David Cameron has this morning been addressing the Sustainable Consumption Institute conference, outlining five approaches to create a Green Consumer Revolution.
What is remarkable about this latest speech is the lack of admission that the five approaches are, in effect, driven by the need of any
UK government 'Regional UK Administration Centre' to comply with the orders which have been issued by our government in Brussels. Coupled with the contradictions contained within this speech means that, like so many others from the same source, we can promptly ignore it.
"There is now widespread agreement about the nature and scale of the threat posed by climate change." Really? There may be 'widespread agreement' amongst 'politicos' and those that have managed to build up 'a nice little earner' by spouting the climate change mantra; but it is not 'agreed' by those of us who fund not only their lifestyles but also the misinformation put out by them.
"If the Himalayan glaciers melt, three-quarters of a billion people will be without sufficient water." Here we go again - 'If'. Who said the Himalyan glaciers would melt and with what 'scientific' evidence?
"That’s why the Conservatives proposed and then backed a Climate Change Bill with binding targets for reductions in carbon emissions." Once again it will be noted that there is no acknowledgement of the fact this had to be done to comply with orders from Brussels. And politicians talk about 'restoring faith in Parliament and politics', about 'being honest with the voters'. Pah!
"That’s why I can announce today the Conservative Party will launch a working group, led by our Shadow Minister for Climate Change Greg Barker, to work with industry to ensure all new appliances and electronic devices sold in the UK have their ‘economy’ modes as the default setting. We're not doing this to boss business around - we're doing this because we don't want to resort to regulation." So what is the difference between 'bossing business around or facing regulation' and 'working with industry to ensure' - amounts to the same thing, surely?
"People recognise that the mindless consumption and materialism of the past decade has neither left them more fulfilled nor served our planet." Until I reached the word 'planet', for one moment I though Cameron had digressed to the expenses scandal!
"I don’t think we should resort to the failed methods of the past – simply pulling bureaucratic levers from above and imposing a centralised view of the world through rules, laws and punitive stealth taxation, that just puts people off." How come then Mr. Cameron, you still intend, for example, to have central government grants to allocate money to local authorities?
"We will require every gas and electricity company to make sure a customer’s bill tells them what they would have paid under the lowest tariff available to them – and what they need to do to move on to that tariff." That is all very well, but how about also highlighting the amount the consumer is paying energy companies to subsidise the wind farms and other such renewable energy scams?
"In Sacramento, America, a company called Positive Energy started publishing information on energy bills that allowed households to compare their energy consumption with the consumption of other people in their area. And they found something remarkable happened. When people found out their neighbours, or households similar to theirs, were using less energy than they were, they began to bring their consumption down into line." Forgive me, but what business is it of a neighbour how someone decides to spend their money?
"And to make sure the system works, we will also give every house a smart meter so the amount of energy they are selling back to the grid can be calculated and they know how much electricity they are generating themselves." Oh yes, remember smart meters - we all heard about their possible uses, did we not?
"My message to you today is one of optimism tinged with urgency. Yes, our resources are low. Yes, our planet is in peril. And yes, the alternative to action doesn’t bear thinking about." Our resources are low due to incompetent government planning; our planet is only 'in peril' to those who believe the unfounded, totally unscientific crap put out by the proponents of the idea and most definitely yes, the alternative to all this crap is worth thinking about!
To paraphrase Richard North on EU Referendum, when discussing government by the EU, we complain a great deal about the present goverrnment but have the electorate actually looked at what is waiting in the wings?