Save money and cut CO2 by less green subsidy, bans and taxes

My critics here complain that I urge a big rethink of the  UK government’s green policies without challenging their CO 2 beliefs. As I explain so often I am out to get urgent and necessary change so need to find common ground with Ministers.
I can now show some proof that this can work. By making the argument that we will help cut world CO 2 by getting out more of our own oil and gas instead of importing LNG government has been persuaded to change its policy. They now need to get on with production licences for Rosebank, Cambo and the others. These will bring more tax revenue, more well paid jobs and big balance of payments savings.

I and other MPs have persuaded the government to drop the damaging idea of a hydrogen tax, a further levy on already high energy bills. They should also drop the state spending. Hydrogen  technology may well prove to be a good way of fuelling transport and storing renewable electricity. Let the market decide. Let venture capital and large company investment develop it.

Given the large proposed borrowings and the need for tax cuts to cut inflation and expand capacity the government should reconsider its planned huge spend of £20 bn on carbon capture and storage. This is a world challenge where once again we need more private sector investment to see how it can work. At least delay it for a couple of years whilst inflation is brought down and growth improved.

They could suspend the roll out of free smart meters. Most who want one have got one now. Going forward those who want one could agree to its costs being added to future bills, spread out over a suitable time.


  1. Mark B
    June 25, 2023

    Good morning.

    As is slowly dawns on those in government that their plans are not working it seems that they have finally begun to listen. Sadly the all this to take effect needs time and, thanks to all the shenanigans over the Tory leadership and who’s turn it should be to be PM. this will come to benefit an incoming Labour government.

    Shades of 1997 methinks.

    1. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2023

      Their plans were always insane and doomed to fail. This especially on energy & the net zero religion but also the lockdowns, the botched half Brexit, the vast over regulation of everything, Sunak’s money printing currency debasing inflation, open door to low skilled immigration, vast over taxation, endless waste, the essentially communist NHS…

      1. Lynn Atkinson
        June 25, 2023

        And now more pylons too, 7 x more, and we believe they are a health hazard. Mess up magnetic fields which distort normal cells. So more sick people….

        1. Lifelogic
          June 26, 2023

          Wind and solar energy are not only intermittent and so need backup they need far more cabling to connect them all up to the grid. Cabling that is far more expensive per unit of energy usefully delivered (due to the distances, many sites and the intermittency).

    2. Cuibono
      June 25, 2023

      Labour’s plans, beliefs and ambitions need to be revealed.
      And a bit of dirt digging.
      Tories are SO good at doing that to their own.

  2. Sakara Gold
    June 25, 2023

    Unfortunately for the prospect of keeping your seat at the next election, many people disagree with your support for the fossil fuel lobby. Using more taxpayers money to subsidise the development of Rosebank etc makes us less energy secure. They will take at east 20 years to begin production – and the oil companies will then want the market price for their oil.

    The oil and gas majors have received over $7 TRILLION in subsidy from world governments over the past decade, this government has paid them £billions in direct subsidy payments over the last winter alone, most of which has been paid out to shareholders. We are about to add to that with another £20 billion for their carbon capture and storage scam

    Far better that the government secures our energy independence and security by rapidly building onshore wind and solar parks, harvesting free energy at approx a tenth of the projected cost of Rosebank product. And promoting more EVs on our roads with upgrades to the national grid and additional infrastructure for the charging points

    Reply Your renewables plan would lead to rationing and power cuts. You need to factor into the cost of wind power the cost of the back up for windless days. We need the gas to keep the lights on when the wind does not blow

    1. Peter Gardner
      June 25, 2023

      What is your evidence of subsidies beng paid to the fossil fuel industry in the UK and paid out in cash to shareholders? As far as I know the only subisides paid to energy companies are those for green energy.

      1. Shirley+M
        June 25, 2023

        Indeed, Peter. Subsidies for ‘green’ utilities which are less green than fossil fuels, once manufacture and disposal is taken into account. If wind is ‘free’ then so is natural gas!

      2. Feadupsouthener
        June 25, 2023

        You are correct Peter. Someone in the know in Scotland wrote a paper on this subject showing quite clearly that the fossil fuels industry does not receive subsidies like the ‘green’s industry does. I will try to find his name today. I think the information is available to read still.

      3. agricola
        June 25, 2023

        Most of the subsidies flow the other way in the form of tax and VAT to fund the profligacy of the majority of politicians.

        1. hefner
          June 26, 2023

, 29/08/2022, ‘Support for fossil fuel almost doubled in 2021, slowing progress toward international climate goals, according to new analysis from OECD and IEA’.

, 04/02/2022, ‘Paid to pollute: Fossil fuel subsidies in the UK and what you need to know’.

, 27/10/2021, ‘For every dollar pledged to tackle climate crisis for the world’s poor, four dollars are spent on fossil fuel subsidies’.

 15/11/2021, ‘COP26: How much is spent supporting fossil fuels and green energy?’.

    2. Richard1
      June 25, 2023

      Your number of £7 trillion is plucked out of thin air. Look at the numbers, it’s not that hard. In the U.K., despite £10s of billions of subsidies (those really are subsidies – cheques written), wind and solar together account for less than 5% of the UK’s primary energy. The global figure is less than 2%. There are applications for both, but neither has anything like the energy density to be a serious alternative to fossil fuels which still account for 80-85% of global primary energy. (In the U.K. being at the greener end of the scale it’s about 80%).

    3. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2023

      Many people (usually with very little understanding of physics and the realities of energy economics) may indeed disagree with support for the fossil fuel lobby. But they have been conned into this by the BBC, charities, international organisation and Governments. The war on CO2 is just a ruse for higher taxes, more control and more Socialism.

      These same people will of course use Diesel, Petrol, Gas, Aviation fuel, plastics, tyres… many like King Charles, Emma Thompson even fly on private jets, helicopter and drive Range Rovers & Aston Martins.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 25, 2023

        Were the Government actually serious about C02 they would ban private jets/helicopters and first class flights, stop burning wood at Drax, stop encouraging people to replace old cars with EV cars, ban large cars with huge engines, chop down old forests (and build with or bury the wood) and replace with new growing trees, ban flights unless they were virtually full… they do none of this. You can only judge most politicians by their actions not their words!

    4. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2023

      “Unfortunately for the prospect of keeping your seat at the next election, many people disagree with your support for the fossil fuel lobby.”

      It is merely support for a sensible & rational energy policy rather than a fairy dust one. Most sensible people want cheap, reliable on demand energy. Also essential for that industry, farming etc. can actually compete and afford to employ people. When they see power cuts or are freezing to death they will quite quickly come to their senses.

    5. Stred
      June 25, 2023

      Although, as usual, you have got the subsidies for oil exploration the wrong way around, you are correct that the 20 billion for CCS is a waste of money and a nice little earner for the petrochemical industry. How do the green zealots in the ministries arrive at 20 billion? Is there a single chemical engineer in the civil service who can do the sums? According to the SEWTHA reference and engineering blogs, the process of separating CO2 from the combustion products has to require a great deal of energy input. That’s why burning carbon gives out a lot of energy in the first place. Then a lot more energy is needed to cool it and pump it miles under the sea and to prevent it escaping. Does the ministry realise that carbon capture has been tried by the petrochemical industry before and it is only economical if combined with other processes? Or did the civil servants just approach the industry and ask how much they would like to try to make it work when everyone else had failed? 20 billion is peanuts these days presumably. It’s only a sixth of the money wasted on HS2.
      But the gas industry can’t lose because the only realistic way to get the CO2 is to reform methane and in order to do so twice as much natural gas would be needed in order to generate the same amount of energy.

    6. Original Richard
      June 25, 2023

      SG :

      Utter nonsense. Whilst fossil fuels are cheap, abundant and reliable and provide enormous funds for the exchequer :

      – Wind turbines requires subsidies to be built. I kg of concrete and steel used to build wind turbines produces just 1 watt of power. Whilst I kg of concrete and steel provides 1000 watts of power for nuclear plants and 2000 watts for gas plants.

      – Wind turbines require subsidies to pay for the enormous maintenance looking after tens of thousands of turbines spread over hundreds of thousands of sq km. The large workforce is thus not employed on real jobs, such as producing goods for export.

      – Wind turbine power is intermittent, so requires a completely parallel system of either gas generators or a massive storage system for when the wind doesn’t blow (or the sun doesn’t shine). Hydrogen storage analysis shows that installed wind power needs to be 6 times the current average demand and requires the storage of 1 million tons of hydrogen. Battery storage analysis shows a battery cost of £11 trillion.

      – Wind turbine power requires running subsidies in the form of constraint payments, which the National Grid, often reduce by exporting the electricity at negative prices.

      – Wind turbines have an economic life of only around 15 years.

      Renewables are a scam, borne out of the CAGW scam, and in fact it will not last much longer. The latest round of CfD non-binding “contracts” are not going to be built. Or at least, not without a further very big increase in subsidies.

    7. Original Richard
      June 25, 2023

      SG : “Far better that the government secures our energy independence and security by rapidly building onshore wind and solar parks…”

      Where is the security when :

      – We rely on China, a state described by our security services as “hostile” for the manufacture of wind turbines and solar panels and supply of critical metals and minerals for motors, generators, batteries and cabling?

      – Putting all our energy eggs into one energy basket, namely electrification, particularly when no economic means to store electrical energy exists?

    8. Mickey Taking
      June 25, 2023

      As a voter in Wokingham for the last 54 years, I doubt the chances of Sir John keeping his seat rest on the ignorance or otherwise on the fossil fuel lobby. The swing will be down to changing constituency boundaries, the more youthful population moving into the concrete rabbit hutches and the overall view on the Party and its turmoil over the last 3 PMs and Governments. The more experienced voter will reflect long and hard on using their vote, but the younger, new to the area might go with the apparent swing.

    9. Roy Grainger
      June 25, 2023

      If we produce more oil and gas from UK fields we collect high amounts of tax on it via licensing, direct tax on production and corporation tax. If instead if we import it we don’t collect any of those. Why is the latter a better idea ?

      Also when did paying shareholders become a bad thing ? You know that major shareholders are UK pension funds don’t you ?

    10. Mark
      June 25, 2023

      You could do with better information. The Brent field was discovered in 1971. It was in production in 1976, having had to design innovative methods of working in 140m of water, whereas today proven designs are available for working in water depths measured in km. There will be no taxpayer money spent on the development: it will all be raised commercially, as there are no plans to reinstate BNOC. Your subsidy figure is entirely bogus: it assumes that oil revenues should all be taxed at the highest rates, much like assuming all income should be taxed at 60% (the marginal rate that applies over £100,000). The reality is that tax applied to oil and gas is much more punitive than for any other business except perhaps tobacco. The government has of course substantially increased the tax take with its windfall profits tax that is so burdensome that several companies have decided not to invest in the UK.

      There is no energy independence in relying on Chinese made wind turbines and solar cells. Indeed, we lack the security afforded by an internationally competitive market with a wide choice of suppliers as with oil and gas. Intermittent supply is already leaving us very dependent on imports, but with no guarantee they will be available in future.

    11. Derek
      June 25, 2023

      Perhaps you should watch and digest the details provided by Tony Heller, Geologist of realclimatescience in a video which exposes the deliberate distortion of available data from NASA, NOAA et al to achieve the appearence that Earth temperatures are getting higher than ever.

    12. Mark B
      June 25, 2023

      And ao called re-newables are not subsidized ?

      Do you get paid for supplying energy to the grid when you are not using your solar panels to charge your car ? If so, then clearly your interest in these matters is more financial than environmental.

    13. Al
      June 26, 2023

      “Far better that the government secures our energy independence and security by rapidly building onshore wind and solar parks, harvesting free energy at approx a tenth of the projected cost of Rosebank product. “- Sakara Gold

      Aside from the issue over subsidies, be aware that even when these are built, getting power to the grid is hardly an instant process. The Orkneys windfarm overproduces significantly, but Ofgem have taken five years (2018 application to mar 2023 approval) to approve a cable to transfer power to the mainland in case “it was not used.” It still has to be laid.

  3. Bloke
    June 25, 2023

    British people have been suffering from a Govt that has a reckless gambling addiction. Using SJR’s cogent plan to persuade the more sensible MPs to gain better control of the worst offenders is a positive way to break the damaging habit of leaders chasing their losses at so many other people’s expense.

    1. Peter Wood
      June 25, 2023

      Trouble is, if SJR is saying to ministers what he says here, which I think is blindingly obvious common sense to most of us, then I fear that it’s a long journey to get any results if they need such explanations.

  4. DOM
    June 25, 2023

    My cognitive skills have never been the most finely tuned but even I can see that as a compliant party politician you accept the climate change political narrative and equate it to the truth. Well, It isn’t the truth, it is an OPINION. The fact that State sanction is now imposed for those opposing Al Gore’s assertion is evidence of a political agenda seeking to destroy all those who stand up and say, NO.

    You appear to sacrifice the commitment to unearthing the truth, oppose reason and logic and relegate the civil to State authoritarianism for what? To tow the party line and protect careers. That stance will drag us all into a space none of us want to be.

    When will opposing climate change propaganda become a hate crime (I never thought such a term could ever enter into the English language but here it is and I for one find that utterly terrifying.)

    Hate is now anything the authorities say it is. This could be Germany in the 1930’s or the Soviet Union. Maoist China etc

    Reply You remain angry against the wrong target. I am out to change those net zero policies that are damaging.

    1. BOF
      June 25, 2023

      Al Gore. That reminds me, his prediction of climate armageddon failed to materialise. As did that specific one of young Greta for 21st June. One thing they are consistent on is climate prediction failure.

      1. hefner
        June 26, 2023

        As you appear to know, G.Thunberg said five years ago ‘Climate change will wipe out all humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years’.

        Now tell me: Is it the same thing as ‘Climate change will wipe out all humanity over the next five years unless we stop using fossil fuels’?

        When I was at school, I was told to be aware of the order of the words in a sentence as the meaning could be drastically changed.
        Didn’t you learn something similar at school?

        1. Martin in Bristol
          June 26, 2023

          Do you see any beginning of this wipe out hefner after five years ?
          I see an increasing world population in this five year period
          What see you?

    2. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2023

      A delay in this insanity is far better than nothing, but net zero should really be abandoned completely.

      JR says “Hydrogen technology may well prove to be a good way of fuelling transport and storing renewable electricity.” Well it wastes a very high proportion of the energy in the process of electricity to H2 to electricity, cost a fortune and is expensive and often dangerous to store.

      Any subsidies other than for certain specialist areas R&D (on things like fuel cells) would be a mistake.

      Subsidies to roll out duff tech just gives you huge debts, poor ability to compete and duff tech littered all over the place – that all needs to be replaced & recycled later. EV cars with expired batteries for example.

    3. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2023

      To reply “I am out to change those net zero policies that are damaging” Well they all are hugely damaging – some more than others!

      Grant Shapps in an article the other day in the Telegraph demonstrated that he does not understand the difference between Power and Energy and this is the man in charge of our mad energy policy. With his NHD from Manchester Poly – does he even have a Physics O level! Why did Sunak appoint such an unsuitable man!

      Perhaps we will not have a hydrogen or carbon capture tax but someone will have to pay for it – bill payers or tax payers who else unless they cancel these lunacies.

    4. Cuibono
      June 25, 2023

      +++ Agree ( but also agree JR is NOT arguing FOR all the lunacy. He is working very hard against it in a measured way and in my eyes can do no wrong. Our straw in the ocean of madness!)

      We are sitting ducks for totalitarianism because of our increasing reliance on the internet.
      The internet was a trap.
      And why on earth pray did we ever need e mails or computers in our lives?
      And we all fell for it for the sake of convenience and novelty.
      How many of us expected to have fewer shops and no banks?
      Or for information on the internet to be sifted and skewed?
      Or to be corralled into 24/7 surveillance?
      We need to get local again.
      But NOT in 15 minute prisons.
      If that is at all possible now remembering the govt’s successful divide and rule tactics.

    5. agricola
      June 25, 2023

      Reply to reply.
      With respect SJR you may as well try to get the Pope to openly advocate birth control. Everyone with half a brain knows that climate changes. It is one of its basic properties and has been for millions of years. A small number in the World are using it as a control mechanism to reverse individual freedom and exert political and financial control for their own benefit. That the World is in need of a big cleanup is not disputed. In the UK it could be done with applied science and engineering that would carry the majority of the people with it.
      Take ULEZ, where law and taxation are seen by the mayor as the only way. A generous vehicle scrappage scheme to remove those less than Euro 4,5,and 6 and offer compliant vehicles in their place would solve the problem and improve business for those who make white vans. And most would be happy ever after.

    6. hefner
      June 25, 2023, Dec’22 ‘Vital signs: Ocean warming’ 345 (+/-2) zettajoules since 1955
      zettajoule = 10^21 joules

      1. Mark
        June 26, 2023

        Divide by ocean volume ~1.3 billion cubic kilometers and by specific heat capacity of about 4.2kJ/kg/C to get temperature change, taking density as approx 1,000kg/m^3 for simplicity.

        Glad they think they can measure to an accuracy of better than 1% with so little information on historic sea temperatures, and even on current ones in the Argo buoy era.

        1. hefner
          June 26, 2023

          That’s 0.06 degC the way you set the problem. But it can be discussed that the whole volume of all oceans is heating uniformly. Satellite observations of sea surface temperature (available from the 1970s, at least in terms of spatial gradients) with an accuracy of better than 0.2 degC since the 2000s, appear to show the global SST warmer by 0.7 degC, with local and seasonal SSTs higher by a few degrees.

          1. Martin in Bristol
            June 27, 2023

            I went in the sea in Dorset recently and that 0.7 degree warming compared to decades ago was a real treat.
            In fact I had to come out it was just too hot.

    7. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      You will have net-zero, and you will appreicate it and love it …..

    8. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      We should all question when MPs and governments start to apply and communicate their opinions as scientific facts …and worry when they cancel any opposing voice

  5. Wanderer
    June 25, 2023

    If the government wants to leave the country in a slightly better position than it is now for when Labour take over, it should follow all our host’s suggestions. I fear it actually wants to cynically drag the country even further down in the run up to the elections.

  6. Peter Gardner
    June 25, 2023

    I would suggest the UK should also invest more in climate research that is not biassed towards CAGW. It is generally true that science projects that aim to prove something extremely dangerous will occur unless the Government acts are more likely to get funding than those aiming to show no immediate government action is required. This is particularly true of big state and high spending governments as the Tories have been since Sunak became Chancellor and now Prime Minister.
    I recently made a radio programme marking the 60th anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty. The people I interviewed who are involved in Antarctic based research into the atmosphere and oceans were not alarmist at all, although there are occasional mavericks who make a lot of money writing books intended to cause alarm.
    For example ice cores encompassing 800,000 years of atmospheric cycles from Antarctica have shown two salient facts: the interglacial cycle (the dominant warming and cooling cycle) is about 100,000 years and we are only a short way into the current warming part of the cycle. Ice cores also show that in a warming period increasing temperature precedes CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. Therefore rising CO2 cannot be the driver of warming but warming can be the driver of rising CO2. Other research showed that despite the alarmist cries of the melting polar ice when the 1,250 square miles of the Larsen B ice shelf broke off in 2002 and drifted northwards, the cause was most likely to have been volcanic action underneath the ice shelf, part of a chain of undersea volcanoes stretching for thousands of miles.
    It also seems to be the case that in funding research and development the government is attempting to pick winners rather than funding the pre-competitive phase of developing alternatives to fossil fuels. That is always bad policy. Why is it doing it? Because it is panicking in response to an alarmist agenda and instead of pausing to think, it is grasping at quick solutions, visible results, deliverables.
    The science is far from settled and may never be. We know beyond doubt the climate models run hot in their estimates of future warming so the trends are exaggerated and amplified further for political and financial reasons. The future is one of a warming earth in line with 8 previous known interglacial cycles. Caution is warranted, but panic and a rush to half baked solutions is not.

  7. Donna
    June 25, 2023

    Sir John – I realise that it will take you a long time and great effort to turn the Green-Blue-Socialist “Tanker” you are on …. but “playing the Globalists’ game” by their rules is basically playing to lose.

    The Climate Change “crisis” doesn’t exist. It’s based on models; $cientific opinion and propaganda. As we saw with the Covid scamdemic, the Globalists have bought-and-paid for the $cientists who are producing the propaganda they want – and any genuine scientists who oppose the scam are silenced. The BBC (required in its Charter to be impartial) has REFUSED for over a decade to allow a debate on the Climate Change scam because they have declared that “the $cience is settled.”

    So – it can be done your way and slowly hoping to change Ministers’ and MPs’ minds – which, at best, will slow down the lunacy they are promoting which will cost us £tens of thousands most of us haven’t got and achieve nothing to reduce global CO2.

    Or we can do it our way and vote the charlatans’ out of their comfortable, taxpayer-funded sinecures to encourage real REFORM.

    I am not voting for a ban on ICE cars or gas boilers. I’m not voting for a Smart meter (I haven’t got one). I’m not voting for 15-minute ghettos; LTNs or ULEZ systems. And I’m not voting for so-called “green” taxes….even delayed or slightly lower ones.

    1. Feadupsouthener
      June 25, 2023

      Hear, hear Donna.

    2. Cynic
      June 25, 2023

      +1Donna, why would anyone want to vote for a bunch of lunatics?

    3. Lifelogic
      June 25, 2023


    4. Ashley
      June 25, 2023

      The people who rightly suggested that:- lockdowns were counterproductive, vaccinating people with emergency unproven new tech vaccines (especially the young for no reason at all) would do serious net harm, the Barrinton Declaration people were all silenced or rubbished by MSM, social media, certain foul PPE graduate Tory MPs, the Government and their duff “experts”

      This censorship has killed millions around the World and injured even more. Excess deaths in the UK still circa 200 a day many vaccine related Cardio Vascular.

    5. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      Well said Donna

    6. Mickey Taking
      June 25, 2023

      Donna reminds us all of the evident truth, the last lines nicely capture the reality.

    7. MFD
      June 25, 2023

      Donna, I agree with all your statement. However, I am not lecturing but i ponder how we can make out views heard as the majority are being ignored by the loud few.
      Science is never settled, it must always be questioned as that is the only way to progress. The people who chant the green revolution puzzle me as their logic is so weak. All those trying to drive humanity to destruction must be opposed and the FREE market left to guide progress in the world. It really works!

      1. hefner
        June 25, 2023

        ‘Science is never settled, it must always be questioned as that is the only way to progress’. Agreed, but who are the persons to do the questioning? Journalists? Politicians? Other scientists? Mr & Mrs Smith?
        Would you feel enough informed/qualified to question the diagnostic of a surgeon telling that you have a malignant tumour and that it should be removed?

        1. Martin in Bristol
          June 26, 2023

          Don’t question the High Priests it is heresy says Hefner.

    8. Jim+Whitehead
      June 25, 2023

      Donna and DOM, +++++++++, I’m in heartfelt agreement. Small changes to policy are not equated to any fundamental changes in the minds of our ‘leaders’.
      We saw this with Brexit, a pretence of acceptance, followed by a thoroughly disreputable attempt to subvert the decision and the vote. Covid, wokery, and Net Zero are a front for the usual suspects to continue their advance. Contrition and humility will never be seen from those sources of our troubles. I’m afraid that your mission, Sir John, is a futile one, and concedes ground by increments.

    9. John O'Leary
      June 25, 2023


    10. paul cuthbertson
      June 25, 2023

      Spot on Donna and I was surprised your comment was published. Normally if it does not fit the Globalist UK Establishment agenda or narrative it is not published.

      1. Donna
        June 26, 2023

        I generally find Sir John is very respectful of different views.

  8. Sakara Gold
    June 25, 2023

    Nobody enamoured of the green persuasion wants an immediate halt to the use of fossil fuels in the UK. Clearly, during the transition we will need gas, petrol and diesel while we develop grid scale electricity storage solutions of the type used by the British start-up Gravitricity.

    There will be no renewables power rationing or power cuts once we have made the transition. There are very few windless days in the UK, we have ample gas generation capacity to take up the slack. What will cause power cuts and rationing is the lack of investment in the national grid; we need HVDC power transmission lines to transport electricity from N Sea wind farms to where it is needed. Focusing on developing more fossil fuel fields is a retrograde step and anyway, it will be 20 years or more before they come on stream

    The British company Xlinks is developing a massive renewable energy project in Morocco. They are building an HVDC cable plant in Scotland to transport the electricity back to the UK. It will produce more juice than Sizewell B at a fraction of the cost. This is the sort of new technology we should be embracing

    1. Lynn Atkinson
      June 25, 2023

      Tell that to ‘just stop oil’ 😂🤣

    2. Donna
      June 26, 2023

      “Nobody enamoured of the green persuasion wants an immediate halt to the use of fossil fuels in the UK.”

      How very generous of you and “the green persuasion.”

      And how do you and “the green persuasion” feel about the prospect of hundreds, maybe thousands, of poor and/or elderly people dying of cold every year because they’ve been deprived of efficient, reliable (and cheap) gas central heating?

      Do tell.

  9. Feadupsouthener
    June 25, 2023

    I am disappointed to realise we have idiots running the country John. Joe Blogs knows what you are saying makes sense. We’ve all been saying this for some time in your diary. Its not rocket science.

    As for paying for a smart meter, why should I pay for something I don’t want?

    As usual, well done for pointing out the obvious to ministers but I await with bated breath to see if any of it transpires. Perhaps someone in the Labour party can be that forward thinking…but I doubt it.

  10. BOF
    June 25, 2023

    I am in full agreement. ACC is a scam, a fraud, and the perpetrators and their useful idiots need calling out daily. The futility of NZ needs ramming down throats at every opportunity. Softly softly is no longer an option.

  11. Timaction
    June 25, 2023

    No, no, no. CO2 is a naturally occurring harmless trace gas that feeds all plant life on the planet. Without plants we and all animals on the planet die. Let that sink in and pass on to your climate zealots/religion believers. It is 0.04% of the total atmosphere and I have seen/read no evidence other than conjecture/unsubstantiated models that it has any significant effect on our climate. Water vapour, volcanoes, our oceans, removing the rain forests, building on our greenbelts has more impact but is not popular to report/believe. There have been many studies in the arctic regions to show that ice drilled at significant depth shows CO2 content of the worlds atmosphere/ CO2 over the millennia. It also shows that CO2 content follows climate change and is not in front of it. In my 65th year I seen variation in our weather from time to time. NOT OUR CLIMATE. The fact that we now have a 24/7 news cycles allows msm to sensationalise normal extremes of weather that have occurred………… forever. As they do with everything else or report their own “diverse/minority/other cultures and beliefs” are good, English are bad agenda.
    It’s time for a proper debate and funding to be allowed on both sides of the debate not just Government funding to prove their religion. Proper scientist’s should stop being silenced or defunded as they don’t agree the narrative from the Governments flat earthers. Amateur part time politicians are not scientists. It’s time for a referendum to stop this costly religion or they need to campaign to remove our boilers/ICE cars/ 15 minute Cities etc. Lets see how that goes shall we?

  12. Jude
    June 25, 2023

    Again totally agree. It’s common sense. Use our own energy resources. Let private sector develop new energy resources & storage. Government should only Govern for the people & protect the people! There are way too many in British politics who think they need to control the people. To give them power & wealth. Which is now clear is the road to ruin the UK.

  13. Julian+Flood
    June 25, 2023

    Sir John, there is resistance to your policy of fighting the sensible battle you can win instead of facing down the overwhelming narrative (wrong in my opinion) that fossil fuels are the exhalation of Satan which is prevalent across the CC debate. People don’t seem to realise that flat denial, even if correct, is making no headway.

    While I might disagree with the notion of hairshirt Net Zero, there is a route to that goal that will leave the UK richer, cleaner and more virtuous.

    Use compressed natural gas to power our economy – clean, low carbon dioxide and vanishingly low particulates.Use the prosperity bought with that wonderful of fuels to build a nuclear economy based on SMRs. By 2050 we really could reach Net Zero. The great virtue of that pathway is the fact that it can be paused at any stage when it becomes clear that hairier shirts are unnecessary.


  14. DOM
    June 25, 2023

    Armed Forces DAY

    Black History MONTH

    Pride MONTH

    Note the timescale and understand what happens when a slimey, filthy appeasing Tory party becomes an extension of the odious Labour party and its woke infrastructure.

    Having your nose rubbed in diversity has changed the Tories into a most repugnant and despised political organisation.

  15. Cuibono
    June 25, 2023

    Does the govt. that imprisoned us and then froze and starved us ( and turned this country into a living nightmare) have even the slightest inkling of the effect of CO2 starvation on plants? As in there won’t BE any plants and thus no insects, no birds, no wildlife. No us…no nothing.
    Not that I think the ridiculous carbon capture idea will work.

    Would the govt. eat fried mice as a whooping cough remedy? Probably. If the snake oil salesman was charging enough.

  16. Malcolm Dodd
    June 25, 2023

    John, I do not understand your comment “my critics here”. I 100% agree with all you write. Malcolm

  17. ChrisS
    June 25, 2023

    You have had some limited success, I grant you and congratulate you for it, but even the most illiterate observer already knew that these were obvious things to do in the circumstances.. The surprise is that government needed any persuading at all !

    There are two bigger problems :

    1. We are unable to convince the government, let alone the opposition parties, that Net Zero is unaffordable and will bankrupt the nation and householders. They are all fully signed up to the same policies as the extreme wing of the green movement. The only difference is that the greens are determined to destroy our whole capitalist lifestyle and eventually take us back to some form of socialist middle age culture.

    2. This government is not Conservative. It is a million miles away from believing in sound money and balancing the books. That is why it is happy to waste £20bn it does not have on carbon capture and storage, let alone the subsidies industry is demanding to keep the motor industry operating, to build yet more wind farms and to provide far more essential things like nuclear energy, hopefully via funding home produced SMRs.

    How much extra is the equally essential NHS manpower plan going to add to government expenditure when it is announced this week ? I can only see taxes going even higher under a new Sunak government. What on earth would happen under Labour ?

  18. agricola
    June 25, 2023

    Finding common ground with ministers must be like teaching a two year old to read. Galileo had the same problem with the Vatican. Little will shift our government and the country will not forgive them for a long time, if ever.

  19. Alan Paul Joyce
    June 25, 2023

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    Perhaps you and your fellow MP’s could now use your persuasive skills to ask the government to reverse their plans to hit households with the £170 net zero green levy which was suspended for two years last Autumn but which will now end in July of this year – as reported in the Daily Telegraph.

    How lucky we consumers are to have this benevolent government on our side. It saves us £120 on the hydrogen levy and slaps us with a £170 green levy.

  20. Donna
    June 25, 2023

    So taxpayers’ are being charged for the procurement of defibrillators for every secondary school in the country, and then for every primary school.

    Now why would that be? Children never used to suffer from heart problems, myocarditis or be prone to sudden heart attacks.

    MPs must be very concerned to know that school children need the provision of defibrillators in case of sudden heart attacks. I’m sure they will be demanding that the Sec of State for Health and the Education Minister give an explanation why this provision is suddenly so necessary.

    Move along, nothing to see. Get your booster. Safe and effective ….. NOT.

  21. Cuibono
    June 25, 2023

    Let us remember the summer days when we were free and happy.
    When normality reigned and we thought the future was bright.
    The future is now dark and something to be feared.
    If we don’t all darn well WAKE UP!

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      I fear a world, a Britian of net-zero

      1. Cuibono
        June 25, 2023

        Net Zero and 15 minute cities.
        Our country will be like Newgate prison c1812!

  22. a-tracy
    June 25, 2023

    Are the government already committed to paying for smart meters this year? Perhaps you should turn it on its’ head and say we will only pay for smart meters for the next three months, after that you will have to pay for your own conversion.

    I think Sunak and gang are damaging your party on purpose. That man is a poor communicator, not one positive message has been made on the news for months and it isn’t because there aren’t any.

    Everyone had these mortgages over 5% right up until the 2008 crash. No-one asks just how this government and the BoE kept interest rates under 2% for 12 years, who paid for that, yet even now that those paying for that aren’t happy its stopped. It’s very bizarre. People talk about high interest rates as though they date back to the 80’s we had very high interest rates in the 90’s my house lost nearly 20% in value six months after I bought it and took years to recover back to the sale price. I warned my kids these under 2% mortgage rates won’t last forever, think about them being around 5%.

    The Lib Dem’s talk as though they weren’t for the first time ever at the top of government between 2010-2015, I think there were five of them in top cabinet positions. Those debts that first mounted were from Labours bust. The second set of large debts after covid yet the Tories just keep turning the other cheek. There is more money than ever going into Benefits, child education, NHS yet for all that you’re not getting any credit for blowing money in those directions whilst the NHS managers and staff even with all that extra dosh can’t see people!

    1. Mark B
      June 25, 2023

      The difference between today and the 1980’s is the house price to mortgage ratio. Back then you could only borrow 3 times one salary or, two and a half times two salaries. Today people have to put up more of their own cash or, take on mortgages 5 or 6 times, and that in some cases is for only part ownership.

      1. a-tracy
        June 26, 2023

        Yes, Mark, and in the 1980s, school leavers earned £23.50 per week, £35 after two years for 40 hours per week, or apprenticeships for four-five years on low earnings £45 for 1st six months. People took on multiple jobs, not just one, to increase gross earnings. Fewer holidays, fewer weekends in Town. It sounds unbelievable now that we accepted such a poor ‘work-life balance’, but we did. My Dad had to work 7, 12 hour days and then have one day off to pay for his first home, they had to share a bedroom at my Nans for five years to save up the deposit with a child/ren in the same room, and people condemn boomers! His house, with his compound interest mortgage and inflation plus extra work done on the house, isn’t worth any more now than it was when he bought it, but we are allowing these modern kids to slam the elderly as though everyone had London gains, I’ve had enough of it.

        The average age of marriage for a first-time marriage has risen by 8+ years to 31.5 for women and 33.4 for men. ONS. We were marrying avg at 22, so many more years to save; the minimum starting salary for someone age 22 now is £20,455 pa (37.5 hrs), £21,819 pa for (40 hrs) with a degree around £25-27,000, and the banks accept more multiples of the woman’s salary (crazy multiples I agree, these young adults are putting off having families because of this decision to push up property prices). We didn’t have help to buy isas that topped up savings by 25%. Houses weren’t snapped up from the bottom of the market for buy-to-let investments, so we could buy doer uppers and work on them ourselves.

        I know two people who bought part-ownership homes and have since taken over the other part by working weekends in a bar and saving hard. They’re not ideal, but they are better than renting for life and having nothing at 65, relying on housing benefits to pay for your home. They’d have been better off having 40-year mortgages if they were 25 when buying. A house is only worth what it’s worth on the day you want to sell it. I know someone who has just sold a 2-bed retirement flat for £70k. They paid more for it.

  23. Des
    June 25, 2023

    If the current level of Co2 is halved plant life starts to die. If the Co2 level returned to a historical average of two to three times it’s current level plant growth explodes, animal diversity increases and the climate carries on doing the same as it’s always done.
    So I have one question. Why in any sane world would we want to reduce Co2?

  24. glen cullen
    June 25, 2023

    What of fracking for shale gas ? so we don’t have to import any gas and create an internal energy price market only selling excess on the international markets

  25. Bryan Harris
    June 25, 2023

    Our host is a true optimist, and while I admire his approach – he deserves to succeed, but in reality he is shouting against the wind.

    This situation goes beyond mere HMG incompetence – well beyond. Those that rule the world have already decided that we will have a new world order, and to get us to that potentially awful state, HMG has to create chaos in every possible way, to reduce us all to being totally dependent on the State, impoverished, sick, without justice or hope for a decent future!

    The sane and rational interventions from our host may slow down the dreaded future, but won’t stop it – not without some miracle!

  26. glen cullen
    June 25, 2023

    The government shouldn’t provide any subsidy, ban anything or levy anything ….if the people want to go ‘green’ let them vote for a green party and let them freely purchase good and service in a free market

  27. Original Richard
    June 25, 2023

    “My critics here complain that I urge a big rethink of the UK government’s green policies without challenging their CO 2 beliefs.”

    Sir John, you may win the odd battle here and there with your approach but it will only delay the inevitable if Parliament does not tackle the CAGW scam and repeal the CCA.

    Firstly, it is a legal requirement for our 1% contribution to global CO2 emissions to be net zero by 2050 and the Government has already been taken to court by ClientEarth for falling behind its carbon budget and which necessitated the turning of the Net Zero screw with the issuance of “Powering Up Britain” earlier this year.

    Secondly because the supporters of this fundamentalist religion are so convinced that the Earth will turn into a fireball (Ex VP Al Gore believes that even now the “oceans are boiling”) if average global temperature climbs 1.5 degrees above that of the Little Ice Age and consequently that the unilateral destruction of the UK economy to reduce our 1% contribution to global CO2 emissions is a price worth paying “to save the planet.”

  28. David Bunney
    June 25, 2023

    We just have to get away from the notion that industry and agriculture releasing CO2 is bad or that it matters in any way. We need politicians, civil servants (regulation, taxation and market rules) to promote production of products and services which have utility for people (rather than distracted with nonsense ESG measurements). If we get back to promoting small and medium sized businesses with low taxation, cheap and reliable energy which can only come about from nuclear and fossil fuels. Renewables consume more energy and money than they generate. Let’s support a cheap and effective energy system based on technologies and economics that make sense. Let’s promote agriculture. Let’s keep more undesirable and uncontrolled migrants out or just send them back to the country they crossed our border from. Let’s run this country for the benefit of it’s citizens and subjects. Step 1 stop worrying about climate and CO2 and start worrying about fundamentals of economic wealth preservation and growth. Currently policies are just destroying wealth and destroying our future.

  29. forthurst
    June 25, 2023

    We are all paying the price for the fact that parliament and the civil service are manned largely by Arts graduates whose knowledge of numerate science is zilch. They are all at sea in a world of chemical equations and the physical properties of common chemicals, proposing one daft idea after another. Just go away.

    1. Donna
      June 26, 2023

      You’re not wrong, but it’s a mistake to think that the people orchestrating and implementing the lunacy/chaos are stupid. They’re not: they are delivering an Agenda and the plan to achieve it. It’s about global surveillance and control of “the peasants;” rationing resources; levelling down the west and concentrating power in a carefully-selected global “elite” who are above democracy – with a second-tier of carefully selected politicians who maintain a pretence of democracy but who will be replaced with a clone if the electorate votes the first one out (Sunak, Starmer).

  30. Lynn Atkinson
    June 25, 2023

    Agreed. By avoiding the basic argument which is based on ‘belief’ and not argument, so you will never win, if you can show them that they are failing because of their own policies, you stand a chance of getting them to change those many damaging policies which will bankrupt us all.

    If we are right, and their foundation beliefs are wrong, by the time we2 have recovered they might have seen the light or been replaced.

  31. wes
    June 25, 2023

    Donna, well put I am 100% of the same opinions (but I did get a smart meter) It’s a shame the REFORM party leader seems to keep quiet at this important time. Maybe he is keeping his powder dry, or maybe the time is not yet right.
    Wes must change from this ludicrous two party system.

  32. graham1946
    June 25, 2023

    Well, good luck with all that. One cheer instead of three I’m afraid. I daresay the government may agree to shut you up, but will dilly and dally until Labour come in to cancel it. You need to ensure that what you suggest is started and cannot be thwarted by an incoming socialist government intent on destroying this country and handing it over to the internationalists. I know that is not within your power, but speaking up and making it public is. I simply don’t trust Rishi and co. who are globalists and I think will sell this country out to get their way and of course their share of the profits. In short, well done for trying, but we’ll believe it when we see it.

  33. George Sheard
    June 25, 2023

    Hi John
    I’m happy the government us listening to you,
    are doing a great job if all MP’S joined together they could get a lot changed for the good ,
    then maybe we could start to get the benefits of Brexit and put the undemocratic in their place,
    Thank you

  34. Mike Wilson
    June 25, 2023

    government has been persuaded to change its policy. They now need to get on with production licences for Rosebank, Cambo and the others.

    When? Tomorrow? The next day? Next week? Next year? After the next election? Never!

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      Agree – the only reason to stop fracking shale gas, to stop mining for coke coal, to stop mining for burning coal, to stop drilling for both onshore and offshore oil & gas ….is because you’re a paid up member of the climate crusade and believe the UN IPCC reports about co2 warming the global temperatures, thereby warming and rising the sea levels, thereby creating the destruction of the world as we know it ! That’s not fact, that’s not science …its opinion

  35. agricola
    June 25, 2023

    Pity we cannot offer Tony Abbott a fivs year contract to sort out the UK top to bottom left tk right. Havn’t heard so much good sense spoken in ten minutes for a very long time.

  36. Mike Wilson
    June 25, 2023

    the oil companies will then want the market price for their oil.

    Indeed. Like they do in the USA. But, there (of course), the government doesn’t take 60% of the pump price in tax.

    The government (sic) could cut inflation at a stroke by reducing the tax on fuel. Mind you they would have to cut public spending too – something which is apparently impossible.

  37. John Waugh
    June 25, 2023

    Andrew Orlowski’s informative article headed – Zealots want to downgrade UK in pursuit of green ideals- (DT 5th June)—-
    On hydrogen-
    Hydrogen is an anti-Midas “solution” that turns anything it touches from gold to manure.

  38. Mike Wilson
    June 25, 2023

    As an aside, I grew up in a 15 minute city – on the outskirts of London. Dad’s work was a 10 minute bike ride away. Mum shopped at the shopping parade half a mile away. I went to school a 10 minute bus ride away. The doctor and dentist were local. The hospital was 10 minutes away. We rarely spent time more than 15 minutes away from home. What’s the problem?

    1. Cuibono
      June 25, 2023

      The problem is that in many areas those facilities are not in place.
      They have been done away with ( including buses).
      Who will bring them back?

    2. Mark B
      June 25, 2023

      The problem is if you want to go further than 15 minutes. Whose decision will it be ? Yours or their’s ?

    3. Donna
      June 25, 2023

      I suspect that you grew up quite a few decades ago. The world has changed: few people work a 10 minute walk or cycle ride away; or have a parade of shops within half a mile. Children are unlikely to go to a school half a mile away and when it comes to senior school they’ll be lucky if it’s within a few miles of home. Grandparents (who used to help with childminding in the ’60s) may now live a hundred or more miles away ….. quite a problem when they get older, frailer and require support.

      Entertainment, sports and other facilities may not exist in your neighbourhood. Your doctor may be several miles away; you’ll be lucky if there’s a dentist who’ll put you on his/her books within 10 miles.

    4. Original Richard
      June 25, 2023

      MW : “What’s the problem?”

      The problem is very few will be able to access speciaist medical treatment and the services they need to stay alive, but I suppose that’s part of the plan.

    5. Berkshire Alan
      June 26, 2023

      That was how it was for many of us myself included
      Different times and values then

  39. Lester_Cynic
    June 25, 2023

    Laurence Fox is going to stand as the Reclaim candidate in Johnson’s Uxbridge seat at the next GE and I think that as a prominent speaker of the truth on matters such as the Pride month he must have realistic expectations?

    His party already has 1 MP, Andrew Bridgen

  40. Roy Grainger
    June 25, 2023

    Spending money on “free” smart meters is an odd idea. I’ve got one and my energy use has not reduced at all as a result – why should it ? Yet that was promoted as a good reason to get one. Actually the reason I got it was simply that reading the old meter was difficult due to access restrictions. I assume the real reason the government is keen on them is they will enable future rationing and dynamic pricing of energy.

    1. paul cuthbertson
      June 25, 2023

      RG – Smart meters are part of the governments “Big Brothe” control system.

    2. Donna
      June 25, 2023

      Of course getting a smart meter isn’t going to reduce your energy consumption. It’s going to make it increase because you’ll be paying for the electricity necessary to power it.

      It’s all about control; surge pricing and the ability to cut your power off remotely if the Government or the power company deems it appropriate.

      1. hefner
        June 25, 2023

        A smart meter (I don’t have one) uses about 1kWh in a year to show the actual energy consumption in a house. That’s about a grand additional total of between 70p and £1. ‘How much electricity does my smart meter use – and is it raising my bill by running 24/7?’, 19/06/2017.
        It is already an old article but I don’t expect the information in it to have changed that much. So maybe £2/year.

        1. Donna
          June 26, 2023

          Thank you for making my point so well. A smart meter will increase your electricity bill, not reduce it.

          We’re exhorted by the Eco Nutters to switch off TVs etc rather than leave them on standby to reduce power consumption and “save the planet.” Yet it’s perfectly OK to have an (unwanted) smart meter running 24/7 and they tell us it will save electricity when it quite obviously won’t, unless they use it to ration your supply and that is the intention.

          In due course, when their social credit system is implemented, you will be given an energy allowance and they will monitor compliance via your smart meter.

  41. Derek
    June 25, 2023

    When are we going to receive, from the Government, the scientifically verified proof that CO2 is severely harming this planet to the extent that WE must pay more and more to reduce such a small percentage of the total global output? We, the electorate, are not shown the justification for the increased spending of OUR money.
    Meanwhile, China ignores us and the protocol and builds more coal-fired power stations to immediately counter the savings we made at enormous expense to us taxpayers.
    It makes absolutely no sense, which now appears to be the MO of our current Government, who appear to be now steering us on a course towards very dangerous rocks. Time to change direction Number 10?

  42. HF Clark
    June 25, 2023

    Quite so Donna. I’m with you on all counts but sadly time serving lickspittle Conservative MPs such as mine will survive the tory wipeout by courtesy of their current huge majorities to further their personal ambitions as ‘grandees’ of the coming but much reduced tory contingent in the HoC.

    My so-called representative was a campaigning remainer but voted for the UK to leave the EU after the referendum result was known. From a banking (god help us) background, he has climbed the greasy pole to become a minister fairly quickly. He is presently cunning enough to keep a very low profile – so low that many of his constituents don’t even know he is the xxx minister.

    In correspondence he avers that he is fully wedded to all the renewable energy crap and cannot acknowledged the futility of it because as he wrote “net zero is an opportunity to grow our economy and to strengthen the UK’s place in the world”. Not surprisingly, he’s very cautious about fracking for shale gas (earth tremors, see) but has stated that “renewable energy is cheaper than gas”. Closed mind or what?

    But once he’s on the opposition front bench next year (shadow chancellor, perhaps, with a high profile and little or no fiscal responsibility) he’ll shuffle his views to suit the situation – all the while with his ambition for the big job lightly veiled until the Labour coalition hits the buffers.

    Then, like Jim Hacker, he’ll reluctantly answer the call to lead his party and the country and thus achieve his ambitious ends.

    Mark my words, it would be better if he and his like were permanently removed from parliament.

  43. Mark
    June 25, 2023

    What Sunak and Shapps “giveth” with one hand they more than taketh away with the other. Instead of the £120 hydrogen levy (presumably now to be funded out of general taxation) they are now imposing £170 of other green levies.

    Next will be adding levies to try to bail out AR4 wind farms that are now withdrawing from investing and to deal with the lack of bids in AR5. National Grid’s £200bn investment programme will build over the next decade to add around £500 more to bills. Then there will be the same again for distribution networks and cabling for heat pumps and EVs. It’s got to stop.

  44. Mark
    June 25, 2023

    I see that after 2 years still no-one has been found to take over from Deben at the CCC on a permanent basis. The interim appointee has an expertise in a limited field of climate science, but not in the feasibility or economics of net zero.

    A better idea would be to abolish the Committee altogether.

  45. John+C.
    June 25, 2023

    There’s not really much point in considering the plans of someone who thinks Carbon Dioxide is a problem. Anything based on that premise is just a game, like persuading children to go to bed because a big bad wolf is coming.

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023


  46. Denis+Cooper
    June 25, 2023

    Off topic:

    “Bold new plan to end problems in NI and break Brexit deadlock over Ulster endorsed by DUP leaders and senior Conservatives”

    “The new package – which will be launched at an event in Westminster on Tuesday 27th June – eliminates the need for the Windsor Framework,”

    The meeting will be at 12 pm in the Rennie Room, One Great George Street.

    Unfortunately I have a much delayed prior appointment for repair of my swift attraction call, as time is running out before they fly off back to Africa, but in my view the most useful price that the DUP could extract for a return to Stormont would be a UK government commitment to unilaterally trial a system of export controls.

    “Why is the DUP not publicly pressing for export controls on goods destined for the Irish Republic?”

  47. Ashley
    June 25, 2023

    No change, no chance with Major. A 197 seat landslide majority for Blair and what a complete disaster that era was.

    Will Labour get three plus terms this time too I will be getting rather old by then all rather depressing? Yet the voters really want far smaller government, lower taxes, to abandon net zero, a real Brexit, public services that actually work, far lower immigration… the complete reverse of what Labour offer and what Cameron, May, Boris & Sunak/Hunt’s fake Tories have delivered.

    1. Mark B
      June 25, 2023

      Once they can get 16 year old’s on the register, EU Citizens and and those who are allowed to remain here (refugees / asylum seekers) you can bet they be in power for just about ever.

  48. RichardP
    June 25, 2023

    I can’t see the roll out of “free” Smart Meters being suspended, they are more likely to be made compulsory. They’ve got nothing to do with reducing carbon emissions and everything to do with control. The Globalists want to control every aspect of our daily lives.
    The good thing is that Smart Meters aren’t proving to be very reliable, which at least gives some hope.

    1. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      …and every free thinking MP should vote against them ….but they didn’t and wont in the future …democracy be damned

    2. glen cullen
      June 25, 2023

      Smart-Meters are already compulsory by stealth, my neighbour was told if she didn’t accept a smart-meter she’d have to find a new energy supplier …’’quis custodiet ipsos custodes’’ (who guards the guardians?) …our opposition in parliament isn’t working

  49. see saw
    June 25, 2023

    At this rate you will be Leader as the sole MP for the Conservatives after the Election like Green Party lady. The rest will be on £100k p /a with GB News.

  50. XY
    June 25, 2023

    While it’s good that you achieve such wins, the big win would be in getting the non-impact of CO2 understood better so that we can progress.

    The predictions have all been wrong (rises in temperature and/or sea level didn’t happen). The evidence and conclusions, based on models, are only models, which are only as good as their inputs, rules and assumptions which are all done by humans – the observations show otherwise.

    The science is not remotely settled as they put it – because science never is, that’s why it’s called a scientific THEORY, because there can always be a better explanation. Getting people to keep an open mind on CO2 science is important.

  51. XY
    June 25, 2023

    P.S. I rememebr Margaret Thatcher being mentioned in recent times by pro-green people, calling her the first PM to be interested in climate change. What they don’t say is that in those days it wasn’t man-made CO2 that was of concern, it was tree-made CO2/oxygen.

    The theories of the time held that the logging in the Amazon rain forest were stopping trees from producing oxygen (even though it was known that they switch from CO2 –> O2 to the opposite between night and day). However, back then people didn’t suggest anything was settled, they kept an open mind and it was eventually dsicovered that phytoplankton in the ocean produce 90% of the world’s oxygen AND they regulate the atmosphere to around 19% oxygen content.

    This is the aspect of environmentalism that is urgent – preserving these plankton is paramount. In a world with massive plastic polution of the sea, we are in danger of suffocating far more than anything else – and far faster. If those little guys die out, we could cease to exist in a matter of months or years, not decades.

  52. glen cullen
    June 25, 2023

    Home Office – 23-24 June 2023
    Illegal Immigrants – 213
    Boats – 4
    Sunak said this morning ‘’we’re stopping the boats’’ well clearly he isn’t

  53. see saw
    June 25, 2023

    Neil Oliver new vid on Bitchute now. I like Bitchute because you don’t have to sign in.
    I suppose what he says isnt on mainstream for fear of panic and compensation claims
    if people believe it.
    Do I believe it ? Who knows.
    Its good to hear different views and then you can make your own mind up and live your life accordingly.

  54. rose
    June 25, 2023

    I have been following your labours and congratulate you on their fruits. Do please press on.

    In order to get rid of the EU tax VAT, we must first abolish the Windsor Framework. One last push on that might do it if you can get big business who are affected by it to help. Richard Walker of Iceland for example. There must be others.

    1. see saw
      June 26, 2023

      How very spiffing of you.

  55. Ralph Corderoy
    June 26, 2023

    ‘we will help cut world CO 2’

    This could also be done by lifting the coming local ban on petrol and diesel cars. Our R&D on these engines has helped make them more efficient in the past. The benefit is not limited to the UK. If manufacturers can’t sell them then they don’t have to compete and research stops. Meanwhile, the rest of of the world will continue with a slower evolution of engine technology.

    The UK’s consumption is dwarfed by others, both now and more so in the future. We should not set an example by cutting consumption but by improving the efficiency of our consumption.

  56. see saw
    June 26, 2023

    How to influence thoughts of every future hair wash
    ( without using electronic mind control )
    or you could go the other way
    layer on the flattery and use music to “eventually” get your message across.
    See ” The Prisoner” for all three techniques.

Comments are closed.