A large number of well paid politicians and their advisers have flown to Italy to spend time talking and eating. Their communique will tell us that they aim to cut carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, and to limit the increase in the world’s temperature to 2 degrees! There’s precision for you.
Why don’t they add they aim to abolish world poverty, end wars, ensure Arabs and Jews love each other and repay all their debts by 2050. None of them are going to be in office by then, so why not?
It is this endless posturing, when by their actions they are doing the opposite, that so annoys people. If they want to cut carbon emissions they should start with their own travel plans. Why not agree a carbon cut through email, internet and video links? If they want to stabilise the world economy, then cutting huge budget deficits by controlling their own costs would show some leadership to the rest of the public sector.
July 9, 2009
Yep, after the Bali agreement, the Kyoto protocol and the Rio declaration I will start to take these things less like pointless free junkets when we get the Slough memorandum or the Carlisle concordat
July 9, 2009
Complete hypocrites the lot of them.
July 9, 2009
Absolutely!
What a totally pointless exercise in navel-gazeing to rank alongside all those fat cat international conferences and 8-course 5-star dinners with which the World Poverty people so often anger us all.
Both are a sheer waste of time, resources and public goodwill – let alone doing something positive for the poor and needy.
July 9, 2009
I completely agree. Remember when a lot of politicians got together at Maastrict and solemnly promised that if government deficits exceeded 3% of GDP or govt. debt exceeded 60% of GDP then their countries would be fined and potentially expelled from the EU. No doubt we’ll see the “exceptional and temporary excesses for exceptional cases” excuses wheeled out in 2050.
July 9, 2009
I think they have made the promises about ending poverty & bringing peace to the Middle East at pervious G8s. The one about repaying debts may just be to far beyond credibility.
While the promise to cut use of fire by 80% by 2050 is not a promise they are going to have to carry out it does imply some lesser cuts now & that simply cannot be done without proportionate economic damage. It also incites idiots such as every single Scottish MSP, who aren’t smart enough to realise Westminster are posturing, to vote for cutting our CO2 by 42% over the next 11 years which will certainly destroy half of our local economy.
July 9, 2009
Sadly, all the main parties seem in thrall of the ‘green vote.’ That and the fact, that the carbon con is going to allow them to tax us even more – all to “save the planet” of course.
July 9, 2009
Actually they do have a case. “Jaw jaw is better than war war,” said Winston Churchill. As they mingle in among Mr Berlusconi’s jokes and lovely ministers, President Obama’s homespun wit, Mrs Obama’s yellow sheath dress and lots and lots of flowers, they are at least talking. Berlusconi actually flirts with Chancellor Merkel. I’ll bet she eats out of his hand.
It is when the talking, flirting and eating stop (North Korea, Somaliland, China) that things begin to look menacing.
And, being the Leaders of the Free World, (bless), they do need all the trappings of Empire. Otherwise, like the Emperor, they would feel naked.
July 9, 2009
Trees are mostly Carbon, where does this carbon come from, from the atmosphere, absorbed by the leaves then fixed into the Plants cells.
So, how about we shut the borders and plant Tens of Billions of trees, this would, over a period of twenty years take out of circulation hundreds of Billions of tons of CO2.
shutting the borders and allowing the population to decline would also reduce our road congestion and Landfill problems.
Not that I actually believe in the Carbon con.
No, these people are not interested in solving these problems, what they are doing is setting up their One world communist Control Grid.
July 9, 2009
Every group of people has some things that they believe deeply in. I am a Catholic, I believe therefore in all sorts of things which seem quite normal at Church. But from outside they are, quite frankly, ridiculous.
The same must surely go for politicians. So, to question Gay Rights, the Abolition of the Death Penalty, Women’s Equality or Global Warming is like me saying that the Holy Father is a silly old man.
(I don’t think he is, actually.)
Every group must be held together by common beliefs, however daft they really are.
July 9, 2009
I just so agree with you John.
July 9, 2009
Bilderberg and other roundtables are where the real decisions are made at the moment, along with UNs coordinating agency Ecosoc.
The G8 is political window dressing to this.
They will coordinate the objectives long after the elected leaders are gone.
July 9, 2009
The Conservatives do need to be careful not to be too closely identified with climate alarmism. It was a good angle for the ‘re-branding’ excercise of 2005, when the global warming theory carried all before it. But now it is looking increasingly likely that the next few years will see a comprehensive debunking of this theory. When that happens a lot of people will look very silly. It wouldn’t matter too much in opposition. But if the Tories are back in office & if they are to have (as is rumoured) a ministry of ‘climate change’ this could be very tricky territory. The costs of green policies are mounting and now we hear there will even be a green gestpo to police omissions by companies. This is bad news for the investment climate and for employment. (And there is of course no evidence it will do anything at all to improve the environment.)
July 9, 2009
How can anyone predict anything that will happen in 2050? Just like the ‘global warming scam’ when ‘experts’ say that the climate will be such and such in 2080? In 1987 did any predict the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989?
Talking about flying all over the world; when will popstars stop flying about in private jets as they pontificate to the rest of us about ‘carbon offsetting’.
Oh I lie. I predict that if I live long enough then I will be 90 years old in 2050!
July 9, 2009
I like Obama’s proposal on Nuclear power. I also liked the lady that Burlusconi sent as his first lady. 80 percent? I would suggest you would be better off planting olive trees and ensuring your house is on high ground.
July 16, 2009
I thought that Miliband’s cheap gibe about rehearsal was despicable, and only served to demean him.
Nuclear power is clearly the answer to the problem of low-carbon energy generation. With modern, advanced reactor design it is reliable, completely clean and ensures security of supply.
Having no oil, coal or gas of their own, the French rely on nuclear power for most of their electricity. If they can do it, why can’t we?
As for waste, it can easily be dumped in the deep-ocean subduction zones, from where over time it will be drawn down into the mantle.
Wind farms are noisy and hideous. Together with tidal and unreliable solar generators, they can only provide a fraction of our growing needs.
Please continue your support, and persuade your colleagues that action must be taken NOW to replace and augment our reactors.