I have long been putting the case that the main net zero policies being pursued by successive U.K. governments are damaging to our economy and add to world CO 2 output. I have pointed out that getting our own gas out instead of importing LNG saves a large amount of CO 2 whilst generating jobs and tax revenue at home. The last government accepted this view and proposed more domestic gas and oil, only for this new government to stupidly cancel the policy.
I pointed out that trying to phase out and then ban new diesel and petrol cars prematurely would damage U.K. car investment and production. It will probably lead to people importing nearly new petrol cars instead. More people buying EVs will increase CO 2 for their manufacture and lead to more gas being burned in power stations to recharge them. I have set out the damage heat pumps will do. The  last government did push back the ban on new petrol cars but failed to lift the penal and damaging tax on selling the wrong types of new car.
My critics say I should spend my time rebutting climate change theory. As an MP I did not see it as my job to change people’s beliefs. I did not seek to make Muslims of Christians, Catholics of Anglicans  or atheists of all. I recognised I had two groups ,two powerful minorities on climate change, deniers  versus fanatics. My arguments were designed to tackle the practical issues and consequences of net zero policies. Pointing  out how absurd key policies are in CO 2 terms as well as the jobs and tax arguments was designed to win over moderate climate change believers, as it did partially with the previous government.
I will continue to make the case for urgent and important policy changes to arrest the damage to industry,jobs and investment the key net zero policies of this government are doing. This case is also environmental. I have always allowed freedom to both sides in the climate debate to state their case here. I have on various occasions raised important questions about climate change theory myself. The immediate need is to alter policy on power generation, EVs, electric heating and the accelerated run down of everything from steel to cars, from petrochemicals to nuclear power. That  requires maximising support from both sides of the climate divide. I will restate my thoughts on the weather issues tomorrow.
October 7, 2024
Good morning.
There are two things that are not being covered on this issue, although our kind host does mention one. The first is that we have never left the EU. The EU dictates our policy. If we had left the EU we could plot our own course. We need to have an honest admission that BREXIT has not happened.
The second is China. Isn’t it odd that all policies which either derive directly or indirectly from the EU seem to benefit China ? Wind turbines made in China. Solar panels made in China. EV Batteries made in China. And so on.
We need an honest open debate and accept that the political class has been captured by China, either directly or indirectly via the EU.
October 7, 2024
At one time there was a lot of talk about that country’s influence in “our”parliament.
All quiet about it now.
Not a word!
October 7, 2024
It’s interesting that you use the analogy of changing religion because that’s exactly what Net Zero is, a religion.
No basis of facts just a zealous pursuit of the impossible. The fact it is bankrupting us has no place in the religious discussion. I would have thought politicians should be calling out the nonesense especially when the majority of the public understand the stupidity.
As for changing Christians to Muslims, this is a work in progress with the daily invasion as can be seen in our cities with their weekly demonstrations.
October 7, 2024
When there isn’t enough electricity to go round we will be rationed. The govt. will just do that “load shedding” thing that they have been doing in SA for years.
And we will all have to poke up with it!
I think we all can see by now that there a lot of integrity involved in any of this.
October 7, 2024
Very few educated, sane, balanced people argue that climate does not change. The abundance of data from past geological time indicates that it has always been changeable. There is nothing to suggest that this will not continue. The main driver is solar activity with contributions from volcanoes, asteroid collisions, and continental shift. The fanciful idea that man can take this under control, short of all out atomic warefare, is for the birds.
The reasons that a small number of diciples of such thinking, leading to Nett Zero, promote it, must be looked for elsewhere. The desire to promote a new political philosophy, personal notoriety, or “Britains got talent” hall of fame. Their messaiantic drive must not be allowed to jeopodise a very real need to clean up our planet. This can, with the help of science and engineering, be achieved, without driving us back to the stone age. We can go a long way down this path as the UK alone without harming our quality of life. Even making a few bob out of it on the way. We can even mitigate against the effects of real climate change if we so choose. I’m thinking in terms of such as the Thames Barrier or growing more wine, but doing it under our own control, not a french champagne house.
There is only one political party that buys into my thinking, the majority are wallowing in a glut of snake oil in an electoral market that is fast drying up, because the taxpayer can not afford the luxury of unachievable Nett Zero.
So for the next 4+ years we can look forward more taxation, more industrial vandalism, less real investment , and a helter skelter ride down the slope of personal GDP, 21st place and falling.