The green Opposition MPs are like Remain

Listening again to the tired and repetitious high level arguments of the Opposition MPs advocating faster progress to net zero whatever the cost, I am reminded of the years of their lectures on the dangers of Brexit . On both topics they are sure they are right. They despise anyone who questions their beliefs or suggests amendments to their position. They arrogantly dismiss opponents as too stupid to have a worthwhile view, or too badly informed to take seriously.They do not even want  to hear an alternative way of meeting their high level aim which presumably is  a better quality of life for the many, whilst tackling flood or drought risk proportionately.

They proceed by making a series of very gloomy forecasts for us all unless their policy is followed.They refuse to analyse why their forecasts have often been wrong in the past, and ignore or explain away repeated errors in their forecasts as new data emerges. Above all they ignore the views of many voters. When challenged on the gap between what they think and what a lot of voters think, they say the political elite has a duty to act and needs to teach the public to accept the actions.

 

They get plenty of help from traditional media. There is an accepted framework to the green debate. The  science is settled. Global warming of more than 2 degrees is coming unless   we adopt early net zero. That will Flood low lying cities, cause water  shortages and forest fires and melt the poles. CO 2 aided  by methane rather than water vapour is the main culprit. Pricing carbon is part of the answer. People must be taxed, priced or regulated out of plane travel, off meat and dairy, out of diesel and petrol cars and away from fossil fuel heating.

One of the reasons a lot of voters say they broadly agree with  this yet do nothing to change their own lifestyles is the perception of double standards.If the great powers actually thought this was a life and death matter wouldn’t China and Germany  be closing their coal power stations now? Wouldn’t the EU cancel the Nord stream 2 Pipeline and fund  a green alternative to Russian gas? Wouldn’t all the experts behind the COP 26 climate  conference ban all those jet flights to it and go virtual?

Above all they fail to deal with the fundamental dilemma faced by China and emerging economies. They need fossil fuels to achieve higher living standards, but their incremental demand tips the world over the top on these carbon accounts. Does the advanced world have the right to stop fossil fuel growth in large populated developing countries? Is there anyway the advanced countries can help them leapfrog to low carbon economies? So far the use of oil, gas and coal in countries like China and India is rising remorselessly up for billions of people.

330 Comments

  1. Mark B
    June 14, 2021

    Good morning.

    People must be taxed, priced or regulated out of plane travel, off meat and dairy, out of diesel and petrol cars and away from fossil fuel heating.

    Pardon me, but isn’t this what the Conservative (sic) government is doing right now ? The Opposition are supposed to be there to point out errors in government policy, not to harangue them into economic suicide. They want the government to fail, and to hell with the consequences to the country, business and the people. All so they can edge closer to power. The tactic is, ‘setting up to fail’ and the Tory Party and government is too stupid to see it !

    1. Lifelogic
      June 14, 2021

      +1

    2. J Bush
      June 14, 2021

      +1
      However, as you point out, it may also be the case that under Johnson the policies have moved so far to the left, because he wants the country, businesses and the people to fail, so he can”build back better”…

      1. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        and in a more “equal and feminine way”!

        Was anyone suggesting we should build back worse?

        1. J Bush
          June 14, 2021

          I am a woman and I haven’t a clue what his “equal and feminine way” statement is supposed to mean. I wonder if it was one of his control freakery ‘nudge unit’ or nut nuts, who came up with that absurdity?

          Reply It is all there in the G7. There is explanatory language about better education and job opportunities for girls and women.

          1. Lifelogic
            June 14, 2021

            3 women for every 2 men undergraduates at UK universities . Alas so many of the degrees they study are virtually worthless.

          2. Lifelogic
            June 14, 2021

            Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab:- “Ensuring girls get 12 years of quality education and women can work and earn an income are some of the smartest investments we can make to change the world, transforming the fortunes not just of individuals, but whole communities and nations.”

            Well certainly relative to HS2, test and trace, Hinckley C, renewables subsidies, the pointless lockdown, the second rate NHS and the net Carbon lunacy, but then almost anything would be a good investment relative to these.

            But then there is education and there is bogus indoctrination in say the climate alarmist religion or woke drivel as we have in the UK.

    3. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Mark B

      The government are too stupid?

      No they’re not, it’s all part of the Green agenda which will see us reverting to pre-industrial revolution standards of living, how will the population react when they’re unable or use any of the ‘smart’ gadgets on which we’ve become so reliant upon?

      1. DavidJ
        June 14, 2021

        +1

    4. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      Totally agree Mark B, this government has an 80 seat majority, it can, at a stroke of a pen, change things. The Green Party, the Labour Party and the Conservative Party are as one with regard to climate change policies and zero carbon
      Its not that Green opposition MPs are like ‘remain’, its that the Tory MPs are like ‘remain’ with their green views

      1. Stephen Glasse
        June 14, 2021

        Yes.

      2. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        When are the 80 majority MPs going to demand the list of things they stood for in the GE be set for discussion and a Bill to make or amend law? Have they all got dementia, meaning no short-term memory?

    5. nota#
      June 14, 2021

      @Mark B, Yup – incredible Governments must weaponize tax to attack the people that don’t share our views

      1. John C.
        June 14, 2021

        Very good point. It is utterly immoral to take someone’s money (i.e. tax them) to compel them to follow policies they disagree with.

    6. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Dead right, Mark B. We know the Conservative government (and the LabLibGreen opposition) have no intention of making life better or cheaper for us plebs.

      Why? Because they’re not planning any increase in the production of electricity to substitute for all the cheap available energy they’re banning – like natural gas and petrol. And they can’t all believe it will be powered by Andy’s toasters.

      Look at your own fuel bills: electricity prices are 5 to 6 times higher than gas, and keep rocketing – despite the supposedly cheaper intermittents.

  2. Lifelogic
    June 14, 2021

    Exactly and belief in this new religion seems to be in inverse proportion to any understanding of science, energy or energy economics. We have have ministers of energy with zero qualifications or even a basic understanding of physics, energy systems, electricity generation or climate. Much of the public have been convinced (by propaganda) that CO2 is poisonous, pollution. It is actually harmless tree, crop and plant food and breathed out in every breath we take.

    The hypocrites flying to summits on their private jets (or first class) to watch for example the fossil fuel powered red arrows and lecture the public on the need not to use fossil fuels. There is no climate emergency, the CO2 warming issue is grossly exaggerated, and we will not get world cooperation anyway.

    Most obvious of all and easiest to show & prove is that the solutions proposed by this Government and the bonkers Committee for Climate Change (wind, PV solar, heat pumps, “green” hydrogen, heat pumps do not work, not even in purely CO2 terms. They just export jobs and the CO2 with it.

    1. J Bush
      June 14, 2021

      +1

    2. graham1946
      June 14, 2021

      Well said. I mentioned the other day that Germany of all nations must have the true facts but does not see any need to stop their lignite fueled power stations. Actions speak louder than ‘religious’ words. A bit off topic, and about Covid. Everyone saw just what the so called ‘elite’ think. There they were, enjoying a summer barbecue, no masks, no social distancing, Macron with his arms round Sleepy Joe and vice versa. And Bojo is going to tell us to stay locked up for another 4 weeks. I am not rushing out, but that’s my choice, not the word of PM who does not do what he preaches.

      1. Sharon
        June 14, 2021

        Someone in the Telegraph suggested we all post our mask (clean of course) to number 10, Downing Street as a statement of intent
 to not wear it after 21st June

        I think that’s a fantastic idea!

        1. Margaret Brandreth-
          June 14, 2021

          Perhaps we ought to tell operating theatres not to wear their masks because we know better.

    3. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      LL

      Any pretence of a science based argument have been abandoned, CO2 levels 500million years ago were many times higher and it coincided with an explosion in growth, literally, carbo-hydrate
 one part carbon one part water is essential to maintain our existence on earth, so the notion that we must become carbon neutral is total nonsense.

      Little Greta would be unable to travel around the globe without OIL which forms a basis of so many things that we rely upon!
      The politicians seem to have fallen for the scam, Margaret Thatcher was the last politician to have had a scientific background

      Will this make it past moderation đŸ€”đŸ€”đŸ€”

      1. Sharon
        June 14, 2021

        Climate change is being pushed (WEF?) on campaign organisations, which in turn have obligingly lobbied businesses, dissent against the idea of carbon neutral has been shut down. All this helps China in their pursuit of global dominance.

        Bottom line- climate change is being used politically to achieve a certain group’s end game of control. There are millions of ‘useful idiots’ unwittingly promoting the net zero cause to their own lifestyle demise.

        1. Fedupsoutherner
          June 14, 2021

          That would sit nicely with the theory shown on GBNEWS last night that Covid was actually released purposely from the labs in Wuhan. Trump said it first and it seems increasingly likely he was right.

          1. MiC
            June 14, 2021

            No, it seems decreasingly likely, now that more authoritative geneticists are adding their insights too.

            However, we will never know for sure either way, it would appear.

          2. Lifelogic
            June 14, 2021

            I think it is highly likely it came from the lab, but probably a leak. I also think that the UK, US and other Governments must already know the real position and with with some certainty. But are choosing to hide it.

            A new study, conducted by British professor Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Dr Birger Sorensen, claims that the virus was created in a lab and has “no credible natural ancestor”.

            The research, according to the report, claims that scientists took a natural coronavirus “backbone” found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a “new spike”, turning it into the deadly Covid-19.

            The study claims that it found “unique fingerprints” in Covid-19 samples, which, according to them, could have only arisen through manipulation in a lab.

          3. Mark
            June 14, 2021

            Some of the virologists who have been claiming that the lab had nothing to do with it seem to have had a lot to do with the lab and what might be termed Frankenstein science: denials from them now sound less convincing. Meanwhile the evidence accrues from analysis of the covid genome, as well as the whistleblower Dr Li Meng Yan and other sources.

          4. anon
            June 14, 2021

            Taking it further. Lockdown & wokeness may have designed to reduce small business and subdue the middle class and working class. Allowing an elite to rule and pay tribute of course. Another angle on the 5th column in the UK.

      2. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        Thatcher fell for it too. These chemistry grads can be a bit gullible sometimes a bit like geography ones. But certainly better than PPE types.

        1. MiC
          June 14, 2021

          She didn’t “fall for it” – which implies absolute credulity – but as a scientist she accepted that the arguments and evidence were credible, and that the probability of some of the very untoward outcomes calculated to be possible was unacceptably high for responsible government to ignore.

          John continues with the infantile absolutist interpretation – which seems so attractive to his followers here on the other hand.

          Reputable scientists – virtually all of them – do not predict as certainties the things that he claims they do, but they do offer evidence to support those probabilities, which, again are too high for anyone with a grain of sense to ignore.

          1. Philip P.
            June 14, 2021

            By 2002, when Thatcher published her autobiography, she’d had 12 years to consider the data and see that the claims of climate alarmists, as she called them, had been overstated. She also had this to say: “The doomsters’ favourite subject today is climate change. Clearly no plan to alter climate could be considered on anything but a global scale, it provides a marvellous excuse for worldwide, supra-national socialism.”
            Rather relevant to what’s going on in the world today, it seems to me, when you look at the Great Reset and the Green agenda.

          2. MiC
            June 15, 2021

            Reread my post.

            You have chosen only to reproduce her comments about those on the extreme fringe of climate activism.

      3. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        L, Could you tell us how the continents were distributed 500 million years ago, and whether this might have any possible impact on the climate. Could you also tell us, what was the Sun like in those days, and possibly what were the concentrations of nitrogen, oxygen and ozone in the atmosphere, and those of carbon dioxide and water vapour.

        Thanks a lot in advance for your wisdom.

        1. Narrow Shoulders
          June 14, 2021

          from your post @hef I see you agree there is much more to climate than man made greenhouse gases and that those gases have a tiny impact on the whole picture.

          1. hefner
            June 15, 2021

            My post only points out that Lester only considers CO2 concentration out of any concern about a large number of other parameters likely to have had an influence on the climate in those days. Another possible reading is that with a Sun’s intensity, a geographical and atmospheric configuration of the planet today so different from what they were 500 m years ago it might be somewhat farfetched to draw immediate analogy between now and then.

      4. Bryan Harris
        June 14, 2021

        Well said Lester
        – You say it so well

        Well said Sharon – Spot on

      5. DavidJ
        June 14, 2021

        +1

    4. Ed M
      June 14, 2021

      There is some kind of serious problem with the environment that is connected to capitalism.
      But problem isn’t with capitalism per se. Our capitalism needs a bit of tweaking and we also need to find proper solutions to the environmental problem through science. All this + some creative thinking + courage + perseverance + planning / leadership and we can have both a strong, healthy capitalist economy and a healthy environment for us all to live in and for generations to come. Human beings are amazing – but we do need to dig deeper on this topic.

      1. Ed M
        June 14, 2021

        Those on the left are panicking / hysterical – and their opponents being complacent. Let’s be neither hysterical or complacent but rather realistic, hopeful, brave and heroic in finding a solution.

        1. John Hatfield
          June 14, 2021

          Ed, you are assuming there actually is a problem with the environment.

          1. Ed M
            June 14, 2021

            @John,
            The scientific argument overall is that there is a problem with the environment and manmade.
            However, the scientific argument isn’t exactly clear about why exactly / details and how to fix the problem.
            The greenies are throwing time, money + energy at the problem but that’s a waste of time, money + energy. And their components are digging their heads in the sand, thinking that worrying about the environment will necessarily damage our economy. No, not necessarily, at all (and it’s a heresy to think this).
            We don’t really have a choice. The influence of the greenies is huge. And so could suffer 2-fold: 1) our economy is damaged because of the greenies 2) our environment continues to be damaged because the greenies are ineffective (they don’t know what they’re doing – except wasting lots of time, money and energy).
            Therefore, we have no choice. We have to act. But it’s action that good lead to great results: we protect BOTH our economy AND environment. The two are interlinked whether we like it or not. And that is the only sane way forward, I believe. Best.

      2. NickC
        June 14, 2021

        Ed, There is less poverty, more leisure, more freedom, and a better environment, due to the benefits of natural fuels (oil, gas, coal) than if they were banned. There is currently no adequate substitute for them.

        “Capitalism” is an ideology (indeed a strawman) invented by socialists (like Marx). What you’re thinking of is the freedom of everyone to trade their skills under a fair and blind contract law.

        1. Ed M
          June 14, 2021

          @Nick,
          Im NOT a greeny! I’m not proposing banning fossil fuels (not yet, if at all – and if yes, then not a blanket ban).
          The reality is we don’t really know exactly what really is damaging the environment. It’s definitely got something important to do with us humans but scientists aren’t entirely sure why. All I am saying we (governments) need to look far more into what is causing problem and then how to use science to fix the problem without damaging our economy either.
          I think my approach is fair-minded, objective, balanced, do-able.

        2. Ed M
          June 14, 2021

          Yes, I didn’t mean capitalist in Marxist sense. I just meant I am not a greeny and that for me a strong economy is just as important as a healthy environment. And that we can have both. There’s a terrible heresy that says you can’t have both at same time – you can. But does require hard work to figure out and carry out.

        3. Jim Whitehead
          June 14, 2021

          NickC, +1, and nicely put.

  3. Mike Wilson
    June 14, 2021

    It would be nice to hear some joined up thinking. A plan to be self sufficient in sustainable energy production that will meet our energy needs for everything including the transition to electric cars and heating – at the same (or less) cost to consumers as petrol (for cars) and gas (for home heating).

    1. Lifelogic
      June 14, 2021

      Totally impossible with current technology unless the government change the laws of physics or the economics of energy. We do not have any zero greenhouse gas sources of energy. Even wind farms, hydro and PV solar have to be manufactured and maintained which produces loads. Plus they need back up. Electric cars take loads of fossil fuels to manufacture the cars and batteries.

      1. DavidJ
        June 14, 2021

        +1

    2. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Mike Wilson

      There isn’t any joined-up thinking to be found!

      1. glen cullen
        June 14, 2021

        +1

    3. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Mike, Natural fuels (gas, oil, coal) are sustainable for hundreds of years. And even if the cost of natural gas tripled (as it might a hundred years from now, due to lower availability) it would still be half the cost of electricity (per kWhr) for householders now. And that’s with about 42% of last year’s electricity generated by the intermittents.

    4. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      Lets resist the transition to electric cars and heating

      1. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        Don’t buy them, don’t change domestic boilers away from gas.

  4. Lifelogic
    June 14, 2021

    Indeed but the whole house not just the opposition is stuffed with “believers” in this insane religion. Only five people voted against Miliband’s mad climate change act – plus a few abstentions.

    Government minister now say we “have” to do this and that by law. No, these morons in government are choosing to do it. They need to change these insane anti-science and anti-competitive job destroying laws now. Above all deal with the BBC’s, schools, universities and Government’s deluded one sided propaganda machines.

    1. Everhopeful
      June 14, 2021

      Johnson in 2013.
      “Who was sitting there, luxuriating at the Department of Energy and Climate Change? It was Ed Miliband, whose sole discernible contribution was to continue the pointless desecration of the moors and dales and valleys of this country with wind farms. There they stand – wrecking some of the most gorgeous views in the world and producing derisible quantities of energy.”

      He’s obviously “got religion” now. What BJ wanted then was new nuclear power stations.
      Bit of a change eh? Who got at him? What? Why? Where?

      1. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        +1

      2. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        Carrie and duff alarmist, scientists it seems both on Covid and Climate alarmism.

    2. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      LL

      Spot on!

    3. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Lifelogic, The government’s ignorant belief in the climate catastrophe religion is bad enough, but, even worse, it’s an utter sham. Natural fuels are being banned, but the government has no plans for the (electrical) energy required as a substitute. Either the government is incompetent beyond measure, or they intend to impoverish us, or cull us.

      1. graham1946
        June 14, 2021

        We should not be putting all our eggs in one basket – electricity. When you do that you are vulnerable and something will go wrong.

  5. Everhopeful
    June 14, 2021

    I would imagine that it is out of control consumerism that is our true woe.
    Manufacturing and selling sustain the rich and powerful. And of course they don’t want to relinquish it.
    The scams have been endless. Brands and packaging. Mind altering adverts. Brand loyalty etc etc.
    The inevitable has/is happening because manufacturing is a game of Beggar My Neighbour. Competition has caught up with them and they have to find a new way to make money and scupper said competition.
    So more lies. More ( now desperate) manipulation.
    The greatest being that we can continue to consume at no cost to the earth. Green is highly polluting.

    1. Lifelogic
      June 14, 2021

      We have built it & designed in obsolescence in so many products today. I have just had to discard some garden chairs after just 18 months due to the plastic material used decaying and spitting.

      Modern gas boilers, washing machines, cars etc. live far less than old ones, phones, EV cars and laptops get discarded as it is not cost effective to change the batteries as they have locked them into the devices or because software changes deliberately made them redundant.

      1. Everhopeful
        June 14, 2021

        +1

      2. dixie
        June 15, 2021

        But it is your own fault. You the consumer has not valued longevity or maintainability or local manufacture. Instead you want it new, cheap and now with blind capitalism doing the rest as manufacturing and design has chased the lowest costs.

    2. Roy Grainger
      June 14, 2021

      One major factor they never mention is overpopulation. Where’s their policies to control that ?

      1. Everhopeful
        June 14, 2021

        +1

      2. NickC
        June 14, 2021

        Roy, The UK population does not need “controlling”. Left to ourselves we would have a mildly declining population. It’s the 9.2m immigrants (and counting) who have made England the most overcrowded country in Europe.

        1. MiC
          June 14, 2021

          Nah, it’s the seventeen million wastes-of-space who voted Leave.

          1. Peter2
            June 14, 2021

            Who will hardly ever vote for Labour again after you and many others insult them.
            Permanent opposition awaits you lefty lot.

      3. Shirley M
        June 14, 2021

        +1

        1. hefner
          June 14, 2021

          Whether I vote or not, Labour, Conservative, LibDems, Green or even Reform Party is incidental. What is priceless is the few here who never write a primary comment to one of Sir John’s blogs but spend their time commenting on others’ comments, fighting windmills a la Don Quijote (and the worst of them is 
 drum rolls 
the one and unique, the excellent Peter2).

          1. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            Oh do calm down hefty.
            Give us another of your clever scientific posts.
            We are all waiting.

          2. NickC
            June 15, 2021

            Another one of your “you’re not allowed to comment” comments, Hefner?

            It does seem that Remains (and Wokes, and Climate Alarmists, and Gender Ideologues) engage in this all too often as a supposedly “winning” strategy. It’s – why bother with the debate when you can ban the speaker, isn’t it? Like Facebook or the BBC.

          3. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            Indeed Nick you are spot on.
            Heffy is all into the cancel culture and hates anyone who dares to post anything he disagrees with.
            On here all he can do is get abusive and call everyone unintelligent.

            But it is what all our little gang of lefty trolls do on here.

      4. Barbara Bebbington
        June 14, 2021

        Vaccines?

      5. Sea_Warrior
        June 14, 2021

        The UN seems especially silent.

    3. dixie
      June 15, 2021

      @Everhopeful – I agree with much of what you say.
      Though it isn’t just consumerism which demands newer things more often but also the associated laissez-faire mentality in commerce and production that is so wasteful and damaging … dig it up – use for a short while – throw away. The refusal to face and pay the true costs for making and marketing so much crap.
      The question is if the current approach is not sustainable, how does it get changed? You will have some people and even some companies adopting a more circular, lower impact approach but not everyone so will a degree of coercion always be necessary.
      I believe a big part of any solution is information, education and debate, none of which we have had.

  6. Richard1
    June 14, 2021

    The evidence suggests that while there has been and is likely to continue to be some global warming, the extent and the threatened consequences have been hugely exaggerated.

    The net zero policies being implemented with righteous zeal – and no rigorous scrutiny or debate – in the U.K. and other (mainly European) countries will in any case be an irrelevance unless they are adopted globally, especially by China. Björn Lomberg has a good analysis of the costs and benefits.

    1. Andy
      June 14, 2021

      Perhaps you should read stuff by some proper scientists. Tackle the worst effects of climate change is not about you. It will mostly not affect your generation. It is about doing the right thing for your grandkids and their kids.

      Still, we should not be surprised that the selfish Brexitists and the Trumpists think of nobody but themselves. It is a generational thing – the boomers really are all ‘me, me, me.’

      1. Richard1
        June 14, 2021

        another evidence and argument-free self-righteous rant from you.

        no wonder you keep losing.

        1. No Longer Anonymous
          June 14, 2021

          Unfortunately they lose the votes but Boris keeps giving them what they want.

      2. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        Are all these works and advice from ‘proper scientists’ available in Chinese scripts and Indian languages?
        Just printing in English for you to quote, addresses about 1% of the people ‘causing’ your concern.
        Do you complain to the 2 countries about the damage they do? Get Greta to do a tour over there.

      3. NickC
        June 14, 2021

        Are these the “proper” scientists who say we can heat our homes and run our battery cars on low powered toasters, Andy?

      4. agricola
        June 14, 2021

        Andy,
        Meanwhile you pollute the atmosphere wit.h your BBQ. Should we teach our grandchildren to build bashas against tropical rain or igloos against an ice age. You write such crap that answers in the same vein seem appropriate.

      5. DavidJ
        June 14, 2021

        All the global warming nonsense is based on seriously flawed pseudo science which has been comprehensively disproved by real scientists and mathematicians. Time for people to waken up and consider the real reason behind the “green” policies: absolute control.

        1. Lifelogic
          June 14, 2021

          +1

      6. Peter2
        June 14, 2021

        People were saying that back in the eighties.
        None of the doomsday predictions came true.

    2. J Bush
      June 14, 2021

      Cost and benefit analysis is a complete No No, with Johnson’s government, as the ridiculous lockdown diktats has proved.

    3. acorn
      June 14, 2021

      Sources estimate that China will possess the world’s largest high-efficiency coal power system by 2020. By 2019, ultra-low emissions technology was incorporated into 80 percent of China’s coal-fired energy capacity, and more low emission plants are set to be built in 2020. https://chinapower.csis.org/energy-footprint/

      China is the world’s leading country in electricity production from renewable energy sources, with over double the generation of the second-ranking country, the United States. By the end of 2019, the country had a total capacity of 790GW of renewable power, mainly from hydroelectric, solar and wind power; and, an energy consuming population of 1,400 million people to service. (Wiki)

      1. NickC
        June 14, 2021

        Never mind, Acorn, there’s a “Rejoin EU” party candidate, Andrew Smith, standing in the Batley and Spen by election. Maybe all your dreams will come true when he’s elected with a massive 98.4% of the vote.

        1. hefner
          June 14, 2021

          NickC, seriously, what’s the B&S by-election got to do with acorn’s comment. Weakening, man, weakening.

        2. Peter2
          June 14, 2021

          A lost deposit beckons I think Nick.

      2. Richard1
        June 14, 2021

        Its no good repeating selective stats to obfuscate. The simple facts are that coal accounted for 66% of China’s power generation and 57% of total energy usage in 2020 (source – Carbonbrief). Over half the rise in CO2 emissions since the Paris climate deal in 2015 is reportedly due to China.

        Unless and until China in particular, but other countries also, agree similar restrictions, net zero simply imposes costs and hardship for poor people in countries which adopt it, and makes no difference to the climate.

      3. Mark
        June 14, 2021

        In 2019 China produced 4.7% of its energy from renewables. That is less than the global average of 5.0%. Brazil, Finland, Germany, Portugal and Sweden all exceeded 16%, with the UK not too far behind on 13.8% and Spain on 13%. China has a lot of catching up to do, especially as it is still almost 58% reliant on coal. Their per capita emissions are much higher than ours.

  7. Andy
    June 14, 2021

    On both topics they are right.

    But we have the Brexitist minority in charge who are so convinced on their own rightness that we now can’t sell sausages to ourselves.

    It’s funny – but also beyond pathetic watching the mess they have made of our country.

    1. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      But the rules which prevent us are EU rules, Andy. The rules YOU voted for. YOU wanted us to remain in the EU. And if not that, YOU wanted us to remain in the EU’s single market. Well, Northern Ireland remains in the EU’s single market, as YOU wanted. Rubbish, isn’t it? It’s funny – but also beyond pathetic watching the mess Remains have made of our country.

      1. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        NickC, again sorry, I do not think that the ‘sausages rules’ have been voted for by Andy or anybody on this blog, except possibly by Sir John. Getting paranoid, aren’t you?

        1. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          Indeed, Hefner, “or anybody”. I was merely parodying Andy’s puerile attempt to blame the nastiness of the EU onto Leaves.

      2. Andy
        June 14, 2021

        Lolz. It is a bit sad watching an elderly man thrash about in anger as he slowly learns his life’s dream is rubbish – whilst he continually tries to pretend it isn’t in a desperate attempt to save face. You fool nobody. I feel a bit sorry for you.

        Your Brexit, your mess. Grow a pair and own it.

        1. Peter2
          June 14, 2021

          Bit harsh on President Biden andy.
          I thought you like him.

        2. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          Everything that’s wrong, Andy, involves YOUR EU empire. Northern Ireland remains in the EU’s single market. Literally. Your Remain, your mess. Grow a pair and own it.

      3. a-tracy
        June 14, 2021

        NickC there seems only one answer to this, the UK must implement no imports on chilled meat products from the EU for a month or two until we can export our chilled meat products to protect our UK farmers, our government also need to help Northern Ireland to provide for their own home market (I support more local produce for our dinner plates), even if N Ireland farms have to buy the extra initial animals to rear from the EU (It appears there are sufficient farms in Northern Ireland to breed pigs and cows to make their own sausages and meats to provide for their own community in this region of the UK? Currently, there are over 25,000 farm businesses in Northern Ireland producing the wide variety of raw materials needed by processors and retailers to meet the demands of consumers).

        Just what is causing the problem getting chilled meat certificates anyway? Why can’t this be explained to us perhaps GB News can find the answers for us because the UK newspapers and BBC news don’t seem to ask the questions. I thought the restrictions from the EU were just to stop us forwarding meat from elsewhere in the World not the compliant UK with meat bred on British farms. The biggest seller of sausages in the UK is Southern Irish – Richmonds. We need to be told by the Supermarkets what are the big exports from the UK manufacturers that aren’t currently certificated to go into the EU to N Ireland Item by Item, quantities so we can understand how big or little this problem is. Is this a case that large producers have been sorted out in the UK the likes of Kellogg’s and Heinz but small enterprises have been hog tied?

    2. outsider
      June 14, 2021

      Dear Andy, You still seem to be driven by an old imperialist mindset, that what Britain does really matters to our global future and that , like Gordon Brown, we have a duty to lead and save the world.
      Yes, the UK emits a great deal of CO2, but it is insignificant in terms of climate change. Net Zero Britain next week might slow global warming by a few weeks. Yes, we should play our due part as members of the world community.
      But are India and China going to slow economic growth to a rate that can be powered carbon-free. Are Brazil and Indonesia going to reverse deforestation? Is Russia going to reduce gas exports instead of multiplying them? Are the Gulf States, Nigeria and the USA going to ban all gas flaring? Is Africa happy to stay poor? Is world output of steel , bricks and cement planned to fall any time soon?

    3. Micky Taking
      June 14, 2021

      No – N.Ireland cannot sell fresh sausages to Irish Republic. They must be chilled.
      So, EU are trying to force GB products to N.Ireland to be chilled too, trying to avoid fresh meats going over the border UK to Irish Republic.
      Hot Dog!

      1. beresford
        June 14, 2021

        So if these sausages are chilled when they enter N Ireland how does this guarantee they are still chilled when they cross the border into the Republic? Doesn’t it make more sense for the British and Irish governments to pass legislation imposing severe penalties on anybody shipping non-compliant items into the Republic for resale?

  8. Lifelogic
    June 14, 2021

    I see that Chairman of the JCVI Andrew Pollard has been knighted. Has he explained why JCVI failed to adjust for gender risk in the vaccine priority order yet? Were these “experts” so daft as not to notice this adjustment would save many lives & at negative cost (even after it was pointed out to them) or was it vetoed by PC politicians?

    My condolences to the widows and relatives of the many extra deceased thus created.

    1. Lifelogic
      June 14, 2021

      Tim Stanley today is sound:- “In Orwellian Britain, lockdown is perpetual and sickness is health
      Embracing the statist doctrine of a permanent war on Covid will end badly for the Conservatives.”

      Combining this economic and health lunacy (far more collateral damage than Covid damage) with the net zero carbon religious lunacy is even more insane.

      1. DavidJ
        June 14, 2021

        +1

      2. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        LL, it is absolutely hilarious (that’s the commonly used word on this blog) how often you quote from people and/or columnists who do not have a STEM diploma, which for you appears the sine qua non for being authorised to pronounce any word on any topic.

        How such a thing is possible? Is the ‘sound proof’ being in accordance with your multiple biases?

        1. Lifelogic
          June 14, 2021

          Some people with science degrees are daft as a brush and some people with history degrees (and even the odd one with PPE) are very sensible. But being numerate and rational is important. Most people are alas often not at all.

          1. hefner
            June 14, 2021

            So tell me LL, what’s in your psychological profile that makes you judge anybody by their degree, obtained 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago even as I guess you must be in your 45+‘s and must have done a number of things in life since you (multi)graduated? Is it some longing for your university days?

        2. Peter2
          June 14, 2021

          Repeat after me
          We must believe everything STEM graduates tell us.
          Hilarious as usual hefty.

          1. MiC
            June 15, 2021

            Why don’t you read and understand a comment – which was itself a reply – before making a fool of yourself yet again?

          2. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            MiC
            Hefty made his usual appeal to authority in his post to LL
            ie We must accept the opinions of experts who are new high priests.
            No dissent must be allowed.
            It is what all you lefties desire.

          3. hefner
            June 15, 2021

            E2P2, ROFL. What’s hilarious is that you even didn’t understand what I was telling LL.
            Have you ever considered shutting up for a while so that your credibility as a commenter could rebuild itself a bit?

          4. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            Carry on Heffty your lefty trolling won’t silence me or anyone else on here.

            Take your own advice is my response to you.

  9. formula57
    June 14, 2021

    So these green Opposition MPs risk getting enthusiastic nods on the doorstep and no votes in the ballot box. Tragic, I am so disappointed, very nearly.

  10. No Longer Anonymous
    June 14, 2021

    Futile, as is the continuation of lockdown. The pity is that your PM and many of your members are now steeped in unquestioned green ideology and wokeism.

    An 80 seat majority and the policies look far more like Andy’s and MiC’s than mine. If you don’t take the knee you’ll be racist – the PM has told us all it’s non-political, so what’s his excuse now ? If you dare question climate policies you’re a ‘denier’.

    What has the PM done ?

    Today I become actively opposed to our government. I see a significant proportion of the population have too.

    This is an oppressive, dishonest and wicked regime and you’ve chosen to remain part of it. I see us being post war East Germany but with masks within ten years.

    Anyway… back to the boycott.

    1. MiC
      June 14, 2021

      What boycott is that?

      Not much evidence of any round here.

      1. No Longer Anonymous
        June 14, 2021

        Not much evidence of a sense of humour on your part either.

        1. glen cullen
          June 14, 2021

          +1

        2. MiC
          June 15, 2021

          I can’t get ’em past John.

          It’s a bit like Sunday school here.

          Smiling is allowed but absolutely NO laughing.

      2. NickC
        June 14, 2021

        Well, oddly enough, you don’t know everything, Martin. But the figures do indicate we’re buying less from the EU. I now even go to another shop rather than buy stuff from your EU empire.

      3. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        MiC, he must be talking of his long announced boycott of this blog, but like any junkie he cannot be away from it for more than 24 hours. Weakling, snowflake and this sort of things come to mind.

        1. No Longer Anonymous
          June 14, 2021

          A member of the working class out in the open throughout the pandemic serving the middle classes as they hid away, Hefner.

          I post less than MiC and Andy. How is it me that’s addicted ?

    2. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      Spot On

    3. Jim Whitehead
      June 14, 2021

      NLA., +1
      First sentence should be in Bold.
      I’ve been actively opposed (for many years) to the party I once contributed to for many years.
      Melanie Phillips hits hard with a good article, ‘Boris’s mind turns to mush’.
      A vote for the party with such foolish leadership must be as daft as casting a vote for Ed Milliband’s juvenile green measures, and that only excludes a tiny group of MPs.

  11. agricola
    June 14, 2021

    I recall detecting climate change among my roses in the late nineties. They flowered up to four times compared with the previous two. So what, climate has been doing this for billions of years and the main driver is the sun. Volcanos have temporary imputs as do the land mass movements on the earths surface. Our coal was laid down when our position was tropical.

    There are as many scientifically informed who maintain that CO2 fluctuations are insignificant as there are who say the opposite. It comprises 0.04% of the Earths atmosphere to put it in context.

    For health reasons alone it would be sensible not to expose people to far more dangerous gases and particulate than CO2. The way many governments have chosen to do it does not make engineering or scientific sense. My greatest condemnation is that they choose to do it by top down dictat, not with consent, in the UK of all places. The seat of modern democracy???

    Politically in the UK the Greens are insignificant, one MP. Their none sense is the nectar of the liberal elite and most of the media who prey at their altar. Their negative response is heard beyond its scientific merits. Just as with Brexit, politicians need to start listening to the majority.

    There is a vast array of things government could do for the benefit of the population but do not realise it or are lobbied to ignore it. Possibly more as the day progresses.

    1. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      I wish there was a political party that questions climate change

    2. Micky Taking
      June 14, 2021

      media who prey at their altar? I think you meant pray? – – although the former is still correct.

  12. Narrow Shoulders
    June 14, 2021

    Opposition MPs?

    Your party is as much in thrall to climate change as any Sir John

    1. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Indeed the Tories are as much in thrall to the climate catastrophe god as the Opposition is.

  13. Bill B.
    June 14, 2021

    Excellent questions, Sir John. But what answers do you get when you put them to your own government, especially the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, George Eustice?

    1. Timaction
      June 14, 2021

      George Useless as in Priti!

  14. Ian Wragg
    June 14, 2021

    You only have to look at the G7 circus to see we are being conned.
    Private jets and motorcade ferrying the great and good about.
    Even a BBQ on the beach which they would deny us.
    The security was a microcosm of what the politicians would like. Empty beaches, empty roads and airports soley for their use.
    Shysters the lot of them.

    1. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Ian Wragg

      Spot on, surely there must be something that the voters can do about our politicians who are supposed to be answerable to the voters?

      1. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        L, Except if a MP commits a gross impropriety, a crime or resigns, we as electors will not be called before the next GE. It is called representative democracy for heaven’s sake. Didn’t you know that?

        1. Lifelogic
          June 14, 2021

          So they say what they think will get them elected before elections then do the reverse & kick the voters in the teeth until just before the next one.

          1. beresford
            June 14, 2021

            This was always true to some extent, but I can’t ever remember it being this blatant.

        2. MiC
          June 14, 2021

          It appears that being on the winning side of an advisory referendum has gone to some people’s heads.

          They seem to believe that they are now entitled to have every single thing that they might want politicians to do.

          You have your brexit – rubbish as expected – and that debt is completely cleared.

          It’s back to business as usual. If enough people don’t like what a party is doing then they can vote out its MPs. However, those MPs are not answerable beyond that to those voters. They are not their delegates.

          1. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            Easier than trying to vote out EU Presidents and Commissioners MiC
            PS
            Still reflecting on the referendum I see.
            Time to let go.
            You will feel happier when you do.

          2. MiC
            June 15, 2021

            Another post which you have clearly failed to understand – take Hefner’s advice, eh?

          3. NickC
            June 15, 2021

            Not “advisory”, Martin. You have not understood the Act of Parliament (or pretended not to) that made the Referendum legal and binding. The Act was unable to specify the terms of the outcome because that would depend on future negotiations. But that the outcome of our choice must be implemented not a single player questioned before the result.

          4. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            Take your own advice MiC
            You post on here 20 times a day.

  15. Alan Jutson
    June 14, 2021

    The problem here is that many different problems have been wrapped up in the so called green policies.

    Some have been proven, like plastic waste, use once and throw away culture of products, and the many types of pollution of the planet on a grand scale, but these are nothing to do with climate change, they are simply due to laziness, poor husbandry of resources, and lack of foresight and care.
    Few would argue that we need to wake up and do something (proper recycling) about this sort of waste, but this problem is not responsible for so called “climate change” at all.

    From my point of view I have not seen one shred of real evidence that the climate can be changed by mankind at all, especially given it is the sun which heats our planet, and other planets, and so any small change in the power of such will effect everything, be it warming or cooling.
    Has anyone actually measured what is happening on the other planets in the solar system where man does not exist ?

    1. Alan Jutson
      June 14, 2021

      No Links, no accusations, no one named.
      Why held in moderation John, too long ?

    2. Fedupsoutherner
      June 14, 2021

      Brilliant post Alan.

    3. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Alan Jutson

      It’s the manufacturers who are responsible for the huge increase in plastic packaging, I recently ordered a TIN of 3 in 1 oil only to find that it arrived in a plastic container, I emailed the company, owned by the manufacturers of WD40 but, of course I didn’t receive a reply.

      Practically everything now comes in a plastic container rather than a glass jar

      1. Alan Jutson
        June 14, 2021

        Lester

        Indeed much is made of plastic, but providing the plastic can be recycled, and that is clearly marked on the container/product then it should not be a problem, it is the consumer who is the problem if they do not put it in the recycle bin, which is where the system seems to break down.

        I agree plastic packaging seems to be overdone by many, but then goods have to be packaged in a way that keeps them in the best condition, recyclable pre-moulded cardboard is useful for impact protection.

        1. Lester
          June 14, 2021

          Alan

          A tin provided perfectly adequate protection for the 3 in 1 oil and was more easily recycled

          1. Alan Jutson
            June 15, 2021

            Certainly in the example you give I would agree, I was trying to make a more general point.

          2. Alan Jutson
            June 15, 2021

            Lester
            Certainly in the example you give, I would agree, I was trying to make a more general point.

        2. Gregory martin
          June 14, 2021

          I am advised by local contractors that the cardboard has little or no value for recycling as the nearest mill able to process it to pulp is in Germany, ours were closed for ‘environmental reasons’

    4. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      Agree

    5. hefner
      June 14, 2021

      AJ, The Journal of Geophysical Research (American Geophysical Union) has its E issue on ‘Planets’ every two months.
      BTW, the AGU was founded in 1896, but the ‘Planets’ issues were started as such only in 1984. Which still will give you a lot of pleasant reading if you were to attack the topic.

      There is also ‘Planetary Science Journal’ an open journal (ie, free upon registration on their website) from the American Astronomical Society, and ‘Planetary and Space Science’ but being owned by Elsevier you’ll have to pay for reading it. Alternatively you may find it in the friendly library of the university close to you.

      1. Alan Jutson
        June 14, 2021

        hefner

        Thanks for the info, but should not someone in the government be reading this sort of stuff, because if all the planets have been warming by the same amount over the last few decades, then why are we even bothering with all this suggested Manmade Warming nonsense.
        JR, Surely someone in the government has asked this simple question of our “Experts” have they not ?

        Or is it all a convenient scare to raise more taxes for pet Government projects/control.
        I am not usually one for conspiracy theories, but this is all now getting so far removed from reality, I am starting to wonder.

        1. hefner
          June 15, 2021

          AJ, what makes you think that other ‘planets have been warming by the same amount over the last few decades’?
          Do you have any reference for such a finding?

  16. Nig l
    June 14, 2021

    Totally correct with Boris dissembling once again. I agree with Macron he must of known of the incoherences of the NI protocol and similarly with the Green agenda.

    1. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Nig 1

      Correct!

  17. oldtimer
    June 14, 2021

    The G7 green agenda is doomed to fail. First because it is based on dodgy science. Second because the rest of the world does not share the view that we are all going to be boiled alive because of CO2, except as a useful lever to extract money from the G7 to counter the alleged consequences. Third because sooner or later G7 voters will wake up to the actual consequences of implementing the agenda and eject it’s advocates from office. It will also mark the terminal decline of western influence on the rest of the world.

    1. Andy
      June 14, 2021

      Erm, it is parts of the rest of the world that are literally being boiled alive.

      The choice is simple. You get on board and help fix the worst impacts of coinage change or you deal with the hundreds of millions of climate refugees that’ll be created in the coming decades if you don’t.

      What do you hate more? Wind turbines or foreigners? Tough one, eh? But that’s your choice.

      Reply I did not know we were going to subjected to coinage change as well.

      1. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        ‘literally being boiled alive’? Isn’t that offending Human Rights Legislation?
        So people are suffering the frog problem of slowly being boiled without the nous to jump out?
        Thats terrible. Perhaps you could find one of those ‘proper scientists’ to figure out at what temperature people should remove themselves from being boiled alive?
        Thanks for the warning – I won’t sunbathe any more.

      2. Mark
        June 14, 2021

        Reply to reply:

        They coin new words every couple of years – global warming, climate change, climate emergency….
        No surprise if they keep doing that. The words become ever more devalued the closer we get to their now 1.5 degree target without apocalypse happening. To counter that, the language becomes more apocalyptic. It’s a highly devalued currency already.

      3. Peter2
        June 14, 2021

        Boiled alive…1.3 degree rise in average global temperatures since 1850.
        I think humans will survive.

      4. NickC
        June 15, 2021

        Andy, Can you supply any evidence of “parts of the rest of the world that are literally being boiled alive” now as compared with say 50 or 100 years ago? And is that people being (literally) boiled alive; or is it the actual parts of the planet?

    2. Lifelogic
      June 14, 2021

      Exactly but how much damage will be done first?

  18. Everhopeful
    June 14, 2021

    In the 19th century there was a scam which became known as The Green Goods Scam.
    A money fraud, it too was used to trick people by appealing to the greedy side of their nature.
    “HOW much if I let you put windmills on my rolling acres?”.

    I note that there are very strict planning restrictions for domestic turbines but none for hot tubs or trampolines or smoke belching, carbon ridden burnt meat BBQs!
    Not that I care
I just hate the noise
which come to think is supposed to be an environmental ( bleat) issue!

    NB Boris.
    Round here they have NEVER been scared of any old virus. Vis gatherings, no masks, kissing, hugging, ball games since March 2020. Your approval ratings are down to furlough payments ( aka bribery/blood money). And skewed polls!

    1. Mark B
      June 15, 2021

      +1

  19. nota#
    June 14, 2021

    perception of double standards

    Perception! – I think not, reality more likely. The Left are just anti Government so anything goes. This Government with an eye the next election above everything else, will agree with left learning voices in hopes of getting their vote. In fact they agree rather than defend any position. Even this weekend according to the MsM Boris has come out in support of a Political Party that wishes to smash capitalism and remove the police. Its all electioneering.

    The position of this Government in virtue ‘agreeing’ actually feeds more dissent, blocks progress and causes even more unrest.

  20. Bryan Harris
    June 14, 2021

    The first 2 paragraphs explicitly describe the socialist mentality -exactly!
    This is one reason we know they are wrong and attack their posturing.
    That they are supported by the media just shows how badly we are served by a press that is supposed to be able to investigate and think for itself.

    It is of course the media that thrusts the idiocy of MMCC down our throats constantly, with no proof whatsoever — HOW MANY TIMES have we heard the cry; “Only 10 years to save the Earth” – It’s all political nonsense, and the socialist mindset has not the capacity to know this.

    Sir JR, Please ask these MP’s you speak of to provide actual real evidence of their claims before they torture us all with their ignorance.
    Proof is non-existant but implied with statements to the effect that everyone knows it is happening. We truly have had enough of lemminism – please insist they produce evidence so that we can show them how poorly they understand what is really going on.

    1. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Bryan Harris

      Agreed, I’ve lost count of the number of times that we’ve been told ‘10 years to save the world’

      When is someone going to ask the obvious question?

    2. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      I’d like to find an undisputed link to consensus evidenced of historical global temperature rise over the last 200 years
all I can find are disputed, revised, amended forecast modelling

      1. Bryan Harris
        June 14, 2021

        Glen – You won’t find a truthful consensus. The truth is mocked and called fake.

        You might want to take a look at articles from The Global Warming Policy Forum, which is good data:

        https://www.thegwpf.com/category/factsheets/

      2. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        but lots of wild guesses?

      3. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        Well, you do not know how to read properly: reanalyses are not forecasts.

        1. glen cullen
          June 15, 2021

          feedback is the breakfast of champions

        2. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          Hefner, How do you know that the global temperature now (or 50 years ago, or 100) is the ideal, and not the global temperature 50 years into the future? Or is it that you’re just afraid of change?

          1. Peter2
            June 15, 2021

            It is a religious belief for him Nick
            No amount of data or facts or previous predictions that have totally failed to come true will change that mindset.

          2. hefner
            June 16, 2021

            Did I say such a thing? Read again please.

  21. nota#
    June 14, 2021

    All the voices on being ‘Green’ also advocate adoption of newly manufactured goods. When it is the continuous renewal in pollution facilities and their delivery that can be singled out as a bigger polluter than actual use.

    Then of course those that advocate being ‘Green’ don’t include themselves and will expect others to pay for it.

  22. Andy
    June 14, 2021

    Congratulations to our EU friends who today will surpass 300m vaccinations across the 27. This includes more than 60m in Germany, close to 50m in France, more than 40m in Italy and over 30m in Spain. Little Malta is the stand out performer – well ahead of the UK in vaccination rates.

    After slow starts – due mainly to the failure of British company AstraZeneca to deliver on its promises -the 27 are now routinely carrying out more than 4m vaccinations a day. At this rate they’ll surpass half a billion by early August.

    reply Not a word of praise for the U.K. which has vaccinated a far higher proportion of the population than the EU?

    1. SM
      June 14, 2021

      Population of Malta&Gozo – 515,000 compared to that of the UK, which is heading to 70million at least.

      The 2 most corrupt countries in the EU – Malta, followed by Italy, according to BusinessInsider.

      Just saying.

      1. MiC
        June 14, 2021

        One of the most corrupt countries in the WORLD, according to one of Italy’s anti-organised crime authorities?

        The UK.

        1. Peter2
          June 14, 2021

          Well it must true if one person in Italy says it is so.
          Hilarious nonsense MiC

          1. hefner
            June 16, 2021

            As hilarious as your ‘counter-argument’ (which is not even such a thing).:

        2. Lifelogic
          June 14, 2021

          Well certainly a lot of government legislation and policy make little sense for anyone other than vested interests. HS2 and pushing EVs, Wind Power, PVs, heatpumps, HIP packs and net zero carbon, the ERM, EU, workers time directives as good examples.

      2. Lester
        June 14, 2021

        SM

        Plus one!

    2. None of the above
      June 14, 2021

      Notice also, the attack on Astra Zenica due to a disputed contract but not a word about the disgraceful propoganda by France and Germany against that vaccine, which resulted in significant reluctance to vaccinate amongst the public.
      An example of shameful bias.

    3. Richard1
      June 14, 2021

      the unscientific and mendacious attacks on AZ and its vaccine by various EU figures such as Macron, von der Leyen and others is one of the lasting scandals of this crisis. God only knows the damage and death it has caused. they should hang their heads in shame – as their populations recognise.

      AZ’s decision to sell their excellent vaccine globally at no profit is an outstanding example of altruism. they and the rest of us – throughout the world – will ignore the sneering of a tiny minority of EU toadies like you.

      1. MWB
        June 14, 2021

        Selling the vaccine at cost is an example of virtue signalling. They should copy Pfizer next in future, and sell for a profit.

      2. Lester
        June 14, 2021

        Richard 1

        Have you missed the reports of the serious side effects and deaths caused by the vaccine?

        It’s not a vaccine, it’s an untested, experimental gene therapy which neither prevents you from getting the virus nor from passing it on, it’s not due to receive certification until 2023 and anyone administering the ‘vaccine’ without informed consent is liable to be charged with a War Crime

        1. hefner
          June 14, 2021

          Everybody who got the vaccine jab(s) from their NHS surgery or the vaccination sites open across the country has to sign a paper giving their consent.
          As for the side effects (which indeed are not zero), could you please give us the statistics of how many got Covid without any jab, how many with one AZ jab, how many with two AZ jabs, and for the same three categories how many have died. If you want you can repeat the exercise with the Pfizer jab.

          To help you, as of 23 May 2021, 60 million jabs have been administered, 22.6 m people have had two, 37.9 m have had one (gov.uk ‘60 million doses of Covid-19 vaccine administered in the UK’).

          So now your turn to provide the missing numbers.
          Thanks in advance.

          1. NickC
            June 15, 2021

            Hefner, Please give us the statistics for how many got another coronavirus (a cold) this year as against last year, and 10 years ago, and the decadal average. To help you, it doesn’t actually matter. So now your turn to provide the missing numbers (yawn!). Thanks in advance.

          2. hefner
            June 16, 2021

            Oh, I was expecting you to provide these numbers as you appear to know the numbers for the other coronaviruses. A difference between the two should be reasonably close to what happened, don’t you think?
            But I see that you’re yawning when numbers are talked about. I guess you must be preferring vague statements. As I think you might be or have been a businessman how far have you been in such a profession without dealing with numbers?

            Isn’t it funny that some contributors here do not want to be given percentages, but when given figures that still is not good enough. And for some others any number appears to put them to sleep.
            Have you ever tried to be consistent or is it something too boring?

    4. Micky Taking
      June 14, 2021

      When did ‘best endeavours’ become a ‘promise’?
      Clearly you never got involved in business contracts, or you would be sued and be bankrupt by now.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        Just a promise to use ‘best endeavours’.

    5. MWB
      June 14, 2021

      The Astra part is Swedish.

    6. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      The EU is not our friend, Andy. As 48 years of stealing our democracy, our rights, our fish, and our money, has shown us.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        With friends like that


    7. Sea_Warrior
      June 14, 2021

      Would I be right in thinking that Malta doesn’t have ‘communities’ resistant to science?

    8. Micky Taking
      June 14, 2021

      The ‘slow starts’ were mainly due to not approving, ordering vaccines. Then to make matters worse the Dim Empire decided vaccines should not be given to the over 60s. Then exagerrated the stats on blood clotting to suggest the problem was worse than natural clotting of population. Having done all this the Dim Empire shuffled proportions of vaccine rollout so that countries who were told to beware, stockpiled their share until they went past the use by date. Added to all that Hungary being an example, decided their people would not die waiting and bought Sinopharm to rollout. But apart from all that it has been a splendid example of 27 getting together to solve a shocking pandemic.

    9. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Andy

      Perhaps you would care to provide some evidence that the untested experimental gene therapy actually works, there’s an awful lot of evidence that it’s killing a great many people who would have survived had they not taken part in a medical experiment

      Even the pharmaceutical companies have been granted immunity from legal action
      which demonstrates that they don’t have much faith in their product, every medication has side effects

  23. No Longer Anonymous
    June 14, 2021

    “One last push… keep thousands out of hospital… ”

    Yes. Including me. Had it not been for a private physio I have only seen a nurse practitioner for ten minutes who told me to take pills for a serious ligament injury. I haven’t seen a doctor once in 13 weeks – but surely a letter should have come from the NHS by now ?

    I know I’m in the system as the physio is well connected but why are orthopaedic admin staff not working ?

    Luckily I’m fit, resilient and resources and coping.

    God help anyone if they get cancer now. From what I’m seeing we have NOT saved the NHS.

    Lockdown kills.

    Anyway…back with the…

    1. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      No Longer, The NHS, particularly NHS management, has been extraordinarily dire during this pandemic. Typically of a government monopoly (for most people) the NHS regards the customer as a nuisance. So what happened? – covid19 patients were given priority, and much other medical assistance simply stopped.

  24. Lifelogic
    June 14, 2021

    Swiss voters have rejected legislation at the heart of the country’s strategy to abide by the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. The CO2 law was turned down on Sunday by 51.6% of voters.

    Great, but why only 51.6%, must be loads of deluded alarmist, con trick, propaganda that is working there too I suppose.

    1. Richard1
      June 14, 2021

      Switzerland is a real democracy – and Europe’s most prosperous and stable country. Which they have managed without ever being in the EU, the single market or the customs union. no wonder they have rejected the EU’s attempts to make them an economic colony, as the EU still attempts to do with the UK through weaponising historic antagonisms in Ireland.

      1. Lifelogic
        June 14, 2021

        Indeed and despite being surrounded by the EU without any sea ports.

      2. glen cullen
        June 14, 2021

        They hold referendum and immediately enact them in full – we’ve a lot to learn

        1. MiC
          June 14, 2021

          No they do not always immediately enact them.

          The one in 2014 against Free Movement with the European Union being a salient example. It was not implemented, and after the European Union had explained the consequences if it were, the Swiss saw sense and voted resoundingly in favour of keeping Free Movement, by 62:38 in 2016.

          Yes, the Swiss are a sensible people.

          1. MiC
            June 15, 2021

            Yes, we should be far more like the Swiss.

            It only took them two years to reverse a disastrously silly referendum result.

        2. Mark B
          June 15, 2021

          +1

    2. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      LL

      Indeed!

    3. Mark B
      June 15, 2021

      At least they got a vote. How I envy them and, yes, I really looked into becoming a Swiss Citizen pre-Referendum.

      1. MiC
        June 15, 2021

        And you would still be enjoying Free Movement with the European Union if you had.

        1. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          I don’t think “enjoying” is the description I’d use, Martin.

  25. jerry
    June 14, 2021

    Sounds like politics to me Sir John, each MP, group or party believing their way is best. I am not just reminded of the years of Brexit debate but also the years of TINA in the 1980s, when Mrs Thatcher and her supporters ignored the views of “many voters” and some MPs in the 1980s, but not the majority who put her, and kept her, in Downing Street.

    We all knew TINA was a lie, we all know “climate change” is a lie, hence why the arguments become more nuanced, but whoever shouts the loudest wins the argument, what ever the facts!

    1. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Butskellism – your favourite, Jerry – had broken down, and was no longer a practical proposition. So, unless you wanted the centrally planned totalitarian option favoured by Scargill and co, there really was no alternative.

      1. jerry
        June 14, 2021

        @NickC; I wasn’t commenting on Mrs Thatcher’s trade union policies but her economic polices.

        1. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          Indeed, as I was, Jerry.

          1. jerry
            June 16, 2021

            @NickC; Sure you were, and NASA has found a London trolleybus on Mars….

            Now had you talked about the TUC I might have given you the benefit, but then that would not have fitted with your desire to go off on a rant against Scargill and/or far-left (as ever), given there were many moderate and reasonable trade unions in the 1980s, some who actually agreed that the UK needed to restructure, rebalance, our economy -although they might not have agreed with the method.

            “Butskellism” was never a reference to the the antics of the hard left but moderate centrist, or at least consensus driven, politics.

  26. MiC
    June 14, 2021

    John’s article translates as “our voters don’t like what we’re doing but they’d get even more of it with the Greens, Lib Dems etc.”

    That probably isn’t true – the UK will no doubt sign up to whatever global agreements are mooted, and so the matter is in the hands of more influential countries and entities, such as the US and the European Union.

    I suppose that it’s worth a try if you’re desperate to hang onto the votes of conspiracy theory addicts and the rest though.

    As I say, if all of the atmospheric CO2 were in a layer, then it would be about 15m thick today as against only 10m in mediaeval times.

    That’s quite some increase.

    1. MiC
      June 14, 2021

      Sorry, the “more” before “influential” is an error.

    2. Micky Taking
      June 14, 2021

      Which of the troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere and exosphere are you discussing?
      Just asking?

      1. MiC
        June 14, 2021

        OK, if it were in a layer at ground level pressure then it would be around 3m thick today, as opposed to 2m in the Middle Ages.

        You can do the sums to work out at what height it would expand to 15m, eh?

    3. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Martin, How do you know that extra CO2 is solely due to man burning fossil fuels? And if you come up with the usual fake answer, then you need to understand how the earth’s natural systems maintain the very small balance of CO2 in the atmosphere, compared with the massive sinks and sources of CO2 in the oceans and biosphere. Good luck with that one.

      1. MiC
        June 14, 2021

        It’s a fair question, but ice cores etc. show levels to have been pretty constant for thousands of years until the industrial age.

        That’s quite suggestive, but not proof.

        However, only a fool would not act on the probability that human action actually is the cause, given the measurable and serious impacts that this is having and in pretty close accordance with the rest of climate science.

        1. Micky Taking
          June 14, 2021

          I quite agree but it seems the leadership, and maybe the people of China and India are all fools not to have heeded your advice. Please go and tell them!

          1. MiC
            June 15, 2021

            The Chinese do not reject the science.

            However, given the stage of their development as a country they consider that their interests dictate a different timescale to address its implications, and they understand what this might mean.

            If you look at what the West has done to date in this regard, then you will see that it has perhaps previously over-promised on the other hand.

        2. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          No, indeed, Martin, only a fool would dismantle our oil based civilisation, which has improved the lot of ordinary people immeasurably, for the CAGW hoax.

      2. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        Thanks for that, NickC, you’re so much better than the ones quoting a 0.04% concentration for CO2 and taking that as the whole of their argument.

        I am not sure what ‘fake answer’ you are referring to.
        But if ‘the fake answer’ is, as I suppose, that the sources and sinks had been balancing each other for the best part of the last 10,000 and that with the accelerated use of fossil fuels this last century the fact that CO2 concentration has been measured since 1958 to have increased from 315 ppm to 410 ppm (Mauna Loa Observatory) is due to human activities.

        It is indeed true that an accurate picture of all the sources and sinks of CO2 is extremely difficult to paint as it would require measurements of those on a global scale, both over land and ocean, with a horizontal resolution of possibly as high as ten meters (to include power plants for example) and the possibility to quantify an awful lot of processes giving rise to CO2. Just one example, pyro-chemical processes: one would have to know how to translate adequately the CO2 produced by vegetation and forest fires, at the various stages of burning. Is the amount of CO2 produced the same when the smoke is black and when it is white? what about that produced by ‘underground’ peat fires as seen not so long ago in the Russian Arctic?

        So, are atmospheric scientists stuck? Yes and no: weather forecasters have repeated analysis of all kinds of weather-related measurements, quite scarce at the beginning of the 20thC, much more widely available since the end of the 1960s thanks to satellites. And what have they done: running the same meteorological systems ingesting measurements of temperature, humidity, wind, pressure, 
 (that was done at various met offices around the world) accounting for the increasing month-by-month CO2 concentration (and those of a few other ‘greenhouse’ gases) and again with a CO2 concentration fixed at its value in 1958.

        And the results are quite different, with the ‘reanalyses’ (that’s the jargon used by those guys and girls (indeed LL there are women with PhDs doing this type of work)) accounting for the increase in CO2 concentration so much closer to the actual independent meteorological observations (not included as initial conditions in the reanalyses) since the end of the 50s.

        As you will obviously have noted, these are not climate simulations, even if the computer models run in meteorological services are not so different from climate models.

  27. Burning injustice
    June 14, 2021

    If you removed the word “opposition” from headline and article your article would still make perfect sense. It’s not the opposition MPs we should be worried about, it’s your own government.

    1. Mark B
      June 15, 2021

      +1

  28. Syd
    June 14, 2021

    Did we all notice David Attenborough’s presentation to the G7, encouraging the Delegates to worship the Zero Carbon religion?
    Where was the alternative argument? Why no speaker who could put forward the arguments so eloquently outlined by our own Lifelogic?

    1. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Syd

      Good point!

    2. Lifelogic
      June 14, 2021

      He was also used to propagandise the citizen assembly on climate change. Select people at random with little or no understanding of climate or energy systems , then brain wash them and use them to “advise”.

  29. Roy Grainger
    June 14, 2021

    The parallel is more between the Green movement and the zero Covid enthusiasts – publish scaremongering model projections which are entirely unfalsifiable and which innumerate politicians are not equipped to reject and so steer them to base policy on them. Boris has fallen for both hook line and sinker.

    We’ll all have a good laugh today when he claims lockdown is postponed again by 4 weeks. We all know he really means twelve months with the usual caveat “AT THE EARLIEST”.

    1. NickC
      June 14, 2021

      Roy, Indeed, there is a pattern. Belief in zero covid, in the EU ideology, and in the climate catastrophe god requires the same type of mindset, at once gullible and stubborn, where sensibility overwhelms sense, and where authoritarianism is the preferred social model.

  30. Burning injustice
    June 14, 2021

    “One of the reasons a lot of voters say they broadly agree with this yet do nothing to change their own lifestyles is the perception of double standards.”
    I suspect voters may say they agree with the carbon reduction consensus because that is the ‘expected’, socially responsible answer. In reality these voters maintain a healthy scepticism and are well aware that we have been happily living with failed doomsday scenarios for 20 years or more. And they are well aware that the developing world will move inexorably towards first world living standards come what may.

  31. The Prangwizard
    June 14, 2021

    Sir John, you are attempting to deceive us all. Point the finger overseas as there are indeed problems there, and there are problems with zealots here, but it is your leader and your party which is where the problem lies here. He and it are making the decisions.

    This is a dishonest piece. Your loyalty to the Tory party and leadership has once again distorted your analysis.

    1. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      The PRANGWIZARD

      Correct, loyalty to party is a very worrying aspect of the current situation, when will someone stand up for the voters?

  32. turboterrier
    June 14, 2021

    Very good post Sir John
    This country has been put I a hole by the Climate Change Act and not once has the cry of “hang about let’s think this through” by those trusted with the welfare and safety of this country.
    We are governed by a PM and cabinet that are all in essence kippers all inflicted with the Black Dog Syndrome.
    Someone has a black dog we have to have a blacker one. There is no other reason for the unjustifiable actions being taken by the cabinet to appease the green lobby and the congregation of the Church of Renewables Saving the World religion. All these actions being proposed all worked out on the back of a fag packet. Until the whole world unites as one then nothing will change and this country will have imploded thanks to what unscientific and emotional people with not a tad of an idea how to pay for all of this nonsense stupidly believe. Not one of them has the guts to stand up and call time out.

  33. Lockdown Kills
    June 14, 2021

    What was the point of the vaccines, Sir John ?

    We know what comes next. Another extension and then “We can’t release you because of the autumn wave.”

    Will you be joining the march on the 26th ?

    1. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      The 1918 Spanish Flu global pandemic was prevalent for 18 months and disappeared without any vaccine all by itself – This covid-19 with all our technology and vaccine has now last longer and according to the medical professionals in the employ of governments will continue for some time yet

      1. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        It ran out of unwilling people to catch it. So many had died.

      2. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        Yeah, about 600 m infected and only between 50 m and 100 m deaths at a time (1918) when the world population was about 1.8 bn people. What is anything between a 2.7 and 5.4% loss between friends?

        For the time being the world has only had 176 m cases and 3.8 m deaths out of a population of 7.8 bn, so only 0.05%, so tell me Glen, is there really any need to worry? Isn’t a small cull like this happening from time to time a nice thing, eh?

        1. glen cullen
          June 15, 2021

          I really don’t understand the point you’re making

          1. NickC
            June 15, 2021

            Glen, Hefner just likes quoting from Wiki for its own sake. It’s his way.

          2. hefner
            June 16, 2021

            Glen, so what was your point? Do you think there is no need for any measure whatsoever? It was not clear to start with, and I might have taken your comment the wrong way. Accept my apologies if it is the case.

    2. beresford
      June 14, 2021

      They need to keep extending until sufficient people have been ‘vaccinated’ that they can bring in their social credit passports, as agreed with the WEF. Without the social credit passports they will not be able to crush opposition to the Great Reset.

    3. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      Lockdown Kills

      Plus hundreds!

  34. William Long
    June 14, 2021

    I wish it was just opposition MPs who take the view you outline so clearly. Unfortunately they are lead by the current Prime Minister and include a great many on the Government side.

  35. BJC
    June 14, 2021

    Anyone who wants a clue as to what it’s like living in a Green “utopia” should visit the filthy streets of the ghetto called Brighton and Hove and take a moment to admire the hundreds of wind turbines standing immobile on the horizon.

    Over the last two years, our ideological councillors have decided to ban the use of weedkiller and are now cultivating chest-high weeds on the streets, all in the name of biodiversity. Whilst saving bees and insects might be a worthy cause for some, it’s the bio-humans who are required to pay through the nose for their deteriorating services and Councillors’ abundant salaries. They’ve forgotten that it’s their job to serve our needs, one of which is ensuring we can walk (to see said bees and insects?) along the streets without dodging the chicane of slip/trip-hazards they’ve created.

  36. Peter from Leeds
    June 14, 2021

    Sir John,
    I am reminded of a different hot debate from my youth – that of the superiority of CDs over LPs. In the end how ever much I wanted LPs they simply stopped making them (though I see they are now making a comeback).

    There is, I believe, an economic debate for moving away from hydrocarbon energy. Originally the UK had a massive amount of coal which helped power the industrial revolution. Then the discovery of North Sea oil and gas kept us self sufficient in energy for many decades. However we are now having to import gas and oil in vast quantities.

    I do not relish having to replace my gas boiler – but then houses used to be heated by coal (our boiler is in the coal cellar). Perhaps the gas mains could be used to distribute hydrogen generated by electrolysis from nuclear, solar or wind power.

    Most (all?) car manufacturers are stopping producing petrol and diesel cars. We will all be buying electric or hybrid sooner or later. And aero manufacturers are starting to look at electric aircraft seriously.

    It is a fact that CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing year on year – how much of this is due to human activity (it went up last year despite world wide lock downs) and how much it impacts the climate is open for scientific debate. However it is also a fact that fossil fuels are a finite resource and will become increasingly expensive.

    1. nota#
      June 14, 2021

      @Peter from Leeds – I like the analogy CD’s vs LP’s, was that price or convenience that caused the change. Then it was a commercial choice now it is a hit you hard in the wallet real proposition.

      CO2 increasing each year, yes, inline with population Growth or is it returning to earlier times. The irony is no CO2, no vegans or animals in the food chain for that matter. To solve it you could suggest the Controlling Powers and their followers are seeking to bring in compulsory euthanasia.

      The again never miss the point all these noisy ‘me-too’s’ believe it is someone else that will pay and all choices will not fall at their door.

      Its a bit like the transport question – get people out of their ‘cars’. Only when you have done that do you come up with an alternative.

    2. Mark
      June 14, 2021

      In 1980, proved reserves of oil were under 30 years of consumption. Proved reserves are ones that are known to exist through drilling and seismic evaluation of the reservoirs, that can be extracted at the current oil price. 41 years later, or 12 years after the oil was supposed to run out, we have 50 years of much higher levels of consumption as proven reserves. Exploration continues to find new reserves when the incentive is there, and new technology continues to improve the economics and recovery of higher fractions of the original oil in place. Although we will reach a point at which oil becomes scarcer, it is not yet in view. Our biggest risks are in abandoning cheap fossil fuels to the Chinese to exploit for their benefit, and rushing headlong into trying to replace them without having first developed the technologies to allow us to do so at reasonable cost.

      1. Mark B
        June 15, 2021

        +1

  37. No Longer Anonymous
    June 14, 2021

    In answer to MiC

    YES. I’m scared of a bit of cloth on my face.

    I went to school in the 70s and early 80s and went to one where far more kids ended up in prison and borstal than university. In the time that I was there (Eastfields High School for Boys, Mitcham in a London overspill borough) four of the lads were convicted of separate murders. Others have gone on to murder since.

    Being a late developer I was bullied. We used to wear snorkel coats as was the fashion. I was pinned down by a gang and they forcibly squeezed the snorkel closed over my face and held me on the ground screaming for what seemed like 20 minutes. It was probably less but I never ever recovered from the experience. I thought I was going to die.

    Having discovered my weakness they took pleasure in pinning me to the ground and having the fat boy lay his belly across my face.

    So yes. The past fifteen months has been difficult for me. I hate having my nose and mouth covered by anything that restricts my breathing but have done it on the orders of the Government, I have taken jabs that I really didn’t want on the orders of the Government.

    I now openly refuse to wear a mask and will resist any officer who tries to enforce the Government’s orders over me. This is no longer a legitimate Government. It has behaved illegally umpteen times already.

    I’ll tell you what happens next because I’ve been right most of the time on this situation.

    Four weeks will become six, then the Autumn wave (or a new variant, whichever suits SAGE) will keep us in lockdown and masks.

    1. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      No Longer Anonymous

      Yes, it’s all SO predictable, when will an honest politician stand up for the voters?/

    2. Lester
      June 14, 2021

      No Longer Anonymous

      Yes, it’s all SO predictable, when will an honest politician stand up for the voters?

      And I HAVE’NT posted this before!

      1. hefner
        June 14, 2021

        You had, mate.

    3. Edmund
      June 14, 2021

      Yes, the inevitable postponement of “Freedom Day”. The fact is that there can be no freedom while it is in the government’s gift to grant it or take it away again. Until the government is coerced into giving us back our freedoms, hopefully by legal action although the bias of our judiciary will make this incredibly difficult, we are living under a dictatorship.

    4. MiC
      June 14, 2021

      You had a nasty experience and its effects exempt you from being compelled to wear a mask, as I understand it.

      However, by far and away most of those complaining have not suffered as you have, and have no need for exemption.

      They just want to get back to loud-mouthing down at the pub again.

    5. Micky Taking
      June 14, 2021

      Surely Johnson stated that should the restrictions not be ceased on 19th July, he would resign? Didn’t he?

  38. Christine
    June 14, 2021

    These people are also very selective in their views. They fail to tackle the main cause of environmental damage to our planet which is the ever-increasing growth in the human population. This Government continues to allow a net immigration of over 600,000 people per year and fails to stop the invasion of economic migrants across the channel. They allow EU countries to continue plundering our fishing resources. We have a Prime Minister who makes promises to save the rest of the World using UK taxpayers’ money but does nothing for the British people. Does he really think other countries will deliver on their promises to help save the planet? They won’t. The UK will end up uncompetitive and much the poorer. What amazes me is that people still vote for them but they will wake up when it starts to hit them in their pockets and they can’t afford to drive their cars, heat their homes and go abroad on holiday.

    As the G7 meeting showed us it’s a case of Do As I Say, Not As I Do.

  39. villaking
    June 14, 2021

    Sir John, I enjoy your thoughtful and enlightened comments on the climate change agenda and it is a pity that you seek to conflate the extreme climate change alarmists with those who saw / see the benefits of the EU single market. Those who voted remain are also often, wrongly, assumed to be pro-lockdown. These are all different issues. I stand as proof of a pro-freedom, anti-lockdown, climate change policy sceptic remain supporter.

    1. Ed M
      June 14, 2021

      I think a lot of this has to do with the masculine and feminine.
      Masculinity is about tough love, responsibility to make one’s own way in world, love of country, and so on.
      Feminity is all about soft love, focusing on power of close relationships, love of the natural world, and so on.
      Both men and women need both from one degree to another in themselves, between each other in a relationship, and the spirit of within a country.

      1. Ed M
        June 14, 2021

        So both the greenies and those who want to preserve the economy BOTH have valuable points to make. Its a case of not being overly macho nor complacent on one hand nor wet or hystrical on the other hand. But being objective about the truth and being brave about accepting that and finding a solution that best meets the healthy concerns of both (I want to make enough money to drive a sports car in the future if I want but nor do I want to drive a sports car if it means I’ve sprouted a second head because of damage done to the environment). We can have best of both worlds (to an important degree) but we got to accept reality and be brave about it.

      2. s carton
        June 15, 2021

        +1

    2. NickC
      June 15, 2021

      Villaking, Yes that’s true. But you are the only Remain on here to be “a pro-freedom, anti-lockdown, climate change policy sceptic” commenter. Makes you think, doesn’t it?

  40. rose
    June 14, 2021

    Their numeracy on this subject is the same as their numeracy on the vaccines.

    They say the “rich” West must beggar itself to stop climate change, but China, India, South America, and Africa can surge ahead otherwise it won’t be fair. Even if they bankrupted us in the West, on their own terms and according to their own arguments, the effect on the climate would be negligible, but it would also be punitive for the West. It is the same with the vaccines. They want us to give away our vaccines to the Third World, in order so they say, to eradicate the Wuhan virus. The numbers again don’t work. We are too small a country and the world population is too big. Better, surely, to look after the people here first as the numbers are so small in world terms, and then turn our attention to the 8 billion.

    By the same token, we should first be securing our own defences here, against flood and drought, moving people back from vulnerable coasts, thinking where to evacuate London and Bristol to if necessary, and above all stopping importing any more people or covering any more farmland and woodland with concrete. We should also be attending to the waterways and natural soakaways which the “Environment Agency” neglects.

  41. Newmania
    June 14, 2021

    The Green Party were a very reluctant convert to the Remain cause seeing the EU as a rich man`s club and fundamentally committed to growth Free Trade and International Capitalisms ( tsk tsk). Guilty on all charges .
    Big promises too be paid for later is a politically irresponsible Green dimension of the Brexit Government and of a piece with the rest of the Brexit practice of stealing from tomorrow to pay for their today. Net zero had nothing to do with either remain or Lab0our it was Theresa May and has been gleefully endorsed by Boris since .
    I see it as a way of trying to make Remain Conservative Voters forget they are voting for Party that thinks they City Jobs are expendable the Universities they send their children to an enemy, and their Liberal views
    , merely worthless middle class affections .

    On the main point overall I agree …but don`t blame me

  42. Newmania
    June 14, 2021

    By the way the fact that this Government and politicians in general love to indulge in cheap gestures where someone else pays does not mean the science behind Green activism is pretty strong , neither do the sometimes exaggerated claims and dubious predictions
    Behind all that we now have 70 years of work so I do think it is problem the world has to take on and I don`t think we need set our standards at the same level as China ….but its too fast

  43. forthurst
    June 14, 2021

    Climate is one of those issues which is beyond the capacity of the majority of politicians to understand, another would be warfare and grand strategy where the history of our politicians to understand a strategic situation and the consequences of becoming actively involved for us has been woeful, and like anthropogenic climate change has been driven by those with a secret agenda against which ignorance and stupidity is no match. Once we have ‘won’ the war on climate change and become suitably impoverished, we can then be endlessly told how we won the battle to save the world much as we are endlessly told how we won wars and saved the world? Will the history of the United Kingdom be one in which the current crop of politicians finished what a century of their equally incompetent forebears failed to achieve: total powerlessness and impoverishment, that which ‘new’ Britons have wanted to leave in their millions?

  44. glen cullen
    June 14, 2021

    The Green Party are not the opposition; they only have one MP – the opposition against the conservative voter is the Tory MPs

  45. Iago
    June 14, 2021

    I think the moral bankruptcy of the government is summed up by their making the Queen, aged 95, travel all the way to the tip of Cornwall from London to host a dinner for the G7 gang.

    1. SM
      June 14, 2021

      Presumably Her Majesty could have refused and sent the Prince of Wales to deputise for her had she felt unable to undertake the task.

      On the other hand, perhaps she enjoyed getting out and talking to people at last?

    2. MiC
      June 14, 2021

      The Queen is perfectly entitled to hand over the reign to her successor if she considered that the burdens of office were no longer what she wanted.

      There seemed to be plenty of smiles from her too.

      1. Micky Taking
        June 14, 2021

        Probably thinking ‘I’ve attended some charades before, but this takes the biscuit’.

  46. Sakara Gold
    June 14, 2021

    It seems to me that the issue is more complex than Sir John’s analysis suggests. Taking as a starting point the scientific conclusion that the world is indeed inexorably heating up, with CO2 emissions the primary cause but with significant contributions from methane and other gases, the question is how does the world deal with the consequences? Inevitably, we will overshoot the 2% target – which will then threaten the 40% of the worlds population that lives within 100km of the coast.

    The problem is exacerbated by an economic system that depends on growth for increased profits, dividends, market share etc. But the world has finite resources and vested interests that wish to enjoy increased profits, as a larger global population achieves a net disposable income to spend on consumer products. The vested interests prefer inertia and greenwashing to actually facing up to the consequences and going for zero carbon. This lack of urgency on their part is what frustrates the Greens and other environmental activists
    .
    The global population is now approaching 8 billion. The consequences of the projected increase in sea levels, increased H20 vapour in the atmosphere, the current exponential increase in burning carbon and the destruction of the world’s green lungs – the rain forests – will be catastrophic. And far more costly than if we grasp the nettle now and make a start on saving our lovely planet.

    1. Peter2
      June 14, 2021

      Humans are intelligent, resilient and keen survivors.
      They face up to challenges and think of solutions.
      The standard green philosophy seems based on no reaction from humans.
      They claim many millions will drown as rivers and seas rise.
      As if they would just stand there like stone statues as water rose over their heads.
      See what Holland did centuries ago?
      They created a huge successful nation under sea level.

      1. glen cullen
        June 14, 2021

        You mean we don’t need government to tell us how & when to wipe our behinds

    2. Mark
      June 14, 2021

      I see you believe in computer models that depend on black box assumptions to work at all, and where the key variable – the sensitivity to carbon dioxide emissions – is only known to a factor of at best about 2. You then rely on model outputs constructed from the high end of the range of sensitivity, and assuming that the world will covert mainly to coal for its energy. None of the models has a track record in being able to hindcast – they produce grossly exaggerated results. Any other religion you want to confess?

      1. Sakara Gold
        June 14, 2021

        @Mark
        This post is absolute rubbish. I see that you have been taken in by the so-called “research” financed by the fossil fuel industries, one of the vested interests who wish to continue pumping out CO2 until the world cooks.

        If you want the FACTS, not fossil-fuel industry paid-for models, I suggest that you check this NASA website out

        https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

        If you want to argue against climate change, it helps if you are intelligent enough to understand the science, which clearly you do not

        1. Peter2
          June 15, 2021

          SK
          We were told by these models decades ago that by 2020 there would be little or no arctic ice, hige rises in sea levels, no polar bears, no Maldives and rapid rises in the rate of increase of temperatures post 2000 and no oil left.

          See the excellent website extinctionclock.org for a very long list of failed doomsday predictions.

        2. Mark
          June 15, 2021

          I do not dispute that the climate is changing. I suspect I probably have a far more detailed understanding of some of the underlying science than most (particularly in relation to infrared absorption, and the practicalities and limitations of modelling). What you seem to have accepted is the extreme RCP8.5 scenarios as the basis for your policy recommendations. Sensible climate scientists recognise that these projections are completely unrealistic.

  47. nota#
    June 14, 2021

    A bit late – and my maths is shot to pieces – the MsM have pictures of the G7 leaders all standing on a plinth – all 9 of them!

    When did an observer become part of the rabble, and why was India and Australia missing on the presumed basis?

    Out of the 9 only 4 weren’t EU rulers. Then those who are supposed to be our leaders wonder why we disrespect them so much(they have never earnt the right of respect- because they keep insulting us), all grandstanding, and virtue signalling.

    So what is the point? why is taxpayer money being wasted this way? Why does a green future not include those that spout such rubbish to the rest of us? G7 may be G9, then why is there a G20 how much disrespect can we tolerate from these juvenile people.

    1. nota#
      June 14, 2021

      The notion that lockdowns, face masks, and self distancing is for everyone else also comes to mind from this rabble of un-representatives of the people. As others have said the world is fast becoming do as I say not as I do

  48. Iain Gill
    June 14, 2021

    sadly all the main political parties are selecting candidates with these silly views.

    the political system is failing us badly.

    1. turboterrier
      June 14, 2021

      Iain Gill
      Spot on Iain. The problem lies squarely at the doors of all the political parties central offices. A blind man at a thousand yards could see where we were heading when you see the standard of the candidates put forward for election. Eighty percent are totally not fit for the purpose for which they were elected.

    2. nota#
      June 15, 2021

      @Iain – correct. Its a kick in the teeth for the electorate when a gang leader says who will represent you. When it should be the electorate of a constituency that chooses both the candidates and then the representative. Its the continuance that should be funding any campaigning not outsiders.

      The Problem with that the Gang/Party Leader cant bribe loyalty to them.

  49. nota#
    June 14, 2021

    The green Opposition MPs are like Remain

    1. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      The Tory government MPs are ‘remain’

      1. nota#
        June 15, 2021

        @glen – I was editing Sir Johns headline. It is clear those Tory’s that are in Government are both remain and left wing socialists. They clearly don’t understand the free market & enterprise, the economy, low tax and self reliance – all the things they are dedicated to drumming out of the UK

        1. glen cullen
          June 15, 2021

          ….and I fully agree with you

  50. John McDonald
    June 14, 2021

    Dear Sir John, as I keep asking, where is a Government white paper that explains and proves that our generation of CO2 is the cause of climate change, and the unproven green house gas effect.
    There is no doubt the climate is changing and if continues to change there will be major flooding and at the same time food shortages.
    It is a good guess that humankind is the problem or at least part of the problem related to pollution in all it’s forms. But is it just our generation of CO2? Our contribution to the CO2 increase is a faction of that which is being released by the plant warming. The level of CO2 from all sources is increasing we can all agree on that.
    Are we just cooking the planet by all the heat energy we generate through industrialisation and population increase, which started some 150 years ago when the CO2 level in the atmosphere began to increase.

    But which politician will say sorry, but we just have to reduce the rate of population increase, and reduce the amount of heat energy we use/waste. Reduce pollution and waste is already agreed by most people.

    Going carbon neutral will not stop the plant warming up. It will more than likely generate more heat and pollution. Green Energy is still Heat Energy.

    CO2 is needed to support Life and is non-toxic. It does reflect infra-red radiation. And is good for making CO2 lasers. Water vapour does a much better job of reflecting heat but it does not build up in the long term like CO2. It rains !

    1. john McDonald
      June 15, 2021

      May I add a postscript to my comment Sir John ?
      facts and figures from the internet are always subject to some extra checking but
      a person generates 2 tons of CO2 per year. A bit hard to believe but there you go.
      Now there are 7.8 billion of use, so 15.6 billion tons per year.
      Fossil fuel 38 Billion tons, but good year last year due to Covid 34 billion Tons.
      The natural CO2 cycle of release and absorption is 750 billion tons per year.
      and the standing level remained constant up until the start of the industrial period.
      Now there where 1 only billon people in 1800. The Green view of CO2 is that the earth (Nature) was able to manage the 750 billion ton CO2 cycle and keep a constant temperature but the addition of 5% from fossil fuel cannot be managed by nature and hence the increased reflection of heat ( build up) as the standing level increased, hence the CO2 layer thickness and more heat reflection back to earth.
      Three key points are neglected . The destruction of the earth’s CO2 recycling system, the sea and plant life since the start of the industrial period, and a population which is generating an additional 2% of CO2 .
      Also the CO2 layer increase will reflect more of the Sun’s Heat back into space, a cooling effect.
      The point is that just reducing CO2 from Fossil Fuel is not the complete answer .
      It is hard to believe that if the earth’s CO2 recycling system is just as good now as it was in 1800 it can’t manage an additional 5% increase in CO2 from fossil fuel. I am the first to promote alternative energy sources to fossil fuel simply on the basis it is running out. But Politician’s are conning us to do it more quickly than need be because destruction of the earth’s natural CO2 recycling system is big business, and the green agenda is also big business for electric cars/batteries, solar panels, wind turbines and a whole host of new products with green labels.

  51. Pauline Baxter
    June 14, 2021

    Do a lot of voters ‘broadly agree with’ the ‘green’ agenda? I have my doubts.
    Surely there are not a lot of voters daft enough to believe that Carbon Dioxide is a harmful gas. Surely not many believe that it is causing a catastrophic increase in global temperatures.
    It doesn’t need a lot of thought and investigation to realise that the ‘models’ are flawed and have been proved wrong over and over.
    Haven’t Opinion Polls also been proved wrong over and over also? Where else is this idea of a lot of voters coming from?
    Let’s face it, ‘the voters’ are also people, trying to survive as best they can in a world that seems to be run at present by a few tyrannical madmen.
    Do we get any opportunity nowadays to express our opinions, or lead a free life, harming none.

    1. nota#
      June 15, 2021

      @Pauline – they do when it doesn’t change their life style or cost them money

  52. Martyn G
    June 14, 2021

    Meanwhile, in the real world I read that the French owners of the Dungeness power plant are going to close it down. That inevitably means we shall have to increasingly relay on buying power from France to keep our lights on. And that, I suspect is why the PM is allowing Eu trawlers unrestricted right to fishing our waters, probably because a certain EU leader made it plain that without access to UK fishing waters implied that the French interconnectors would no longer be allowed.
    A typical example of Green lunacy is running Drax power station on USA wood chips.run Drax power station on wood pellets procured from the USA to reduce the UK’s CO2 generation. But:
    * The trees are felled by machines run on fossil fuels.
    * The felled trees are made into pellets by equipment powered by fossil fuels.
    * The pellets are transported to dockside by transport powered by fossil fuels.
    * The pellets are transported by ships using crude fossil fuels.
    * The pellets are moved and delivered to Drax with the use of fossil fuels.
    How on earth does that make Drax a ‘green’ source of power generation? Madness, all is madness!

    1. glen cullen
      June 14, 2021

      I believe Drax, and the like, make use of carbon trading and planting a few trees

  53. Barbara
    June 14, 2021

    These Doomsday scenarios remind me of 1983 , when a certain Dr Anthony Fauci in the US said AIDS would spread through household contact and people should even disinfect their children’s toys. The Royal College of Nursing here said 1.5 million people would die from it in the UK by 1990. None of it was true, of course, and none of it happened – but show a politician a hockey-stick graph (almost a guarantee of fraud, as Steve McIntyre has tirelessly pointed out), as was done with supposed ‘catastrophic man-made warming’, and they fall for it every time.

  54. X-Tory
    June 14, 2021

    One of the few true things that green campaigners say is that this is a *global* issue. There is no point in the UK taking action if the main producer of greenhouse gases – China – does not follow. And they are NOT following. On the contrary, they are INCREASING their CO2 output. So even if the UK shut down altogether, and produced zero greenhouse gases, within a year or so China would make up the difference.

    So for us to take action which damages our economy and lifestyle makes no sense at all. It is utterly moronic. Indeed, it is treasonous.

    I will only believe that green campaigners really mean what they say when they take action against China. And the only action that will work is full trade sanctions. So either do that or shut up.

  55. Derek
    June 14, 2021

    The climate change policies benefit the few to the cost of the many. As usual, it is the poor who end up paying the elitists’ bill, while the promoters of Green energy pick up the cash. Meanwhile China laughs.

  56. glen cullen
    June 14, 2021

    68,000,000 pop. and 3 deaths today – and this government is putting us in lockdown for a further 4 weeks
..just can’t see the logic

    The 4 tests to lockdown don’t even included the death rates

    1. Hat Man
      June 14, 2021

      Indeed they don’t, Glen Cullen. That’s because lockdowns aren’t about saving lives, they’re about saving (political) careers.

    2. steve
      June 14, 2021

      glen cullen

      “68,000,000 pop. and 3 deaths today – and this government is putting us in lockdown for a further 4 weeks
..just can’t see the logic ”

      Yes I watched it too. Within five minutes I concluded there was hidden agenda.

      It ocurrs to me that agenda is to cause as much damage to the economy as possible. Now who’s interest would that serve ?

      Johnson let the Indian variant in, does’nt apologise or explain himself, then goes on to say we will have to learn to live with it….in other words get used to lockdowns until the economy is totally trashed, and they then think they’ll have justification to go grovelling to – guess where, on our behalf.

      Johnson lets it in and tells us we have to learn to live with it.

      Bunch of bloody criminals.

      1. MiC
        June 15, 2021

        Steve, how many of your rights and freedoms would you be prepared to surrender to deal with the cause, if 150,000 British people had been killed not by a virus but by foreigners here?

        For instance, would you have thought that there should be a call up if needed?

        Or would you have said “Oh, just leave them alone – they’ll get bored and give up before long”?

        Well?

        Come on.

        1. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          Martin, “if 150,000 British people had been killed . . . by foreigners”. I wasn’t aware that you subscribed to the possibility that covid19 escaped from a Chinese laboratory?

  57. bill brown
    June 14, 2021

    Sir JR,

    Some good and relevant points raised which are spot on.

    Please, just make sure taht the campaign does not turn into an emotional campaign with large generalisations that are not very fact based as with the Remainers lately.

    thank you

    1. Peter2
      June 14, 2021

      What would we do without you bill and your pro EU posts.
      Do you have daily target?

      1. bill brown
        June 15, 2021

        Peter2

        I just don’t like emotional generalisaitons but prefer arguments based on facts and figures

        1. Peter2
          June 15, 2021

          Well give us some then bill !

          1. bill brown
            June 15, 2021

            Peter2,

            There are no exporters suppliers or manufacturers of food products in the UK, who are out to harm the UK as stated by JR and many others on this blog

            Reply It’s the EU that is out to damage trade in food especially GB to NI

        2. NickC
          June 15, 2021

          We’re waiting, Bill, we’re waiting . . .

  58. steve
    June 14, 2021

    JR

    So too is Johnson.

  59. Margaret Brandreth-
    June 14, 2021

    I understand what a more feminine way is , however the feminine is more of a literate expression rather than human gender.
    When you write this John you seem to forget or try to reason above the common emotions of all involved. The big ‘I’ which is concerned with fulfillment of self within a set time alive, dominates:unless we have an all altruistic society ( laugh) How do we respect others and new generations? by arguing furiously and doing nothing? We can talk till the cows come home but the world is full of people who simply go around killing others for the big ‘I’ ( I , often being part of the us) so how do we get them to accept the ultimate destruction of human life by climate change?
    I sit in my beautiful garden and watch how the birds , foxes , squirrels and deer are continually fighting for their lives: are we so different?

    1. Margaret Brandreth-
      June 14, 2021

      i suppose I ought to change that to literary expression for fear of challenging the comprehension skills of readers!
      off topic .. I seem to remember that your birthday is around now , but your DOB is now not published . However if it is son , Happy Birthday ..

      1. Margaret Brandreth-
        June 15, 2021

        not son ( that mistake makes it seem very patronising .. apologies) i.e is on 15th

  60. Mark
    June 14, 2021

    The realities of the present situation are that the government plans for net zero are unattainable on the timescale they are targetting, but the attempt will cost many trillions of pounds and destroy the economy unless it is halted at an early stage. Meanwhile, because few other countries could even contemplate such insane levels of spending, let alone wish to damage their own economies and threaten the collapse of their societies, the reality will be that there will be no big reduction in emissions from the rest of the world: indeed, they are likely to increase modestly. If the climate doomsters are right, and this leads to significant changes in climate which require expenditure to adapt, we will not be able to afford it, having bankrupted the country on the vain attempt by the implausible to pursue the impossible. If they are wrong, do they fear the retribution that will be called down on their heads for having trashed the country for nothing?

    The wise course is to hold fire on the pursuit of net zero, and save against adapting to such changes as occur. The only time to change that course is when there is genuine global agreement – not just among global elites – on a need to do otherwise. It will be marked by immediate action, not vague promises of perhaps doing something sometime.

    In the mean time, by freeing the economy from the constraints of net zero we would have the full scope to make advances across the whole gamut of activities which would offer many more options for dealing with our future. Committing to unworkable and immature technologies while banning ones that work is the way to take a Great Leap Backwards.

  61. Original Richard
    June 14, 2021

    The same groups who in the last century called for the UK to unilaterally disarm our nuclear weapons are now calling for us to unilaterally implement impossible CO2 targets.

  62. XY
    June 14, 2021

    Well said, sir.

    The science is NOT settled. I beliee that the government should be setting up programmes to investigate what’s actually going on and publish it.

    If it turns out that this is all due to (say) changes in the planetary orbits around the sun, operating on cycles of tens of thousands of years then we are going to be in even more trouble when we need to shift the other way.

    1. MiC
      June 15, 2021

      Scientists never claim that science is settled, however they might be traduced by the media and by partial observers.

      For instance Einstein’s General Relativity has weaknesses which are being explored as we write.

      However, they may well claim that a majority of scientists agree as to probable positions, but that is not the same thing at all.

  63. nota#
    June 14, 2021

    North Tyneside Conservative Council orders the Union Flag to be taken down as they are ‘overtly political’

    Seems to be confirmation of the new left in action

    1. glen cullen
      June 15, 2021

      There should be a urgent question in the house

  64. No Longer Anonymous
    June 15, 2021

    God.

    Oh God.

    When the country finally wakes up to what your Government has just done… defeat from the jaws of victory.

    When does that shrill alarm bell go off then ? End of furlough, perhaps ? Britain is going to look as bleak as post war East Germany but with soggy masks and enforced knee taking at work.

    I don’t believe the polls for one second – and I was bang on about the Brexit polls, bear that in mind.

    1. MiC
      June 15, 2021

      What has been defeated?

      1. NickC
        June 15, 2021

        Rationality?

  65. Lindsay McDougall
    June 15, 2021

    India certainly could do better. The climate in India is ideally suited to solar power. Also, the whole of the east coast of India, stretching into the Bay of Bengal, has a monsoon climate, and for four months a year it is very windy. There is obviously scope for suitable investments. Should the west pay for them? As long as India thinks it can afford to invest in nuclear weapons, I say “no”.

  66. bill brown
    June 15, 2021

    Sir JR,

    The latest twitters on the EU trying ot punish us and therefore buying Australian farm products what a load of absolute nonsense

    reply A lot of people agree with me. Why should we buy so much food from the EU when they try every trick to damage the U.K.

    1. bill brown
      June 15, 2021

      Sir JR,

      There is no producer or manufacturer or supplier to teh UK taht wish to harm the UK, you are hunting a goast that does not exist.

      1. Peter2
        June 15, 2021

        I agree bill.
        It is the EU bureaucrats who are standing between legitimate buyers and sellers.
        If you want to buy a product or service in Europe you should have the freedom to do so.
        If I want to sell a product or service into Europe then I should have the freedom to do so.
        Remember when the Common Market was set up to facilitate trade?

Comments are closed.