Comments on: Peter Spencer’s Hunger Strike against unconstitutional Carbon fuelled actions by the Government

By: Fair Compensation

Fair Compensation — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:31:46 +0000

The offer of “$2,170,000″ was the value AFTER the changes, not the value before, so that argument is dodgy, to say the least.

Fair Compensation would be calculated on the original value, not the devalued value, as has been done here.

This was just a weak attempt to make him go away, else every farmer would have been offered compensation.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:28:04 +0000

Read the court cases…
There was a valid offer on the table for the farm at $2,170,000 (market value for the farm…which the NSW government had no obligation to provide). If Peter was allowed to complete the land clearing that was prevented by the NSW legislation, the market value of the farm would have increased to $2,400,000.
So,like all things,this is about the money. Peter feels he is being short changed, and has created this conspiracy theory of “Big government” acting illegally. Yet it appears the NSW Government has operated within the law (it really has nothing to do with Kevin). For mine, I don’t know whether $230,000 is worth your life.

By: amicus curiae

amicus curiae — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 16:17:28 +0000

Pity Kevins to gutless to talk! If Peter dies then to my mind the PM has a direct involvment in his death, neglect if nothing else.
Kyoto is an admitted useless measure and should be scrapped immediately.
Our Farmers bear the brunt of Howards stupidity and Rudds cupidity!
And Rudds so suckered by AGW propaganda he is still willing to sign more of our nations livelihood away for NO good reason.
see the exposes on Patchauris corrupt dealings now breaking (not the MSM) online Telegraph Delingpole.