Waste Management NZ has been purchased by a Beijing Corporation namely ‘Igneo’ a Beijing Capital Group. This means that NZ largest organic waste disposal will be owned by this Beijing Corporate. Igneo Infrastructure partners. The First Sentier Investors is a global asset management business, ultimately owned by the Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group. Igneo Infrastructure Partner as an unlisted infrastructure asset management business, is part of First Sentier Investors Group. They communicate, conduct business through different legal entities in different locations. 1st April 2022 Igneo Infrastructure Partners agreed to acquire 100% interest in NZ’s largest resource recovery and waste management services provide (Waste Management NZ Ltd.,). The buyer being the Beijing Capital Group

Beijing Igneo intends to benefit from long tern growth prospects and the sectors of the tail winds. Waste Management NZ operated 860 trucks across 70 locations in NZ, collecting over 2.1 million municipal bins per month. Comprising of a nationwide network of 49 recovery transfer stations and technical facilities, handling over 1 million tonnes of residual waste and recycling over 200,000 tonnes. Comprising of a nationwide network of 49 material recovery, transfer stations and technical facilities, handling over 1 million tonnes of residual waste and recycling over 200 thousand tonnes of residual waste and recycling

Igneo was jointly advised by Craigs Investment Partners and the Royal Bank of Canada on this transaction Bell Gully acted as the legal counsel. The purchase of Waste Management NZ by Beijing  was approved by the NZ Overseas Investment Office (OIO). Igneo is an autonomous investment team in the ‘First Sentier Investors Group, has been operating since 1994. . It invests in high-quality, mature, mid-market infrastructure companies in the utilities and transport sectors in the UK, Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand. Has a focus on ESG and proactive in ‘asset management’. Igneo manages US$14.8 bn worth of assets (as at 31 December 2021) on behalf of more than 120 investors around the world.

First Sentier Investors manages US$182.5 billion in assets (as at 31 December 2021) on behalf of institutional investors, pension funds, wholesale distributors, investment platforms, financial advisers and their clients worldwide. Has offices across Europe, America’s, Asia Pacific, they were formerly known as ‘First State Investments, but then was acquired by Mitsubishi UFJ Trust and Banking Corporation in August 2019. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG) is one of the worlds leading financial groups with , headquarters in Tokyo. Has a global network with approx.., 2500 locations in more than 50 countries, has approx.., 170,000 employees offers services in commercial banking, trust banking, securities, credit cards, consumer finance, asset management, leasing. First Sentier Investors (FSI) is an asset management business and the home of investment teams FSSA Investment Managers, Igneo Infrastructure Partners, Realindex Investments and Stewart Investors.

Igneo Infrastructure Partners is a UK trading name of First Sentier Investors International IM Limited. In the EEA this website is operated and communicated by First Sentier Investors (Ireland) Limited, registered office 70 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2, Ireland, (CBI registration number C182306). First Sentier Investors is ultimately owned by Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc (MUFG), a global financial group. This is a leading global financial services group and one of the largest banking institutions in Japan. One of the worlds leading financial groups with total assets of approximately $3.1 trillion (USD). The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ New Zealand branch provides diverse corporate banking and finance services through a comprehensive network of branches

First Sentier Investors are stewards of assets under management of AU$215.5 billion (as at 31/12/22) across listed equities, fixed income and direct infrastructure on behalf of institutional investors, pension funds, wholesale distributors and platforms, financial advisers and their clients. Helping to grow their clients wealth. The Beijing Capital Group (BCG), which is owned by the Beijing municipal government.  In 2013 Hongkong listed Cheung Kong Infrastructure Holdings (CKI) has agreed to buy New Zealand waste management company EnviroWaste for NZ$501 million . Transpacific NZ Waste Management was sold to Beijing Capital Group for $950 million in 2014.

Corporate capture is achieving dominance in global affairs from Health, Food, Agriculture, Education, to Advance AI , Societal, Political and Environmental.  The official memorandum partnership signed between the World Economic Forum and the UN 13^th June 2019 that gives corporations access to the UN. Hundreds of organizations from around the world endorsed a collective letter to the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, asking the UN to terminate the strategic partnership between the UN and WEF. Which is said to undermine the mandate of the UN’s impartiality and effectiveness as a multilateral body, particularly when it comes to protecting human right, the partnership is seen to be undemocratic

The UN/WEF partnership is reported to formalize a disturbing corporate capture of the UN, this moving the world dangerously towards a global privatized undemocratic global governance. With corporate leaders being whisper advisors to heads of UN Agencies, systems. The UN/WEF official partnership is namely a global corporate marriage, but the worlds citizens are not invited to have any opinion as to how dangerously undemocratic this is. NZ Government have kept NZ Citizens in the dark over such a huge event that does effect every UN Nation State, including NZ. The WEF is a non- elected global organization, not elected to govern the sovereign (people) of NZ.

The WEF/UN Partnership establishes an institutional home for multinational corporations within the UN. The proviso of the partnership included the power and money the WEF would bring to the UN to accelerate the global agenda 2030. To partner the UN to achieve the insane socialist global utopia, solutions for climate change global health, education. No-one talks about how these corporations, the global elite have caused much of the global crisis that they aspire to address. The WEF reported the pandemic crisis as a narrow window of opportunity, the WEF new normal, the Great Reset.

The UN agency heads and the Secretary general himself participates in the World Economic Forum regional level meeting, where UN Nation States individually support and embrace the corporate takeover of the UN. The implementation plan of the WEF first started to develop in 2009 in the wake of the financial crisis, hence calling for a new system of global governance, where corporations would be granted equal status to UN Member Nation States. A multistakeholder system that drew on the WEF’s “blending, balancing many organizations from both private and public sectors, international organization and academic institutions would turn the UN into a global governing Public-Private Institution. Thus turning the UN into a Multistakeholder body. The WEF represent billionaire stakeholders, there was no approval sought for this marriage between the UN/WEF by member states that I can find in my research. The UN’s present day and future involves giving corporate executives crucial say in universal decision making. Influence and global power to corporate actors, the UN/WEF Multistakeholder governance a role in the global governance worldwide.

The question is, is there a huge risk of “UN Nation State Governments being  diluted, instead will  the worlds biggest tech companies and profit driven Big Pharma involved in legislating global rules

What is an example of stakeholders you may ask? At the multistakeholder UN Food System Summit organized by the Secretary General UN, the stakeholders were large agri-businesses, data management companies and commodity leaders. Much of what has happened stems from the Klaus Schwab Global Redesign Initiative report WEF proposing a shift in global governance. This is a 600 plus page pdf that can be found online. Accompanying the mass of WEF corporations are the philanthropist financing mechanism, that finance the corporate world and international decision making of the 2030 Global Redesign Initiative, the so called ‘New Normal’. As the UN Secretary General said as to the post pandemic crisis “We must never go back to the old normal”. The old normal of course is the innovative free-market economy, the freedom of choice, old values, beliefs the worlds populations are to accept the demands of the WEF/UN Global Stakeholder Corporate Global Governance of stakeholderism, corporate capture. (The UN Nation States become the backseat passengers in a global vehicle driven by corporate CEO’s, such as BlackRock the largest  asset manager in the world

Hearing Christopher Luxon press interview today I cannot but help pick up on this embracing of the International Global Order, which actually is driven by stakeholder corporate communism. He uses the language of the UN/WEF, and speaks of his worldly experience which includes UNILEVER member of WEF Corporatization.

Researcher: Carol Sakey

E Environmental S Social  G Governance A Chinese Communist Social Credit system that demands compliancy and obedience. One on Rewards and Punishments. BlackRock has been highly criticized for their entrenchment, promoting of this ESG framework. Now investors are threatening to pull out billions of dollars from BlackRock Asset Management. However the largest Asset Manager in the world and other Corporates and partnering Governments – Banks etc., have come up with a holier than though way of entrenching corporate capture into civilization, every living entity in the world. They are touting this as ‘kinder’ with a massive impact that will allow corporate capture cart explicit global powers as to Public Private Governance (Corporations partnering with governments worldwide)

The new ESG Global Holier than Thou ESG Global governance acted out locally includes embedding ESG Chinese Communist  Social Credit system into the concept of the ‘One Health Approach’. The very same approach being used by governments worldwide. The WHO International Pandemic Treaty is also entrenched with the One Health Approach.

The One Health Approach is a concept of controlling Humans, Animals-Wild and domestic, plants, soil, air the whole eco system.  You will find that certain Iwi Elite using this approach in their partnership with the NZ Government.

All governments, UN Nations State leaders, banking institutions to entrench ESG in all financial institutions worldwide this includes using the concept of the One Health Approach to maximize profits. Govts allowing Asset Managers eg BlackRock and their investors to make policy recommendations through their  position themselves with massive global power and influence.

Maximizing profits for BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, Amazon etc., Hence a Global Multi Stakeholder Governance enacted out here in NZ implemented as domestic policies. To mobilize people to think differently to drive green tax credits, green investment portfolio’s. Reporting in Corporate business media.

“A new approach to ESG government policies is needed before its too late” The concept of the One Health Approach connecting ESG – One Health- to Corporate Governance. (Corporate Capture)

Iwi Elite partnership with the Government. A One Health Approach includes mythology. Mythology that has now entered the school curriculum science program of evidential facts of science. A massive control system over life itself. Humans, Animals-Wild and domestic, plants, air, soil, water, rivers, oceans the whole eco system.. The One Heath Approach is a catalyst for UN Agenda 2030 global development goals. The Pandemic has highlighted the global potential, like a dummy run for the global One Health concept by bringing together medical, veterinary and environmental scientists and policy specialists.

Since the 2003 UN world health Conference this inclusive global approach into ecosystems has been high promoted and actioned especially within Agenda 2030 and the global development goals and 169 targets. Namely One Health sustainable global development across all sectors of governments, NGO’ Academia etc.,  The concept of the One health Approach has been referenced as keeping UN Agenda 2030 on track and now accelerating it through corporate capture.  Now entrenching the One Health Approach into Govt policies partnering ESG Corporate capture through Asset Management with corporation eg BlackRock, Vanguard, Amazon etc.,

The G7 gathering reinforcing the One Health Approach as a catalyst for Multistakeholder governance which destroys small businesses and farming communities, the farming industry. Indigenous Governance through the concept of a One Health Approach. Mythology through a One Health Response entrenched with Corporate Capture Communist Chinese Social Credit Scoring to control peoples behaviour through rewards and punishments.

Corporations and influential asset managers — such as BlackRock, State Street or Vanguard — must address stakeholder interests in ESG by changing their governance and investment practices in relation to their position of global power and influence.

A kinder appearance with a massive impact the implementation of ESG Government policies. Mobilizing people to think and behave differently. Social Engineering for Corporate power and wealth.

One Health is a collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approach — working at the local, regional, national, and global level

RESEARCHED BY  Carol Sakey

LINKS:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-022-01076-1

https://theconversation.com/a-new-approach-to-environmental-social-and-governance-policies-is-needed-before-its-too-late-211473

Putting the ‘Con’ in ‘Consensus’ There is no 97% consensus among climate scientists, many misunderstand core issues (Appeared in the Financial Post May 2015). It was the lead up to the Paris Climate Summit, there was massive activist pressure in and on all governments to fall in lines with the ‘global warming’ agenda, to accept emission targets which was reported as “could harm our economy”. Governments worldwide, including NZ’s threw out domestic economy under electric vehicles, wind and solar farms, the economy was to be like a train wreckage

It was reported that 97% of scientists agreed with the climate change debate, as it turns out that was a massive lie, it was made up. Climate Activist Bill McKibben claimed there was a consensus that greenhouse gases are a ‘grave danger’. He was challenged, asked where his source of information came from, he promptly withdraw it. Barack Obama US President at the time sent out a tweet claiming ‘97% climate experts believe global warming is ‘real’ man -made and dangerous”, he was referring to a survey that did not even ask that question, he made it up

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) asserts the conclusion that most (more than 50%) of the post 1950 global warming is due to human activity, chiefly greenhouse gas emissions and land use change. (But does not survey its own contributors, let alone anyone else, its unknown as to how many experts agree with this). And the statement, even if were true, does not imply that we face a crisis requiring massive restructuring of the worldwide economy. In fact, it is consistent with the view that the benefits of fossil fuel use greatly outweigh the climate-related costs. One commonly cited survey asked if carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and human activities contribute to climate change. But these are trivial statements that even many IPCC skeptics agree with. Both statements are inconsistent with the view that climate change is harmless. So there are no policy implications of such surveys, regardless of the level of government.

The most highly cited papers supposedly found 97% of published scientific studies support man-made global warming. But in addition to poor survey methodology, that tabulation is often misrepresented. Most papers show that 66% actually took no position. Of the remaining 34%, at least 33% supported at least a weak human contribution to global warming. OK, so divide 33 by 34 and there you have it 97%, however 33% includes many papers that critique key elements of the IPCC position. There are more recent surveys that shed light on what atmospheric scientists actually think. Bear in mind that on a topic as complex as climate change, a survey is hardly a reliable guide to scientific truth, but if you want to know how many people agree with your view, a survey is the only way to find out.

In 2012 the American Meteorological Society (AMS) surveyed its 7,000 members, receiving 1,862 responses. Of those, only 52% said they think global warming over the 20th century has happened and is mostly man-made (the IPCC position). The remaining 48% either think it happened but natural causes explain at least half of it, or it didn’t happen, or they don’t know. Furthermore, 53% agree that there is conflict among AMS members on the question.

They are liars, there was no 97% consensus on man-made global warming. Half reject the IPCC conclusion, more than half acknowledge that their profession are split on the issue. The Netherlands Environmental Agency published a survey of International Climate Experts. 6550 questionnaires were sent out, 1868 responses were received. The questions referred only to the post 1950 period. 66% agreed with IPCC that global warming had happened and humans are mostly responsible. The rest either  did not know or think human influence was not dominant. Again NO 97% Con(Sensus) behind the IPCC

The Netherlands Environmental Agency recently published a survey of international climate experts. 6550 questionnaires were sent out, and 1868 responses were received, a similar sample and response rate to the AMS survey. In this case the questions referred only to the post-1950 period. 66% agreed with the IPCC that global warming has happened and humans are mostly responsible. The rest either don’t know or think human influence was not dominant. So again, no 97% consensus behind the IPCC. The Dutch survey that described ‘climate experts’ a large fraction only work in connected fields such as policy analysis, health and engineering, and may not follow the primary physical science literature. But the Dutch survey is even more interesting because of the questions it raises about the level of knowledge of the respondents. Although all were described as “climate experts,” a large fraction only work in connected fields such as policy analysis, health and engineering, and may not follow the primary physical science literature. Of 46 per cent of the Dutch survey respondents – nearly half – believe the warming trend has stayed the same or increased. And only 25 per cent agreed that global warming has been less than projected over the past 15 to 20 years, even though the IPCC reported that 111 out of 114 model projections overestimated warming since 1998. ¾ of the respondents disagreed, or strongly disagreed with the statement “Climate is chaotic and and stated it cannot be predicted.”

The  IPCC said in its 2003 report: “In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore “the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” There are unresolved discrepancies between models, observations regarding issues like warming in the tropical troposphere and overall climate sensitivity, and Natural Climate variability. Its much too difficult to realistically climate model, simulate clouds. Clouds are an enormous influence in Climate Assessments, conclusions.

Lots of people get called ‘Climate Experts’ and they appear to contribute to the appearance of ‘consensus’, without necessarily even be knowledgeable about the core issues. A massive consensus by the misinformed really is NOT a Consensus.. It’s a big Fat Lie. Its worth nothing of any value. The phony claim of 97% consensus is mere political rhetoric aimed at stifling debate and intimidating people into silence. The Barack Obama’s website (barackobama.com) says “97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made … People I urge you to call out all these political corrupt propagandists that reside in the toilet bowl of Wellington.

They laugh at you if you dare to publicly debate, discuss this Global Warming Agenda. They derail, shut people down. They even shut the real scientists down. This is not real science, this is about controlling populations worldwide into smart cities, to eat bugs and plant foods. To destroy farming communities, small businesses.This is Corporate Capture world wide, the profiteers are those that are the DAVOS Crowd. The WEF and the UN. The WEF representing the Multistakeholder Corporations. The UN with their International Rules. Like hand in glove WEF and UN official partnership agreement 13^th June 2019.. The United Nations implements their one world global governance rules and regulations worldwide to be adopted by UN State’s (Includes New Zealand) and the Corporations are deployed worldwide to accelerate the Global One World Governance Agenda to enslave populations worldwide.  UN Agenda 2030. Leave no-one behind, everyone, everywhere, at every age.

Those political cronies that reside in the toilet bowl of Wellington with their political policing are determining that the people have no voice to call them out on their corruption and lies. I urge you do not remain silent stand up, the more you speak up publically the easier it gets. It may seem uncomfortable, you may feel nervous at first but the more you do this, the more courage you get, the more empowered you are. Remember Silence is the CON in CONSENT.

God Save New Zealand.

Link:  https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/putting-the-con-in-consensus-not-only-is-there-no-97-per-cent-consensus-among-climate-scientists-many-misunderstand-core-issues