Tyranny by treaty

The World Bank is now seeking Congressional approval to increase its grant/financing capacity from $90 billion to $280 billion a year.

Since the World Bank established the GEF in 1991, $16 billion in taxpayer funds, or $850 million a year, has flowed from 32 developed countries to projects mandated by just six of the 16 UN environmental treaties. 65 per cent of these funds are for biodiversity and climate change treaty projects such as Project #1901. GEF’s new budget is $2.5 billion a year, but this figure is dwarfed by the US government’s commitment to a transfer of $100 billion a year from developed countries to developing countries on the climate change treaty alone. At 22 per cent, the US’s share of this commitment will be $22 billion a year - for just this one UN treaty.

There are 822 GEF climate change projects slated for developing countries. Total value: $21 billion. GEF is granting $2.8 billion for these projects with the balance coming from “cofinancing” arrangements, primarily grants and lines of credit for more taxpayer dollars arranged by the World Bank to private finance companies.

But look closer. If one sorts the 822 GEF climate change projects by “enabling activity”, we find 280 such projects. What is “enabling activity”? It’s paperwork, paperwork valued at $200 million - with GEF grants supplying almost 90 per cent, while GEF retains a 10 per cent agency fee on every document.

Paperwork heaven

Every UN treaty triggers Secretariat costs, thousands of projects around the world, national legislation and litigation, and lots of paperwork.

For example, the Environmental Protection Agency spends $1.5~2 million to write up our annual US Inventory for Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, as required by the UN’s climate change treaty.

A similar document, China’s Initial National Communication to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), is 102 pages and cost $3.84 million - almost $38,000 a page! China contributed only $240,000 to this total and we taxpayers in developed countries paid the balance. China’s Second National Communication carries a $6 million price tag with China contributing $650,000 and taxpayers paying the balance. GEF retains its standard 10 per cent agency fee on every document.

We taxpayers paid fully $59 million out of the $60 million doled out for UN-mandated “second national communications” for 130 countries on the climate change treaty, while GEF retained agency fees of $7.5 million.

And, in a glaring conflict of interest, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) also runs the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) where all the science supporting climate change is processed, regurgitated and disseminated to the world.

Add in thousands of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) receiving UN grants to further hype the scheme as “saving the Earth” and you can see where this is all heading.

It’s all barely “transparent”. It’s all without oversight. There’s no accountability. There’s no way to vote those pushing such bad policy out of office. Shielded by the UN, they’re a world away from the reach of your vote. But it’s all as close as your wallet.

So how big is it? The UN International Civil Service Commission now handles personnel for 40 UN agencies, agencies where corruption is an ongoing issue. Oh, and by the way, the UN pension fund is also broke and needs a bailout!