Election Day

Now it’s your turn. Today voters decide who should represent us in the next Parliament.

I have had my say, so I will write about something unconnected to the UK election this morning.

Last week Mr Trump announced he was pulling the USA out of the Paris climate Agreement of 2015. This met with substantial protest from governments around the world. Mrs Merkel and the EU were especially vocal in condemning his action.

The Paris Agreement laid down two things. It set out voluntary targets for reductions of CO2 by the advanced country signatories, and allowed developing countries more latitude on their targets as growth often comes with more energy consumption. It established a Green Climate Fund for the advanced nations to make substantial payments to the developing world to help fund their investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency. Mr Obama was particularly proud of the decision, and is very critical of his successor.

Mr Trump argued that the USA is expected to pay too much, and the others have not done enough. He argued that far from limiting coal and carbon dioxide it would shift coal production from the USA to China. He argued that the costs were severe on the USA, with large losses in prospect for coal and wider industry, whilst the gain in total carbon dioxide reduced worldwide would be small.

I am giving you the chance to write about Mr Trump and his critics on this important subject, knowing you will write about what you want to.

Published and promoted by Fraser Mc Farland on behalf of John Redwood, both at 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG40 1XU


  1. Dame Rita Webb
    June 8, 2017

    Anybody who sincerely believes in the existence of a “magic money tree” should go out and vote Conservative. After all having doubled the national debt and having a could not give a toss attitude to deficit spending, they have one as big as one of those giant sequoia trees that you can drive your car through in California.

    1. Len Grinds
      June 8, 2017

      Mrs May has (i) refused to show up to debate with the other party leaders; (ii) staged pretend rallies in secret locations, the public kept out; (iii) issued a manifesto without costings, (iv) answered questions with pre-prepared soundbites cooked up by Lynton Crosby.
      If you value political debate, you cannot vote for her

      1. brian
        June 8, 2017

        May has been wise to refuse to participate in circus-like campaigning activities. These are set up to ensure greater profits for the TV and Press outfits, not for rational debate on the issues of the time.

      2. Richard1
        June 8, 2017

        She is a little wooden but what is this drivel about an uncosted manifesto. As far as I’m aware all the Conservative pledges fall well within the public spending limits announced in the autumn statement and the budget. There’s an awful lot of fake news for the left amplified by the BBC on this subject.

      3. realist
        June 8, 2017

        Len Grinds.
        Running the government and state is not about public debate. Debate is not about democracy either. I am so excellent at debate that if that is the only criterion thou should bow before me”!! It is nice entertainment for the interested ear, only. It sounds like silly childish rattle and chitter-chatter to most peoples on Earth however.
        I have voted today for Mrs May and her team. They may get it wrong. But Corbyn IS wrong however good his oratorical skills. His ideas of defence whatever he might do in practice show weakness and indecisivemes to most of our enemies who recognise only strength, only strength.Not a sit down with a nice cup of tea and a slice of cake reaching a nice sweety-weety agreement to help Ev-er-y-one. The despise us all even Momentum and the Labour voters, Ev-er-y-one

      4. DaveM
        June 8, 2017

        You can’t vote for her unless you live in her constituency. You can vote for the party she leads though.

    2. Hope
      June 8, 2017

      Paris agreement is more about business than climate. Why should China and other countries be given time to change when others are expected to act straight away. Does anyone belive Germany will give up its industry? No it will buy from Russia and claim to comply with the act.. In short passing the blame to countries who produce the energy or pass the jobs to other countries like China. It is not solving the world problem but deciding who can have the jobs to improve third world economies or those who side step the problem like Germany. The agreement is utter rubbish. Climate has always achanged, we need reliable proof it is man made.

      1. hefner
        June 8, 2017

        What could be a reliable proof that climate change is man-made?

        1. Hope
          June 9, 2017

          Evidence would be a good thing. Not from those with vested interests. What do you think?

          1. hefner
            June 10, 2017

            Sorry, how do you define evidence? And please do not play with words: give me a list of potentially changing physical indices that would indicate that something might be happening with the weather and climate.

    3. John Finn
      June 8, 2017

      So can we assume you don’t accept that there should have been some sort of balance between deficit reduction and maintaining a reasonable level of public services.

      1. Edward2
        June 8, 2017

        At the current level and speed of deficit reduction the opposition have been shouting about cuts and austerity.
        Are you calling for an even lower level of spending?

    4. bigneil
      June 8, 2017

      Don’t forget the “waving in” of hundreds of thousands of foreigners, all using the NHS for free, getting money for free, getting their kids schooled for free, translators for free etc etc – no contribution needed. The UK govt loves non-contributing foreigners, pity they don’t love the people who have to pay for it all, anywhere near as much.

    5. Mitchel
      June 8, 2017

      Well,it does exist -for the time being;but as they used to say in the dying years of the Soviet Union,everything’s forever,until it is no more.I’ve long since made sure there’s no exposure to gilts in my portfolios.

    6. NickC
      June 8, 2017

      Yes, Dame Rita, the Tories have doubled the national debt …. whilst being criticised by the likes of you for “austerity” and not spending enough.

      Of course the Tories should have repealed the Climate Change Act 2008, and stopped subsidising Wind, Solar, and Biomass. The hysterical shrieks from the green blob would have been a spectacle to behold. That same green blob that criticises the Tories for doubling the national debt and austerity at the same time.

      1. hefner
        June 8, 2017

        Have your figures right, please. Compare the amount of money represented by the doubling of the national debt and the cost (to the state) of subsidising wind, solar and biomass.
        Please publish the numbers when you have them. Do not forget that a bid part of the cost of renewables is being born by industrial and individual customers.

    7. David Ashton
      June 8, 2017

      Dame Rita, that tree came crashing down this year. Perhaps an omen for the current spend and waste conservative policy.

    8. Richard1
      June 8, 2017

      This really is a piece of nonsense if you don’t mind me saying so – its the Labour Party’s fatuous line.

      Of course if you start with a deficit of 11% of GDP, it doesn’t vanish overnight. So if the deficit comes down, as it has over 7 years, form 11% to 2-3%, in each of those years there will still be a significant increase in absolute borrowing. the proper lesson is it takes years, probably decades, to recover from a Labour government. Always has, always will.

    9. John Wood
      June 8, 2017

      Well remember that the ‘Sorry there is no money left’ Labour Government left a deficit of £160 billion a year and any attempt by the Tories to reduce that has been met with (inaccurate) screams of ‘Tory Austerity’ and you may better understand the position. It would be £350 Billion higher if Corbynomics had been in force from 2010 to 2017.

      1. acorn
        June 10, 2017

        Don’t worry, the Bansters are gradually paying it back. Net debt was only £767 billion, 50% of GDP in 2009/10, before the Banks blew up.

        Two years later it was £2,300 billion, 147% of GDP including the banks! £1,300 billion of which went into the busted banks. They still owe about £300 billion. Meanwhile, households’ economy has been austeritised to help bail-out the Banks.

        BTW. The Conservatives would have done exactly the same bail-out of the Banks as Labour had to do. The mistake Labour made was not nationalising those Banks at zero cost and not having to use the magic money tree.

        PS. Have you noticed that the Conservatives have never questioned where the near £200 billion lifetime bill for Trident submarines, is coming from?

    10. adam
      June 8, 2017

      “Gold Grows On Eucalyptus Trees – National Geographic 2013”

      They do exist!

  2. Mark B
    June 8, 2017

    Good morning

    I would just like to wish our kind host the best of luck today and to thank him for this blog which he has kept going whilst campaigning.


    1. Mark B
      June 8, 2017

      PS I am with President Trump. Oh for a PM of the calibre that puts the people and their country first.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 8, 2017

        Indeed roll on the some real science and some climate realism. There are actually many positive effects of more co2 in the atmoshere ((higher crop yields and the greening of the planet) and of it being a little warmer anyway, if that did happen which is far from clear anyway.

      2. Hope
        June 8, 2017

        And me and thousands of others.

        Majority of Children not getting dental treatment, adults paying a fortune for the same possibly the cause of this, while May sends £14 billion abroad. We are becoming a third world country. When will we have a Nigel or a Donald to step forward? If May gets elected she should step down immediately and let a leaver become PM. She is dreadful and her record is dreadful for protecting us. Border controls needs immediate examination and change irrespective of any existing EU rule. We are leaving and our safety comes first.

      3. Cheshire Girl
        June 8, 2017

        Mark B:

        I do so agree with your sentiments about putting our country and it’s people first. I suppose we can always hope!

      4. Ed Mahony
        June 8, 2017

        ‘creativity, persistence and patience’

        – In fact, this sums up so much the positive way of doing well in business (the sort of approach the Quakers used when creating the great businesses of this country) compared to the more hard-nosed alternative.

        You don’t have to be hard-nosed to do well in business. We don’t have to follow Trump’s hard-nosed, short-term approach to the environment and how to deal with it whilst looking after our economy as well in the medium to long-term future.

        We can have our cake and eat it. It just requires creativity, persistence and patience – the more noble approach in general, and the best approach for our environment and economy in the medium to long-term.

      5. Chris
        June 8, 2017

        I agree to your PS, Mark B.

      6. Ed Mahony
        June 8, 2017

        ‘many investors’ – silly comment this on my part

    2. eeyore
      June 8, 2017

      And thanks and admiration from me, JR, for keeping the blog running through the campaign. Good luck to you and to candidates of all parties who will stand up for our constitution and prosperity.

      All elections are “the most important for a generation”. This one may really be so.

    3. TIM H
      June 8, 2017

      Yes good luck today John and thanks for the blog and clarity of thought.

    4. Stephen
      June 8, 2017

      Dear Dr Redwood,
      please let me add my thanks to you for your blog. A smidgen of sanity in a hysterical false news world.

  3. Bob Dixon
    June 8, 2017

    The Paris Accord is a nonsense. Good for President Trump.

  4. Old Albion
    June 8, 2017

    Good luck JR. I hope you are re-elected today.
    I will vote for the Conservatives today, not because I think they are especially capable. Simply because the thought of Corbyn in power seriously scares me.
    Trump may well be a complete buffoon? On Paris agreement, I make him right.

  5. Deborah
    June 8, 2017

    Good luck for to-day John !
    Thanks for all you blogs during your campaiging.
    I am with President Trump, he is for America. He is America

  6. Roy Grainger
    June 8, 2017

    Such is the loathing of Trump in the media very few have reported on the substance of his disagreements with the Paris agreement. It does seem somewhat odd that China and India can continue to increase CO2 emissions as much as they want whereas the USA has tight targets. Also no-one has given USA credit for actually reducing their emissions over the past few years (by promoting fracking so the lower-carbon gas produced selectively replaces higher-carbon oil and coal).

  7. Richard1
    June 8, 2017

    Bjorn Lomberg, the Danish climate economist, has calculated that the Paris agreement if fully implemented will lead to a reduction in global temperatures of 0.2C by the end of the century at a cost of $1-2 trillion pa. This figure was quoted by Trump as evidence for the agreement being a huge cost for little return. Strangely, in all the outraged denunciations of Trump by the EU and others, no-one seems to have responded to this point. (I did however see it asserted the other day in the guardian that the figure should be 0.9C). As the argument in favour of subsidies for renewables and transfers to developing countries for them is an insurance policy against catastrophic global warming, establishing whether or not this 0.2C figure is correct seems quite fundamental.

  8. Lifelogic
    June 8, 2017

    Trump is quite right to withdraw the UK should follow and scrap the absurd climate change act. Trump should also do the world a favour and expose the massive distortions and outright fraud that had gone on in the climate alarmism industry. The climate changes and always has done, there is no evidence of a irriversable climate armageddon at all. No warming since 1998 nothing out of the normal for the last 100 year either.

    The UK should also repeal the Miliband’s hugely damaging and misguided climate change act, voted for by nearly every single MP. Nearly all of whom are unfortunately scientifically illiterate. Get fracking too.

    Even if you do believe in the bogus CO2, devil gas “polution” religion these policies still make no sense at all.

    1. Lifelogic
      June 8, 2017

      Trump is also quite right on the Mayor of London and his highly visable armed troops with automatic guns on the streets. This is a pointless gesture much loved of politicians. We should indeed be worried as it will do nothing real to reduce the threat and could well make it worse. It is largely doing the terrorist’s work for them.

      The way to defeat the terrorist threat is better intelligence behind the scenes and then actually acting on it when appropriate. This and invisible armed police and forces on rapid call as needed.

    2. Lifelogic
      June 8, 2017

      Overall majority odds for the Tories now at 1/6 (half of what I managed to get just two days back). It seems my bet and the economy are, thank goodness, safe from Corbyn and Sturgeon vandalism. Let us hope JR and his like can rein in May and get some economic sense into her head.

      The next election will be won by having a record of doing what actually works – cheap energy, a far smaller government, lower & simpler taxes, freedom of choice, sound law and order policies, good defence and a bonfire of red tape. Time for her to grow up.

  9. Duyfken
    June 8, 2017

    Let’s assume that the Tories (not just TM) gain a significant majority. Then the next focus for attention is the composition of the new government. I fear we shall see the likes of Rudd, Green and Gummer favoured whereas the Cabinet and ministerial incumbencies need a much tougher and more positively Conservative composition. If there is any weakening of the “Brexit” team, I hope there will be plenty of ructions. TM should be pressed to realise that she is on probation regardless of the size of electoral success.

    1. a-tracy
      June 8, 2017

      Well, the good thing about Mrs May backing off from fronting the entire GE campaign is that at least no more can she claim it was ‘all about her’ and ‘strong and stable’. She is fortunate to have trusted politicians like Mr Redwood for conservatives to vote for, good luck to you John.

  10. Jerry
    June 8, 2017

    I do NOT expect you to publish this before 10pm tonight.

    Who ever wins today must balance media regulation (no I’m not talking about ownership), it is clearly daft that on election day the broadcast media, indeed even this site, is legally prevented from publishing UK specific political articles but the newsprint media can push their agendas at the breakfast table before their readers go off to vote.

    Either political comment should be allowed or it should not, and that law should apply to all persons and companies subject to UK law.

  11. David Price
    June 8, 2017

    Good luck today.

    I’m with Donald Trump on this. The Paris Accord will be supported unquestioningly by those who get money or a competitive advantage from the deal just as those countries in the EU are very pro EU as long as they are net beneficiaries. The who thing is part of the simply part of the UN scam to redistribute wealth.

    If you took money and competitive advantage out of the Accord then it might be tolerable if were likely to achieve anything substantial and was enforced, but it won’t and isn’t.

    It is notable that with the nominal* withdraw of the USA from the Accord the auto industry in Germany, that cradle of EU morality and eco friendliness, are demanding Germany also withdraw so their energy costs can be brought down to make them competitive.

    Far from censuring President Trumps actions in support of his country, May should be following his pro-US policies.

    *The USA legislature has not approved the Accord.

  12. alan jutson
    June 8, 2017

    Whilst I have not read the Climate change accord agreement, I have listened in full to President Trumps speech, rather than just the sound bites you get on news broadcasts.

    I thought he explained the situation quite clearly, although I have no idea if his figures which he challenged or outlined himself are correct.

    He suggested the USA was not against clear air, and he was in favour of sustainable energy as long as it was cost effective, and the results would be worthwhile.
    He did not refuse to co-operate, he just thought the USA were being used as a financial punch bag for a scheme which simply did not produce the results, so asked for a revised deal or he would walk away. (Rather like Brexit)
    No one wanted to revise the deal from the USA perspective, so he is prepared to walk away, and stay away, until they are prepared to give ground to him.

    In the meantime I would be surprised if the USA does not still invest in research for alternative power or cleaner coal, but at the same time they will not close down “so called” dirty and inefficient power plants and sources, which if left running would allow their industries to remain competitive.

    Moving pollution from one country to another does not solve the overall problem we have.

    As far as I am concerned I have an open mind about so called Man made Climate change, because I do not think there is sufficient proven evidence for such a claim.

    The fact that governments around the World have used so called green taxes as a huge source of extra income leads me to believe more is being made of climate change by those governments, simply for tax income purposes, rather than planet saving ideals.

  13. Peter D Gardner
    June 8, 2017

    Most major public expenditure projects proceed only if there is a satisfactory business case. Measures involving vast sums of money taken by the government from UK citizens to pay for ‘green energy’ are based on the hypothesis that global temperatures are rising dangerously and that were mankind to reduce emissions of CO2, the rate of increase could be reduced sufficiently to halt a further rise in global temperature.
    I have been reading oodles of papers on this over the last six months. I cannot find anything that provides itself a convincing evidence based case for such action or even does so in combination with other evidence based studies. I have a science background, Cambridge degree, practising engineer until retirement. You don’t need to be a practising scientist to understand the scientific method and the utility of models but I do.
    Whatever may be said about CAGW and the methods used, the fact remains that the the climate models used run hot, significantly hot compared with empirical data. the reasons do not matter. The point is that they significantly exaggerate warming from atmospheric CO2.
    That’s the science and the maths. Next the policy makers and gatekeepers of public monies. Their policies and actions are not based on the empirical data, nor the science. They are based on the outputs of the models in relation to atmospheric CO2. There is a positive feedback loop between the gatekeepers and those seeking funding for their projects in CAGW, green energy and so on, aided by hysterical media and public action groups.
    Current policies are, therefore, dangerously wrong.
    The costs of current policies are so bad and damaging that the reasons they are wrong do not matter for the moment. It matters only that UK urgently stops large imposts on the British public, be it taxes, levies, or by indirect methods.
    In future, public investment should be made in sustainable energy, climate science and so on, in the same way and by the same criteria as it is for other areas of research or support of industry. The ‘national interest’ overlay for prioritising available funds should ensure as much research money goes to those sceptical of CAGW as to those pushing CAGW. the overall aim should be to reduce the uncertainty.
    Britain should withdraw from the Paris Agreement and any other treaty based on the hypotheses of CAGW, including carbon trading. Clearly some of these actions must await Brexit but I would dearly love to see them made an explicit part of the withdrawal arrangements.

  14. Ian Wragg
    June 8, 2017

    3 cheers for Trump. He has exposed the accord for the scam it really is. Of course Murky and the EU are very vocal because they want to ham string everyone else like they have done.
    Young men delivering Tory leaflets here in the Ashfield marginal.
    I am a fully paid up UKIP supporter but my wife and I are lending you our vote.
    Don’t disappoint us.
    Good luck.

  15. Peter D Gardner
    June 8, 2017

    Very best of British to you, Dr Redwood. May the ain be at your back and the road rise to meet you. Hoping for a massive majority for you. Also for your party but on condition Mrs May’s loopiness is kept in check and she is taken firmly in hand to ensure a good clean Brexit, sticking to the primary issues, and gets it done quickly.

    1. Stephen
      June 8, 2017

      here here

  16. Edward2
    June 8, 2017

    Paris is a failure.
    Many countries that are criticising America are yet to meet their targets for CO2 reductions they agreed to under the last climate conference at Kyoto.
    China and India are allowed to carry on rapidly increasing their CO2 emissions for decades into the future and to self audit their figures.
    With these two nations exempt the chances of big reductions in CO2 are slim.
    America and the UK are reducing their CO2 yet are painted as the bad boys.
    Despite not signing the Kyoto agreement America is very close to the target Kyoto would have set due partly to fracking but mainly to massive investments in clean energy technologies.
    The attempt to get America to pay hundreds of billions every year into a fund for others to play with and to volunteer to transfer even more jobs and prosperity to other nations has failed.

  17. eeyore
    June 8, 2017

    This election result is likely to be skewed by over-representation of the elderly, who don’t object to getting out of bed to vote, and under-representation of the young, who do.

    As Labour has replaced class war with age war for the purposes of the poll, this effective disfranchisement is no small matter. It cannot be desirable that trivial and perfectly legal personal habits should have such grave consequences for democracy.

    Is it too much to hope that, when Parliament returns, steps will be taken to ensure we can all vote, via our smartphones, from the safety of our bedrooms? A simple Like/Dislike button would be familiar and comforting to millions who are intimidated by the alien complexity of pencils, paper and distant polling booths.

    1. ian wragg
      June 8, 2017

      Didn’t see much evidence of snowflakes whilst out and about today, polling booth only 100 metres from home.
      probably sheltering in their safe spaces and doing high fives.

      1. hefner
        June 9, 2017

        IW, you might need glasses or a new pair as it seems that there were many more snowflakes going to vote than you had seen. Not much of an election analyst, are you?

    2. a-tracy
      June 8, 2017

      The young labourites need to remember that not everyone under 30 votes for them and shouting down their opinions and scaring them from voicing them because of ganging up and slamming the opposition is neither helpful to the debate nor to the good of the Country.

    3. Narrow Shoulders
      June 8, 2017

      A “None of the above option” would also be welcome.

      I had to write mine in today.

    4. Edward2
      June 8, 2017

      It’s free to vote.
      Just get up.
      Go out.
      And vote.

  18. alan jutson
    June 8, 2017

    I wish you and the Conservative candidates well today, and I hope your Party gains a good majority.

    If the Conservatives fail, then you can only blame your own Party manifesto, the people that put that document together clearly do not understand the electorate, or as I have said many times before “human nature” as it was simply garbage.

    You have now had three tries at sitting duck, open goal elections, and you have failed in the last two to capitalise on woeful opposition.

    Conservative supporters cannot be expected to keep on propping up a Party which takes them for granted.

    Fail to capitalise big time in this one John, and your Party needs a complete and utter re-think on the direction of travel.

    People work hard to improve their and their families life, they do not work to simply fund extravigant Government spending.

    Taxes and National Insurance is a shared scheme for all where the many pay for the few who are unfortunate, that is the whole essence of Insurance, you minimise personal risk.

    Only a fool would take out insurance with expensive premiums, and then pay the full cost of any claim themselves.

  19. Bert Young
    June 8, 2017

    Trump is certainly no diplomat but he is a breath of fresh air in the political establishment . The USA has paid its full share in protecting the world and it is right to point out the discrepancies that exist . Germany does not pull its weight in many areas ; it has the wealth and it has caused terrible disruption . I’m old enough to recall the Marshall Plan and the way Germany was able to rebuild itself following the World War 2 ; it should repay its debts like we had to .

    As for today , I sincerely hope the Conservatives win and do so with sufficient majority to be able to slap the EU in the face . Good luck John .

  20. David Murfin
    June 8, 2017

    China needs to cut emissions drastically and urgently, not to avoid global warming, but to stop poisoning its people with smog.

  21. APL
    June 8, 2017

    Pity Trump can’t stand in Maidenhead.

  22. margaret
    June 8, 2017

    He has a point. Whereas allowing other countries is important for world trade , it is handing over ‘power’ on a plate where others have struggled to make their country great .

    We do not want any further contamination of our atmosphere so it seems ethically wrong to allow others to pollute whilst penalising ourselves, however USA should still voluntarily try and reduce its carbon footprint.

    Perhaps developing countries could lead in renewables and America etc help in the production of these sources of power.

  23. Chris S
    June 8, 2017

    First of all, I sincerely hope that you and my own MP, Chris Chope, are returned with increased majorities, despite the appallingly inept campaign run by those around Mrs May, particularly Nick Timothy who I believe was responsible for the “Dementia Tax” debacle.

    It will be a pity that probably at least 50 potential colleagues of yours will not be taking their seats as a result of the way the campaign was managed.

    Turning to Mr Trump : He has been the subject of the most relentlessly hostile and partisan press campaign we have ever seen from every branch of the so-called independent press. This has extended to the UK where he has been pilloried by the BBC in particular. One thinks of that hugely disrespectful question asked by Laura Kuenssberg at one of his first press conferences. By comparison, Corbyn has had an easy ride.

    Of course, President Trump is his own worst enemy. Why the Leader of the Free World needs to waste his time and effort on criticising the Mayor of London is beyond me. It would be far better if he kept his fingers off his phone keypad and left Twitter to others. On the other hand, used wisely, it would give him an outlet to get his policies across to the public, something denied him by the white House Press Corps.

    After eight years of the weak and ineffective Obama, President Trump is at least taking some action on things that matter on the world stage.

    He has made many good points : his assessment of the EU and in particular the role of Merkel and Germany has been very insightful and spot on. If only other leaders were so honest and straightforward. I hope he uses his influence on the IMF to force Merkel to deal more fairly with Greece and allow meaningful debt relief.

    On NATO, Mr Trump is indisputably right. Why should the US and to some extent the UK spend our treasure defending a country like Germany that refuses to spend more than 1% on defending itself ? I would have given the Europeans five years from his inauguration to meet the 2% target, after which US involvement would be gradually withdrawn in proportion to the shortfall in their contribution. I would aqlso have demanded they be fully commit to NATO in return, not to wastring money on some ineffective EU army. It would be a policy that would play well in his re-election campaign.

    Of course, the Europeans hate being told a few home truths and people like Juncker, Hollande and Merkel have very unwisely treated the President with ill-disguised contempt.
    Macon has started badly by making the same mistake.

    President Trump has made good progress with China and we will have to see if that bears fruit in bi-lateral trade and in particular over North Korea, certainly the most dangerous problem currently on the world stage and one that will have to be dealt with effectively during his first term. Unlike Obama, it is something that he simply can’t ignore.

    As for the Paris climate change agreement, I am rather sceptical and regard the agreement as overly oppressive on the West and the US in particular. I would certainly want to revisit it and reduce the financial cost and impact on Western countries and at the same time demand more action by countries such as China and India.

    Overall, President Trump has shaken up the diplomatic and political world, particularly upsetting the breathtakingly arrogant leaders of the EU. That has been a pleasure to see and was long overdue.

  24. jason wells
    June 8, 2017

    Trump is behaving like a spoilt child throwing his toys out of the pram-
    his administration and political outlook is so bad for everyone it can only end in tears- neither does it look good for UK’s prospect of a chance of future trade deals since he is determined to drive America to an inward looking protectionist mode.

    What more can we say about president trump then, except to say that trump and the whole US debacle is an awful indictment of the naïve American people who put him there in such high office for which he is totally unsuited. Only another three and a half years to go!

    1. Mark B
      June 8, 2017

      If you stop buying the ‘Cool aid ‘ you just might feel better.

    2. Anonymous
      June 9, 2017

      It is the fault of the political and media elites which banned Reaganism and Thatcherism.

      Trump was the backlash to this lack of choice.

  25. Bob
    June 8, 2017

    Some may wonder why the Paris Agreement like so many other peculiar policies appear out of nowhere and are foisted upon us often without even being mentioned in political manifestos as in the case of SSM and mass immigration.

    Where do you think the ring-fenced 0.7% foreign aid budget originated?

    The answer is U.N. Agenda 21.

    Join the dots.

    Power to Mr Trump’s elbow, he has stirred a hornets nest, and the Globalists are out to get him.

    1. hefner
      June 8, 2017

      Indeed Agenda 21, which started as a panel discussion in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. So, as you said, it “appear”ed “out of nowhere”.

      So am I a globalist, or simply someone who has liked to keep himself informed over the years?
      The knee-jerk reactions of those who have found in Trump their White Knight in a Shining Armour is a real pleasure to savour, day after day.

  26. Man of Kent
    June 8, 2017

    I think Trump has been clever in separating his views on ‘global warming ‘ – ‘ a hoax ‘and the policy implications of Paris which disadvantage America economically.

    He is happy to fight on the economics of the Accord while steering clear of the left liberal
    ‘climate denier ‘ name-calling .

    The problem is that while many of us believe ‘global warming ‘ ,due to man ,is tiny and not worth bothering about [ +0.2deg C by the end of the century according to the IPCC ] there are great swathes of immature leftists and committed internationalists who have political aims of world government that depend on perpetuating the myth.

    They will not say what physical evidence they would accept to change their views .

    So a deadlock will exist for the next 50+ ? years .

  27. Little Englander
    June 8, 2017

    Best wishes to you Mr.Redwood and looking forward to seeing you returned to carry on representing us in the way that you do.

  28. Fedupsoutherner
    June 8, 2017

    Trump is right in his actions. Germany and China are both using coal because they have discovered renewables are not only expensive but unreliable too. We pay monstrous amounts of money to switch wind farms off when there is too much wind. This happens often in Scotland but more wind farms are bring erected meaning an ever escalating cost to switch off and a big profit for the developer. At the same time we have to run power stations and use diesel generators as back up. This actually increases emissions. A good source of information on this subject can be found on the Global Warming Policy Foundation website. Also Doctor John Constable. Why our politicians don’t listen to common sense is beyond me. Good luck for today. I hope we wake up to a true Conservative government tomorrow. One that can make the right decisions to take this country forward in the big world.

  29. The Prangwizard
    June 8, 2017

    I voted early. Those pesky new booths I have written about before are still in evidence. This time there was an ‘inspector’ at the polling place and I’ve made with his help a written complaint. As I have said before they are insecure. Any voter’s intention can be seen and can be claimed to be seen.

    They are a mistake. Voting cannot be claimed to be secret any more with these new boths.

  30. Eh?
    June 8, 2017

    For America, the Climate Change agreements have helped create their rust belt running through several states putting many people out of work.Hilary Clinton is online actually announcing she would put coalminers out of work and laughing like a drain. Now she is out of work.
    It has also created jobs elsewhere in solar and wind but with massive subsidies which outweigh the benefits of clean fuel in part because the money for clean solar and wind came from the work of people working and powered by fossil fuels and increased their use of fossil fuels.
    Politics, in the larger context, is part of our environment. Climate Change politics because of their excess , created an imbalance in the world environment. Became toxic to the food intake of millions of American workers, they lost their means to survive. Climate Change politics created President Trump. He could not have come into existence without fruitcake Liberal Democrats overegging the cake. Their political bi-product toxins led to their own defeat. Poetic politics!

  31. Phil
    June 8, 2017

    The first duty of an elected Politician is to protect and serve its citizens.
    Donald Trump, by his recent decision to leave the Paris global warming scam, is obviously living up to that concept and I applaud him.
    It’s a shame that our cognitively dissonant, blinkered Politicians on this side of the pond are too busy exploiting pseudo scientific quackery in order to stealth tax the electorate with huge energy bills in the name of virtue signalling whilst at the same time making vast sums from a confected industry that by itself will not cure anything let alone a problem which we all know does not exist.

  32. Paul Cohen
    June 8, 2017

    With all the brickbats being thrown at Mr Trump it is a bit rich that the main perpetrator is Mrs Merkel garnering EU countries to sign a letter deploring his deciion to withdraw the US from the Climate Agreement.

    She as Head of State has presided over a country whose main auto manufacturers with worldwide sales have been fitting cheat devices to hide emmisions far exceeding those claimed and agreed. This has sabotaged the agreement and demands condemnation and centure for crippling it.

    All seems very quiet from other signatories at present – why is this?

  33. Establishment
    June 8, 2017

    Trump has a first duty to America, to American workers. In his book, a worker is everyone
    who works. His working class includes street cleaners and top business workers. His unemployed workers include street cleaners without a job and top business people some of whom do not work and are therefore do not have a job. Eating without working. He hates that.
    Climate Change fanatics have stopped his American workers from working. ” Our miners want to work.Terrible dangerous jobs. But they love mining. We will give them back the honor of doing what they love. They are going back to work. Our miners are going back to work, believe me!
    A coal fire smells so good when you are cold. Personally I know it does better toast too 🙂

  34. roger carradice
    June 8, 2017

    Dear John
    Climate Change is used by anti capitalist organisation such as Greenpeace and the BBC to push their agenda. It is significant that the BBC will not allow sceptic scientists to debate the matter. The Paris accord did nothing to stop China and India producing greenhouse gasses but required western countries to do so and pay a hundred billion dollars a year from ordinary families here to kleptocrats abroad. President Trump was right to pull out. Sadly only Ukip wish to pull the UK out and repeal the national suicide note the Climate Change Act and I look forward to the Conservatives having the courage to do the same.

  35. Libdum
    June 8, 2017

    Let’s hope Libdems members are not allowed to vote twice because they are two faced.

  36. NickC
    June 8, 2017

    Donald Trump is right. The UK should pull out of the Paris Accord too. Nor should we subsidise Wind, Solar, and other means of energy production (actually conversion). We should repeal the Climate Change Act 2008. Then our electricity costs would plummet and we could regain basic industries like glass, cement, aluminium smelting and steel production. There has been no saving in CO2 because those industries still exist, having simply moved to other countries.

  37. Trumpeter
    June 8, 2017

    When China and India have taken advantage of an economy such as the USA by receiving money, and cut backs to American industry better enabling them to become even greater world economic, military and political powers,- what financial aid will they give to America for whatever reason that might be necessary in the future for the survival of Americans?

  38. English Pensioner
    June 8, 2017

    I suspect that a large number of US voters voted, as I have over the years, for the lesser of two evils.
    Actually, I think that Trump is doing better than I thought he would, he’d do even better if he calmed down a bit and just got on with things and stopped using Twitter! I fully agree with him in pulling out of the Paris agreement and believe we should do the same. His actions so far show that he definitely puts his country first.

    I think the other reason why he appealed to so many people was because he was not a professional politician and has worked for a living outside politics. Far too many in politics are there, not because they believe in a cause or believe that they have something to offer their country, but because it can be quite an acceptable and lucrative career. Many have never had a genuine job outside politics and personally I would never vote for such an individual.

    I just hope that the Tories win this election and that Theresa May will start putting this country first, particularly when it comes to Brexit, but somehow I still have my doubts about her determination after what I consider to be a not particularly successful time at the Home Office.

  39. Antisthenes
    June 8, 2017

    Assuming and that is a big assumption global warming is a threat that scaremongering scientists and others say it is it is absolutely certain that the Paris Accord and many other measures we are already taking are not ones cost conscious and sensible people can rationally accept. Three glaring misconceptions accompany our actions on the threat of climate change.

    Firstly the science is far from settled. We do not know how much the change is natural and how much is man made and we do not know what the effects will be, it is all conjecture. Secondly we do not know if the cost benefits of climate change outweighs the cost of trying to prevent it. Thirdly to achieve world wide consensus and to satisfy the progressive left measures and agreements are heavily weighted to include the transfer of wealth from wealthy countries to poorer countries.

    Wealth which at this time they cannot afford as they are struggling already to maintain their standards of living and stave off bankruptcy. Also unfair commercial advantage is being given to developing nations and the incentive to contribute to tackling change by reducing CO2 is removed. No need to if in receipt of special dispensation. No doubt Trump has recognised this state of affairs and so does not wish to give away vast amounts of American taxpayers money or heap horrendous costs onto American businesses and industries. It is time that EU leaders also recognised what climate change prevention is all about. It is not to fulfil the role of that which it is purported it will but to to line the pockets of the unscrupulousness and further the aims of socialising the world.

  40. Anonymous
    June 8, 2017

    Anti Trump=Anti West.

  41. rose
    June 8, 2017

    This was designed to be a massive transfer of wealth from West to East, with nothing being done to cleanse the air overall. I very much dislike the bullying by certain nations ganging up on their ally. This has become an all too depressing feature of modern diplomacy, and has set in as a habit. Shame on you, Frau Merkel, you disgrace us all.

  42. iain
    June 8, 2017

    Trump is a hard headed businessman and this decision is not unexpected. The reaction of career politicians comes as no surprise as they normally fall in line re Climate Change ( formally known as Global warming ) action plans. The Emperor’s new clothes spring to mind.

  43. MikeP
    June 8, 2017

    Good luck today John, thanks again for your daily blog and clear expositions on Brexit et al, a fine effort.

  44. Ali Choudhury
    June 8, 2017

    I was rather against Brexit and May looks a bit second-rate if I am being honest, but you have been a good MP and there is not much choice when the other option is a hapless terrorist-hugging Leninist who wants to turn us into Venezuela.

    As for the Paris agreement, whatever the West does in cutting fossil fuel emissions is going to be of marginal impact given the demand for electricity in Asia. Hopefully renewables, natural gas and newer forms of nuclear power will become cheap enough to catch on widely.

  45. lojolondon
    June 8, 2017

    I am with Trump. The climate change deal is total garbage – for example it accepts that Chinese emissions will grow for the next decade, while money is transferred from the USA to China to support non-emitting technology. A very, very bad deal for the USA, even if you believe in the scam that is ‘Global Warming’.

    About the election – I hope that Mrs May wins a massive victory – proving once again that the pollsters are more of an election-manipulation tool than a reflection of reality, and exposing the BBC once again for their totally anti-Conservative campaign over the last weeks.

    Two key changes that we should all wish for following this election : A new Chancellor, a proper fiscal Conservative, who will completely change the direction we have taken for the last 6 years, and finally re-invigorate our economy. Secondly, more power to David Davis, for a really hard line on the Brexit negotiations, and remember that no deal is much better than a bad deal.

  46. Carbon based beings
    June 8, 2017

    “It (The Paris Agreement ) set out voluntary targets for reductions of CO2 by the advanced country signatories” Why should it wish to decrease levels of CO2 when it was far higher levels which allowed us to come down from the trees and eat lush vegetation in the first place? Food plants like CO2, alot.

    1. eeyore
      June 8, 2017

      Species have a half-life of about ten million years; that is, within that period (a few millimetres in the geological record) half the species in an ecosystem will have moved on to become something else. There is no reason why humanity should be an exception, though it is melancholy to consider that all our intellectual glories will vanish like the dew in the sunshine.

      When we go, the entire universe may cease to be self-aware. That is no small loss.

      However, from the point of view of, say, a dodo or a Bengal tiger, humans are probably an unmitigated nuisance the world would be better off without.

      If we cannot survive in a warmer carbon dioxide-rich world, we would do better to get out of the way with good grace and make way for some other life form less picky. No doubt this is what is at the back of Mr Trump’s mind. In the meantime, though, it is important to vote Tory.

      1. Edward2
        June 8, 2017

        Despite your pessimism and hatred of mankind we continue to thrive in ever increasing numbers.
        We live and survive on this planet in climates as diverse as minus 10 and plus 35.

  47. Tony Sharp
    June 8, 2017

    Mr Trump is right and the Cameron’s and Milibands and Obamas who support and signed the Paris Accords were Virtue Prejudices on Stilts, agreed by Politicians spending our money on stupid non-proven policies. Every time I look for hard scientific evidence from these sources one finds tiny bits of data have been extrapolated by self-styled experts who are not scientists but trained in the social sciences, demography and geography which seem to have replaced sociology as the intellectual equipage of these people – often they claim post-graduate qualifications in ‘environmentalism’. Environmentalists are actually Extremists in the mould of Marxists.

    I have noticed that the anti-capitalist Left have shifted their stance over the last two decades from ‘social issues’ to ‘environmental issues’ with the same aim and that the ‘Green Ideology’ is in fact a quasi anti-capitalist one masquerading as a concern for the environment. It is on analysis a very totalitarian ideology seeking to interfere in the two most basic of human freedoms – that of choice and of economic growth. It is however, also not just anti-western capitalism, it is also anti-industrialisation per se. The grand design would be to restrict not only the West’s economic growth but more alarmingly that of the developing world, notably India and China which however if Green policies were marginally successful there would condemn many millions to less than subsistence living.

  48. Bryan Harris
    June 8, 2017

    Thank God the world still has some free-thinkers lefte.

    It seems most people have swallowed the con that is MMGW – but the science is far from proven, showing the calibre of those that ‘believe’ without question.

    I’m hopeful there will be more sanity and real leadership from Trump and that he remains at the Whitehouse for a very long time.

  49. Handbags
    June 8, 2017

    President Trump seems to doing everything he said he would.

    Illegal immigration from Mexico down by 50% – job creation up by 300,000 or more – and he’s now blown the whistle on the Paris Agreement scam.

    To top it all, the liberal media are apoplectic with rage.

    It’s wonderful stuff, it doesn’t get better than this.

    1. Chris
      June 8, 2017

      Yes, he has achieved far more in his first few months in office than Obama in two terms. There will be positive effects for other countries as well, including the UK. The Paris Accord rejection is of huge significance, and it demonstrates a President who is not going to be duped by false science. As another commenter said, he is a breath of fresh air, and I believe he is vital to our future.

  50. Atlas
    June 8, 2017

    I’m not surprised so many countries signed up to the Paris Climate agreement. After all who would not sign up to something that bunged so much money their way for doing nothing themselves.

    Trump is correct in what he did. Too many people, organisations and University research groups are getting fat, fed on the Teat of ‘Climate Change’ without it being given close independent scrutiny.

    Science is littered with ‘consensus’ claims that were later shown to be just plain wrong.

  51. Turboterrier.
    June 8, 2017

    The news on RE outputs are giving the congregation of the Church of RE something to raise their eyes and hands to the heavens and praise the Lord. No mention of the cost both financial and human. The millions paid out to those affected to move home and keep quite with gagging clauses.

    If only we had a leader and members at Westminster who will not just nod and allow this madness to continue with no concerns of the millions in fuel debt and poverty, who will question all the complaints about noise, effects on birds of prey, bat population, private water supplies and the real effect on the planet when you take in all the construction processes and finally with all these turbines running somewhere there are fossil fuel power
    stations operating on tick over just in case they are needed. End result very little to no impact on CO2 across the world never mind this island.

  52. Peter
    June 8, 2017

    I am 57, and old enough to remember the various climate scares – global cooling in the 1970s (http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm), acid rain in the 80s, global warming in the 90s, and now the ill-defined “climate change” The ecologists switch from scare to scare, it’s always the fault of Western Capitalism, and they neither ever admit they were wrong nor explain why the previous scares were unfounded. Count me a skeptic (not “denier”, thank you very much!). (There has been no global warming for the last 18 years, – and well done Prez Trump for getting the US out of this global boondoggle!)

  53. Narrow Shoulders
    June 8, 2017

    Having read Mr Trump’s reasons for backing out of the agreement I have much sympathy for his position. There is no way that either India or China would have signed up on the same terms as those given to USA , EU and more developed countries. A previous climate change deal resulted in carbon trading, how pointless is that.

    I wish you well for today Mr Redwood, I hope you are returned with an increased majority, you strike me as a worthy and hard working constituency MP who is also able to contribute to the national debate.

    1. John
      June 8, 2017

      India, China and the Gulf States contribute $0 to the Climate Change fund. The US contributes over $3000 million

      1. hefner
        June 9, 2017

        You are right wrt India, China and the Gulf States.
        On the other hand, the per person contributions are (in US$) (see greenclimate.fund)
        59.31 Sweden
        58.63 Luxembourg
        50.20 Norway
        28.89 Monaco
        18.77 UK*
        15.64 France
        12.73 Denmark
        12.40 Germany
        12.21 Switzerland
        11.80 Japan
        9.41 USA
        So the picture is much more muddled than what newspapers would tell and the American citizen is in fact contributing six times less than a Swedish one is.
        * Furthermore the UK total contribution is made of 20% so-called grants and 80% so called capital contributions, these latest being money linked to future overseas investments likely to bring financial returns to the country.
        So beware the screaming headlines in the UK Press.

  54. Simon Platt
    June 8, 2017

    I haven’t kept a close eye on the details of the Paris climate agreement, but I can say one thing: carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.

    1. hefner
      June 8, 2017

      CO2 is not a pollutant, agreed, but it is all the same a “greenhouse” gas.
      Trump does not seem to know the difference between these two features.

  55. Tom William
    June 8, 2017

    The Paris Accord is just that, an accord not a treaty so basically it is “promises”, or words, with no penalties. By 2030 China will be producing as much CO2 as the USA, Japan and EU combined. India plans to build 400 new coal plants. The USA has reduced its CO2 emissions very considerably over the past 10 years or so and plans to continue doing so. It has advanced R&D as well.

    Trump’s mistake was promising to leave the Paris Accord. Leaving it is an unnecessary gesture which infuriates many, including Merkel who is actually backing new German coal plants after she decided to close down nuclear plants.

    1. forthurst
      June 8, 2017

      “Trump’s mistake was promising to leave the Paris Accord.”

      Trump has appointed Rick Perry a notorious Climate Hoax denier as Secretary of the Dept of Energy. The latter is closing down the section which itself was concerned with closing down US industry and counting polar bears on icebergs. Trump is trying to promote US industry not create an excuse for endless political infighting through lack of leadership.

      Submission to the climate hoax is a typical example of the lack of patriotism and leadership of most Western leaders who follow policies instituted by globalists and propagandised by their captive MSM without examining the intellectual rationale or provenance of so many ‘-isms’ that have been designed to undermine us through the assault on the European nuclear family such as femininism, multiculturalism, LGBT etc. What we need is a PM with intellect, patriotism and a profound desire to shift the prevailing culture back to one which is nurturing of the English people rather than of anyone who is not. I’m not optimistic.

    2. hefner
      June 8, 2017

      Agreed, with just an addition: by 2030, China=USA+Japan+EU, but that’s not the only point. The real one is how much CO2 has been produced by different countries since the Industrial Revolution. The lifetime of CO2 is thought to be between one and several centuries. The important thing is how much is being accumulated.

      But obviously, not a problem for most of us oldies on this blog.

  56. Richard Butler
    June 8, 2017

    If Corbyn wins John, we are looking to you and others to begin an insurgency that results in firstly a truly distinguishable conservative party and secondly a referendum on English independence.

    Not that I think Corbyn will win, but the free Uni fees offer is very compelling for youngsters.

    1. SheaJ
      June 8, 2017

      Richard butler..not to worry we’ll start to see the signs of independance very soon when the brexit talks begin. So when the ‘crash out’ happens will be the start of our real independance. Soon afterwards we’ll be free of scotland- and everyone else as well- we’ll be truely independent.

  57. Paul wills
    June 8, 2017

    Just listening to trump sounding off about religion at some preachers convention – goddamn awful garbage? And to think this is the person some of us think is the person to follow as regards the Paris accords or anything else! Some people even think and hope that we could get a trade deal going with the trump administration..not in your dreams..not in a million years.. the guy is truly nuts

  58. The Prangwizard
    June 8, 2017

    Just wish to say I’m with President Trump too. Climate change accords etc. ought to resisted. It’s a scam. Government is too keen on virtue signalling to act in our best interests. This and foreign aid just adds to our impoverishment. Conscious and wilful neglect of its own people.

  59. Yorky
    June 8, 2017

    Richard Butler
    “insurgency” is a rather strong word. If the British vote for him they will not be worthy to live in a free country, and they will not. Many peoples throughout the world have in their histories behaved in such a way as to wipe themselves off the map. It is quite usual. It is how nature separates the wheat from the chaff.
    There has been evidence for some time the people’s of these islands are but a shadow of the wit of their ancestors. In truth, like the Irish, Welsh, Cornish, English and Scots, most of their most aspirational have emigrated.
    It is only Yorkshire people who have had the moral grit to stick to their guns and stick to their country. The UK has aways been owned by good Yorkshire folk. We are not voting for Corbynistas and magical Green wibewal men in the forest. No worries!

  60. Jack snell
    June 8, 2017

    Comeys evidence is truely staggering.. trump and the white house staff accused of lying?.. the trump staff in cahoots with the russians?…. but as we know from this side..all politicians lie.. so why should we expect anything different from trump?

    1. Embarristering
      June 8, 2017

      Jack Snell.
      “Evidence” ( truly staggering )only in the language of legalese, a wanting language. Mr Comey has produced no evidence whatsoever.

  61. Martin Conboy
    June 8, 2017

    It needs to ge pointed out that the definition of “developed” countries vs. “developing” countries forvthe Paris agreement 2015, is as defined by the UN in 1992. This is explicit in the Paris treaty.
    So really big polluters like China and India are “developing” countries as far as the Paris treaty is concerned and so are exempted from taking action. China can carry right on building a new coal-fired power station per week.
    Trump is right. The devil is in the detail, and the Paris treaty is lopsided, not in the interests of the western world.

  62. John
    June 8, 2017

    Its interesting to look at the Green Climate Change fund contributors on that website;


    Missing from the contributors are countries like:
    All the Middle East and Gulf States

    The UK contributes a lot more than Germany yet Germany pollutes far more.

    Out of the total $10 billion income the US pays $3bn. We pay $1.2bn

    Heavy industry in China is unregulated, its people are dying from the toxic chemicals they spill out. Obama and Clinton boated about the removal of heavy industry from the US to China. Just because its now in China does not mean there is less pollution caused. They import their coal from Australia and then transport their steel good all around the world in giant diesel powered container ships.

    I’m with Donald on this. Aeron Musk will still continue to develop electric power, the US will still be a leader in renewables. But let them smelt iron and take back heavy industry into their regulated country. We need to do the same.

    Meanwhile Germany will continue to falsify their diesel emissions.

  63. John
    June 8, 2017

    Also noticed that out of the contributors to the Climate Change Fund, Luxembourg is the biggest polluter per head by a margin.

    Yes Jean Claude Junker’s tax haven Luxembourg that he made such. Funny that.

    Emissions per head:

    UK – 7
    US – 17
    J C Junker’s Luxembourg tax haven – 21

  64. Ed Mahony
    June 8, 2017

    Good luck Mr Redwood.

  65. Iain Gill
    June 8, 2017

    Exit polls say hung parliament eh

    If they have me refusing to vote for them, even in the face of corbyn, it’s hardly surprising

    None of the above wins

  66. hefner
    June 8, 2017

    Will May be out by the end of June? And who will be giving the Brexit talks in 10 days’ time?
    As Patel just said on Radio 4, it is only exit polls, but those usually are very close to the final results.
    After a weak Presidential-type campaign, May has been found out for what she is. I will be polite and not qualify this.

  67. Monty
    June 8, 2017

    Exit polls are predicting a hung parliament. That will put Corbyn into Downing Street, with Sturgeon in his coalition. She could demand the shelving of Brexit as the price of her support in coalition.
    I’m just hoping and praying that a lot of Conservative voters lied to the exit pollsters.

  68. Chris
    June 8, 2017

    Desperately concerned about the exit polls. If true, this will be a disaster, and will have much to do with the arrogance of power. I think advisers’ heads should roll, and further radical action should be taken swiftly, in order to save the country and Brexit. I believe it is as serious as that.

  69. Former Conservative
    June 9, 2017

    I am so glad the electorate have given us a kick in the teeth for the communist style coronation of Theresa May, who know one wanted and her tyrannical speech about controlling the Internet.

    It was in fact totally obvious this would happen.

  70. agricola
    June 9, 2017

    1 out of 107. Why?

  71. Sid
    June 9, 2017

    Soubrey is spitting feathers.

  72. McBryde
    June 10, 2017

    Well, that was a pretty unaminous response to the Climate Change issue.

    The contributors on this site seem naturally intelligent (ie able to form balanced opinions against the headwind of propaganda), and articulate.

    When you are PM one day, JR, I hope you will remember what this sample of the electorate considers to be the truth! I think it’s an example of how the people are becoming wise to the tactics of those in power – those who have other masters to serve, rather than their proper role which is to serve the people.

    Congrats for speaking your mind honestly and openly. Would you be able to follow Trump’s example if you found yourself in a position of greater power?

Comments are closed.