|
|
Post by montegriffo on Jul 12, 2024 16:13:56 GMT
Nah it's easy, Labour are the ones with a huge majority.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2024 16:20:41 GMT
The Tories had that in 2019 and Labour won with just 34% of the vote; does getting a majority somehow change what a party actually believes in? Not that Starmer believes in anything, so maybe you're right, he'll appeal to rank populist sentiments and u-turn on almost anything & everything
Guess the Nazis having a majority (and no I'm not saying Labour or Tories are like the Nazi party) made them right too eh?
What the majority believe isn't necessarily the right thing at any given time, plus, as stated, Lab won with only 34% of the vote; many voted for them purely because they weren't the Tories - they don't like Labour
If Trump wins over here, will that mean he's right and the majority made the right decision? I'll accept it, but I won't like it
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 12, 2024 17:23:28 GMT
Assuming the overwhelming scientific consensus are right, it is a little hard to see what is the alternative to Net Zero for mankind.
No doubt the costs of Net Zero are high and will have a significant impact on living standards
If the scientists are correct, the costs of not achieving Net Zero and impact on living standards will be infinitely higher.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,698
|
Post by Steve on Jul 12, 2024 17:40:56 GMT
The problem is that all the actions so far in support of net zero have been relatively easy. But of course only tinkering with the issue. Actually getting to net zero would take tough measures and as the OP shows, these are likely to be very unpopular. In short electoral suicide.
I confidently expect the UK's commitment to net zero by 2050 to go the way of say the UK's commitment to turn off analogue radio by 2015. As soon as it starts to look tough political will evaporates.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 12, 2024 17:59:02 GMT
You may be right Steve. And of course there is no point the UK achieving Net Zero if say Trump took power and ignored the issue there. It’s a massive test of whether humanity can work together to avoid, if the scientists are right, disaster.
My guess is frankly we’ll fail the test.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2024 17:59:08 GMT
As long as they can line up jobs for those who lose theirs, I would be in favour of transitioning (to net zero - not gender)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2024 18:01:35 GMT
You may be right Steve. And of course there is no point the UK achieving Net Zero if say Trump took power and ignored the issue there. It’s a massive test of whether humanity can work together to avoid, if the scientists are right, disaster. My guess is frankly we’ll fail the test. A ridiculous metric If China refuses to transition, people in the USA say that the USA shouldn't transition either, they often make this argument. If you use that argument for the UK, then you can't reject MAGA's argument that you have to wait for the Chinese to embrace Net Zero before the USA should make any steps towards it, so it's self-defeating. Every country should do what they can right now regardless of what others do or don't do |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,698
|
Post by Steve on Jul 12, 2024 18:57:11 GMT
Relying on nations to just do the right thing isn't going to work once the needed measures become tough. Electorates the world over have a massive 'what's in it for me now?' mind set.
So if the IPCC supporting nations really believe it's necessary then extra tariffs on non compliant nations would be needed. And that's when the fights will break out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 13, 2024 7:19:57 GMT
The government has to either believe and act in its avowed commitment to net zero or not. Milliband has a choice: be dishonest or not or change the commitment. Seems he's taking the first option. Better than what the Tories did when they took the dishonest route. Fuck net zero. Net zero will be ground into the dust when the horrors of what it actually means for the peoples of the west become ever more apparent. Thank christ im no one of the poor buggers about to be cast onto the dole queue in the North Sea oil and gas sector. Its only NEW drilling they are stopping. We will continue to need some gas even when we achieve net zero. We should be reducing the amount we sell around the planet. Lets push our new super efficient wind turbines instead. Much of the world does not have a national grid so I think there's a big opportunity here beyond saving the environment and nature. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 13, 2024 7:22:10 GMT
That's a different debate. This is all about probity. If you have a supposed commitment to net zero then you either have to change it or support it or be dishonest. Sunak chose the latter. scrap the commitment. Like I said , the public in many countries are slowly coming around to what this vanity project net zero actually means for them. Who cares what sunak chose? He is out of a job , and the tories are toast , of little relevance , and we are now into the labours administrations term in office. In a multi party uk. I dont think davy up in Aberdeen cares one jot who committed to what , but merely the fact ed milliband , down in England , is about to make him and his family poorer. Can I assume you don't believe in AGW? |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,698
|
Post by Steve on Jul 13, 2024 12:41:10 GMT
Turns out the story was false - just the Daily Torygraph lying again.
'The Telegraph reported on Thursday morning the Energy Secretary – a committed opponent of oil and gas – had told regulators not to approve a new round of drilling that was slated for confirmation in the coming weeks.
The move would have seen Miliband overrule officials and experts warned legal action would be likely.
But the UK Government's Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has said the reports are untrue and no official decision has been made.'www.thenational.scot/news/24445188.ed-miliband-orders-immediate-ban-new-drilling-north-sea/ (other sources available) |
|
|
|
Post by brownlow on Jul 17, 2024 16:52:26 GMT
Might not be a bad idea - if Labour could commit to spending more than about a weekend's worth of GDP on alternatives.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 18, 2024 21:03:59 GMT
Might not be a bad idea - if Labour could commit to spending more than about a weekend's worth of GDP on alternatives. It might be less about putting money in and more about incentives |
|
