By Paul Homewood
I see that the Government has come up with a daring new game. It’s called: Stress Testing the Loyalty of Conservative Voters Until They Finally Snap. Over 4,000 party members are believed to have quit since Liz Truss was forced out. Those of us who are rallying round our new Prime Minister, as he tries to steady the ship, probably felt rather pleased when he said that he would not be attending Cop27. The crisis at home is far too great to waste time grandstanding in a luxurious Egyptian resort, with 24,000 diplomats and 13,000 observers who are deeply worried about everyone’s carbon footprint, except their own. If “Not Much Cop” was serious about the climate emergency, why wasn’t it held on to Zoom?
Don’t be daft. Such energy-saving measures are for the little people, like you and me, who dutifully do our recycling. Not for the hellfire-preaching eco-zealots who travelled in the 400 private jets that landed in Sharm el-Sheikh over the weekend.
As if that hypocrisy weren’t quite stomach-churning enough, the sponsor of this year’s jamboree was – brace yourselves! – Coca-Cola.
All together now: “We’d like to build the world a home and furnish it with love/Grow apple trees and honey bees but, unfortunately, we manufacture 120 billion throwaway plastic bottles a year which ruin natural habitats, so the bees die.”
No further proof is needed that Cop27 is a bazaar of balderdash, I think. It’s a giant con trick perpetrated by global elites on trusting populations who like the sound of a greener, cleaner world (who doesn’t?) but who still have no idea of the vast cost and sacrifices that will be involved in reaching net zero. We are talking trillions of pounds.
Rishi Sunak, who reversed his decision not to attend the conference, only added to the general air of ivory-tower, out-of-touchness when he appeared to commit the UK to something called “climate reparations”. It was easy to tell it was a terrible idea, because the BBC reported that “the good news from Cop27 is the loss and damage proposal claim”.
Basically, we are on the hook for untold billions to countries experiencing adverse weather conditions, because we invented factories. And cars.
Surely, in the current economic climate, when people are worried about how to manage their very existence, the Government wouldn’t be mad enough to ask the British people to divert their taxes away from vital public services to “environmental reparations” for countries like Somalia, Kenya and Pakistan?
Ah, well, as Jeremy Hunt prepares to make up to £35 billion in spending cuts and around £25 billion in tax increases, at least Rick and Katy in Darlington, who are struggling to feed their three children after paying the gas bill, will be cheered by the thought that they are helping to fund Nairobi’s Railway City and Hydropower Project.
Rishi Sunak says this is “the right thing to do”. Sorry, Prime Minister, giving in to specious emotional blackmail from developing nations when your own countrymen are facing enormous hardship is not just wrong, it’s immoral. May I suggest a polite but firm response to requests for money we do not have along these lines:
It was with some surprise that we learnt that you and other countries, including Bangladesh, Kenya, Mauritius and even China, would be seeking “climate change reparations” from the United Kingdom at this week’s Cop27 summit. Apparently, you (and Ed Miliband) think that the terrible floods Pakistan suffered recently are entirely the fault of industrialised Western countries like our own because of historic carbon emissions.
While there may be some truth in that, other experts have suggested that the reason Pakistan experiences such terrible flooding is because you have cut down all your trees. Pakistan has the highest rate of deforestation in the world. When your nation was created in 1947, 33% of the total land mass was covered by forests; now that area is only 5%. Because of the lack of trees, the rain runs straight off the mountains into the silted-up reservoirs which then overflow.
In addition, we would like to point out that Pakistan has always had major floods, many just as catastrophic as the recent one. The 1950 flood, for example, killed twice as many people as the 2022 flood within a much lower population. Not every natural disaster can be blamed on the United Kingdom, gratifying and lucrative though that accusation may be.
Pakistan is already one of the UK’s biggest recipients of aid. In 2019/20, you received around £302 million from our heavily indebted country, spanning areas including human development, climate and the environment. Most British people would consider that quite a generous gift to a nation which has its own nuclear weapons and a space programme. Pakistan also has more than a thousand coal mines. We do wonder whether you have any concerns about their impact or was it just British coal mines which caused a problem?
Plus, the present population of Pakistan is 225 million (up from 65 million in 1970) which will inevitably add to pressure on the environment. Sorry, there’s not a whole lot we can do about that.
The proposition, as we understand it, is that Pakistan should now receive “loss and damage” compensation from UK for the “cost” of historic emissions. How is that bill to be calculated exactly?
We remain proud of our Industrial Revolution which freed millions of ordinary people from back-breaking servitude, as well as causing a vast and sudden increase in life expectancy. For centuries, the average lifespan in the UK barely rose above 36 years. By 1901, life expectancy had jumped to 45 years (men) and 50 years (women), due to an increase in wealth, the production of cheaper goods, healthier diets and better education.
The UK will neither apologise nor make amends for the Industrial Revolution whose beneficial effects continue to be felt every day around our world.
Should you persist in your unfair demands for “climate reparations”, may we suggest you pay us royalties for the following: the internal combustion engine, Spinning Jenny, steam power, Tarmacadam, electrical telegraph, railways, automobiles, airplanes, radio, television, computers, pharmaceuticals and the world wide web.
We’ll throw in Parliamentary government and democracy for free as a gesture of goodwill. Bank transfers welcome.
Very best wishes and we remain cordially yours,
Of course, demanding compensation for everything the United Kingdom has contributed to the world would be absurd. Equally absurd is committing billions we simply don’t have to settle historic “loss and damage” claims. On the list of “developing countries” with their hand out is China. The country which has emitted more carbon dioxide over the past eight years than the UK has since the start of the Industrial Revolution.
If the Conservatives are looking for new ways to guarantee electoral annihilation, asking skint voters to pay for “climate reparations” should work a treat.
In my opinion, the Tories are missing out on a huge political opportunity here. With the idiot Ed Miliband already committing Labour to this idea of reparations, this is the chance for them to open up clear water between the two parties and come down clearly against this potty policy.
At the next election, voters would be given the choice of paying tens of billions to the Third World or spending it on more important things at home.
It’s time to grow a pair, Rishi.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
November 9, 2022
We don’t owe developing countries ‘climate reparations’ – they owe us | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)
You must be logged in to post a comment.