Jump to content

What is the beltnroads policy?


nomadpete
 Share

Recommended Posts

@hihosland nailed it!

 

Its basically a payday loan.. you lend the money never expecting it to be paid back... and you extract every last mollecule from within the country's scrotum as a result...

 

Let me be quite clear.. Donald Trump, Validimir Putin and the North Korean guy are distractions.. China and Xi Jinpin are the biggest threat to the world at the moment...

 

He is very smart - as we are all talking about DT... who is as useless as teets on a bull...

 

 

Edited by Jerry_Atrick
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Study up on what the Chinese have done to many small Pacific nations by way of their "expansionist" policies, and you can see the pattern in "Belt and Road". 

 

Basically it's, "We pour a big heap of our money into developments in your country, and you then pay us back. When you can't pay us (as is often the case, due to inflated potential returns), we move in as mortgagees in possession, and grab very useful strategic items for ourselves, such as minerals, prime farmland, fishing rights, etc, etc ..."

 

The Chinese Communist Party is the leopard that cannot change its spots. It was always intent on World domination and ensuring Communist idealogy was extended to every part of the Globe - and all it takes is dumbos such as Andrews, who totally lack shrewdness and perceptiveness as to Chinese Communist Party long-term aims. The old saying is that the Chinese think 50 years ahead, most Westerners only think about next week.

 

The reason we have seen nothing in the news media about the Belt and Road policies and developments is because COVID-19 makes for better-selling news. But in the background, there is great alarm in the important circles, as regards the constant and devious Chinese penetration into our industrial, technological, resources, and political arenas. Not for nothing is the Govt currently boosting our spy agencies. We need to be on heightened alert to the menace that is a China of total World domination.

 

The next move will be a takeover of Taiwan, which will almost certainly result in some major fireworks - although Taiwan does not stand much of a chance when China finally makes a firm and sudden move, to "re-establish" Taiwan as part of China.

Edited by onetrack
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, old man emu said:

Ans Taiwan, with no oil, will be left like a shag on a rock by the World's self-anointed Protector of Democracy.

Therein is the lesson for Australia: unless we have something our big brother stands to lose, in time of dire need he won't come to our aid, no matter how many times we came to his.

Long ago our fearless leaders realised this and let the Americans make us part of their Belt and Road.

Before that, it was the British. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this takeover of agreements by states with foreigners and breaking contracts is not being done to save the states. It is purely a political grab by the Feds, and we all know where that is going. All the way with whoever is the US President, no matter how big a clown he is.

The person who is going to have the final say on these agreements is the Minister for Foreign Affairs. She is the person who had to go to Donald to get her instructions, even though she has to quarantine on her return.

There is one bright light on the horizon for me, I will be to old to worry about it all, with a bit of luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Yenn said:

Now this takeover of agreements by states with foreigners and breaking contracts is not being done to save the states. It is purely a political grab by the Feds, and we all know where that is going. All the way with whoever is the US President, no matter how big a clown he is.

The person who is going to have the final say on these agreements is the Minister for Foreign Affairs. She is the person who had to go to Donald to get her instructions, even though she has to quarantine on her return.

There is one bright light on the horizon for me, I will be to old to worry about it all, with a bit of luck.

Much as I distrust of our current corrupt federal government, we should remember that it is they, not the states, who have constitutional foreign affairs powers.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can it be a federal issue?

Our states operate as separate countries within greater Australia. As such, why can't they sign up for anybodies beltnroads agreements, whether it be a US one, a UK one, or an Asian one?

 

My main question was what are the risks (surely there are strings are attached), and what checks and balances are there?

 

For decades, we have been brainwashed into believing that foreign investment is good for us. Even though it is obvious that a foreign investor wouldn't be investing unless there was profit to be drawn from us.

IE, why let the foreigner take profit from what was already our own opportunity anyway.?

Likewise, why make a (overseas) deal such as beltnroads without telling us dumb voters what it's going to cost us, as it surely will do in the long run?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nomadpete said:

How can it be a federal issue?

Our states operate as separate countries within greater Australia. As such, why can't they sign up for anybodies beltnroads agreements, whether it be a US one, a UK one, or an Asian one?

I believe you are mistaken; decades of negotiations over a century ago culminated in those separate colonies/states giving some of their powers to the Commonwealth Government. Foreign affairs was one of them.

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I'm starting to wonder what's the benefit of having all these state government mobs.

For instance, it has resulted in lots of conflicting behaviour over handling the covid problem. And we keep getting inconsistent road laws, from state to state.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I acknowledge that DFAT technically have responsibility for foreign affairs, but somehow the federal government doesn't have the power to do much about foreign agreements by the states.

So they are rushing a new legislation through to give them the authority that they already had, but couldn't use?

 

From ABC News:-

 

"Victoria's controversial trade deal with Beijing may be scrapped by Australia's Foreign Minister, using new powers being proposed by the Federal Government."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that a State can do business with any private organisation it wants to. Look at the coal mine in Queensland that has caused much protest. Everyone knows that the Chinese government has its whole hand in any Chinese business, so its involvement a deal with a Chinese financial institution should come as no surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nomadpete said:

So, how did Dan make this agreement in the first place, if it's a federal responsibility?

It's a grey area, NP, which the Morrison government is finally taking some notice of.

Scores of cities and shires have "sister city" agreements with counterparts in other countries.

Lots of investment contracts have been signed with foreign corporations to allow the development of infrastructure and businesses in Australia.

 

Trouble is, the Chinese Communist Party which controls their government, keeps a tight rein on even supposedly "private" businesses in China. Hence the growing distrust of Huawei, TikTok, etc. The alarm bells were finally heard when a Chinese corporation was given control of the Port of Darwin, which is also our main northern naval base!

 

Under their current leader, the CCP has become increasingly belligerent across the world, bullying ethnic Chinese in other countries to expand its influence. University and even school courses in this and other countries have been "adapted" so as not to offend the Communist Party. There is now a growing reaction against this aggressive approach and even Party insiders are uneasy about it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm concerned because the Asian business ethic is based on long term battle plans. And has a powerful political control subagenda. 

As such, their goals are easily achieved against our short term government planning (in)capabilities.

All of which does not bode well in the long term

for any nation that they make deals with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally am not worried about Chinese influence. Gosh we have gone from war to war in order to be the best friend of the US. And we are a sovereign country and we could  tax overseas owners as much as we wanted.  I bet  this would upset the US more than the Chinese.

If I had my way, we would be making nukes using our own uranium and get  Jabiru designed drones ( with inertial nav systems )  by the thousand and not be at the mercy of anybody.

I'm not anti-US , I have good mates there and I like the place to visit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all about Trade as a major priority over anything else - just like the COVID-19 virus restrictions anger, from the likes of the ultimate Greed Merchant, Clive Palmer and his followers.

 

The State Govts have been cutting deals with China to "increase trade investment". In other words, sell everything you can lay your hands on, to the Chinese, and don't even look at the ramifications.

 

The Darwin Port 99-year lease to the Chinese is a classic that caused the Defence Dept to rage against the stupidity of the deal. But there are strong rumours, kickbacks to NT pollies were involved in that idiotic deal.

 

In W.A., we now have the worst (ex-)Premier we ever had, Colin Barnett, raging against Federal Govt "interference" into his former "trade deals" with China. Barnett was the greatest imbecile who was ever given control of this State.

 

Barnett blew W.A. taxpayers money like a drunken sailor. Well North of $300M of our money was utterly blown on trying to rebuild a rusty coal-fired power station that was promptly scrapped - as it should've been originally.

 

Barnett raged on, with typical Liberal propaganda, about how the Rudd/Gillard Govts left Australians, "in debt for centuries, with their wastefulness".

 

This is the same bloke who, under his tenure, promptly increased W.A.'s State debt from the $3B State debt he inherited from Labor - to an incredible $42B - and lost the States prime global credit rating in doing so - meaning we now have to pay higher interest on our borrowings.

 

This is the same bloke, who at the last election, reduced the Liberal vote % to a level unparalleled in W.A.'s voting history. Barnett is a dropkick who, like Palmer, only sees $$$$$$ signs in any dealings with the Chinese - and who conveniently ignores the long-term ramifications of a undemocratic, dictatorial, Communist Party-run State, moving into a position whereby it can totally secure its raw supplies of minerals and food, and dictate to all Australians, while they cream off our premium produce and strategic minerals, for their exclusive benefit.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-27/wa-china-deal-at-risk-under-proposed-new-foreign-relations-laws/12601514

 

Barnett should just straight out admit, he follows the Palmer creed - sell everything you can lay your hands on to the Chinese, all the while telling people you're a Great Australian, and you'll make Australia Great again. They are Donald Trump clones.

Edited by onetrack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, onetrack said:

...Barnett blew W.A. taxpayers money like a drunken sailor... under his tenure, promptly increased W.A.'s State debt from the $3B State debt he inherited from Labor - to an incredible $42B - and lost the States prime global credit rating in doing so - meaning we now have to pay higher interest on our borrowings...

Crickey, that's even worse than Howard, who railed against Labor's $160d debt and when he got into power, ran it up to almost  $400b.

Despite all this, every one knows the Libs are better at handling the economy- Rupert told us!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anybody tell me what is contained in this agreement that Dan has so proudly signed on behalf of all Victorians?

What exactly has this foreign government promised, what strings are attached, what is the 'win - win' perspective that benefits both sides equally?

What is the timeframe?

Dan wouldn't have made a commitment unless there was something in it for him (and hopefully for the people).

The other government wouldn't have signed up unless they are confident of gaining more than it costs them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Can anybody tell me what is contained in this agreement that Dan has so proudly signed on behalf of all Victorians?

My understanding is that it is a framework agreement  Here it is. I have not read it so I have no insights into it either way.

Link to download pdf at the bottom of the page

https://www.vic.gov.au/bri-framework

 

 

 

Edited by octave
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The link for some reason takes me to the top of the page... But copy and paste it into the search bar and you can get to it..

 

It is not a legally binding document, but as I understand, sets out a framework (policy) and committee that meets semi-annually.  I will read later today...

 

However, a quick glance of article 1 already has me skeptical (notwithstanding what looks like minor errors of translation - so what other minor errors of translation were there during the negoitations):

"... bring into play respective strengthens with the concept of openness, green, and clean governance, ...."

 

YAFKM, right.. China.. Openness, green and clean governance? FFS! Australia ain't that great at it, either.. But somehoe, Victoria doesn't seem to me to be the entity that can bring pressure onto China to strengthen governance on any of these fronts... Or has Victoria acquired nukes in the not too distant past?

 

(YAFKM = You are f.... kidding me)

 

I am personally uncomfortable how Labour/Labor parties have cosied up to the Chinese. Even in the UK, the Conservatives has also cosied up, but not to the same extent.  When Blair was in power, the then Chinese premier visitied the UK and Blair ordered that protesters were not allowed to line the streets of the motorcade route the Chinese premier took, to be enforced with armed police! Armed police are rarely seen in the UK - normally as responders to terrorism, etc (which they are deft at rapid response). Apparently the Premier was annoyed he could even see them from afar. Blair also cancelled a Serious Fraud Office investigation into corruption at BAe when the Saudis threatened to buy F15s of F16s instead of whatever BAe was pedalling.

 

Rudd is a Sinophile and Labour here are also pushing for Chinese investment, etc. Despite Labour being for the litttle people, supposed equality, etc. However, they seem to brush nder the carpet the human rights abuses, totalitarianism and authoritarianism, agrression to their neighbours, etc. They say the US and UK got rich on slavery.. but how is China any different? Yet, Labor/Labour lap them up... They are a quick fix to long term problems, but the new long term problems will be worse than the ones we already have.

 

(That is all of course, my opinion. Anyone care to put up facts to suggest otherwise.. let me know).

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...