THE ‘DUTY OF CARE’ APPLIED TO GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY.

It would appear that successive Governments have KNOWINGLY both acted (i.e. passed UNLAWFUL ACTS OF PARLIAMENT, which are supposed to be enactments of the LAW) to allow "Un-necessary Unreasonable Environmental Damage and Destruction", and have omitted to control it, which they ought to have done according to LAW, to the extent that the global threat of "Unnecessary and Unreasonable Environmental Damage and Destruction" is COMMONLY AGREED to be as serious as a threat of World War.

Therefore it would appear that such Governments are manifestly RECKLESS and CRIMINAL, by act and omission in their "Duty of Care" for the global environment.

The Government is voted in, and paid, by the People to ENACT THE LAW, and thereby to serve the best interests of the People.

To this end therefore the Government is the servant of the People, and the People are the Masters of the Government.

It is UNLAWFUL for a "master" to employ a "servant" to commit a reckless act (the "vicarious responsibility of a master for the act of a servant"); so if the Government is reckless in it’s Duty of Care for the environment, then it is unlawful for the People to pay tax to the Government as long as the Government continues to be reckless.

Our intention is not to persuade people to withhold their taxes, to do so would hardly be seen as reasonable, prudent and well intentioned.

It is our intention to inform the people of the facts and thereby to exert as much political pressure as we may upon the Government to cease its EVIDENT recklessness.

The ONLY way the government can cease this environmental recklessness is to provide:

ALL REASONABLY AVAILABLE RESOURCES FOR GREEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT,

-anything less being "an omission which is reasonably foreseeable as likely to cause further physical, emotional, mental and spiritual injury" to the People, who are the neighbours of the reckless government.

The question which then arises is `What are these “all reasonably available resources”?’

When asked, most people will agree that the threat of "Un-necessary Unreasonable Environmental Damage and Destruction" is of a similar magnitude to a threat of world war, therefore, we may assert that the resources reasonably available to fight such a threat are of similar magnitude to those which would be made available if we were to have to fight a world war.

In other words, according to LAW we should declare a global "State of Emergency" in order to mobilise our collective resources to fight this most serious, REAL AND PRESENT threat to our well-being and security;

~ we cannot have a healthy economy when our workforce is suffering from the effects of an unreasonably unhealthy environment . . .

A State of Emergency for the environment, would involve combining competitive and co-operative free enterprises, directed and financed towards using all our splendid resources and technologies, to create a beautiful world for ourselves and future generations.