The UK drive to net zero is too expensive and will not lower world CO2.

I have long been critical of some UK plans to take us on the road to net zero. They entail making it very dear to use energy here so we import high energy using products from abroad. They stop us getting out our own oil and gas so we import more from overseas. They run down our food production from home farms, only to bring in more from abroad.

All those who do think getting world CO2 down is a crucial priority should attack these plans, as they mean more CO 2 produced in shipping all the things to us. If we bring in more LNG gas that produces far more CO 2 in its compression, shipping and conversion than our own gas down a pipe. If we import German or Chinese steel they may produce more CO 2 in its manufacture than we do, but they will certainly produce more CO 2 in its transport.

Today I want to concentrate on the damage these policies do to our state finances. They lose us lots of revenue, by substituting foreign for domestic production. All the super taxes paid on oil and gas output go to a foreign producer government not to the Treasury. All the taxes on wages and profits in making things go to overseas governments where the exporting factories lie. There is a major drain on our balance of payments which means the country has to borrow more from overseas to pay the bills in foreign currencies, leading to a higher debt interest burden. This is economic self harm on a grand scale.

There is the excessive expenditure taxpayers are asked to pay for. We should immediately defer the ÂŁ20bn spend on carbon capture and storage. Our competitors are not doing this and it is just another cost burden, only this time a charge on taxpayers rather than business using the energy. We should cut the government spend on hydrogen development and the proposed new tax to pay for some of it. Hydrogen technology may well represent a good way forward for heating and transport, but there is no reason why taxpayers should pay for experimentation when the world market will allocate capital to what it sees as the most likely winners. The government did not have to send taxpayers money to businesses to develop smartphones and computer pads. The market found them out and paid for them.

The government should reduce taxation on energy using businesses by removing the emissions trading carbon taxes, allowing it remove the subsidies it currently has to pay to offset the damage the taxes do! It should unwind much of the money go round in the energy sector. Today we have subsidies to some ways of delivering energy allied to windfall taxes which are not actually geared to windfall prices but are just another levy. There are too many subsidies and too many taxes today, putting more companies off investing in the UK owing to the complexity and uncertainty surrounding how much anyone will be allowed to profit by large capital commitments.

The government should end the scheme to get taxpayers to pay for smart meters for all homes. Half the country does not want them and they should not be paid for out of taxes. The government  should not fund local anti road schemes designed to create more congestion and to ensure vehicles burn more fuel in traffic jams.

The government has to spend a large sum on trying to secure a Jaguar battery factory. Its motor industry policy wants to close all existing diesel and petrol vehicle building and components factories by the end of this decade and it desperately needs new factories to build entirely different electric vehicles instead. To do this it is going to throw huge sums of subsidy at trying to attract the battery and EV plants some companies wish to build somewhere in the world. The government should lift its ban on petrol and diesel vehicles so that it keeps more of the traditional industry for longer. It would then look less desperate to attract EV business and would not have to bid so much subsidy in an attempt to limit the overall loss of jobs and activity.

I share the government’s aim to get the deficit down. Saving money on damaging green policies which do not even cut world CO 2 would be a great start to control spending.

149 Comments

  1. formula57
    May 28, 2023

    Certainly “This is economic self harm on a grand scale” deliberately and knowingly promoted by this rotten government. But let us not forget children, Starmer would be somehow worse.

    1. Ian+wragg
      May 28, 2023

      It was never meant to lower CO2, it’s just a other plan foe the impoverishing of the western world to give advantage to the BRICS
      The latest WHO initiative is a further step to OWG.
      We’re not stupid John as the French and Dutch are beginning to revolt.
      You reap what you sow si expect a drubbing at the next election although the other parties are worse.

      1. Peter
        May 28, 2023

        ‘ We’re not stupid John as the French and Dutch are beginning to revolt.’

        Not stupid but not the type to revolt either. Politicians know this and take liberties with the phlegmatic population of these isles. The French would have been ripping up the cobblestones ages ago.

        1. Sharon
          May 28, 2023

          In Sceptics Daily there is a link to The Times describing how lots of organisations are merging and it includes disaffected farmers, truckers and bikers to pile pressure on ministers to reverse what they say is a “war on motorists”. This is aimed at the ULEZ and 15 mins cities etc, but it has the potential to move to other topics. The group is called UK Unite.

          Net zero, WHO treaty, ULEZ and related bits of that, Woke, Immigration, CBDC, high taxes etc is highlighting that the ‘conspiracy theories’ were in fact – not! It’s a socialist takeover!

          1. glen cullen
            May 28, 2023

            What has this government done to stop the London Mayors attack on motorists ….they could stop ULEZs tomorrow but do nothing !

      2. Christine
        May 28, 2023

        I don’t believe the Reform Party is worse and hope people get behind them to change the direction of this country like they did with Brexit.

        1. glen cullen
          May 28, 2023

          dito

    2. Wanderer
      May 28, 2023

      Starmer would be worse. But the saving grace is that you can only destroy the country once. Left to their own devices the Tories will achieve that pretty soon anyway, so it makes little difference.

      1. APL
        May 28, 2023

        Wanderer: “Starmer would be worse. ”

        Yes. But all the policies Starmer would implement are in the Labour party manefesto!!

        I can’t think of anything in the last Tory manefesto that has actually been properly implemented. They haven’t even ‘got BREXIT done’. The flagship policy!

    3. Dave Andrews
      May 28, 2023

      He’ll just end up doing what the blob tells him, just like this lot.

    4. Mickey Taking
      May 28, 2023

      When an economy is laid waste, immigrants pour in using our taxi services, we supply foreign forces in their battles, we concrete over sacred fields, we laud union heads for bringing the workforce to idleness – what further damage will Starmer do? Oh..of course the words ‘he’ and ‘she’ will be banned as abusive and ‘they’ wil become the most used word in our language.

  2. Mark B
    May 28, 2023

    Good morning.

    With the exception of those here, no one is listening.

    Lord Mandelson was right when he said; “We are living in an age of post-democracy.”

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 28, 2023

      I suggest ‘We are living in an age of incompetency, deceit and lies’.

      1. glen cullen
        May 28, 2023

        since 2016

  3. Wanderer
    May 28, 2023

    I’d be interested to hear our host’s views on why the government doesn’t follow any of the sensible and rather obvious measures he suggests. I guess the loss of political capital entailed in telling us might be substantial…

    1. Richard II
      May 28, 2023

      +1

    2. Gabe
      May 28, 2023

      Well 90% + of our largely moronic MPs support May’s Net Zero it was nodded through without even a vote.

      Rishi Sunak set to ask retailers to place price caps on basic foods items, such as bread and milk, in an attempt to battle skyrocketing food inflation it seems. This socialist fool sounds more like Ted Heath every day. What about a prices and income policy Rishi?

      What about a cap on tax levels and government spending & waste Rishi? You caused the problem with your vast tax increases, money printing currency debasement and your endless government waste and corruption.

      1. Gabe
        May 28, 2023

        Let me help Sunak these are some of the the things that cause higher prices in shops (and indeed higher house prices and other things) most come from this dire socialist government in spades.

        Expensive energy, QE currency debasing, over regulation of almost everything, increases to wages and minimum wages, high net zero energy costs, vast increases in taxes of all types and rates/council taxes, the pushing of heat pumps and EVs, net employment laws, the attack on landlords pushing up rental costs, higher commuting costs, ULEZ and the pushing of EV cars and over taxation of other cars, slow planning, OTT green crap building regulations, OTT health and safely (that often make things more dangerous not less), OTT restrictive (hard to fire bad employees) employment laws, higher interest rates, restrictive bank lending regs…

        1. Dave Andrews
          May 28, 2023

          Allowing foreign investors to speculate on UK residential property, holding modest earners in this country to ransom for a place to live.

      2. Mark B
        May 28, 2023

        This is it. The more I look at this so called government the more they remind me of Ted Heath and the 1970’s. What’s next on the list of Rishi’s bright ideas, a three day week ?

        1. turboterrier
          May 28, 2023

          Mark B
          He will not have to worry about 3DW the unions have decided on that course to steer.

        2. a-tracy
          May 28, 2023

          Four, its happening Fridays are becoming dead days, if places are open they’re closing at lunch.

          1. MPC
            May 28, 2023

            Yes the Land Registry no longer answers the phone on Fridays – seriously

          2. glen cullen
            May 28, 2023

            MPC – would you answer the phone at ‘home’ at 4:45 on a friday

      3. Gabe
        May 28, 2023

        ECO King turns down heat on his palace swimming pool I read.

        This I assume is just one of his swimming pools & at just one of his palaces. Will he will also no longer be spending over ÂŁ1 million on his personal transport each year and only fly economy? I am sure that will comfort the many OAPs freezing to death this winter due to his net zero insanity and rip off intermittent energy agenda as they are unable to find ÂŁ2,000 on keeping their homes warm.

        “9 Jul 2009 — Just 96 months to save world, says Prince Charles. The price of capitalism and consumerism is just too high, he tells industrialists.” so rather too late now is it not?

        The King of blatant hypocrisy and deluded stupidity. How much rent do you get from those windfarms on the sea bed exactly?

        1. glen cullen
          May 28, 2023

          Here’s a list of the great & powerful, predictions that didn’t/haven’t happened
          https://extinctionclock.org/

  4. Pete Kite
    May 28, 2023

    Just plain common sense that ordinary people are well aware of.
    Spare us from the state subsidised vested interests.

    1. MPC
      May 28, 2023

      I’m sure you don’t mean it but describing Mr Redwood’s article as no more than common sense underestimates the courage shown in taking a stand against net zero. Such a stance is far from easy in the face of mass propaganda advocating further bans and more (and ever more expensive) ‘clean’ energy: I meet otherwise highly intelligent people who believe we need more wind farms to solve the energy crisis! It’s going to be a long hard road back to some sort of sanity. I just hope the next government doesn’t succeed with in effect a total scorched earth destruction of reliable and efficient domestic energy extraction and skills. That would be even worse than Venezuela where nationalisation wrought the damage.

      1. Gabe
        May 28, 2023

        “I meet otherwise highly intelligent people who believe we need more wind farms to solve the energy crisis!”

        Well obviously they have little science or just do not “think” very much. So many people know lots of things and use lots of big words but are totally unable to actually think I find. Government web sites claim cycling and walking produce no direct or indirect CO2 (written I assume by government’s “highly intelligent” net zero “experts”).

        Walking actually produces far more CO2 than a full car does per passenger mile when correctly accounted for with the extra human food intake needed. Rather faster more efficient and convenient too and no need for a shower on arrivals or a hotel on route!

      2. Gabe
        May 28, 2023

        JR did not vote for Ed’s dire Climate Change act even back in 2008 – unlike 90%+ of out scientifically illiterate & deluded MPs.

      3. John+C.
        May 28, 2023

        What you’ve really got to take a stand against is the Climate Change scam or myth. Once that is seen for the nonsense it is, all the rest of the net zero absurdities automatically wither and die.

    2. Mark B
      May 28, 2023

      +1

  5. turboterrier
    May 28, 2023

    The fear installed of armegeddon proportions by all the world bodies, our lack lustre politician’s, to bow down to this new religion will be shown in history as the biggest total control scam ever to be placed upon mankind to provide world domination by the few.
    A very good post Sir John but nobody is listening. The die has been made and filled, all we are waiting for is it to set.

    1. glen cullen
      May 28, 2023

      Everyone is jumping onto the phrase ‘net-zero’ because they wouldn’t join a campaign called ‘maintain-sea-level’ 
.but that’s what the UN IPCC climate change is all about

  6. Donna
    May 28, 2023

    Correct in almost every respect Sir John. But we’re not ASKED to fund this lunacy – we’re forced to. And we’re supposed to believe that early Middle Ages technology, made obsolete in the 1800’s because it is unreliable and doesn’t work when the wind doesn’t blow, is going to provide sufficient electricity to power this country plus millions of EV’s no-one wants.

    Wind is currently providing 2.9 GW. Gas 4.8 GW and Nuclear 5.24 GW

    Unfortunately, many of the Eco Nutters in the Establishment expect to make a great deal of money out of the scam and the cowardly Blue-Green Socialist CON in Government does what the UN and the WEF tell it to do.

    This country is no longer a democracy in any meaningful sense.

    1. turboterrier
      May 28, 2023

      Donna
      +1

    2. Ian+wragg
      May 28, 2023

      I’ve just been reading a university study on wind patters, it say mean wind speed o er the UK has dropped 3% over the last decade and is expected to reduce a further 10% by 2959.
      This affects wind generation exponentially so no matter how many windmills we install, a saturation point will be reached and blackouts will be the result.
      Lions led by donkeys i think.

      1. hefner
        May 28, 2023

        statista.com 17/04/2023 ‘Annual average wind speed in the United Kingdom (UK) from 2001 to 2022’.

        And I further doubt that anybody would have produced a forecast/prediction/projection to 2959.
        Or have you suddenly started to believe in climate predictions?
        Give your reference IW.

      2. John+C.
        May 28, 2023

        Sheep led by donkeys.

    3. Sharon
      May 28, 2023

      Donna
      +1 from me too!

  7. Cuibono
    May 28, 2023

    Meanwhile “ green” has rendered virtually all household goods very much less useful.
    And all in the name of saving the planet.
    It has all been done so secretly.

    1. glen cullen
      May 28, 2023

      Everyone is looking for solutions without clarification to the problem 
.absurd

  8. Bloke
    May 28, 2023

    This reckless Govt behaves like a child playing chess as a slogging match. It acts on impulse to snatch what it regards as valuable pieces to capture without thought of effects. Naively they regard the loss of their opponents’ Queen or Castle confers material advantage at the expense of pawns. Those with a strategy to assess the fuller position emerging foresee that a check is risking their King and loss of our country across the board.

  9. Cuibono
    May 28, 2023

    Two entire Houses of Parliament which don’t give a stuff about law and order, people’s welfare, safety and happiness are SOOOOO worried about the planet?
    Why?

    1. Mark B
      May 28, 2023

      Money !

      1. Cuibono
        May 28, 2023

        Yup!
        Transferring plenty of it from us to them!
        As ever. All they need is a totally bogus excuse.

  10. DOM
    May 28, 2023

    John still very skilfully (clumsily imho) endorses the green agenda by ‘appearing’ to oppose it but endorsing its core beliefs all the same. That’s not nice to see and an insult to his readers

    JR should attack the climate change/CO2 political narrative rather than endorsing it. Yes, it’ll get him banned from this party and cancelled from public life but he’ll regain some dignity by knowing that no longer does he have to live a lie by supporting something he doesn’t believe in

    He should also condemn the real purpose behind environmentalism . That is, the creation of a State collectivist machine seeking to control our most fundamental actions as humans ie feeding, warming and cleaning ourselves. Until he does that he’ll be seen as just another conformist endorsing Neo-Marxist barbarism

    The State does not have the moral authority to tell the public how they should their wealth, what they should think and what they can say. Down that path leads horror, pain and suffering

    Reply My way is the better way to stop damaging green policies. You are always unhelpful and grumpy.

  11. Jude
    May 28, 2023

    Totally agree, surely the simplest route is to plant more trees across the globe.
    Produce our own energy & reduce the British population to a more productive size.
    The real question John is why? Net zero is a western goal created & enforced by who? We are being led by the nose by the globalists. Who are unelected & only interested in their own pockets. It’s time we took UK back from the abyss of stupidity!

  12. Javelin
    May 28, 2023

    Chinas builds more Co producing power stations every 3 months that the entire UK production of Co2.

    It’s NOT getting warmer.

  13. Old Albion
    May 28, 2023

    Net zero = Gross lunacy.
    Crippling the (dis)UK for 0.045 of Earths atmosphere………………

  14. majorfrustration
    May 28, 2023

    Parliament is clearly not working for the people. There has to be another way and given time the people will find it.

    1. glen cullen
      May 28, 2023

      But all the major parties in parliament are as one on their policies of net-zero …thats not good government when so many people are against (its like brexit all over again)

  15. Lifelogic
    May 28, 2023

    Starmer/SNP would be worse is about the only positive claim the Tories can make. They have got almost every single thing wrong in 13 years. Botched Brexit, the lock downs, immigration levels, the net harm vaccines even for the young, the dire NHS, tax levels, currency debasement/inflation, net zero, public services, energy policy… what an appalling waste of an 80 seat majority.

    The UK drive to net zero is indeed too expensive and will not lower world CO2. Plus a little more CO2 is not a serious problem anyway probably a net benefit in fact. Two examples on lunacy burning imported wood at Drax and replacing you old IC car with a new EV car – both increase net world CO2 output they do not reduce it at all.

    Yet our generally deluded, art graduate, virtue signaling, group think MPs nearly all but a tiny hand full voted for this lunacy or nodded May’s Net Zero insanity through. Doubtless they still think the Covid vaccines were “safe and effective” and it was a great plan to coerce them onto younger people at virtually zero risk from Covid.

    1. the methods they push do not even save significant CO2 they generally just export this production.
    2. the methods are un-affordable anyway
    3. World cooperation would be needed and China, Russia, India… will continue to burn gas & coal
    4. A bid more CO2 (tree plant and crop food) is greening the planet nicely and is a net positive for the World anyway.
    5. Far, far better ways to spend the £billions to save lives now even if CO2 reduction made any sense. See How to Spend $75 Billion to Make the World a Better Place – by Bjþrn Lomborg (Author)

    1. Mark B
      May 28, 2023

      LL

      Drop the Labour / SNP thing, it isn’t going to happen. More Labour / LibDem is anything.

  16. John McDonald
    May 28, 2023

    Sir John, this is just Globalism in net zero clothing. Until you get ride of the Globalist elite running this country there is nothing you or I can do about it. One can no longer vote for a different political party to change things. They are all the same. We are now effectively in a one party state run by Globilists who want to crush national identity and self-sufficiency, and in the end, individual thought and freedom to express it.

    1. Donna
      May 28, 2023

      Absolutely correct. The WEF rules.

      1. Mark B
        May 28, 2023

        Did they not boast that they had ‘their people’ in parts of the UK Cabinet ?

    2. turboterrier
      May 28, 2023

      John Mcdonald
      Very well said.

    3. Wanderer
      May 28, 2023

      +1. Until the middle class wakes up we are stuck. Not many working class people believe in the green spin, as far as I can tell.

  17. Philip P.
    May 28, 2023

    I see SJR’s perfectly rational arguments as directed towards his Tory MP colleagues. The position he takes seems to be that, as free-market Conservatives, they should agree with him that moves towards net zero are better left to the market. Unfortunately, the premise appears to be wrong. Are his colleagues really free to think rationally for themselves about net zero? Were they selected as MP candidates by Conservative Central Office for their qualities as intelligent logical thinkers, and their adherence to traditional Conservative values of preferring to avoid state intervention? I don’t think so.

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 28, 2023

      In the search for sheep it is not difficult to find lots in the field.

  18. Richard1
    May 28, 2023

    All good ideas. Unfortunately, like all the really bad policies of recent decades, the net zero plans have cross-party consensus. The blob would explode with righteous anger if any of these suggestions were acted upon. So we are unlikely to see this from a cautious Conservative govt walking a tightrope in public opinion, trying to address obvious public demands whilst not contradicting groupthink shibboleths.

  19. BOF
    May 28, 2023

    A well articulated piece today, Sir John, but I doubt you are reaching the three monkeys of power who are unable to recognise the evil they do. You and like minded colleagues need to make some hard hitting speeches in parliament and force public debate.

    Electric vehicles I will say with certainty will be a failure. There is no aspect of them which is either environmentally sound or sustainable. The latest example of this is the fact that car parks and bridges were never designed for the additional weight of the batteries.

  20. Les Brooks
    May 28, 2023

    You perfectly identify the madness of Net Zero.

    1. MFD
      May 28, 2023

      +1 100%

  21. Berkshire Alan
    May 28, 2023

    One of the reasons I read your postings on a regular basis John, is not simply because you are my MP, but because you appear to be one of the very few Politicians who seems to have any sort of common-sense on a whole range of topics, is prepared to go against the general flow, and to outline your views clearly with sensible explanation.
    Your posting today says it all, Our Parliament is full of politicians living in a fools paradise, who think they can change the World, which in turn means bankrupting the taxpayers of this Country, with pie in the sky policies.
    I can only hope that eventually your thoughts will get the breakthrough of common-sense in Parliament that we all deserve.

    1. Mark B
      May 28, 2023

      +1

  22. agricola
    May 28, 2023

    Your title says it all, a piss up in a breewery run by alchoholics anonymous.
    It is desirable to cleanup the planet, but we a suffering an ill defined enemy. CO2 has its supporters, ask any tree.
    UK governments response has been precipitate to say the least. First they have damn near destroyed the car industry by dictating the direction of travel, lets go electric, when technically they are ill equiped to do so. They exacerbate the problem by not being able to sort out our basic energy production, or make its green version reliable. I am sure they have pissed about Rolls Royce with their SMR solution by not going ahead with a pilot plant. My guess it is driven be politicos and scibes wanting a cheaper tied to the EU solution, equally unreliable. Their socialist solution to who pays is placate the poor with hand outs but hammer the profligate and industry with levies on their bills to cover the cost of their idiocy. Industy in general finds it hard to compete on the world stage. How long before we find ourselves supporting an alian and agressive regime in China just to get cheap electric vehicles all dictated by our socialist idiots. I cannot wait for a great parliamentary clean out in 2024, including the Starmer look alikes, and their replacement by people who really believe in a sovereign UK.

  23. dixie
    May 28, 2023

    What do you suggest is done to re-establish production in this country to re-shore industries and replace foreign imports?
    Cheaper energy by itself is not the solution, the trading away of the majority of our manufacturing by our friends in the City happened before the focus on net zero.
    How will you convince the consumers that buying the cheap imported tat at the cost of domestic businesses and jobs is actually a bad idea?

  24. Des
    May 28, 2023

    Why do we want to lower Co2? Plants thrive more with extra Co2 and die with less. Climate is no controlled by one tiiny trace gas but by the Sun and orbital cycles and many other far more powerful forces.
    The net zero agenda is a con and a disaster.

  25. Not a happy bunny
    May 28, 2023

    Will the Government change course and if not why not?
    This week we bought at a supermarket runner beans from Kenya, strawberries from Morocco, grapes from Chile, potatoes from Egypt, bacon from Denmark, butter from the Republic of Ireland and garden border plants from Holland. The runner beans were tough as were the grape skins, the strawberries were going off, the bacon from Denmark was good as were the plants from Holland. In the supermarket were apples imported from everywhere and generally are not fresh. It is said the corn on the cob must be eaten within 20 minutes of picking to take advantage of the nutrients before they leave the vegetable. How fresh is our imported food, is shelf life more important than freshness? The EU fruit and vegetable grading machines still reign supreme so any produce of irregular shape or size is still binned even though it is fresh.
    The whole idea that our tiny island is an existential threat to the rest of the world because of our CO2 production is bonkers as are most of this Social Democrat so called Conservative Government attempts at governing. We need a referendum to bring in PR and get rid of this two party system which blocks all other entrants to government, yes even the Liberals and the Greens, anything is better than what we have.

    1. agricola
      May 28, 2023

      NAHB,
      This government will not change course because it lacks a navigator.
      Can I make a suggestion, try eating seasonally. By doing so you will eat fresh food at its best. Where I live there is no shortage of farm shops which do not import from all over the world, so freshness is not in question. It might cost you a bit more but if you can assuage the strawberries until they are in season here you will eat healthily.

      The first real democratic step we need is for Conservative Associations to exclusively choose their own candidates for elections. What other parties do is of no concern to me. Then on big questions, like:-
      Nett Zero for instance or ULEZ payollas, permission should be asked of the electorate via a referendum. Both suggestions will put the fear of god into Conservative Central Office so they must be good, and I would term it democracy.

  26. Charles Breese
    May 28, 2023

    Your article admirably demonstrates that the Government is making decisions without involving high quality problem solving capabilities. The good news is that there are private sector initiatives under development for working with the Government to help it make better decisions.

    1. a-tracy
      May 28, 2023

      Thank goodness a nice positive comment. I hope you are correct because the people on here saying it won’t matter if we get Labour, SNP, the Lib Dem’s or Greens or a coalition of that mixed up bag of socialists are going to be in for a shock if they think taxes and times are bad now!

      The greens want more roads blocked, more ulez, more 15 minute cities, less cars, more public transport reliance with the unions controlling our freedoms for more money for themselves. I daren’t think about that too much it’s depressing.

      Yes the Tories having plotted and planned to get rid of Boris are taking us back to all the EU rules, sending millions to other countries whilst telling us to pull in our belts because there is nothing they can do but tax us more. 17 Apr 2023 — Britain has given China ÂŁ400million in foreign aid since ministers pledged to end the payments, ÂŁ80m for the Ukraine +++, ÂŁ4.4m to Chad. BRITAIN spent more than ÂŁ112million last year on foreign aid projects in India and Pakistan. Britain spent $15.7 billion in aid in 2022 – including domestic spending such as refugee programmes – slightly down from $15.8 billion in 2021, showed preliminary data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

      Yet we were told our aid was reducing from 0.7% to 0.5% and a big fuss about that was kicked up. You just can’t believe anything anymore.

  27. Donna
    May 28, 2023

    So now Socialist Sunak is asking supermarkets to place a price cap on “essential items.” Of course, what that means is the supermarkets will recoup their losses on “non-essential” items ….. bought by other shoppers who may also be struggling.

    There isn’t a shred of Conservatism in him – or Hunt.

  28. ChrisS
    May 28, 2023

    I see that today Starmer has announced that if he takes power there will be no more licences for North Sea oil and gas, despite everything you say about imports.

    This is just one of the many major mistakes a Labour administration would make and is why we have to make every effort to reduce their lead in the polls.

    1. graham1946
      May 28, 2023

      Don’t worry, It won’t happen. Starmer will renege on that as he has on just about everything he has ever put up. He’s useless, but so are what we have. We need a change if only for change’s sake. We cannot go on rewarding such incompetents as we have in government with our votes or it will say we all agree with every jot and tittle they put out and we will never progress.

  29. glen cullen
    May 28, 2023

    The first question shouldn’t be about net-zero, it should whether or not we fully believe the UN IPCC climate change modelling ‘forecasts’

    1. graham1946
      May 28, 2023

      You are not allowed not to. No-one stating the opposite case gets any airtime or attention except to be ‘cancelled’ if those promulgating this rubbish see any chance that people will see the truth. It’s all a giant scam. As slways, follow the money. Who gets the benefit – the same old clique is who.

  30. Sakara Gold
    May 28, 2023

    Many will be disappointed that you are not promoting EVs over ICE cars. This country leads the world in renewable energy and if the UK car industry moves EV and battery production elsewhere because of a lack of government support we will only have ourselves to blame

    On my way to Yorkshire yesterday to stay with friends over the bank holiday weekend, I stopped at a service area near Grantham. They had a bank of 25 (I counted them) EV charging points. Every point was charging an EV and there was a queue of vehicles waiting to use them. Chatting with one chap in the queue at Greggs for a coffee he expressed disappointment that the government had failed to meet its target of 40,000 extra EV charging points this year. The reason why? Kwarteng gave a ÂŁ250million “underspend” previously earmarked for this support to the MoD for Ukraine.

    EVs are the the future, we cannot ignore the fact that the world is embracing this disruptive change to the vehicle industry. Like it or not, the writing is on the wall for the fossil fuel industry.

    1. R.Grange
      May 28, 2023

      EVs are the future for those who can afford them. Going without a car is the future for those who can’t.

      As planned. The wholly government-funded Climate Change Committee has made a big reduction in car use a priority. It has ‘a critical role in securing behaviour change for climate change’ (UK Parliament website).

      Then again, if your informant was right, SG, and the government diverted funds away from EV charging points towards Ukraine, perhaps it realises that EV charging points would be an even bigger waste of money than sending weapons to Eastern Europe to keep a war going.

      1. Sharon
        May 28, 2023

        Didn’t the WEF say recently, it’s time to stop private car ownership?

        1. Mark
          May 28, 2023

          Just as well they only bother with private jet ownership.

      2. glen cullen
        May 28, 2023

        Why do you think our government has spent £4bn (yes £4 billion) on building new cycle lanes the length & breadth of the country 
.you plebs will buy a bicycle, and be happy and healthier

      3. Mickey Taking
        May 28, 2023

        yep – we are ever nearer having Zil Lanes in London.

    2. Dave Andrews
      May 28, 2023

      Why can’t the charging points be installed by the motor trade? The taxpayer never had to foot the bill for petrol stations.

      1. hefner
        May 28, 2023

        Most of them are: BPpulse, ChargeYourCar, ChargePlace, Ecotricity, EDFEnergy, GeniePoint, GridServe, InstaVolt, Ionity, Osprey, PodPoint, ShellRecharge, Tesla 
 are not paid by the taxpayers.
        (auto express.co.uk, 07/09/2022, ‘Best electric car chargepoint providers 2022).

        1. R.Grange
          May 28, 2023

          And what makes you think, Hefner, that these companies aren’t getting subsidised by the government?
          For information, ‘The government said it will use its ÂŁ950m Rapid Charging Fund to increase the number of “high powered chargers” available on the UK’s “strategic road network” to over 6,000 by 2035.’
          https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/uk-electric-vehicle-charging-infrastructure-investment-increased

          Or is the money all going to Ukraine after all, instead of to charging points?

        2. glen cullen
          May 28, 2023

          Just for balance ‘’ The Department for Transport (DfT) has announced £20m of funding to improve electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure for councils, which are set to pilot rapid on-street chargers and ‘petrol-station-style’ charging hubs.’’
          https://www.edie.net/councils-get-20m-of-government-funding-for-local-ev-infrastructure-schemes/

      2. John+C.
        May 28, 2023

        Dave, that is a very sound point, and it points to a very significant factor, that all previous developments have come about because the new inventions ( trains, televisions, electric lights etc. etc.) have been recognised as obvious improvements or wonderful conveniences. EVs have not beaten ICEs in fair competition. They have needed deliberate government subsidies and propaganda to make any advance, a sure sign that they are no real improvement at all.

        1. glen cullen
          May 28, 2023

          You’ve hit the nail on its head – net-zero isn’t about invention or competition, its about control, restrictions and tax

    3. Mark B
      May 28, 2023

      Sorry for the length, Sir John.

      Firstly. No government subsidies petrol stations, or the automobile when they first started. What kicked things off, much like the steam engine and the transition from wind and water to coal and steam, was that private individuals and capital saw the potential and invested their own time and money into them. As the technology improved others too saw their potential over ‘traditional’ means as so we progressed for the horse and cart to the world we have today.

      EV Technologies have far too many drawbacks to be fully viable. Yes they would work well in cities were the infrastructure is already there and the perceived benefits can maximized. But for many people the reality of owning and running an EV simply does not work and you rather, albeit inadvertently, highlight that fact when you pointed out that there were queues of people waiting to have their cars charged. It takes some 30-40 minutes per car (assuming it is the only one on a three bank set *) and longer if others are charging next to you. This means that as others also will need to charge they will have to wait. How many chargers do you think we would need for network to run efficiently ? And why should I, or anyone else who does not own an EV, be expected to subsidies those that can and the private network providers that will profit from taxpayers largess ?

      Reply Even cities are difficult where many people live in homes with no garages or wired space outside so how do they plug in overnight?

      1. Mark B
        May 28, 2023

        *The charging bays supply DC current from of of the 3 Phase AC grid supply similar to that of our homes. If two or more cars use the same phase to supply the DC Charger then capacity and so charging rate is reduced.

      2. Mark B
        May 28, 2023

        Reply to reply.

        Very true.

      3. Margaret
        May 28, 2023

        I saw a house recently without a garage but a parking space at the front of the house.There was a specifically made covered electric point attached to the house for battery charging.

      4. glen cullen
        May 28, 2023

        Right to reply – that accounts for 2/3s of the population in flats and terrace housing

    4. IanT
      May 28, 2023

      EV’s might eventually be the future for some SG but they should not be forced on us.
      If we had a true ’emmisions’ accounting scheme it would be easier to see the actual ‘carbon’ impact of these policies. I drive about 4,000 miles a year and since (in the UK) it takes about 54k miles before an ICE vehicle starts to emit more than an EV (given an EVs much larger ‘carbon’ manufacturing cost) – logically, I will be doing the planet a favour if I continue driving my (n) ICE car for another thirteen years…
      And of course, that’s just comparing one EV vehicle against one ICE vehicle. If I were to lease a new EV every 3 years, then keeping my ICE on the road (for just nine years) would make even more sense in terms of my overall carbon footprint surely? I think the Government should be rewarding folk (like me) for not replacing my car all the time – or at least taxing EVs on their larger initial carbon footprint and extra weight.
      Very few (none?) of these “Net Zero” policies makes any sense when you actually examine them more closely.

      1. IanT
        May 28, 2023

        BTW – Sakara was impressed to see 25 charging points but (assuming) that they were all “fast” chargers (50Kw +) and that all the cars using them could take a fast charge – then it’s still 30 mins to get an 80% charge per car.
        Let’s say a throughput of 50 EV cars per hour max. I can easily fill my ICE car (from empty) in less than 5 minutes, so four petrol pumps can handle 50 cars in an hour quite easily (in fact I think three might be able to do so). That’s at least six “fast” chargers required for every petrol pump in a busy motorway service station currently. That’s also assuming they are all working and that the EV drivers all return promptly after 30 minutes of course.

    5. graham1946
      May 28, 2023

      Your second paragraph demonstrates perfectly why people don’t want ev’s. Who wants to get to a major changing centre and queue up to spend another hour waiting to be fueled? Like more windmills, more charging centres will make no difference. How are you going to charge millions of ev’s – simply carpet the whole country with them and windmills and solar farms? If we are world leaders, when some days when we get virtually nothing from these things, god help mankind. But he won’t have to, the rest of the world is more sensible and won’t do it. I’d suggest the war in Ukraine and it’s eventual victory over Russia is a bit more important than whether you have to wait to fuel your inadequate (it can’t even get to Yorkshire without re-fuelling_ e.v.

    6. turboterrier
      May 28, 2023

      S G
      That is just great all the while you have the time to hang about in the queue and for the charge to take place.
      In the real world time is money and is getting more expensive everyday.
      Just had work done by a central heating engineer and his hourly rate equates to 65p/minute.

    7. Berkshire Alan
      May 28, 2023

      Sakara
      You outline one of the very reasons (lack of charging infrastructure) why I recently purchased a new diesel powered vehicle, to replace a 23 year old 4 x4 petrol model.
      I do a mixture of journeys with some long haul travel involved each year, driving to the South of France, to Devon and Cornwall for holidays, and visiting family members, a 200 plus mile round trip.
      At motorway service areas, like you describe, I see cars waiting for hours to get onto a charger, indeed in France they seem to have even less chargers than we do.
      An EV as a local home powered runaround may be fine, but for what I need it would be totally impracticable, even with extra overnight stops, they would be useless if no charging points were available/vacant.
      Then of course we need a sensible power generation policy and cabling system.
      Here in Wokingham we have just been informed (Local Authority) that a local solar power site cannot be connected to the grid for 11 years, yes 11 years, the original promise on gaining planning was 2 years.
      It would seem that the local grid does not yet have enough capacity to cope !!

      Reply Yes, local grid capacity is a major issue. There is no way we could all get EVs this decade and be able to charge them. My ICE vehicle has a range of 630 miles on a single tank which means I get anywhere I want to go and back refuelling at my local garage in less than five minutes when I want. I would hate range anxiety and could not fit in trying to find a charger outlet and queueing for it when out and about maximising the use of my time.

      1. Berkshire Alan
        May 28, 2023

        Just back from Norway.
        95% of electrical power generated by their own Hydro systems.
        Population only 5,500,000 within a Country with a land mass the size of Germany.
        Electric cars are popular over there, few long journeys undertaken, and roads generally pot hole free.
        Motorway (as they called it) we travelled on was one lane each way, without a central barrier, had normal road junctions and roundabouts incorporated, lots of tunnels used to shorten journeys.
        Clearly they do not have a traffic/population problem like we have here, did not see a traffic jam, and many towns do not need/have traffic lights.

    8. Wanderer
      May 28, 2023

      Sk. I should think relatively few support EVs here, for reasons that have been stated ad infinitum. EVs are only the future as long as government hammers ICEs. If it wasn’t for that, take up would be minimal.

    9. MWB
      May 28, 2023

      Meanwhile, those on their way to Yorkshire in their ICE cars, would not have had to stop for a lengthy time in order to charge up. I can do 500 miles in my Audi A5 Coupé, after a 5 minute petrol fill-up.

    10. Original Richard
      May 29, 2023

      SG :

      Many people may be “disappointed” by Sir JR’s lack of promotion of evs but I expect most people will not want to be forced into ev ownership, even if they can afford it.

      It’s not the lack of charging points which is the main issue but the time it takes to re-charge each vehicle and this will not be solved by increaing the power available at each charging point as the batteries are damaged by fast charging. In addition the costs to increase the national and local grids to deal with all the extra power required is unaffordable.

      This is well known which is why the DES&NZ is counting upon evs becoming too expensive and impractical for most people and thus naturally enforcing their preferred option of “behavioural change” (viz severely reduced car use/travel) to achieve Net Zero.

    11. Original Richard
      May 29, 2023

      SG :

      Evs are “not the future” and the world is not “embracing” this technology. Most of the world doesn’t even aknowledge CAGW is a serious issue, if they’ve even heard of it, and wouldn’t agree wiith Net Zero to solve a non-existant problem as far as they are concerned.

      For evs to be a solution we will need a totally new way to store/provide the electricity with 2 orders of magnitude improvement at least over current Li-ion technology. Perhaps nuclear batteries.

      Even e-fuels for ices, produced by cheap nuclear power will be preferred to existing bevs.

      Here in the UK, where evs are being forced upon us it will be discovered:
      1) The batteries are very expensive and will not last long, especially wth fast charging.
      2) The Li-ion batteries are very dangerous and can catch fire spontaneoulsy even without abuse. This will lead to very nasty fires with fumes of hydrogen cynanide etc so evs will not be allowed in enclosed car parks and their insurance will become very high.
      3) The 50% extra weight will cause extra costs as bridges and roads will need to be strengthened to accommodate them.
      4) There will need to be an enormous expansion of the local and national grids to get the power to charge points – especially as we will only be able to charge at the times when the wind is blowing.

      The real reason of course for forcing evs is to reduce private transport to almost zero.

  31. Pat
    May 28, 2023

    Good morning,

    I don’t know whether anthropogenic global warming AGW is actually occurring or not, but many scientists believe that it is a serious risk.

    As our host has repeatedly pointed out, many of the measures imposed on us by the green lobby clearly increase global CO2 output.

    Perhaps the question we should ask is why our government is so eager to exacerbate AGW to appease the green lobby and hamstring UK industry, in particular local oil and gas production.

    The anti democratic extremists of Just Stop Oil, and their supporters, should be challenged as to why they repeatedly demand measures to increase AGW.

  32. Kenneth
    May 28, 2023

    Sir John, your analysis is always constructive, positive and forward-looking.

    However I think it is time that you looked in the other end of the telescope and asked why our government has got into a position where it is carrying out policies that are so damaging to both our environment and our economy.

    What forces were – and are still – acting on our government that result in such bizarre policies? We know there is no popular movement at play so where does this all come from?

    I would respectively ask you to look at this because, no matter how good your solutions are – and I think they are good – this issue will not be properly dealt with unless we tackle its root cause.

    Reply They follow policies recommended by the civil service, the big UK quangos, global corporates, the G7 and other UN Conferences, the EU’s reflection of those global attitudes, international treaties like the Climate COP treaties etc. It is not one or two billionaires as some argue, not just a UK “blob”, it is the whole self reinforcing weight of establishments at national, corporate and international level who want more diversity of people but no diversity of thought.

    1. Sharon
      May 28, 2023

      SJR
      With regards to your reply to Kenneth


      So what you are saying confirms what a lot of us have been saying for ages
 the government is under instruction from outside forces. They are not running the country as per their instructions from the electorate.

    2. Kenneth
      May 28, 2023

      I agree with you.

      I would therefore ask that you develop these themes more fully in some of your future commentaries.

      If the government keeps on with policies that please a minority (albeit a powerful minority), it will lose the next election.

      The majority needs a champion. We also need someone who will point out that, in a democracy, the majority wins.

    3. Stred
      May 29, 2023

      And where do all these CEOs of global corporations, quangocrats, UN officials, bankers, Blackrock bosses, government ministers who are young leaders of the club, presidents and Kings meet to plan their post democratic agendas? Davos. Starmer prefers the place to Westminster. WEF WEF.

  33. David Cooper
    May 28, 2023

    With our gracious host’s permission I will reproduce 6 questions that I have devised for green religion zealots: –
    1. If the UK achieves Net Zero by 2050, by how much will this reduce world temperatures?
    2. Your answer appears to be “don’t know”. If we told you that manmade greenhouse gas output is 4% of the total, and that the UK’s share of the 4% is 1%, in other words 0.04% of the grand total, how will that affect your answer?
    3. Your answer now appears to be “probably not much, but we need to set an example”. If other nations do not follow in the UK’s footsteps, and choose instead to laugh at us behind our backs, what is the point of setting an example that wastes time, squanders resources and materially damages quality of life in the UK as we know it?
    4. Your answer is now “but you’ll be cooler, healthier and safer”. When we compare this instance of wishful thinking to the near certainty that scarce and expensive fuel and electricity will make us cold, poor, hungry, dirty, immobile, bored and controlled, where is the net benefit to quality of life?
    5. You have answered “but I’m a fully fledged member of the globalist elite, or one of their fellow travellers. I’ll still be warm, wealthy, well fed, clean, mobile, stimulated and controlling.” How do you sleep at night?
    6. You have answered “I’m all right, Jack”. Do you know that your Net Zero king is not in fact wearing a magical green robe, and that he is in fact stark bullock naked?
    In today’s context, namely that the drive to Net Zero is futile and too expensive, may I end by observing that this seems to be known full well, as the UK and other developed Western democracies are driven into decline and the ordinary plebs comprised within their working and middle classes are driven into poverty. Who is behind the driving?

  34. Christine
    May 28, 2023

    Net Zero is the biggest act of self-harm a British government that has ever inflicted on the people of this country. All your arguments against it are valid so you must ask the question why are they doing this to us and how can you remove them from power? If you don’t get rid of the usurpers Sunak and Hunt soon they will have caused irreparable damage to our country. Surely there are enough MPs in your party who can see the damage they are causing. Time is fast running out.

  35. Bert+Young
    May 28, 2023

    What’s the point when the worlds biggest polluter pays no attention to climate demands ?.

    1. Bill B.
      May 28, 2023

      Bert + Young: This has nothing to do with climate and everything to do with control.

    2. glen cullen
      May 28, 2023

      Agree

  36. Bryan Harris
    May 28, 2023

    The government should end the scheme to get taxpayers to pay for smart meters for all homes. Half the country does not want them and they should not be paid for out of taxes. The government should not fund local anti road schemes designed to create more congestion and to ensure vehicles burn more fuel in traffic jams.

    Exactly, but they will carry on with these mad schemes because they have the muscle to impose them, and they are necessary to their goals.

    It’s all about compliance and control.
    With smart meters everywhere energy and water can be cut off on a whim to suit political machinations.
    With roads being taken out of service, it means people will slowly get used to the idea of 15 minute cities and all the horrors that involves.

    It really doesn’t matter what the rest of the world is doing, how ineffective our netzero is on a world wide scale, the rest of the world will just carry on as the West is destroyed by treachery from within it’s own doors.
    The UK, Europe and the USA are the actual target for the destruction that will be caused.

    1. graham1946
      May 29, 2023

      15 minute cities – isn’t that what we used to have in the middle ages, villages where the people never went further than a few miles by horse if they had transport at all? We have had an industrial revolution since then, but do the authorities really expect us to go back hundreds of years, always excluding themselves of course. Seems like that’s the general consensus of opinion and that’s not usually wrong. I have jokingly suggested here before that horses and donkeys will become fashionable again. Seems like we are led by donkeys, although I don’t like that insult to a noble animal.

      1. Bryan Harris
        May 29, 2023

        @graham1946

        Spot on – that’s exactly what they want – only it will be far worse now than it was in the original dark ages for us serfs.

        The novel ‘ DARK DAYS OF THE 22ND CENTURY’ describes it perfectly.

  37. Alan Paul Joyce
    May 28, 2023

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    I have reached the point where I have given up on the Conservative Party. I realise that this is a vanishingly small concern to you but this Sunak administration is not on the side of British people. Indeed, it seems to deliberately want to punish us. Unaffordable electric cars and heat pumps, high-energy costs for industries thus exporting our jobs abroad. Uncontrolled immigration giving us a lack of housing, school places and pressures on the NHS. A failure to deal with street protests that prevent people going about their business. There is not a single aspect of government policy that works in our favour. If your way is better, and I presume by this you mean engagement and dialogue with government and ministers, then this does not appear to be working either.

  38. oldwulf
    May 28, 2023

    Dear Mr Sunak

    The plebs will not support net zero until the economy has been sorted out.
    First things first.

  39. ukretired123
    May 28, 2023

    Once again “nutcase nonsense in a nutshell” that is nuts ” nut zero “.
    Again forecasted accurately by SJR whose track record leaves lesser persons trailing clutching at straws due to their own shallow thinking, inability to think outside the box and unable to weather the storm and stand up to defy the group think for a cosy life.
    Keep going Sir!

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 29, 2023

      So what happens if Sir John was to be defeated in Wokingham? This election is likely to see a close run thing.
      What Plan B has Sir John prepared? How will his commonsense continue with the foolish majority in the current Party? How will influence be exerted? Graceful retirement from politics? Not a chance.

  40. Ian B
    May 28, 2023

    ‘Net Zero is to Expensive’ Everyone on this Planet knows that. A Virtual Signal to suck up to what some of use think are those on day released from the Asylum.

    A Government interested in the World and in particular the UK would have in place mechanisms to deal with the situation should it arise. No one should loose sight of one overriding fact, the majority of the Worlds Governments refuse to put their own economy, therefore their people in danger in this manner.

  41. Ian B
    May 28, 2023

    ‘The government has to spend a large sum’ Sir john, that statement is misleading, it should read the Government is to forces the UK taxpayer to give a foreign Company their hard earned money, because there is nothing else it should be used for!

    If Tata gets this money from the Taxpayer, how do we know it wont just disappear to India? Uast as with their earnings/taxes etc. What will the direct reinvestable share/ownership the UK taxpayer will be buying in such a money givaway. Lets not forget this Conservative Government has form in ‘giving’ money to Tata, to bring about the New Defender model, the UK taxpayer funded the removal of production from the UK to Slovakia. The UK lost jobs and revenue and gave the EU therefore Tata the money to implement it.

    The UK is Tata’s patsy they have an affinity with this Conservative Government and know how to blackmail it for maximum reward.

    At the moment it looks like India will get UK know-how, UK money after which like others with some lame excuse can just say bye-bye

    1. Ian B
      May 28, 2023

      @Ian B This train of thought is not anti -Foreigner /Xenophobic as some would wish to denigrate it. Free, real free trade doesn’t succeeded when the playing fields are corrupted by Governments. Any enterprise demanding UK Taxpayer Funding is only acceptable when in the case of Foreign ownership the same is offered to UK Businesses by their own Taxpayers.

      Of course there can never be Free Trade while Governments hand out taxpayer money or offer subsidies, the reality then is that those that ‘can’t’ afford something get to fund those that ‘can’.

  42. rose
    May 28, 2023

    Agreed. If only they would change their minds on gas.

    On the WHO, isn’t the main danger from our civil servants? They gold plated every EU directive when other countries ignored them, and it will be the same with the WHO. There may well be constitutional protections written into the treaty, but to the civil servants they will be as another Stormont Brake, something not to be used on any account.

    1. Mark
      May 29, 2023

      The WHO provisions are dangerous if they are incorporated into UK law. If WHO decided they didn’t like the UK they could under its provisions order a lethal or at least debilitating jab to be administered to the population, assuming that the WHO ordered complete lockdown of the economy hadn’t worked to destroy us – presumably after we had failed to adhere to our 15 minute cities. It only takes a compliant NHS or police to enforce it.

      Perhaps the people will not prove compliant when the orders come from outside the country. But perhaps the enforcers will also come from outside the country.

  43. Ed
    May 28, 2023

    Net Zero is:
    1. Completely impossible
    2. Utterly pointless
    We have a catastrophe coming down the tracks.

  44. Fedupsouthener
    May 28, 2023

    Something somewhere has gone wrong. Could it be government interference again? Twenty years ago I was living in Spain and electricity prices were very high. Now Spains prices are half of those in the UK. Something needs to change. Government needs to get out of the way and stop listening to Greta.

  45. Keith from Leeds
    May 28, 2023

    All good sense, Sir John. But you have a Chancellor who radiates negativity & misery saying he would not mind a recession! How does someone so stupid survive? He also thinks Andrew Bailey is doing a good job!
    Proverbs 29.18 says, ” Where there is no vision the people perish.” That sums up this government perfectly.
    But Mr Hunt can console himself that the Beatles wrote a song about him! ” He’s a real nowhere man, sitting in his nowhere land, making all his nowhere plans for nobody!”

  46. Jon Marcus
    May 28, 2023

    If Sunak and Hunt read these blogs and acted on them the Tories might, just might, have a chance of winning the next general election.

  47. forthurst
    May 28, 2023

    JR crying for the Moon as usual. His party and his colleagues have been selected on the basis that they disagree with him on all points. In every country with a purportedly democratic system there are forces at work with the explicit intention of foisting their agenda through elected politicians onto an unwilling but unsuspecting electorate. This country has the worst democratic system apart from the USA in the purportedly Free World because of the difficulty of successfully launching new parties more aligned with the aspirations of the people.

    The First Past the Post electoral system is the easiest to infiltrate and control; that is why it needs to be replaced by an electoral system in which all votes count equally such that parties like the Tories and Labour can be consigned to the dustbin of history where their presence is long overdue.

    1. Mark
      May 29, 2023

      FPTP is not the problem. Look first to the rules that the Electoral Commission implement that govern the permitted spending of new parties in elections, and the media blackout on the positive policies that non-mainstream parties put forward. Indeed, the media contrive to narrow electoral reporting to a very small range of issues, and indulge in attempts to smear. Then there is the modern system of candidate selection. Candidates are only adopted if they agree with the Dear Leader at the time they are adopted. Incumbents who are at odds with the leader may be forced out – whether it is Corbyn or Raab – if they are any real threat to the leadership. Then there is the issue of a civil service gone rogue, not implementing policy and writing its own agenda into law – something we inherited from our time in the EU, where the Berlaymont operates as a complete democracy bypass. If a Slightly Sensible party actually made it into being government they would be faced with complete obstruction by the civil service – that’s bad enough now. They would need to plan for a replacement service to ensure essential functions were carried on.

      1. forthurst
        May 29, 2023

        You’ve actually made my point without realising it.

        1. Mark
          May 29, 2023

          I think you will find that PR systems are subject to all the faults I have described and then some. If balancing power is held by a minority party it can impose its will by threatening to bring down the government. Under FPTP minorities have no such influence. Under PR, governments are always a negotiated compromise that have nothing to do with what manifestos might have said beforehand. It becomes very difficult to kick an undesirable element out of government. Thus we have seen Germany go from a coalition of CDU and Greens to Socialists and Greens. How to get the Greens out? Especially if you refuse to deal with AfD.

          1. forthurst
            May 30, 2023

            …and the Tory Party is currently implementing its Manifesto promises. I know all the arguments one way and another; however, my point remains that the UK and the USA have the least representative governments in the Western world as a direct consequence of FPTP.

  48. Pauline Baxter
    May 28, 2023

    Sir John, I have lost patience with you!
    Instead of pointing out that ‘the drive to net zero is expensive and does not work globally’.
    Why can you not say outright that :-
    Carbon dioxide is a beneficial gas.
    Carbon dioxide does not cause global warming.
    Carbon dioxide encourages food plants to grow.
    Carbon dioxide encourages fodder plants to grow to feed meat providing animals.
    Without carbon dioxide Earth would be a totally sterile lump of rock.
    We need MORE carbon dioxide in our atmosphere not less.

    1. glen cullen
      May 28, 2023

      I agree with your list

    2. Mark
      May 29, 2023

      An international group of scientists set up by CLINTEL the Dutch organisation has just published its scathing review of the work of the IPCC working groups, as well as the translation of that into the Summary for Policy Makers. These people are real specialists, entirely qualified to critique the IPCC in ways that politicians are not. We need to make sure their voice is heard. Make the politicians follow the real science. Tell BBC Verify to read it for a start.

      1. glen cullen
        May 29, 2023

        Every MP should read for balance ….before they make decisions

        1. Mickey Taking
          May 29, 2023

          Ah! you assume they would understand what is in front of them?

  49. paul cuthbertson
    May 28, 2023

    JR – forget all the political waffle, Net zero is TOTAL BS.

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 29, 2023

      nicely summed up!

  50. Original Richard
    May 28, 2023

    CAGW is initially a communist trick to destroy the West’s economies using the chimera that is Net Zero which was then taken up by corporates who could make money from tax-payer funded subsidies and schemes and politicians desperate for more power and control.

    The history shows both current temperature and CO2 at very low levels since the start of the Cambrian explosion 500m years ago. Most of the time there has been no ice at the poles and temperature has been up to 15 degrees C higher than today. CO2 has been 10 times or more higher than today with no correlation between CO2 level and temperature until when the current low levels for both have occurred and then CO2 follows temperature (Antarctic Vostok Ice Core Data). Even the history since the last ice age which ended just 10,000 years ago shows temperatures higher than today.

    The current satellite global temperature data shows a slow benign warming of 0.13 degrees C per decade and the IR data used by Happer & Wijngaarden shows negligible if any additional warming by increasing levels of any greenhouse gases because of IR saturation. Their 2019 paper has never been refuted by the IPCC just ignored.

    Complicated, chaotic many variable systems, such as our climate, cannot have a “tipping point” and there is no theoretical or experimental proof that going from 3 molecules of CO2 in the atmosphere to 4 molecules per 10,000 will produce a climate breakdown/emergency/crisis.

    The IPCC’s models don’t even take water vapour/clouds into account or that the sun is shining all the time. They have no explanation at all for the worst climate change of all, the occurrence of ice ages.

    The data shows that extreme weather is not getting either more frequent or more intense. The poles are still covered in ice and the Australian Great Barrier Reef is in the best condition it has been since records began, and anyway corals prefer warmer water.

    We need more CO2 in the atmosphere not less to aid plant growth and reduce famines. So low is our current level of CO2 that 9 times over the last 800,000 years it has dropped to 180 ppm, just 30 ppm above the level below which plants, and hence all life on earth cannot survive.

    1. hefner
      June 3, 2023

      OR, Only so-called stationary chaotic systems do not have tipping points. All others can switch from one set of orbits on their attractor to another set and therefore go to a completely different state (ie, go through a tipping point). It is a very basic characteristic of chaotic systems. Try read ‘Lorenz system’ on wikipedia. With only three equations it illustrates this behaviour.
      There is even a MATLAB code for you to test that on your PC.
      And maybe that’ll encourage you not to repeat things you don’t understand.

  51. rose
    May 28, 2023

    Interesting hearing Mr Erdogan this evening, calmly knocking the IMF, extolling oil and gas – “free natural gas” – , and asserting it is possible to fight inflation without putting up interest rates.

  52. Original Richard
    May 28, 2023

    That CAGW and its Net Zero solution is total nonsense is proved by :

    1) China, India et many al are not following this path and have no intention to do so and no activists are pressing for them to follow us.

    2) Our politicians would have immediately started a nuclear program the moment the CCA was signed. Nuclear is the only low CO2 emission power which can provide abundant cheap and reliable power. The fact that we will have only a maximum of around 5% nuclear (EDF/China’s Hinkley Point C) by the decarbonisation date of 2035) is proof that cutting CO2 emissions is not the primary reason for Net Zero but the control of the population through the rationing of expensive and intermittent supplies of energy, food, heating and travel and with an economy basically running on the vagaries of the weather as we used to do before the Industrial Revolution.

  53. ChrisS
    May 29, 2023

    Yesterday I was at a classic car show in West Sussex where I was the judge for the best car in the show.
    To see all of the high quality cars on display, most of them beautifully built in Britain over the last 100 years and in many cases restored to perfection in recent years by British tradesmen, was such a stark contrast to the state of the UK motor industry today.

    The future is not looking good because most of us will simply not be able to afford to buy the electric vehicles manufacturers are being mandated to produce. Many of those, like myself, who might be able to afford an EV, will not go ahead and buy one because they don’t have the range or the recharging ability that we need from our cars. If the government refuses to change course and goes ahead with its ban on new IC-engined cars, we will opt to run on our existing petrol and diesel cars indefinitely. If my modern Diesel Audi eventually fails, I will revert to my classic cars instead. I can, at least, be confident that they will still be running right up until petrol is no longer available.

    Reading through this piece, my anger and frustration was building at the sheer incompetence of our government which is being so badly led down a cul-de-sac by the civil service and its liberal-leftie advisers. We also had a hint of what would happen if Labour wins the general election, when only yesterday Starmer announced that he would abandon all new North Sea oil and gas production in favour of imports, which we all know would be immensely damaging to our balance of payments and employment, and would actually make our emissions even worse !

    It is a very sad state of affairs and with all political parties currently signed up to our unaffordable path to Net Zero, how are we going to escape impoverishment and the cold homes through future winters that the policy will dictate ? Something has to give, and a sense of reality is desperately needed.

Comments are closed.