come across as a buffoon, but he's very effective in his attacks against every aspect of renewable energy in his Telegraph blog - with the support of the moderators and a round-the-clock team of astroturfers.  The methodical way he's going about it, suggests he's following a strategy developed by his mates at the Heartland Institute and the GWPF.  Of course, the latter's Nigel Lawson has high level government contacts and the effects of his lobbying can be seen in the recent reshuffle by David Cameron, when the last supporters of renewable energy were neutered.

Delingpole may come across as a buffoon, but he's very effective in his attacks against every aspect of renewable energy in his Telegraph blog”

And now he is hoping to enter into politics campaigning against wind farms?! As it says in the story, there are no wind farms where he is hoping to win a seat, so he can heroically claim, whichever way it goes, that he stopped the wind farms.

Reminds me of the story of the guy who has a fear of elephants and clicks his fingers every few minutes to ward off the elephants. When asked by a bystander what is he doing? He says “It's a trick I learned to ward off elephants”. The bystander says, “but there are no elephants for hundreds of miles!”. The clicker says “yeah, it works well doesn't it?!”

 

The thing is, the majority of people in the UK have grown extremely tired fo the wind farms expansions and downright hostile in many cases. The feed-in tarrifs have been slashed because peoples' electric bills have gone way up. Politicians are scrambling to back away from the overly green stance they've been pushing for many years in face of the continuing poor economic outlook and an angry public.

Dellingpole should go far on an anti-wind platform. If you don't believe it, read some of the angry comments at the popular online newspapers whenever they print 'environmental' columns.

Dellingpole should go far on an anti-wind platform. If you don't believe it, read some of the angry comments at the popular online newspapers whenever they print 'environmental' columns.

That's the whole point of astroturfing!

The thing is, the majority of people in the UK have grown extremely tired fo the wind farms expansions and downright hostile in many cases. “

Really Hank? You have some sort of study that shows this, or is it just opinion? Because it seems 66% over there favour it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/apr/19/wind-power-poll-uk-public-favour

The feed-in tarrifs have been slashed because peoples' electric bills have gone way up.”

They are going up in every country Hank and have been doing so long before renewables entered the scene. Inefficient old methods of electricity generation over long distances, means they have to constantly upgrade the transmission grid to cope with demand for all those plasma's and air conds. Distributed electricty generation makes far more sense, as it can produce energy onsite or close to where it is needed.

Dellingpole should go far on an anti-wind platform. If you don't believe it, read some of the angry comments at the popular online newspapers whenever they print 'environmental' columns.”

I have. I don't know what you are talking about. There just seems to be support ;)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/09/observer-editorial-cabinet-reshuffle?INTCMP=SRCH

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/09/john-gummer-warning-green-agenda?INTCMP=SRCH

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/build-more-turbines-poll-shows-public-wants-wind-farms-7814798.html

 

“The U.K. government granted tax relief for natural gas drillers and cut subsidies for renewable energy, signaling more reductions in the months ahead as it balances demand for cheaper power against a goal to lower pollution from fossil fuels.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change cut subsidies for onshore wind 10 percent, offered less financial support than expected for biomass and said it may cut solar further. Drax Group Plc (DRX), owner of the U.K.’s largest power station and biomass consumer, fell by a record. Gas drillers get a tax credit worth 500 million pounds ($776 million).”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-25/u-k-cuts-onshore-wind-support-1...

http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/opinion/opinion/123636-industry-split-on-la...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/aug/01/solar-panel-feed-in-ta...

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/13/solar-damages-feed-in-...

Phil, if you would expand your reading list of true “news” websites you'll see that the 'push back' on expensive (and often useless) green energy schemes is growing in the EU. Both Germany and the UK are enacting new policies that are much more sensible in today's economy. It's happening whether you want to believe it or not.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2148025/Electricity-bil...

Energy Secretary Ed Davey said on BBC 1's Sunday Politics programme: 'The real thing that's driving energy bills for households is the cost of global gas and global oil and we need to try to make sure that our economy is better insulated.

'We're having to import more and more gas as the North Sea oil gas supplies run down, that's going to leave our economy more exposed.'

Soo… The UK is a net importer of oil and gas, and they are trying to kick the coal habit by taxing the hell out of it.  That's why.

Phil, if you would expand your reading list of true “news” websites you'll see that the 'push back' on expensive (and often useless) green energy”

Oh, you mean right wing or Murdoch owned press? Got it.