An about-face of epic proportions. You’ll never guess who said this:
David Cameron has ordered ministers to ditch the ‘green crap’ blamed for driving up energy bills and making business uncompetitive, it is claimed. The Prime Minister, who once pledged to lead the ‘greenest government ever’, has publicly promised to ‘roll back’ green taxes, which add more than £110 a year to average fuel bills.
But a senior Tory source said Mr Cameron’s message in private is far blunter. The source said: ‘He’s telling everyone, “We’ve got to get rid of all this green crap.” He’s absolutely focused on it.’ Tory high command has also privately abandoned Mr Cameron’s pre-election mantra ‘vote blue, go green’. ‘It’s vote blue, get real, now – and woe betide anyone who doesn’t get the memo,’ the source said. Downing Street denied the claims and said: “We do not recognise this at all.”-–Daily Mail, 21 November 2013
No. 10 is tellingly refusing to deny the report in today’s Sun that David Cameron has ordered aides to “get rid of all the green crap”. A Downing Street spokesman merely stated that “we do not recognise this at all” (a classic non-denial denial). In reference to the environmental levies imposed on fuel bills, a Tory source earlier claimed of Cameron: “He’s telling everyone, ‘We’ve got to get rid of all this green crap.’ He’s absolutely focused on it.” The source added: “It’s vote blue, get real, now – and woe betide anyone who doesn’t get the memo.” –George Eaton, New Statesman, 21 November 2013
h/t to Dr. Benny Peiser of The GWPF
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I know what I believe about this story and it is what Downing Street said. Downing Street denied the claims and said: “We do not recognise this at all.”
I’d like to know how the PM intends to deal with Ed Davey, the personification of green crap.
Couldn’t agree more David!
I don’t think this was ever in his plan, but it’s got politically unavoidable. Energy companies are raising prices between 4-10%, way above inflation. Those raising by 4% are saying they’ll raise further if the green taxes aren’t removed, and those raising 10% are saying they’ll reverse some of the rise if the green taxes are removed. Once the PM said in parliament that the price rises were mostly due to green taxes introduced by the former Labour government, he’d pretty much painted himself into a corner.
The business in Warsaw of getting the developed world to pay for prior releases of CO2 – i.e. the United States of America, Germany, France, Britain, Canada, Australia – is a logical conclusion because CAGW “threatens” the future world. How would Al Gore respond to this?
An interesting situation, this is. Al Gore gets a Nobel prize for alerting the world to the coming thermeggedon, and sets the stage for the US to give billions of American taxpayers’s money to corrupt and ineffective foreign governments in a global governance scheme. If Gore had become President, would he be supporting such a move?
Wouldn’t that make an interesting question to ask Al. In public. (As if you could.)
This utter nonsense is completely out of hand, i am sure ANY rational human being can see this is 100% GRAP.
By all means if people want to wander off into the scrub, and build mud brick “off the grid” igloos, as long as it doesn’t impinge on my lifestyle, knock yourself out – but leave the rest of us and our taxes alone.
Ken Hall: “denied the claims and said: “We do not recognise this at all.””
‘Denied the claims and said…’ or ‘Denied the claims by saying‘?
Call it a green trial balloon.
I took that to mean he wanted to remove as a break out item the costs of green inclusions in any new programs – rather like “hide the decline”, he would like to hide the expense of green policies.
Camoron is just like most MPs in the UK; you can’t trust anything they say. Six Labour MPs were found to be criminals over their fraudulent expenses claims (and two of them were Members of Her Majesty’s last Government). They’ll say anything to remain in power, or in their cushy jobs leading to a knighthood or even better, getting on the EU gravy train.
“There, members of the European Parliament, along with representatives from the U.S., Italy, Sweden, Hungary, and Poland formally signed the “Warsaw Declaration” calling on the UN to discontinue work on a new treaty until a genuine “scientific consensus is reached on the phenomenon of so-called global warming.” / CFACT Nov 12 2013
Is there a document on the web showing the names of the persons and their representation?
I am specially interested in the Swedes.
I asked on the contact form for CFACT and Whatsupwiththat, but no answer.
To judge the meaning of this story, look at this BBC take:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24637499
Mr. Cameron has gotten the bill, or more correctly, has seen the bill that the electorate is getting. Oddly, he wants to continue in office.
“We do not . . . ”
Is this a use of imperial we?
Does David Cameron (who’s he) have authority to use the imperial we?
Maybe it is a literal statement from a bunch of scribes in the front hall?
The custodial staff?
I repeat my idea. Surely the time is coming when a politician who matters WANTS to believe that CAGW is a hoax.
My first reaction to this story was “nice legs.”
My second reaction was that Cameron now realizes there are more votes in providing cheaper energy than in being seen as an environmentalist, which a conservative leader is never going to get credit for anyway.
the issue here is all about public understanding.
green is good – I have no problem with trying to be as green as possible. Most normal people would agree with this general sentiment, especially if things are put into context correctly. But half the problem is that green is often actually NOT good! The raping of the planet for special materials for wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, loss of food production for biofuels, etc, etc.
As per usual, what the politicos have done is get it all ar$e backwards by not explaining how much being green actually costs (us, the public, I mean). And I don’t mean in ‘simple’ monetary terms.
The REAL cost of many ‘green’ things is actually increased wastage, energy use in production, etc, etc – resulting in a net ‘Green Value’ loss !
I would like to see all the green idea(l)s being properly explained – IN FULL – from start to finish, environmentally audited, if you will – such that people can make INFORMED opinion and judgement on the merits of such things. Without this correct information, all the tree huggers are spouting is idealism and impractical, costly, and fundementally environmentally flawed policy. In this context, it would indeed be worth getting rid of the green ‘crap’ !!
Here in the USA, our current administration’s plans to deal with America’s most significant economic problem — American’s have it better than most everyone else and we consume more than our fair share — continues apace. Give it a few years and we will have hobbled our economy so badly that our per capita income and consumption falls to third-world status.
.
I hope your right!
When people realize, what it is costing each of us, for a virtual gain, of the “warm & fuzzy” green feeling and a feeling that we are doing something when we are, in fact, not… they may decide such personal extravagance… excessively expensive. One can always hope. GK
– Naive conception of how British politics works. Remember after the election Eco-scam Cam also said “This will be the greenest gov ever”
.. and his father-in-law gets £1000/day windfarm subsidy.
– If he does actually the evacuate all the greencrap then they whole country will feel all the better for it.
G. Karst – he has no intention of removing the expense, only the reporting of it. In the US we call that a hidden tax.
How Green Was My Value
Delingpole has a different view (as do I):
‘This, remember, is still an administration committed to wasting billions on the Navitus Bay and Atlantic Array offshore wind farms; to wiping out mid-Wales and Shropshire with pylons; to lay waste to our countryside with more wind turbines; to rolling out shale gas at a pace so slow it won’t be at least a decade before we see any benefits; to paying massively over the odds to the French and the Chinese for outdated nuclear technology.’
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100246933/on-green-issues-no-one-talks-more-crap-than-david-cameron/
On September 27 2013 Nick Butler wrote on his blog in Finacial Times
“Those who seriously question this view are now reduced by their sheer weight of the evidence in the new Intergovenmental Panel on Climate Change report to the level of the eccentrics who maintained that the earth was flat long after the reality had benn proved”
http://blogs.ft.com/nick-butler/
On November 21 2013 chris produced a testimonial from Nick Butler about the testimonials of a bureaucracy regarding the testimonials of scientists about the experiments they testify have been performed.
The EU commission will tell him where he can stick it. And give him another million illegal immigrants. (“Refugees” in EU media speak)