MetOffGate – the questions begin

Met Office
Image via Wikipedia

From the Global Warming Policy Foundation, the questions begin, news coverage follows:

Did UK Government Keep Cold Winter Warning Secret In Run-Up To UN Climate Conference?

Press Release

London, 6 January: The Global Warming Policy Foundation has called on the House of Commons Transport Select Committee to set up a parliamentary inquiry into the winter advice the Government received by the Met Office and the renewed failure of both the Government and local authorities to prepare the UK transport system for the third severe winter in a row.

In a letter to the Chair of the Transport Committee, Louise Ellman, MP, the GWPF stresses that “Lessons have to be learned well in advance of the start of next year’s winter so that we are much better prepared if it is severe again.”

In recent days, the Met Office has stated that it apparently warned the Cabinet Office in late October that the start of the winter would be exceptionally cold. It would appear that the extreme weather warning was kept secret from the public.

According to media reports, the Cabinet Office has been unwilling to confirm whether or not it failed to pass on the Met Office warning to local and road authorities, airports and water companies.

“Not only is the lack of Government preparedness a cause for concern, but we wonder whether there may be another reason for keeping the cold warning under wraps, a motive that the Met Office and the Cabinet Office may have shared: Not to undermine the then forthcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun,” said Dr Benny Peiser, the GWPF director.

It will be important to establish whether the Met Office consulted with government officials about their Cancun strategy and what effect this may have had on the handling of the ‘secret’ cold winter warning.

In light of the renewed failure to prepare the UK and its transport system for a prolonged and harsh winter, the GWPF has listed 19 questions that need to be addressed in order to avoid future debacles.

The full letter is attached below.

Louise Ellman, MP

Chair, Transport Select Committee

House of Commons

London

SW1A 0AA

5 January 2011

Dear Mrs Ellman

Transport System’s Winter Fiasco

I am writing to you on behalf of the Global Warming Policy Foundation regarding the transport system’s ill-preparedness in face of this year’s record cold winter.

The GWPF is calling on the Transport Committee to set up a parliamentary inquiry into the winter advice the Government received by the Met Office and the renewed failure of both the Government and local authorities to prepare the UK transport system for the third severe winter in a row.

This year’s winter fiasco has severely damaged the British economy – and its international reputation – as a result of the country’s ill-preparedness.

It would appear that the Met Office provided the government with contradictory winter advice and we need to find out what went wrong. Lessons have to be learned well in advance of the start of next year’s winter so that we are much better prepared if it is severe again.

Last summer, the Department of Transport carried out a study of the resilience of Britain’s transport infrastructure in the light of the two previous severe winters.

When the Quarmby Report (The Resilience of England’s Transport Systems in Winter) was published in late October, it entirely relied on the Met Office’s assurance that the chance of a severe winter and heavy snow would be relatively small and that the effect of climate change had further reduced the probability of severe winters in the UK; see also Transport chaos not an annual issue, say official report. Investment in more equipment may not be economical given rarity of British snow, says RAC Foundation chairman http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/21/transport-met-office

In recent days, the Met Office has stated that it apparently changed its original advice in October and actually warned the Cabinet Office that the start of winter would be exceptionally cold. It would appear that the Met Office’s cold warning was kept secret from the public.

According to media reports, the Cabinet Office has been unwilling to confirm whether or not it failed to pass on the Met Office warning to local and road authorities, airports and water companies.

Not only is the lack of Government preparedness a cause for concern, but we wonder whether there may be another reason for keeping the cold warning under wraps, a motive that the Met Office and the Cabinet Office may have shared: Not to undermine the then forthcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun.

Throughout October and November, the Met Office repeatedly pushed and published their key message in the run-up to the UN climate summit – that 2010 would probably turn out to be the hottest year on record, culminating in these Cancun-timed media reports: Cancun climate change summit: 2010 was hottest year on record http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/8175591/Cancun-climate-change-summit-2010-was-hottest-year-on-record.html

The Met Office was represented at the UN Climate Summit in Cancun by key scientists who briefed news media about their key message; see Scientific evidence is Met Office focus at Cancun <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2010/pr20101126b.html>

It will be important to establish whether the Met Office consulted with government officials about the UK’s Cancun strategy and what effect this may have had on the handling of the ‘secret’ cold winter warning.

The transport minister Philip Hammond has asked the government’s chief scientific adviser whether the last three cold winters may signal a ‘step change’ in weather in the UK.

The Met Office appears to deny this possibility. In its submission to the Quarmby Report, the Met Office claims that the chances of a harsh winter are receding steadily. Yet, the Met Office models were contradicted by Sir David King, the former government’s chief scientific adviser, who has publicly warned that the government should plan for more cold winters in the next few years.

It is evident that Sir David King has serious doubts about the reliability of the Met Office’s computer models. This manifest contradiction is further undermining the credibility of the Met Office which makes it all the more important to properly investigate the underlying problem of its erroneous winter projections and government advice over the last three years.

In light of the renewed failure to prepare the UK and its transport system for a prolonged and harsh winter, the following questions need to be addressed in order to avoid future debacles:

1. Why did the Met Office publish on its website estimates in late October showing a 60 per cent to 80 per cent chance of warmer-than-average temperatures this winter? What was the scientific basis of this probabilistic estimate?

2. Why did the Met Office provide the government with a secret forecast about a exceptionally cold start of the winter, at the same time it was publishing an opposite forecast to the public?

3. Did the government conspire to keep the Met Office forecast secret in the run-up to the Cancun climate summit?

4. Did the Cabinet Office fail to take appropriate action in response to the forecast and inform the relevant authorities to prepare the country, to keep the highways clear, to prepare airports?

5. Why did the government let its Winter Fuel Allowance budget be used up with only a fraction of the winter gone?

6. On what scientific basis did the Met Office tell the Cabinet Office that there were early indications of an exceptionally cold start to winter?

7. Why did the Met Office confirm to the news media on 27 October that its probability map showed significant warming in the months ahead?

8. Has the late October prediction by the Met Office that this winter would be mild affected planning for this winter? If so, what is the best estimate of how much this has cost the country?

9. In 2009, the Met Office predicted a 65% chance that the winter of 2009/10 would be milder than normal. Has the Met Office subsequently explained what went wrong with its computer modelling?

10. What is the statistical and scientific basis for the Met Office’s estimate of a 1-in-20 chance of a severe winter?

11. Has the Met Office changed its view, or its calculations, following the harsh winters of 2008, 2009 and 2010?

12. Is the Met Office right to be confident that the severe winters of the last three years are not related?

13. Which severe weather alerts were issued by the Met Office and when?

14. Although the Met Office stopped sending its 3-month forecasts to the media, it would appear that this service is still available to paying customers, the Government and Local Authorities for winter planning. What was their advice, in September/October, for the start of winter 2010?

15. Has the Met Office been the subject of any complaints from its paying customers regarding the quality of its advice?

16. Is it appropriate that the chairman of the Met Office is a member, or a former member of climate pressure groups or carbon trading groups?

17. Should senior Met Office staff (technically employed by the MoD) make public comments advocating political action they see necessary to tackle climate change?

18. Has the government evaluated different meteorological service providers and has it ensured that it is using the most accurate forecaster?

19. What plans has the government to privatise the Met Office?

In view of the high level of public interest in this matter, we shall be releasing the text of this letter to the press.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Benny Peiser

— end

================================================================

Here’s some news coverage:

The Met Office knew that Britain was facing an early and exceptionally cold winter but failed to warn the public, hampering preparations for some of the coldest weather on record. In October the forecaster privately warned the Government – with whom it has a contract – that Britain was likely to face an extremely cold winter. It kept the prediction secret. Motoring organisations and passenger groups said yesterday that the delay hampered preparations for winter. – The Daily Telegraph. 4 January 2011

The Met Office has defended its decision not to make public a long-range forecast which predicted “an exceptionally cold” winter. The forecaster, which has its headquarters near Exeter’s Sowton Industrial Estate, told the Cabinet Office in October that temperatures would plunge lower than usual, and the winter would be longer than average.–Patrick Phelvin, The Exeter Express & Echo, 5 January 2011

It’s hard to know whether to laugh or cry over the latest antics of the nation’s official weather forecasters. The Met Office now claims that it briefed the Cabinet Office privately in October that the winter would be ‘exceptionally cold’. Forecast? The Met Office didn’t warn the public about the severe winter weather. It’s increasingly difficult to understand what they do to deserve our £200million a year.—Daily Mail, 4 January 2011

You couldn’t have asked for a better snapshot of the chasm that divides today’s so-called expert classes from the mass of humanity than the snow crisis of Christmas 2010. They warn us endlessly about the warming of our planet; we struggle through knee-deep snow to visit loved ones. They host million-dollar conferences on how we’ll cope with our Mediterranean future; we sleep for days in airport lounges waiting for runways to be de-iced. They pester the authorities for more funding for global-warming research; we keep an eye on our elderly neighbours who don’t have enough cash to heat their homes. –Brendan O’Neill, Spiked Online, 4 January 2011

And finally, an article from 2005 that underscores how the Met Office used to handle such news:

Forecasters are predicting that Britain could be facing one of the coldest winters in a decade. Ewen McCallum, chief meteorologist at the Met Office, said the vulnerable and elderly would be particularly at risk as temperatures fall. He said it was important to give an “amber alert” to government, fuel firms, business and the health sector. He added that the aim was for “forward planning” to “make sure that government departments and business utilities have got their act together”. —BBC News, 19 October 2005

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
114 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
3x2
January 6, 2011 10:38 am

bill says: January 6, 2011 at 9:07 am
In N Ireland a public official has actually resigned – pretty well unheard of in the UK – the N Ireland water board man listened to the Met Office and didn’t lag his pipes so they all burst and now he’s toast.

Hardly toast. In the best traditions of the public sector he may well exit with £500,000 ($750,000). How many pensioners would that have kept alive in the recent cold snap?

January 6, 2011 10:41 am

bubbagyro says: “Who will bring the charges?”
I’m not a lawyer, but I would expect the Health and Safety Executive could do so under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. It applies to some government (Crown) bodies as well. Under Schedule 1 the MOD is listed, and the Met Office is part of the MOD, so I suspect they can be prosecuted under this act. The Cabinet Office is also listed, so if they try to play one off against the other, go for both.
“Application to Crown bodies
(1)
An organisation that is a servant or agent of the Crown is not immune from prosecution under this Act for that reason.
(2)
For the purposes of this Act—
(a)
a department or other body listed in Schedule 1, or
(b)
a corporation that is a servant or agent of the Crown,
is to be treated as owing whatever duties of care it would owe if it were a corporation that was not a servant or agent of the Crown.”
SCHEDULE 1
Section 1
List of government departments etc
Assets Recovery Agency
Attorney General’s Office
Cabinet Office
Central Office of Information
Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service
Crown Prosecution Service
Department for Communities and Local Government
Department for Constitutional Affairs (including the Scotland Office and the Wales Office)
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Department for Education and Skills
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Department for International Development
Department for Transport
Department for Work and Pensions
Department of Health
Department of Trade and Industry
Export Credits Guarantee Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Forestry Commission
General Register Office for Scotland
Government Actuary’s Department
Her Majesty’s Land Registry
Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Her Majesty’s Treasury
Home Office
Ministry of Defence
National Archives
National Archives of Scotland
National Audit Office
National Savings and Investments
National School of Government
Northern Ireland Audit Office
Northern Ireland Court Service
Northern Ireland Office
Office for National Statistics
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
Office of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales
Ordnance Survey
Privy Council Office
Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland
Registers of Scotland Executive Agency
Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office
Royal Mint
Scottish Executive
Serious Fraud Office
Treasury Solicitor’s Department
UK Trade and Investment
Welsh Assembly Government

James Chamberlain
January 6, 2011 10:57 am

pat says:
January 6, 2011 at 9:53 am
I thought the same thing. Traditional forecasters got it right and withheld the info for some reason. Computer modelers got it wrong and blathered all over the airwaves ahead of Cancun.
1- If true, It still doesn’t help the MO much as it shows that they have big communication issues if true.
2- If true, It also shows what type of forecasting is superior…….

tty
January 6, 2011 11:00 am

“Green Sand says:
January 6, 2011 at 9:43 am
If you were composing the following chart, would you not think that the trend line was telling you something?
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/graphs/HadCET_graph_ylybars_uptodate.gif
the red line is a 21-point binomial filter, which is equivalent to a 10-year running mean.”
No it would not, because there is no way you can calculate a 21-point binomial filter closer than ten points from the end of a diagram. The last ten years is some kind of a fudge, and without knowing how it was done it is impossible to base any conclusion on the trendline.

Martin A
January 6, 2011 11:04 am

Baa Humbug: Do I need to explain what buckleys chance is?
Buckleyd if I know.

Vince Causey
January 6, 2011 11:04 am

So GWPF wants the government to order an enquiry to investigate how the government conspired with the met office to deceive the public. Yeah, good luck with that fellas.
About as much chance as getting Stalin to investigate why he ignored overwhelming evidence that a German invasion was imminent. Or as much chance as asking Nixon to investigate the allegations that he bugged telephones. I could go on, but you get the drift.

Mike Haseler
January 6, 2011 11:06 am

James Sexton says:
If there’s one thing that should bring warmistas and skeptics together, it should be an end to bird mincers. Or not. Mike Haseler, please help your non-Commonwealth cousins out here…what’s a bird mincer?
Windmills, dear Sexton!
(I think the figure is one large bird per bird-mincer per month – but it might have been per year).

Allan M
January 6, 2011 11:08 am

bill says:
January 6, 2011 at 9:07 am
How about ‘Pothole-gate’? Here in UK roads are at third world collapse levels. Is this because local councils, taken in by Met Office ‘forecasting’ decided global warming = warm winters = no more freeze-thaw = cheaper, lower-spec asphalt — which falls apart when the forecast turns out wrong! Can County councils sue the Met Office? What fun. Can buckled-wheeled citizen-cyclists sue Councils for 4″ holes around the roads ironworks?
We, the UK’s ~24 million motorists, pay £50 billion a year in tax. But the ‘stards can’t even fix OUR infrastructure. Local Authorities pay out more of the funds on compensation for damaged vehicles than they spend on fixing the roads. The grade of asphalt used, when it is, for resurfacing is banned in many countries due to skidding issues.
———-
In N Ireland a public official has actually resigned – pretty well unheard of in the UK – the N Ireland water board man listened to the Met Office and didn’t lag his pipes so they all burst and now he’s toast.
It is understood Laurence MacKenzie offered his resignation earlier this evening and recommended that Sinn Féin’s regional development minister, Conor Murphy, accept it. MacKenzie is expected to walk away with around £500,000.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2011/01/limitations-of-language.html

Green Sand
January 6, 2011 11:15 am

tty says:
January 6, 2011 at 11:00 am
“Green Sand says:
January 6, 2011 at 9:43 am
If you were composing the following chart, would you not think that the trend line was telling you something?
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/graphs/HadCET_graph_ylybars_uptodate.gif
the red line is a 21-point binomial filter, which is equivalent to a 10-year running mean.”
No it would not, because there is no way you can calculate a 21-point binomial filter closer than ten points from the end of a diagram. The last ten years is some kind of a fudge, and without knowing how it was done it is impossible to base any conclusion on the trendline.

———————————————————————————————
Thanks for that, though not being a statistician I am not sure how it helps me, but I will do some research.
The description is from the Met Office site, they obviously think it is meaningful and “is equivalent to a 10-year running mean.”
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/index.html
“Other information”
“The graph above shows annual anomalies relative to the 1961-1990 average and the red line is a 21-point binomial filter, which is equivalent to a 10-year running mean.”

January 6, 2011 11:28 am

Question 2 drives me crazy. You can avoid answering it in snow many ways.
\\2. Why did the Met Office provide the government with a secret forecast about a exceptionally cold start of the winter, at the same time it was publishing an opposite forecast to the public? //
A2 #1: The Met Office did not provide the govenment with a “secret” forecast. (it was just a different forecast.)
A2 #2: The Met Office did not provide such a forecast. (One lone forecaster did outside the authority of the Met Office
A2 #3: We always send simultaneous forecasts that predict it will be warmer/colder at the same time to improve our accuracy by “covering our bases.”
A2 #4: Just like when we say there is a 70% chance of showers, that implies there will be a 30% chance of dry conditions. We told people there would be a 60-80% chance of warmer than usual conditions. It’s not our fault if you don’t get the message that there is a 20-40% chance of colder conditions!
Good grief, guys. I’m no lawyer, but I can ask questions better a nailing down facts.
A2.1 in Sept, Oct, Nov, what winter forcasts did the Government receive from the Met Office?
A2.2 Who authored each forecast? Were that all Official Forecasts and if not, what were they?
A2.3 Did any of the A2.1 forecasts warn of a colder than normal winter?
A2.4 Which of the A2.3 forecasts did not reach the public through TV, radio, or newspaper by December 10? Why did they not?

stephen richards
January 6, 2011 11:35 am

What I think points to lying is that all the private forecasters said there would be a record cold start to winter in August. They included JoeB , Piers C, SOlutions ltd, the polish met off, the russian off etc. The Brits still persisted in saying it would be warm or perhaps more accurately kept stumm. Said Nothing.
Sadly the UK government has never been populated by a more stupid class of politicians than now and will only get worse tomorrow ahen another LibDem gets elected to parliament thanks to a tory PM. Unbelieveable. Some of the senior tories must be cringeing in the pews.

GaryP
January 6, 2011 11:36 am

“Mark Bowlin says: Mike Haseler, please help your non-Commonwealth cousins out here…what’s a bird mincer?”
Bird Mincer = Raptor Cuisinart, Bat Masher, Seagull Killer, Flicker Generator, Ice Thrower, Landscape Blighter = windmill.

January 6, 2011 11:38 am

No,No: They just didn’t know it. They did not lie. It couldn’t have appeared on the screens of their WII Models.

Stephen Brown
January 6, 2011 11:46 am

This story definitely has grown a pair of legs!
Autonomous Mind has more about the Met Office, its obfuscation and incorrect prognostications of late. Please read:-
http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/met-office-continues-to-hide-inconvenient-facts/

Casper
January 6, 2011 11:47 am

It sounds like a theory of conspiracy to me 😉

John from New Zealand
January 6, 2011 11:48 am

Can’t wait to see the outcome of this one!! Either the Met Office are lying their butts off (which would be very unwise as it’s easily verifiable), or the politicians have deliberately misled the public for political propaganda purposes.
Anyone know what the death toll is as a result of the freezing temperatures in the UK?
It’s unavoidable that heads will roll over this one, the first of many governments caught with their pants around their ankles, and it will scare the living c#$p out of the others. It’s just a matter of who they’ll scapegoat, the Met Office or governMENTAL scientific advisors, both of whom probably deserve it just as much. Either way, the public won’t buy it.

Stephen Brown
January 6, 2011 11:50 am

Reference my last comment, here’s one of the Met Office “Warnings” the Autonomous Mind was referring to:-
http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/met-office-severe-weather-warning-ignored-in-northern-ireland/

kwik
January 6, 2011 11:53 am
Amber Waits
January 6, 2011 11:55 am

“When Met-Office purposely confused [the] public while giving secret information to privileged in order to allow them to capitalize on fuel and antifreeze speculations on detriment to society they proved the AGW institutions are corrupt plotters against public that serves to cartels of privileged.”
If indeed this secret info engendered private market speculation, then would this not be a clear case of insider trading? Isn’t insider trading a crime?

Roger Knights
January 6, 2011 12:02 pm

Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to believe.
—Laurence J. Peter

son of mulder
January 6, 2011 12:02 pm

“David A. Evans says:
January 6, 2011 at 9:12 am
One thing I would say is almost a dead cert…
The MO did NOT warn the government office!
If they had any clue as to the weather even DAYS ahead, what was Julia Slingit doing stuck at an airport?”
Maybe they don’t believe the MO either. Does a government believe its Ministry of Propaganda?

Colin Aldridge
January 6, 2011 12:03 pm

The truth of this episode is I fancy mundane and lacking in conspiracy. The Met Ofiice has aso poor a seasonal forcasting record that it announce last year that it would stop publishing them… so no public forecast. Howvere it still made a forecast and told the government what it was. Probably HMG thought that no one would take any notice of a Met Office forecast even if they did publish it given the press derision over previous wrong forecasts. Probably HMG also gave low credibility to the Met Office forecast for the same reason. When The Met office started forecasting a very cold December about a month ahaead it was too late to do much about it by way of stockpiling… apart that is from Heathrow ordering a decent amount of deicer.. which they completely failed to do by the way!

SandyInDerby
January 6, 2011 12:04 pm

Couple of items on the Paul Hudson blog on the BBC what is of interest is the 2nd paragraph after the American 3 Monthly temperature forecasts in this link.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2010/10/another-cold-winter-ahead.shtml
and this one is interesting too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2010/10/winter-20102011-update-cold-an.shtml

Neo
January 6, 2011 12:10 pm

“Lessons have to be learned well in advance of the start of next year’s winter”
The first lesson is obvious … don’t believe the Met Office.

UK John
January 6, 2011 12:23 pm

A 100% certain prediction.
You will receive a non understandable answer to a completely different question, this will be after much delay.
The reply will end with “The UK Met office works constantly to refine and improve its long range forecasting”.
It is a dead duck organisation, it is going through a long painful self inflicted death, its support of all things AGW is the cause of its terminal disease.
I long ago gave up with it, it is beyond hope.