“Politicians of the left have seized on climate as a way to force citizens to do what they say, or extort more tax from them, or both”

“Global warming will have none of the catastrophic, end-of-civilisation characteristics portrayed in the press”    

I wonder if you heard my local MP, Nick Herbert (Conservative Arundel & South Downs), on BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions last Friday night.

Herbert is now front-bench Shadow Justice Minister and along with his master David Cameron subscribes to the notion that governments have the knowledge and the power to change the climate. Herbert not only supports the current government’s climate policy to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 60 per cent by 2050, he told the Any Questions audience that he wants to cut them by more. Pause for cheap applause.

But this would devastate our economy, induce 1930s levels of unemployment, pitilessly negate any progress made in living standards in the 3^rd world, and have absolutely no impact on the world’s climate. (Note that Herbert, Cameron and the Tories talk about new “green” taxes to achieve this but they never say which taxes, or how exactly this would work).

Herbert said we had to follow the science, then had the gall to laud former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, whose mischievous and hysterical movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, was found to have 9 serious errors of scientific fact by a British High Court judge.

Killer question
Gore was interviewed on BBC 24’s Hard Talk show on Monday evening by Stephen Sackur, when the failed presidential candidate received his Nobel prize. After listening to the usual garbage about how the world will end unless we act now, how we are close to a climate tipping point which will plunge the world into chaos, Sackur asked the obvious question. If this was all true, with the burgeoning amount of CO2 wreaking havoc with the climate, surely it makes sense to bring economic growth to a halt as soon as possible? Collapse of stout party. Gore could only waffle his generalised twaddle. Oh no, we don’t have to sacrifice our standard of living, said Gore. Surely if there is a climate emergency, emergency action is needed?

We hear the same garbage from other British politicians. Foreign Secretary and leading Labour POAGY (pillock on a gap year) David Miliband falls into the same trap. Impassioned arguments that we can and will save the climate out of one side of his mouth, followed by promises to raise capacity at Heathrow out of the other. Clearly, if there was a clear and present danger to the future of the world, Poagy Miliband would be seeking to shut down airports, not boost their traffic. 

Jump on the bandwagon
As a former Science and Technology Correspondent for Reuters, I know that the science linking climate change to human activity is weak to say the least. But politicians, mainly of the left, have seized on this issue as a way to scare citizens into doing what they say, or extort more tax from them, or both. It is not a policy that I expect from a Conservative like Herbert, except perhaps one trying to ingratiate himself with his leader, or jump on a bandwagon.

  Wouldn’t it make more sense if we paid attention to experts like Bjorn Lomborg, who in his latest book “Cool It”, (see my review - Climate Change Action Squanders Money And Won’t Work "Climate".) castigates those claiming that the end of the world is nigh?

“Global warming will have none of the catastrophic, end-of-civilisation characteristics that are so often portrayed in the press,” Lomborg said.

Pain no gain
Some aspects of a warmer climate may actually be beneficial, Lomborg says. Lomborg, and many other experts around the world who are ignored by the mainstream media, say that action to drastically cut CO2 emissions with Kyoto-style agreements will cripple our economies, and ironically, have an almost zero impact on the climate. All pain and no gain.

I voted for Herbert at the last general election. That’s one vote he won’t be getting the next time, unless of course he wants to open up the debate.

Neil Winton – December 12, 2007