Climate Assembly Parrots Green Party Demands

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Robin Guenier

 

 image

A frequent flyer tax, phasing out polluting SUVs and restricting cars in city centres are among climate change solutions suggested by members of the public.

A citizens’ assembly of 108 people from all walks of life published its report after weeks of debate.

They proposed curbing road building and using the pandemic to cut emissions.

MPs said the report offered a "unique insight", but activists Extinction Rebellion said it didn’t go far enough.

The report says the government must show leadership on climate change and insists climate policies must be fair to all – especially the poorest in society.

Its radical conclusions may offer political cover to ministers who’re typically nervous of a public backlash against policies that affect lifestyles.

What have they said?

The members said it was "imperative that there is strong and clear leadership from government” to tackle climate change.

One member, Sue, from Bath, said: “Even with the country still reeling from coronavirus, it’s clear the majority of us feel prioritising net zero policy is not only important, but achievable.”

Hamish, a software engineer from rural Aberdeenshire, told BBC News the government needed "to develop a long-term strategy to help us”.

A key theme of the report is education. Ibrahim, a GP from Surrey, said: “The media has to take a role – schools as well. We perhaps need to look at the curriculum.

“You can’t go to someone and say ‘you need to switch to the hydrogen boiler because it’s low CO2’ but they have no idea [about it]. You’re more likely to get a buy-in from people when they know about the issues.”

Members said the government should start phasing out the sale of polluting new vehicles such as SUVs, and clamp down on adverts for highly-polluting goods.

Another central message is the need for policies to be fair. Amanda, from Kent, said: “Electric cars have to be more affordable to everybody – not just people who earn enough money.”

They also supported higher taxes on frequent fliers, and investment in clean aviation technology.

Tracey, a mother from Northern Ireland, said: “I would be a frequent flier myself – so I would say there needs to be something there to stop us from taking so many flights – to reduce our emissions.”

On the subject of what we eat and how we use the land, the assembly urged a voluntary cut of 20-40% in eating red meat.

“The government can’t legislate against eating red meat," Amanda told us, "but with education, advertising and labelling I think we can change their attitudes towards eating red meat – as we did with smoking."

They also said:

  • Businesses should make products using less energy and materials
  • People should repair goods and share more, instead of owning all their appliances
  • The UK should get more power from offshore and onshore wind, and solar power
  • New housing developments must have good access to facilities through walking and cycling

Most members were not very keen on nuclear – or on burning wood in power stations – and most weren’t confident in carbon capture and storage.

They think the government should be harnessing the Covid crisis to limit support for high-carbon industries.

What’s the reaction been?

The MPs behind the assembly said the report "provides a unique insight into the thinking of an informed public to the trade-offs and changes required to help deliver on the objective that parliament has agreed". They said: "Their work merits action.”

Crispin Truman, from the countryside charity CPRE, said it shows "public appetite to end the UK’s contribution to the climate emergency has far outstripped government action.”

And Tom Burke, from the climate change think tank, e3g, added: “This is a striking tribute to the common sense of the British public. There is a clear lesson for politicians and editors across the political spectrum about the role our citizens are capable of playing in shaping public policy.”

However, radical green group Extinction Rebellion (XR) condemned the proposals as too timid to meet internationally-agreed proposals limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5C. They warned that the report could get buried in government bureaucracy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54087176

 

Sorry, but this is not how democracy works. Decisions cannot be made by a tiny unelected group of eco-extremists and/or gullible members of the public.

The idea that it shows "public appetite to end the UK’s contribution to the climate emergency is laughable. This is not the public we are talking about, and they would be horrified if they fully realised the path they are being led down.

Some of their recommendations simply do not stack up anyway

A frequent flier tax will make no difference at all to air travel, as most passengers are either business travellers, who will simply add it onto expenses, or very wealthy.

The obsession with SUVs is also potty. I have one, and I get better mpg than my old Mondeo.

Both ideas have the Green Party trademark all over them, and it is easy to see how the climate assembly members have been duped and bullied by the barrage of green propaganda they have faced.

This statement sums up the general walliness of the assembly:

“You can’t go to someone and say ‘you need to switch to the hydrogen boiler because it’s low CO2’ but they have no idea [about it]. You’re more likely to get a buy-in from people when they know about the issues.”

Clearly nobody has told them that hydrogen boilers will triple energy bills, or that hydrogen is not even zero carbon. Neither do they appear to have asked themselves who will pay the estimated cost of £100bn to upgrade the natural gas network and adapt householder appliances.

Another equally inane statement comes from “Amanda”:

“Electric cars have to be more affordable to everybody”

And just how do you intend going about that, Amanda? They don’t exactly grow on trees.

Very telling is this remark:

Most members were not very keen on nuclear

Again, this has the Green Party stamp all over it.

I am especially perplexed by this bit though:

They think the government should be harnessing the Covid crisis to limit support for high-carbon industries.

So, with the economy crashing all around us, these bright sparks suggest we deliberately let viable industries go bust?

 

The overall impression though is that their proposals will only make a small dent in UK emissions. They have not grasped the real implications of going Net Zero.

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/3k6ZUnE

September 13, 2020 at 08:27AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s