The King is at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) foolishly preaching Climate Change and tip-toeing around the incredibly dangerous demand for reparations.

CHOGM’s socialist language drips from its headline: CHOGM Samoa 2024 formally opens with calls for solidarity and collective solutions.

Said the King:

‘Together, we can expand opportunities across this family of nations to build shared prosperity and truly resilient economies – while also meeting growing challenges such as disinformation and extremism, and ensuring that the untold potential of technology, including Artificial Intelligence and social media, works for our societies, not against them.’

Do you recognise any of this language?

Would His Majesty be in favour of the Prime Minister’s Misinformation and Disinformation Bill? What is his definition of ‘extremism’? And how would social media and AI be manhandled into ‘working for societies’ without becoming the plaything of the powerful? What sort of ‘work’ is the public forum supposed to do, other than exist?

‘We can surely try to invest in as many as possible of the one-and-a-half billion people under the age of 30 in the Commonwealth to ensure they have the right personal development. This means skills, opportunities and entrepreneurial drive, as well as the ability to thrive and prosper in this changing world while being shielded from the negative aspects of technologies.’

Please expand on what you imagine this ‘shield’ to look like? Perhaps a bureaucracy of unelected fact-checkers and thought police pre-approving what it is ‘safe’ for us to read? Or maybe it will be the eSafety Commissioner alone in a room, hissing randomly at tweets…

It would not be unreasonable to worry about the phrasing contained within the speech given by the Prime Minister of Samoa. Describing a ‘Modern Commonwealth’ (since when did it require a prefix?), she said:

‘Our theme, “One Resilient Common Future: Transforming our Common Wealth”, highlights the importance of a united Commonwealth Aiga, or Family.’

A feature of this ‘transforming’ is Samoa’s carbon offset program which was green-washed by guilting leaders into planting a tree before the close of the conference. Plant a tree (a reasonable and otherwise harmless request) but in doing so tepidly agree to the carbon offset program (a dangerous and expensive con).

One wonders when we might have a political leader with a spine sturdy enough to call this sort of political theatre out for what it is – a scam.

Returning to the King’s speech:

‘Together, we represent a third of humanity, with all the splendidly diverse complexity that this entails. And yet we know and understand each other, such that we can discuss the most challenging issues with openness and respect. At a time of heightened global tensions, of horrifying conflict and challenges of the greatest magnitude, it seems to me that these connections between us are more precious than ever. Together we are wiser, stronger and more able to respond to the demands of our time. That said, our cohesion requires that we acknowledge where we have come from. I understand, from listening to people across the Commonwealth, how the most painful aspects of our past continue to resonate.’

Later, he tries to temper this capitulation to regressive race politics by championing respect and harmony without realising that acknowledging Marxism is like placing the key in the lock of Rome’s gates and walking away. Anything could happen.

So dangerous is his acquiescence to the social piracy of blood-victimhood that it was a relief to watch His Majesty pivot to what he describes as his ‘primary concern’ – Climate Change. He then repeated the oft-told lies of the tabloid press, pinning natural disasters on Al Gore’s imaginary climate ghost.

The Prime Minister of Samoa mentioned a passing concern regarding China’s influence in the region, especially its apparent militarisation of a woefully corrupt Solomon Islands. Yet she was careful to add that their nation, and others in the region, were keen to access the lucrative Chinese market. All this, while promoting in her speech their commitment to ‘the promise of a 1.5 degree world’.

How does expanding China’s economy – its factories, its workhouses, its resource expansion – aid in the 1.5 degree goal when China is the largest polluter on the planet? These two things cannot be achieved in tandem. Would it be safe to assume that the 1.5 degree promise is useful in extorting money out of ignorant nations like Australia while the Pacific happily adds to CO2 emissions (that it says is flooding its islands) in return for cold, hard cash?

That seems likely.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has recently returned from a press conference where he said:

‘We today discussed, importantly, our new climate and energy partnership that we will be delivering on. We have a common view about the challenge, but also the opportunity, that climate change action represents. We both are on the path to Net Zero through the transition, and we see that as an opportunity for new industries, new jobs and a new industrialisation of our respective countries.’

He went on to add that, when talking about the UK, they might ‘look at cooperation in areas such as climate finance’.

Albanese then promised more Renewable Hydrogen grants – meaning that racket is still going.

Our Prime Minister also claimed that ‘climate change is above politics’. Which is odd. For a concept above politics, it certainly drives policy and absconds with quite a lot of money. Albanese then invoked Margaret Thatcher to justify his rant about the climate that was woefully disassociated from the truth.

‘It is about existential threat that exists to countries like Tuvalu and Kiribati. It’s about the world in which we live. It’s about our native fauna and flora. It’s about the natural disasters that we were warned would increase in intensity and in frequency. And that is precisely what we are seeing in Australia, but in other parts of the world as well, increased impact of climate change, whether it be rising sea levels, increased cyclones, increased bushfires, increased droughts, we are seeing the impact of climate change, that’s recognised by scientists around the world, and indeed one of the first world leaders to recognise the challenge of climate change and the need to act was Margaret Thatcher.’

Then the Prime Minister effectively opened our Treasury (not his) to the greedy hands of climate peddlers.

‘And there is an equity aspect to climate change because of its impact is not even across the board, and so it is part of the context of the debate is making sure that Australia and those countries that, of course, are largely responsible for the emissions which are there, have a greater responsibility to act. That’s something that’s been recognised in, that’s part of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. We need to act together as the world.’

Mind you, we have to give the hyperbole award to Secretary-General:

‘The accelerating impacts of climate change and ecological breakdown causing more frequent and devastating disasters, destroying lives and livelihoods, threatening years of hard-won progress. Mounting pressure on the process, culture, and institutions of democracy. These crises have interconnected, entwined, and worsened one another, amplifying existing inequalities, spreading instability, and bringing forward the tipping point of conflict. And they underline the essential paradox of the world today.’