A regular complaint here is my views are ignored.
Those who support them write in to tell me to promote them in other ways, ignoring the fact that I do. I am always ready to reproduce them in the media, or to write an article for another blog or publication, or to talk to decision makers.
Those who disagree write in to tell me I am wrong and ignored. They amuse me as they clearly are not ignoring me and at least think I am worth abusing.
Watch this space. Much of what I am saying about growth, net zero, running public services, management of quangos is apolitical and helpful advice.
I have written, spoken and promoted a number of causes that did succeed. I spent the 1970s and early 1980 s promoting privatisation and private capital investment to promote jobs and growth. I had to write the books about wider ownership, and the failings of nationalised industries. At the time academic opinion and commentators ignored the big damage to jobs, customer service, innovation and investment from heavy reliance on nationalised monopolies. Labour opposed privatisation strongly. Conservatives were sceptical or cautious. Then Margaret Thatcher invited me to advise her on a large transformational programme. Tony Blair adopted private capital and choice for some public services and accepted most of the privatisations . Big wins.
In the 1990 s the imperative was to save the pound. The public wisely wanted to keep it but many in senior official and political jobs wanted to join the Euro. I resigned from the Cabinet highlighting the dangers of abolishing the pound. John Major and more importantly Tony Blair then offered a referendum realising the focus on the issue showed a bad gap between them and the public. That was crucial in saving the pound. I set out the case in Our Currency, our Country (Penguin) and Just say No. Another big win. If we surrendered the currency we would have surrendered crucial rights and powers of self government.
In the 2010-2015 Parliament I worked with a small but then a growing number of Conservative MPs to get a referendum to leave the EU. People on this site told me I could not do it that way and I should join another party.I explained that we had to firstly persuade the Conservative party to adopt a referendum as policy, then help it get elected. Then we would need to join a cross party Leave campaign. Many writing in thought this all impossible but it happened.
Today we may well be close to the Bank of England changing its policy on making big losses which I pioneered as a vital issue. Those of us putting the case against self harming net zero policies are at last a growing voice getting more attention.
If you want what I am saying then actively promote these views and use the materials I provide. If you disagree then debate with me if you think I am wrong. I am happy to do so on any recognised media and here on this site.
September 13, 2025
Good morning.
As someone who regularly points much of what you say in this article I feel it is only right to explain my position.
I do not doubt either what you say or your sincerity, Sir John. What I doubt is, are THEY listening ? Because we have been discussing many of the damaging issues such as Nut Zero and MASS IMMIGRATION, not to forget, many of the stupid economic decisions all governments have been making for quite sometime now. And it isn’t to say that this site and your good self have been the only ones.
Perhaps. But how long has it taken and, could it not be the case that the damage has already been done and that there are no other options on the table anyway ? ie Economics and the Markets are forcing them to rather then them listening to reason.
Do not doubt that I and many here wish you well in your endeavours but, from our perspective things are moving at a glacial rate when, we have seen that governments can act very quickly when it wants to. eg The SCAMDEMIC.
September 13, 2025
Common sense has been put shoved aside by personal interest, both financial and power. We now have ’causes’ that turn into dogma that common sense can’t challenge. We have become fat and lazy, expecting and being told that ‘the state knows best’. Perhaps we need an existential challenge we can all put ahead of our own interests to regain our national pride and common sense. Our politicians DO reflect the corruption and incompetence of our society as it is.
PS Sir J, you have worked out how money is simply a ‘flow of value’ around the system, neither being lost nor increased, EXCEPT by addition or subtraction from the Money Supply from the BoE. Do think it through.
September 13, 2025
Agreed. eg Transrights.
September 13, 2025
“we have seen that governments can act very quickly when it wants to. eg The SCAMDEMIC.”
Indeed usually very expensively and generally in totally the wrong direction and doing vast net harms in addition to the vast costs:- The Blair’s Iraq and other wars, Heath joining “the common market”, Climate Alarmism, Net Zero, the mad Energy Policy, Chagos, the net harm covid “vaccines”, the net harm lockdowns…
September 13, 2025
So Liz Truss has said that Oxford Uni. should expel Abaraonye the rather dim and nasty PPE undergraduate who appeared to rejoice in the death of Charlie Kirk – “He has brought shame on Oxford and shame on Britain,” she wrote. More worrying is that so many members of the Union voted him to be the next president of the Union! To be fair to him he is clearly a fairly dim chap but the university knew that when they took him on with his duff A levels – for diversity reasons I assume.
Perhaps just close down PPE Oxon. completely? After all Torsten Bell read PPE Oxon and when asked about the increasing costs of living said “that is why we have increased the minimum wage”. This increase and the NI tax grab and Net Zero are the main causes of the large increases in the costs of living you dope Torsten!
Google “politicians who read PPE” for a rather dire list with only a tiny few exceptions. Truss perhaps one of them after she finally ditched her university Lib Dim delusions!
September 13, 2025
Which is why she should never have been considered for PM.
We may dislike some views / opinions but, that does not mean we should ban, silence or dismiss such people. Unless their words are calling for, and / or result in harm.
September 13, 2025
Mark B.
I am inclined to agree with you however, if I had a business or institution and someone representing my organisation made such comments, I would worry that it brought my organisation into disrepute.
As an individual, he is free to say what he likes no matter how much I may disagree with him but, if he represents an organisation such as The University of Oxford, then he needs to engage the brain before his he engages the mouth.
September 13, 2025
You don’t want a PM with opinions? Rather left to WEF or his/her influential mates?
September 13, 2025
Indeed but the Union members should demand a vote of no confidence in him. If the university takes people not on merit but for diversity reasons they rather make a rod for their own backs. Next these diversity students will get worse degrees and this will be blamed by them on racist teaching or marking no doubt!
See all the legal disputes in the US between Indian applicants and Black candidates!
September 13, 2025
Inciting violence is a criminal act.
September 13, 2025
Mark B – being removed as a representative doesn’t stop free- speech. It says that as our representative your views are not ours. He is still free, entitled for the moment to the right as an individual representing him self to free speech and then to be challenged.
We have a Minister that wants Parliament to ban certain TV programs because they have views that are at odd with theirs. Banning not debating, or challenging.
We have a ‘Lord’ that represents the whole House of Lords, yet has been expelled as our Ambassador in the US. He stays a Lord.
We all have the right to be insulted, have views, But by the same token we have the right to challenge views.. Cancelling in the extreme that was being applauded in the Oxford instance was never debating, never challenging – Left -wing over reach
September 13, 2025
The ability of government to act swiftly in entirely the wrong direction and against the national interest has been on display very frequently in the past 25 years.
If successive governments had done the right thing as enthusiastically as they have done the exact opposite, we would be a much more secure, solid stable nation. We would be admired for our pragmatism and inventive capacity rather than pitied and seen as a basket case by world observers incredulous at our inability to do even the most obvious mundane things.
Building roads that flow filling pot holes and repairing infrastructure in a timely manner retaining effective power stations instead of blowing them up. Let us not mention HS2 and time to build just one nuclear power station.
Any nation with an ounce of self respect and an ounce of self respect/authority would not allow rubber dinghies transporting aliens of unknown intentions to rock up on our southern coast and then put those arrivals of unknown intent up in four star hotels.
But we go even further down the path of lunacy by deploying our entire legal system and fund said legal teams to ensure no one is ever blocked or sent back once they have arrived on our shore.
That is not the action of a nation in control of its own affairs.
September 13, 2025
Government by focus group, with the group not being representative.
September 13, 2025
Government by Nudge Unit. This is a psychos against the civilians. Long-standing.
September 13, 2025
If the people listen then ‘THEY’ who don’t or can’t listen because they ‘can’t prove JR wrong’ are forced into positions where they lose.
This is the power of democracy.
We all recently watched the small minority in Parliament, whom we could not help apart from haranguing our own, mostly useless MPs, fight and win against the May Government 5 times. It was a near miracle.
JR will leave a legacy as important as that of Enoch Powell, he also fought in a minority, sometimes of one, and won many battles by extraordinary actions, courageous and with no thought for himself.
Make no mistake, the most powerful politicians are not those prancing on a stage, I’m thinking of Kinnock and others, they are the ones who save the nation from absolute disaster. If we had lost the £ we would be in the same position as the EU subordinate nations who can’t afford to break free!
JR is teaching us much on this blog. How to be an MP, how to be a Minister, how to be a politician.
Those that come next need to hit the ground running, so all of this advice is VITAL, and we need to choose the BEST, nothing but the BEST and they will be stretched to breaking point to save the Britain from this long and Secret War, again at the last minute.
JR is a modern day Warrior, fighting with his brain and soul rather than his sword arm. We can only give thanks and learn.
September 13, 2025
Usually by the Markets.
No ! It is the power of reality. As someone once said; “Sooner or later you are going to run out of other peoples money.” But in truth it is not money it is trust that governments run out of. They can always print more money. But when trust in Sterling and the ability to meet your debts gets called into question, the value of your currency goes down, interest rates go up and your Bond / Gilt payments increase. This has NOTHING to do with democracy and, if it did then the Labour Backbenchers will be clamouring for cuts to public spending, which they are not, as their voter base relies on all this free (for them) money.
September 13, 2025
Brexit had nothing to do with money.
That’s Trumps mistake. Being a businessman he thinks everything is negotiable. It isn’t.
If Brexit had bankrupted us I would still have fought for it because you can recover from bankruptcy, you can recover from bombs.
Once you have lost your homeland, your laws, your people, you are finished.
September 13, 2025
@Mark B – Agreed. But WEF Socialism is not Democracy, it is a religion that strives to cancell all those that don’t accept their rule
September 16, 2025
Well said Lynn.
Who’d want to be an MP, though, with the amount of abuse and the way they drag families into it? All we seem to get now are the PPE brigade from the Oxbridge unions still playing uni-politics with our lives. Pretty soon they’ll be coming into the commons if they can be bothered preferring to work from home, in their PJs and Uggs.
September 13, 2025
The main problem I have with privatisation is that the government sold off its assets too cheaply. Now there are no more assets to sell off and the country is bankrupt. I blame you and Margaret Thatcher.
September 13, 2025
Well had they kept them they would have cost the governments far more in losses.
But I agree that regulation was usually very poor indeed. Governments alas are fairly useless at selling things, v. useless are running things and useless atcregulating things too. Not their money nor they who get the value so what do they care.
Look at the dire BoE as JR points out!
September 13, 2025
or put more concisely ‘Governments alas are fairly useless’.
Debate why does that happen?
Could it be that in reality, politically motivated people simple construct a persuasion, lies, manifestos, likeminded theorists join to gain power to change society and balance economics to suit themselves not the country?
September 13, 2025
Perhaps most politically mined people are very good at making a case but have no idea on how to formulate policy which creates a positive feedback loop.
Support and subsidy sound lovely but are generally destructive.
September 13, 2025
No good at legislating you mean?
I agree.
For instance there is a period when the landlords of empty property have exemption from Business Rates. It’s to give them a chance to undertake dilapidations and relet.you can only relet when the property has no existing lease, when it is VACANT, but the legislation is called and refers to ’empty’ properties.
So tenants are ‘emptying’ the property 3 months in advance of the end of their lease and fooling the not-very-bright Councils to give them the relief intended for the Landlord.
I believe this is fraud and Councils are complicit. But it’s another unproductive battle that will consume resources and time which together is bankrupting Britain.
September 13, 2025
Governments are useless because they get into power by telling sweet lies the gullible electorate falls for. Plus the people wanting to get into power are typically the exact kind of people who shouldn’t, but sensible people are too busy with their worthwhile jobs to consider political office. So you get a bunch of idiots just there to push their ideology.
Look at the election leaflets next time there’s a local council election. What you find is all the candidates falling over each other trying to outbid their fellow candidates about how they will spend yet more. None of them say vote for me and I will put a laser beam on spending to reduce your council tax bill.
September 13, 2025
and the sheep don’t consider that the more they spend the bigger the debt, the less there is to spend…vicious circle will get going. Bankruptcy!
September 13, 2025
Well the Lords have managed to pay £10million for a door that does not work!
September 13, 2025
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since any privatisations ,during which time several governments ,of both hues, have made egregious miscalculations with the economy.These have landed us where we are now .Not the earlier privatisations which created efficient , well respected ,successful business such as BP, BA, BT, Amersham , British Gas ……
September 13, 2025
SS
How much is a huge loss making business worth, perhaps the Market decides its true real value.
Yes some assets may well be worth more from a community and security point of view, Water perhaps as an example. but many other Government owned organisations were just sucking up taxpayers money by being poorly managed by clueless politicians.
September 13, 2025
Nationalised industries were hardly an advertisement for a well run, well managed, efficient , strike free entity .In fact the exact opposite . British Steel , BT , BP vastly over staffed
September 13, 2025
TfL
September 13, 2025
I would spread the net of blame so much wider – you could argue that UK citizens did not value these assets enough to buy and retain shares as majority investors. Nor does the general consumer value local businesses and manufacturing enough, prefering to buy cheaper from heavily subsidised foreign competition who in many cases stole the ideas and exploited the efforts by early movers to establish the markets.
September 13, 2025
My problem with privatisation is that I didn’t get free shares as a British citizen, and therefore a part owner of the once nationalised industry
Tell Sid – what he thought was partly his has been sold to someone else and he gets nothing for it.
September 13, 2025
It sold off its liabilities at the best price possible.
There are plenty of liabilities to sell off. Tell us how to sell HS2, the NHS which makes £250 Billion loss each year, the wind farms which will cost billions to dismantle and which are not recyclable.
How do we sell off the liability of millions of imported people who cost £500,000 EACH over their lifetime?
The Thatcher Government turned liabilities into enough of an asset to sell them, but governments ever since continues to amass liabilities.
I blame those who learned NOTHING from the Thatcher interlude.
September 13, 2025
The above comment is in answer to Steven Sharpe.
September 13, 2025
LA, and that was a good answer too, thank you.
To Sir John, You have made a very good case today, and a timely reminder of the immense value which you have given to the nation, in tangible results, clarity of thought, and with admirable conduct throughout, and I expect that your modesty will make reply difficult for you. My admiration is profound.
September 13, 2025
Many of those ‘assets’ were at one stage private industries to begin with. Railways, energy generation, roads and even our health service. We only now see the world from a post 1948 nationalisation perspective. And the fact that some have become more valuable is dues to them being well run, not being sold on the cheap. They only issue I have ever had is over the sale of water.
September 13, 2025
Interesting. Railways got created by backing such as Brunel then lack of maintenance and income lead to debt.
Energy such as coal yet the miners would scramble in slag to find lumps for home use. Roads and bridges were maintained by tolls intended to fund repairs. NHS set up but allowed private practice not a 100% employment, to ensure better incomes could be sought. Water! Sold on, ‘profits’ made, dividends paid maintenance ignored!
September 13, 2025
SS,
Privatised companies are now often foreign-owned. They are often price gougers with little concern for the business they run.
For all their faults, most can see the nationalised equivalents were much better for the country.
Reply Not so. Cf monopoly BT with the range of competitive broadband and mobile phone providers we now have.
September 13, 2025
BT privatisation was partly successful on the back of technology changes. BT was mainly running Strowger exchanges at the time. Mobile phone technology was about to revolutionise telephony.
This did not apply to other privatisations. Rail continues to lag behind countries like Japan. Water just went to the dogs. Power supply is a complete mess.
Reply Yes nationalised BT invested in out of date electromechanical switches when competitive systems like US were far ahead with electronic. BT rationed phone access owing to capital shortage. Private capital and competition allowed massive catch up by UK
Electricity and gas privatisation with competition drove prices down and gave us the rush to gas, much more fuel efficient with less emissions than coal. In the last 15 years this has been undermined by price controls, subsidies and supertaxes in the name of government led net zero,
September 13, 2025
The assets were originally sold to Sid and his pension funds. Sid decided to cash in capital gains and buy houses instead, particularly after the BTL market saw lax lending, and pension funds were required by Gordon Brown to finance his deficit spending by holding gilts and paying tax on notional capital gains on share holdings, so they sold shares. The EU demanded that other EU countries should be able to own UK utilities, which Labour enabled by cancelling golden shares and the measures of the Utilities Act that resulted in a splurge of takeovers by EU (often state backed) firms in 2002. Such asset sales (and borrowing overseas to fund morrtgages) have been an important factor in maintaining exchange rates, helping to finance trade deficits while “selling the family silver”.
September 13, 2025
@Stephen Sharp – it wasn’t the price as such, it was the not ensuring free market competition. Personally thinking, the Government needed to off load liabilities that these companies placed on the Taxpayer – all good. It would have made more sense just to hand them to the Workforce, they had a vested interest in tomorrow. As it stands the burden is left to the consumer that has no choice to pay over the odds, for poor and inadequate results.
Reply I always argued for competition. Where too little was introduced government put in a Regulator and price controls.
September 13, 2025
Articles in Conservative Home, Telegraph , talks on radio,PopCon ,TV .Lectures from All Souls .I am not sure what more you could be doing John ?
September 13, 2025
His books, newspaper articles and interviews, GB news, the BBC, Talk TV, his web site… does this man ever sleep? David Starkey is perhaps the only other person similarly busy and sound too!
September 13, 2025
Unfortunately both are wrong on the Ukraine War.
That could be our undoing.
September 13, 2025
He fights the good fight but, I question if those it is for are tuned in ?
September 13, 2025
I think you may have acquired some mental health jargon ‘self harming net zero policies’. I won’t write anymore because my computer tells me this site is ‘Not secure’.
September 13, 2025
Ed Net Zero policies are hugely self harming. Surely even Zealot Ed must be able to see this? Harming to energy costs, the economy, defence and the environment too!
September 13, 2025
But Ed is getting the transformation that the WEF wants!
September 13, 2025
Zealot Ed can’t see it because he’s a career hypocrite. He can only find fault in others, so he jets around the place preaching everyone else shouldn’t use fossil fuels.
September 13, 2025
@Lifelogic @Dave Andrews, its worse than that he doesn’t believe in anything he dictates to others, ‘heat-pumps’ not in his constituency home he sticks to gas. Oh, the price.. as Guido pointed out that cost is funded by the taxpayer
September 13, 2025
Even Starmer and Blair see it. That’s why Starmer wanted to sack Milliband.
What has Milliband over Starmer to parry that sacking?
September 13, 2025
answer ….enough idiots that support Ed!
September 13, 2025
Oh no. Much worse than that.
September 13, 2025
Of all the politicians and diplomats that should get their P45, RedEd seems to be coated in Teflon.
September 13, 2025
But what you submit is likely published anyway so does this security matter!
September 14, 2025
WRT “not secure” – connect using https which is secure instead of http (where you get the “not secure” indication) – possibly the fault of your search engine.
September 13, 2025
Well done for what you’ve achieved. It explains in part why you are motivated to carry on.
I had a much shorter (10yr) experience in lobbying/activism, and local politics. I very swifty discovered that persuasion, compromise, and approaching issues tangentially produced results (sometimes) whereas head on confrontation usually brought long term setbacks. I also learned that letting others take public credit for success was often the best way to keep things moving forward.
September 13, 2025
I forgot to add. There were always people who said “just do xyz” and had no conception that in the real world you can’t click your fingers and instantly change minds, policies and power structures.
September 13, 2025
The more you can do JR to get your sensible views adopted the better. For 40 odd years this has been true it would have saved the country £ trillions and have been in a far better position.
Common sense is alas not that common and certainly not in most politicians. Lord Debden on Any Questions last night elevated from Selwyn Gummer by David Cameron for example. Debden “The truth is this government it is getting some things very right, foreign affairs (Lammy) defence (John Healey), Wes Streeting at health… Ed Miliband is doing an “extremely good job making a change of great importance!” Is this man sane?
As usual with the BBC no one with common sense, climate realist, small government views on the panel! Debden was the BBC choice of someone on the right for this panel!
September 13, 2025
Some excellent recent videos from Dr John Campbell on vaccines and fertility Dr Ross Jones , Dr Malhotra various, Cancer and mortality increases post covid vaccines, the Japan statistics, Czech Republic stats, Italian stats…
September 13, 2025
Kennedy has banned the jabs. Trump has been misinformed and is realising it, asking why Pharma don’t trumpet the miraculous results they revealed to him.
The net is closing in.
I have stopped taking my dogs for their annual vaccination.
September 13, 2025
Haven’t they got decades of proof for you? If introduced in the last 5 or so years you may have justified fears.
September 13, 2025
No they haven’t. I never had my dogs vaxxed every year an6 more than children were vaxxed every year.
Once is enough to build the antibodies.
September 13, 2025
Well some vaccines do net good and others do net harm the expression “Anti-Vaxer” is as stupid as “Climate Change Deniers” surely everyone is against net harm vaccines and who denies that the “climate changes”? Alas not always easy to decided but no doubt that the Covid “vaccines” did huge net harm.
September 13, 2025
The Covid shots are NOT vaccines. Stop helping the enemy by referring to them as such.
They are MRNA gene therapy.
September 13, 2025
I agree with some things you write but not everything.We certainly need to continue finding other sources of power as self sufficiency does not leave us in a weak position for huge increases in bought in fuel.
Although steps have been made to make nuclear power and it’s waste products safer, there’s always the fear of accidents and problems which could potentially end civilisation as we know it.Fracking and digging for more coal is a finite source.
Net zero is a ridiculous goal to set but as forests are fewer and buildings are more,the amount of CO2 should be continually monitored and houses should stop being built.If we didn’t prioritize helping immigration and concentrated on looking after what we have and in my view a conservative stance there would be improvement.
I don’t agree with privatisation because again of the threat of taking away services and losing power,but I do believe improvement can be made with effort in nationalised services.
I don’t agree with selling off assets and again making us more vulnerable.
To sell everything and rely on private concerns is making us weak as a nation.
September 14, 2025
Fear of nuclear accidents is vastly exaggerated as if a death in the nuclear industry is infinitely worse than any other. The safety record of nuclear us exemplary, with fewer deaths per TWh generated than any other generation method by a large margin. Really only Chernobyl is associated with a significant death toll – yet one which is small compared to annual deaths in say coal mining. Even in the Ukraine war nuclear power stations have remained off limits for destruction, with only some military deaths in battles for control. However, the Russians have destroyed over 80% of Ukraine’s coal and gas generation, and Ukraine has responded by bombing oil refineries. The consequent deaths far exceed those in battles for nuclear stations, and are a very small proportion of a death toll in the war now said to be nearing 1.5 million.
It is usually forgotten that in the Fukushima tsunami several conventional power stations were inundated to the point of total loss, and that while Fukushima Daini was also damaged beyond economic repair, it was safely shut down (the hydrogen explosion was at Fukushima Daichi). Two other nuclear stations were shut down automatically but remained undamaged, including the one closest to the epicentre of the earthquake.
Nuclear weapons proliferation is a separate topic, and does not depend on nuclear power. Iran’s centrifuges at Natanz are powered by gas fuelled generation.
September 14, 2025
The recent vitrification of waste helps,but the problem is the half life can be thousands of years.Previous careless disposal of waste in water and mistakes are also of concern.
September 13, 2025
“Is anyone listening to common sense ” ?
Perhaps not the right people John, otherwise we would not be as a Country in the state we now find ourselves.
The problem is perhaps those who could alter the direction of Government simply may simply not fully understand your thinking, or are too embarrassed to ask a fellow, or opposition politician for further details.
Party politics has been in part a large reason for this County’s poor performance, and for decades we have been governed by theorists and idealists, rather than experienced commercially aware self made successful people, who in the past have had their own skin (money) in the Business World of hard knocks.
September 13, 2025
I gave up debating net zero on this site because of the moderation of well researched, factual posts which disagree with your views and the “facts” which are used to support them.
Though over the past couple of weeks you have allowed posts of the truth around curtailment costs (trivial when compared to the total cost of electricity generation from all types) the capacity market (equally trivial when compared to the total cost of electricity generation from all types) and the fact that CfD’s do not – and never have – involve subsidies.
In fact, renewables that are operating under CfD’s have been generating electricity below the market rate since September 2021 – and so have been paying money into the Treasury via the Low Carbon Contracts Company. A lot of money. This will stop if Farage/Tice manage to demolish our N Sea windfarms and replace them with oilrigs, as is Reform policy
In 2025, for the first time, zero carbon generation produced 50% of our electricity, allowing British juice to be exported to the EU via the interconnectors overnight – earning income – and saving us from having to import lots of extremely expensive tankerloads of LNG each month.
Most of the anti-net zero propaganda has it’s source in paid-for articles in the right-wing press and is repeated as if it’s the truth by the Reform limited company. The vast majority of the 121 Conservative MP’s in parliament are middle-of-the-road one nation Tories who support net zero
Reply This is untrue. Electricity prices 4 times gas per energy unit. CFD guaranteed prices for wind around double typical wholesale cost of gas generated electricity.
September 13, 2025
Did you not see the interview with Milliband where he insisted that the oil price is set internationally while admitting the oil companies pay a marginal tax rate of 78%! Miliband revealed the ‘duping delight’ smile as he repeated that lie.
The interviewer failed to ask him why our energy cost is 4 x the USA if oil prices are set internationally and taxes levied nationally have no effect.
September 13, 2025
Most of the pro net zero propaganda is in paid for so called ‘research’ which results in the ‘the science is settled’ nonsense, which is never true. Many have got extremely rich doing this and the ‘anti’ people hardly ever get a look in as it is heresy to gainsay it all. What we do know is that it will bankrupt us, destroy our industries and not add one jot to the reduction of world temperatures. Even zealot Milliband cannot answer this simple question when asked about what effect our emissions would have if we hit net zero tomorrow. We know the answer – zero, but too much money is being made out of it to have a proper debate.
September 13, 2025
SG : The wholesale price for electricity is around £70-£80/MWhr (based on the price of gas we are told and which includes a carbon tax). The current weighted average fixed offshore wind CfD price is £149/MWhr. The lowest operating CfD is Hornsea 2 at a CfD of £80/MWhr. Hornsea 2 lost £150m before tax in 2024 more than the loss of £107.5m in 2023 and this is despite Hornsea 2 Phase 2 receiving £4.1m in constraint payments at an average of £46/MWhr. The biggest AR6 project, the 2.4 GW Hornsea 4 project, was cancelled by Oersted citing rising supply chain costs, higher interest rates and increased execution risk. This shows that their £85/MWhr bid was uneconomic The CfD price for fixed offshore wind for the next auction is £113/MWhr. Furthermore, the CEO of GBE has said we will need to use floating offshore wind as we are running out of shallow water. The CfD for floating offshore wind is £271/MWhr. Oh, and NESO’s Clean Power 2030 report clearly shows that our exports of electricity when wind generation is high will be at prices lower than the imports necessary when wind generation is low. The NESO report also clearly shows that DSR, aka electricity rationing, and interconnectors will be necessary by up to 40% of peak demand to ensure no collapse of the grid.
September 13, 2025
And when rationing and rolling power cuts occur, not doubt it will be the fault of Brexit, not inept government.
September 13, 2025
They think they will control the blackouts, but they will NOT.
In fact in short order the political class might come to see that they control nothing.
September 13, 2025
Unfortunately your post contains many inaccuracies. The costs of curtailment and the capacity market are going to rise very substantially as more renewables capacity is added. Even NESO and the OBR re beginning to reflect this in their forecasts. You can see the overall payments for CFDs from the Low Carbon Contracts Company here
https://www.lowcarboncontracts.uk/resources/scheme-dashboards/cfd-historical-data-dashboard/
It shows there have only been three quarters where CFDs repaid to billpayers. The overall subsidy paid out now exceeds £10bn. However, even at the height of the energy crisis the monthly average subsidy inclusive price paid for renewables exceeded the cost of gas generation, with ROC holders making huge profits. Incidentally CFD payments do not go via the Treasury. The LCCC charges (or eventually refunds) directly to retailers who pass on the cost in our bills.
Incidentally I don’t think Reform yet have a well worked out policy for retreating from Net Zero. They will find it difficult to cancel or tax existing CFD contracts, and repealing the Climate Change Act doesn’t undermine other legislation which remains in force until amended.
The UK was a significant net exporter of electricity in 2022 during the energy crisis, mainly to France. It was supplied by running extra CCGT using imported LNG, and done at a profit. By contrast, exports of renewables surpluses garner low, even negative prices, heavily subsidised by UK billpayers. With such surpluses growing across Europe they will struggle in future to gain any market and will likely result in higher curtailment instead.
In reality, renewables output has mostly been disappointing this year, resulting in large volumes of imports and more running of gas generation.
I don’t think you have spotted the big changes in Conservative energy policy, ranging from support for UKCS development through moving away from reliance on costly renewables. I think even Miliband has noticed that.
September 13, 2025
The deconstruction of Western democracy is happening via unregulated unelected international agencies that present themselves as legitimate authorities.
These international bodies suck in financial support from member nations and sit in judgement of those member nations while ensuring the individual leaders of the international bodies are never personally seen as responsible for anything.
Until we break out of the mindset that has brought us to the situation where we feel obliged to progress UN policy or WHO instructions or judgements by the ICC we are doomed to oblivion.
Democracy may be challenging, it may be costly and sometimes slow, but it is far better than any other option political construct yet tried. If long term open, free and fair society is the desire of mankind, then democracy still delivers the only proven option.
September 13, 2025
John, I trust that you will continue in the same manner. It is so wonderful to have very experienced, honest man with common sense throughout your thinking. You are invaluable when you are on GB News sparring against the incompetent Labour and left wing guests.
September 13, 2025
The king should be encouraged by Tories to call for an annual National Day of Prayer like the king did twice during WW2.
The National Day of Prayer should be on a Saturday so it doesn’t interfere with work Mon to Fri nor with religion on Sunday. It should be non-political (but focus on what we all have in common – let disagreements return after the Day of National Prayer but not on that day). So nothing contentious. During the National Day of Prayer, people should be asked to pray for their nation. For their king, Parliament, the judiciary, armed forces, police, those in health and education, business leaders, workers, and the vulnerable (and praying for the vulnerable also means that you will end up paying less tax to pay for them! But it is firstly for their blessings overall). It’s about paying for peace in our nation – and outside. It’s about praying for marriages and families, neighbourhoods, the economy overall. It’s about praying for more entrepreneurs, and writers and artists and those in the arts. It’s about praying to preserve our woodlands and animals and so on. It’s about praying for people with addictions of any kind. It’s about praying for people who want to change their lives for the better. It is about praying for people to be more patriotic. AMAZING things would result for all (stronger / more stable economy, less tax, happier and more fulfilled people overall with better sense of humour, more work ethic, higher productivity – and lots, lots more). Small things you might not even recognise. And big things,
Lastly, obviously it’s voluntary. And those who don’t believe in God can still be asked to do something for their neighbour or to help clear out the rubbish in the local stream or whatever.
For God, king, family and country.
September 13, 2025
You are trying to use patriotism to blind us to the issues which are destroying our country, which you admit by citing that prayers are required today as in WWII.
Useless politicians always try to leverage the ‘my country right or wrong’ mantra, to stop justifiable criticism of THEMSELVES. The political class and indeed the King is NOT Britain.
I am proud of my country and my countrymen because they are incisive, use right and wrong as a yardstick and have the courage to do what is right no matter the cost.
That’s patriotism.
September 13, 2025
I also think religion should be mixed with the pub. So everyone should go to the pub (or club or whatever) afterwards and a have a good time / laugh.
September 13, 2025
Sorry, I mean patriotism should be mixed with the pub (you can be a theist or an atheist and be a patriot).
September 13, 2025
How very funny you suggest NOT holding the National Day of Prayer on a Sunday!
Are you having a laugh at my expense? Have I failed to take it seriously?
Since I would suggest that most Sunday prayers fall on deaf ears, it seems likely that even picking a different day of the week will meet the same outcome?
September 14, 2025
Probably a bit over-ambitious, I agree.
But I think it would be powerful. If lots of people at least said something like, ‘I pray for my country’ and say one Lord’s Prayer – at a particular time on a particular day. Not Sunday as Christian folk here use that day to focus on The Almighty. And Mon to Fri everyone too busy.
And to avoid being happy clappy on the one hand (yuck). Or over solemn / pompous on the other (yuck).
Powerful stuff. The Bible clearly says on numerous occasions that all prayer is answered (maybe not always in the way one intends – although sometimes, yes – and praying for your country is a Christian duty).
September 13, 2025
I tend to think that albeit your ideas have been proven largely correct, since Thatcher days you’ve not had a conduit. You’ve needed a route of communication for these ideas. Thatcher had it and could talk right through to people’s hearts. Farage has it and has developed modes of communication to back up an already strong communicating voice. His weak point is teamwork.. which was also Thatcher’s but she solved it by bringing in people like you.
Despite your strong analysis and logic you always needed a conduit to communicate and lead. Books and articles are necessary but insufficient. Had you and a few others -we can all name a handful of people-got behind Farage and a good vehicle in those Cameron/Clegg disaster years, things could have been very different now. Between you, you could have determined who the fruit and nut cakes really were, not gone through the abject failure of the May half baked Brexit debacle, Covid nightmare and so on. You can cite Brexit, but it was strangled at birth by your ex-colleagues!
Reform proves wrong your thesis that parties coming from nowhere can never overtake the so-called main parties in FPTP. It could have happened 10-15 years ago, and it’s a tragedy that it was never tried.
Reply The next election is likely to be more than 3 years away. There can be plenty of changes in opinion by then. I will not be standing for election then but am happy to advise those who will.
September 13, 2025
If anyone judged Sir John Redwood on his warnings and suggestions on a whole range of things e.g. the covid response, bank losses, poor public sector productivity and many more, he would fair extremely well as he has been proved right most (perhaps all) of the time.
Unfortunately the left wing media generally does not look at the history of what worked and what didn’t and who was right and who was wrong. If it took its head out of the sand, it would no longer be left wing as it would have soon learned that Left policies don’t work!
September 13, 2025
Windfarms in America – built by ecoloons – are now harvesting vast amounts of free energy:-
Texas is home to some of the largest wind farms in the world, including the Roscoe Wind Farm and the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center. These massive installations have helped Texas become the leading state in wind energy production, generating the cheapest electricity from wind than any other state in the U.S. North Dakota and Wyoming actually lead per capita generation of electricity from wind. But then, nobody lives in N Dakota or Wyoming
Top 8 wind farms in Texas by capacity:-
Great Prairie Wind Farm – 1,027 MW
Los Vientos Wind Farm – 912 MW
Roscoe Wind Farm – 781.5 MW
Javelina Wind Energy Center – ~749 MW
Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center – 735.5 MW
Capricorn Ridge Wind Farm – 662.5 MW
Sweetwater Wind Farm – 585.3 MW
South Plains Wind Farm – 500.3 MW
As of September 2023, there were only two new nuclear reactors under construction in America with a gross electrical capacity of only 2,500 MW – both of them are years late and $billions over budget – while 39 reactors have been permanently shut down. Continental USA is embracing solar and wind because they recognise that, once the up-front costs of building the infrastructure are recovered, the electricity produced is extremely cheap – for the priducers
Trump forced Ørsted to stop construction on its $1.5bn Revolution Wind project off the coast of Rhode Island last month. The order to down tools came despite the fact that the project is 80% complete, with 45 out of 65 wind turbines installed. Ørsted have now been forced into a rights issue to cover their losses.
Reply Texas is also a great state for oil and gas production. Wind energy is not free. It is very capital intensive and the debts to build it are a big cost. The system needs maintenance, and the life of turbines can be quite short. Actual output may only be 30-40% of stated capacity. You need expensive back up for windless days.
September 13, 2025
‘Capacity’ of wind farms is no measure. Most work at no more than 30 per cent of their capacity. We probably have enough ‘capacity’ to cover most of our needs, but some days the ‘capacity’ runs at low single figures in actuality and some days too much so we pay to turn it off – a lunatic idea if ever there was one.
September 13, 2025
A very good point made.
September 13, 2025
Also if we all switch to heat-pumps then vastly more electricity generation, gas back up and grid capacity will be needed for a few v. cold winter days. This investment will be hugely expensive and it will be wasted for circa 75-90% of the year. An insanely inefficient plan!
September 13, 2025
Keep going John!
September 13, 2025
+ 1
I wonder if part of the regular complaint is prompted by the awareness that those in power should be listening more attentively and acting sooner in consequence.
September 13, 2025
Listening at all would be a good start. It is evident they don’t or are opposed to it.
September 13, 2025
Sir John
The one thing I keep forgetting to ask and it relates to yesterdays great analysis. The OBR states £257bn of Taxpayer money will be paid out to cover the BoE’s give away. Where and who did the money go to, clearly collectively £257bn finished up in someone’s pocket.
That then poses the question how do the rest of get to the front of the queue for these hand-outs
Reply People’s savings and investment funds sold the gilts to the Bank at a very high price and are now buying them back at a much lower price, so they can pocket the profit.
September 13, 2025
When SMRs are ready to be built in quantity, the US will rapidly become the world leader in building them. That is why they are not building any new large reactors at huge cost, unlike us.
The Conservatives should have gone flat out in supporting Rolls-Royce. If they had, we could have at least ten SMRs ready to start construction by now and secured the world lead in the technology. The utter stupidity of the civil service demanding a competitive tendering process has added billions to the cost and several years of delay. Sometimes you just have to get on a project.
September 13, 2025
We could build some big reactors at reasonably low cost if we bought from South Korea and stopped the ONR from being pointlessly obstructive, adding delay and cost, and politicians from trying to use nuclear for international political negotiations. Czechia did this recently, and are also a launch customer for RR SMRs. At least the Nuclear Regulatory Task force seems to be on the ONR case, but they may not end up securing adequate reform the other side of the political sausage machine.
September 13, 2025
The advantage of SMRs is that they are cheaper and quicker to build and can be situated closer to where the power is needed. No need for hundreds of miles of new unsightly overhead transmission lines
September 14, 2025
You can also build large new nuclear power stations without having to invest in new grid capacity. There are already half a dozen approved potential sites (basically adjacent to former stations). SMRs and AMRs have the advantage that they could be located at a wider range of sites because they are less dependent on cooling water, but more sites could easily be approved for large stations based on previous coastal power stations. I recently made a submission to the ESNZ SC on precisely this topic.
September 13, 2025
Or we could just build coal, gas & oil power stations ….. and follow the lead of the great net-zero’ists China
September 13, 2025
@Chris S – One of the leaders in the field is Westinghouse, the company Gordon Brown inferred would never be required by the UK even that it was UK owned and run – so he sold it off to cover his back on his self induced financial crisis. Even today with all the hype surrounding the Rolls Royce SMRs they intend buying the technology from Westinghouse they haven’t evolved the abilities to do it on their own.
Which ever way you look at it the UK Taxpayer will be twice for something they already had.
September 13, 2025
@Reply – the Cynic in me just has to query those involved in this profit taking, it might even in all probability be all innocent and above board. But, as it is, a transaction that didn’t need to take place, one purposely at a loss to the taxpayer for someone else’s profit, something we see other Central Banks avoid, it is reasonable to try and read into the action on who profits.
Its sometimes not what you do but what you do do to be seen to be squeaky clean that matters.
Badly managed and out of control
September 13, 2025
QE was a three card trick. Government need to fund huge levels of deficit spending to prop up the banking system after the financial crisis, and again during covid. That meant trying to sell lots more gilts. So the BoE printed money, and used it to buy existing gilts, with the money then being used to buy the new issues, instead of the Bank buying or financing the new gilts directly. Next the money was used to prop up bank balance sheets and they in turn redeposited the cash at the BoE as Reserves earning Bank Rate. You can see the very close correlation between QE outstanding and Reserves in Chart 4 of this lecture by Bailey last year
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/speech/2024/may/andrew-bailey-lecture-london-school-of-economics-charles-goodhart
When you net out the transactions you find that the BoE financed the increased government spending as lender of last resort, and there was no significant change in gilts holdings by other sectors. If it had not done so, the excess gilts would have had to be sold at a heavy discount, forcing up interest rates. The government might have been forced to borrow from the IMF.
Other holders of gilts saw a large mark to market capital gain (realised where where they sold to the BoE) as a result of QE/ZIRP on their higher coupon and longer dated holdings, but the new issues they bought instead came with derisory coupons and huge risk of capital loss when ZIRP ended. The BEAPFF itself has replaced redeemed issues with fresh purchases at minimal yields until they started QT, increasing their exposure to capital loss after the end of ZIRP with the bill furnished to taxpayers.
The end of ZIRP reduces the risk of further capital losses and loss of real income as yields renormalise, however QT increases gilt supply depressing prices, and the threat of large deficits adds to the risk.
September 13, 2025
I see a sensible suggestion from Bryn Jones of Rathbone wealth management. The idea is for the government to purchase all the deeply discounted low coupon long dated gilts at a premium to current market price (as low as £25 per £100 nominal for some of them). They could then retire the debt, lowering outstanding debt by the difference between the price they pay and the par redemption value, because they would only have to refinanced the purchase value.
Reply They would need to borrow the money to buy up the discounted debt at today’s higher interest rates, so how does that help?
September 14, 2025
Take a £10bn nominal long dated gilt issued with a 0.5% coupon now trading at £25 per £100 nominal. Buy it back at £30 to give an incentive at a cost of £3bn. So you have to refinance £3bn that you paid, not the £10bn that is now retired. Debt outstanding is reduced by £7bn. Of course, you pay a higher coupon. The £10bn incurred coupon payments of £50m p.a., but the new debt might incur a 5% coupon costing £150m p.a. The extra £100m p.a. means that you are ahead so long as the capital repayment saved exceeds the added interest cost, allowing a redemption date up to 70 years ahead for the original debt. You can refine the calculations using discounted cashflows, and examine the consequences of different refinancing assumptions over time.
Reply Yes, if you could buy enough at a very deep discount you might end up a winner after refinancing. It is not a sure fire big win in tge way you suggested and you could end up losing depending on refinancing rates and duration.
September 13, 2025
It is an honour to be able to contribute to and learn from your site Sir John. It must take up a lot of your time and everyone should be appreciating that and grateful for it. However I have noticed a handful of contributors who I think fail to understand that. I hope their comments are more appreciative and constructive going forward.
September 13, 2025
“If you want what I am saying then actively promote these views and use the materials I provide.”
Absolutely. If nothing else write (email) your MP. Before emails the narrative was that an MP took notice if they received just 12 letters on a particular subject. Because emails are free and easy MPs will consequently receive many more emails than they did with letters. But people should never, ever take the view that emailing their MP has no effect. If MPs receive hundreds of emails it must have some effect. It is perhaps the only way for those MPs immersed in the Westminster bubble and reading nothing else but the Guardian can learn of the existence of alternative views and the views of their constituents. Also use your MP to email government departments such as DESNZ who do not allow emails from the public. Ask questions, such as why DESNZ is offering fixed offshore wind CfD contracts at £113/MWhr when their ‘Electricity Generating Cost 2023’ report claims the cost of fixed offshore wind is £44/MWhr, a figure used by the CCC and MPs. Email Westminster Select Committees who also often appear to work in their own bubbles with no allowed inputs of alternative views. If would be wonderful if Select Committee reports were to have attached a public forum for comments. Or perhaps one set-up by a non-governmental organisation to debate the Select Committees’ evidence sessions and reports.
September 13, 2025
Select Committees, OFGEM and DESNZ do run consultations. The last never publishes the submissions – only its internally generated summaries, which always manage to exclude anything that doesn’t broadly support policy: I suspect criticisms are binned from the outset. Select Committees do publish written evidence submitted to them, although their choice of witnesses for oral sessions tends to look for support for government policy most of the time. I have made 3 submissions to the ESNZ SC this year – most recently at the request of one of the Parliamentary researchers, so I guess my earlier submission(s) hit home somewhere.
OFGEM does publish some consultation submissions (I recently made one on NESO’s role in planning), but it can end up drawing the wrong conclusions even when it apparently takes notice of particular critiques.
I often bring up broader policy implications rather than confining myself to the minutiae of the nominal consultation questions. For example I highlighted to OFGEM that making detailed 10-25 year plans is redundant given that the next government is almost certain to follow a radically different path, and that although it is a good idea (finally) to get around to working on the basis of trying to achieve lowest overall system cost such work is worthless if you make false assumptions about costs. They were seeking approval for the detail of their highly Sovietised planning process proposals.
September 13, 2025
Good words today SirJ, I like a narrative that make me think, reflect and review my own beliefs
September 13, 2025
Its about listening to commonsense and understanding the pluse of the nation ….which governments and qangos fail to do
”The National Trust has ordered the removal of a Union Jack flown on a historic monument in Sunderland”
https://www.gbnews.com/news/national-trust-union-jack-removed-penshaw-monument-sunderland
September 13, 2025
Including the march to London today
September 13, 2025
I agree, haul it down and run up St. George.
September 13, 2025
It seemed to me at the time that you were making headway with the end of the Boris administration and the Truss administration on energy, though not with Mr Kwarteng.
Reply Sunak was persuaded to allow oil and gas exploration and development and delayed bans on petrol cars.
September 13, 2025
”’delayed bans on petrol cars”’ which his government & party initiated
September 13, 2025
Sir John
You have at all times applied the logic and common-sense in a polite and informative way. That should always and be encouraged to continue.
Unfortunately we have to many people now in positions that they only listen to themselves, they resent disagreement and debate and seek to cancel were ever they can
September 13, 2025
To me at least you have always reasoned with logic and common sense SJR as your track record speaks for. Compare that with Labour spinning they are “Fixing the foundations”. More like kicking away the aspirations and future of millions by shallow thinking and recent admission of Labour’s groupthinks.
September 13, 2025
The problem with relying on the commonsense of others is sense is not common.
September 13, 2025
I am very curious as to what defence (if any) the Bank of England offers as to why it is happy to lose Government, or rather taxpayers, so much money through the sale of long dated bonds at huge losses. Can anyone help me understand as to what they’ve got to say for themselves? Equally important as to why the Government continues to give the nod to this practice?
September 15, 2025
I see you may have at least a partial victory over the BoE after several former MPC members came out broadly in support of the idea of cutting or halting QT sales and net redemptions. There is talk of cutting the programme from £100bn to £70bn or below for next year. Talking about it has stirred up some action. Well done.
Reflecting on it, I think the BoE needs to do a lot more thinking about what replaces Reserves if not other forms of reserves. MMT tries to pretend that reserves have no place in limiting bank lending or controlling inflation. Yet it was essential to ensure that QE money did not leak en masse into the economy which would have stoked massive inflation. Sterilising the money as reserves was an essential part of the programme. It can really only be unwound by having a healthy economy that produces a surplus to allow the historic debt to be paid off.