UK Politician Amber Rudd: No Deal Brexit as Bad as Climate Denial

“342303320 Amber Rudd MP” by 01081066l – Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Commons –

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Former British Secretary for Energy and Climate Change Amber Rudd, who admitted to “inadvertently” misleading parliament when she resigned as Home Secretary, has just conflated criticism of the British Government’s Brexit proposition with “climate denial”.

Amber Rudd compares Eurosceptics to climate change deniers as she warns over ‘sobering risks’ of no-deal Brexit

Anyone who claims Brexit will be easy is ‘being as cavalier with people’s future as those who deny that the belching of fossil fuels into the atmosphere is warming the planet’

Lizzy Buchan
Political Correspondent

A former cabinet minister has compared Brexiteers to climate change deniers as she fired off a warning over the “sobering risks” to the economy if Britain crashes out of the EU without a deal.

Writing in The Sunday Times, Ms Rudd, a former energy secretary, said: “Yes, we will leave the EU’s political institutions in March next year – we will no longer have MEPs or be members of the European Council. But disentangling regulatory and legal systems that have been entwined for more than 40 years will require delicate diplomacy.

“Such an endeavour will not be straightforward. Anyone who claims it will is being as cavalier with people’s future as those who deny that the belching of fossil fuels into the atmosphere is warming the planet.

Just as we must listen to scientific warnings about the risks of manmade climate change, so we must listen to the businesses and economists warning that a chaotic Brexit will threaten our economy.

Read more:

There is no doubt that post Brexit, many British greens will miss their generous former friends in the European Union.

But in my opinion Amber Rudd’s attempt to conflate climate “denial” and criticism of the government’s Brexit plans in my opinion is a desperate and rather clumsy attempt to shut down public debate.

184 thoughts on “UK Politician Amber Rudd: No Deal Brexit as Bad as Climate Denial

  1. She’s a lying fool. Disentangling regulatory and legal systems is utterly facile. It requires no negotiation whatsoever. The UK has laws and regulations, and on the day we leave, we have laws and regulations. That is literally it. What exactly do we negotiate?

    The trade stuff can be made a bit more complicated and can require negotiation, but that is not laws and regulation. Another Remainer who simply has no clue what she is talking about, but is happy to make it all sound very difficult.

    • If you read what she said properly, she told the truth, even if accidentally.

      Just as we must listen to scientific warnings about the risks of manmade climate change, so we must listen to the businesses and economists warning that a chaotic Brexit will threaten our economy.”

      We should treat both sets of warnings the same way. That’s precisely what she said.

      YES! We should pay the same attention to both warnings. We must not listen to those warnings.

      • I wasn’t aware that the EU as an entity had been around for 40 years. I thought the EURO and thus the EU came to be between 1999 and 2002. In my math that is 20 years ago. Granted though there has been some kind of agreement in force since the end of WWII

      • CommieBob, I had a similar thought response. Since she thinks the the 2 threats are comparable, her statements produced the thought: No evidence of catastrophic warming means no need to worry about catastrophic Brexit.


    • The union was originally created primarily to help integrate/manage/promote an efficient coal (and steel) industry among members.

      It (the union) has morphed 180 degrees into an entity that has, among its main priorities, a desire to decimate any real efficiency as associated with the coal industry.

      Her statement seems to be a confirmation of the above.

      • It goes back to the European Coal and Steel Community, founded in the 1950’s to prevent the outbreak of World War One, as any fule kno.

      • DonM – No! It has been all smoke and mirrors from the start. The “union” or EEC as it was known before it became the EU, was NOT created to “help promote an efficient coal and steel industry” …. The “thinking” at the time was that intertwining Germany’s coal and steel industry with (initially) France’s, followed by the other original four member states (Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Luxembourg) would prevent Germany ever having the capacity to go to war in Europe again. Or that is how some people have interpreted it. Others see the EU as a continuation of dominance in Europe by Germany by other than military means.

        The “union” was subsequently promoted as a “free trade” zone, a reasonable sounding agreement between neighbors – which was precisely what the British thought they were agreeing to in 1973, for the most part unaware that it would slowly morph into the undemocratic creature that has now resulted in BREXIT.

    • I think you and your 53 supporters might be in for a shock on March 30 next year if there is a “no-deal” Brexit. It’s not the trade that is difficult; it’s the agreements the UK will no longer be part of that will cause the trouble. For example, all EU countries accept each others driving licences.What happens when the UK is no longer part of that agreement? I don’t know the answer to that and neither do you!

      There are several hundred of those agreements, any one of which in the absence of a negotiated replacement could prevent access of goods or people between the UK and the European mainland if their “laws and regulationx” are not your “laws and regulations”.

      In fact in many areas you don’t have any laws and regulations of your own any more and you’re going to have to create them. Meanwhile the EU laws and regulations you signed up to no longer apply. I wish you luck.

      • Observer

        It’s a two way street. European driving licences are accepted in the UK along with everything else.

        But that wasn’t always the case, and whilst it was a bit more inconvenient in the past, we didn’t have a common driving licence or passport standard before the EU.

        How do UK drivers fare in other countries outside the EU? Perfectly well from my experience. And part of the desire of Brexit is to stop unrestricted immigration, so yes, travel will again be slightly more inconvenient, but far from restrictive, unless the Europeans want to be bloody minded about it.

        Laws and regulations are also a smokescreen. America and China import goods into the EU whilst conforming to the laws and regulations. Why would they suddenly become an insurmountable problem for the UK the day after we leave?

        It’s much like the disasters ‘project fear’ predicted would overcome the UK when the referendum was decided. The predictions of calamity weren’t even close, the UK prospered, and we’ll do so again after we leave.

      • My wife just drove herself and me across the United States from Boston to San Francisco (I can’t drive – epilepsy). Trip of a lifetime and we met so many brilliant people along the way.

        My wife has a UK driving licence, which was accepted without question. Last time I looked, the US wasn’t a member of the EU…

  2. All you have to remember about Rudd is she has a majority of 346 and hopefully will be gone at the next election.

      • Dispose of litter thoughtfully.
        Can someone lock her up in the ladies room instead, please?

      • The general direction of travel is MP, then head of a quango working 2 days a month for a fabulous salary ( you can head up more than one at a time) then onto the EU, probably as a commissioner, then the House of Lords where you can snooze in a corner of the chamber, often described as the best members club in London.

        Lots of golden troughs that the greedy elite sup from.

        Obviously they are very keen to retain their gilded existence. We are very keen to prevent them.


    • The poor woman was promoted way beyond her ability. Irritating as she is, I hope she doesn’t lose her seat in the next election as the thought of Jeremy Corbin running the UK is truly scary!

      • Very many MP’s are promoted wildly above their abilities. Theresa May is the best example of this, I wouldn’t put her in charge of a corner shop.


    • I had the misfortune to live in her constituency, but moved before I had the opportunity to reduce her majority further.

  3. Oh dear.

    I have just moved house and become one of Amber Rudderless’s constituents.

    The hysterics over Brexit are now beyond surreal – food rotting in the fields, everyone at risk from super-gonorrhea, plans to nuke the Channel Tunnel if Brexit goes badly (no, really). I should have expected this to be hitched to climate issues at some point.

    Rudd will be receiving a lengthy letter and then a visit from me in short order.

    • She’s a remnant in a leave constituency with a tiny majority, out soon. I would spend the time enjoying Hastings and Rye but each to his own! (401 constituencies out of 632 estimated to have voted leave of course!)

      • Out soon, to be replaced by … ?
        A “leave” constituency but will they have a “leave” candidate ?
        Don’t these morons realise that the Tory party is likely to be demolished at the next General Election, their only hope being to get behind Brexit properly ?

        As for hitching Brexit to “climate change”, well, only shows that she merely reflects the vacant ideologies she derives from the bbc and similar propagandists.

        • OE: I begin to think that some dipstick in back-office of the Tory party has worked out that the vast majority of Leavers across the country are to be fond in Labour constituencies, the thinking being that fewer Tories will be discombobulated by a failure of Brexit than Labour. They – the dipsticks – probably think it a risk worth taking.
          But NOT in my name. WTO works for me. I just want OUT!

          • Harry

            No, the majority of leavers are in Tory constituencies although those in labour ones are also well represented.

            Some 65% of all constituencies voted leave, which in a General Election would have resulted in an overall majority of some 60 seats.

            As has been said, the Tory party is playing with fire in taking the current route

          • Hi Climatereason. The actual numbers were 422 : 228 constituencies for Leave. My point was based on teh fact that an awful lot of Labour voters voted Leave but I wasn’t sure of the constituency numbers, Either way, there will be a lot of Leavers and Leave constituencies pissed off with anything other than a clean Leave. Unfortunately, I think we’re being sold down the river and, in not leaving we shall not remain – in the form that some idiot Remainers seem to think. Our place in the EU and the EU itself will change as a result of this – for the poorer (meaning, for the rich).

  4. “Amber Rudd’s attempt to conflate climate “denial” and criticism of the government’s Brexit plans in my opinion is a desperate and rather clumsy attempt to shut down public debate.”
    Don’t worry Eric, nobody’s going to listen to her. She was one of Cameron’s cronies, who, like Theresa May, some suggest were promoted beyond their executive abilities. Like Mrs May, she will not be missed and will leave no lasting positive legacy.
    Sadly, we don’t have a leader to “drain the Westminster swamp” at this time, but one lives in eternal hope.

      • John Endicott

        That leaves a choice of two. Nigel Farage or Boris.

        One exception might be, however, Sajid Javid. A good business track record and seems able to make a decision.

        • Jacob Rees-Mogg seems a good candidate. He never managed to lock himself out of his own house.

          • ha! rural, then? population density problems only exist in cities.
            we don’t even have homeless in the country- there’s no place for them to live…lol

      • I keep wondering what happened to Owen Paterson. He seemed to be competent, strong-minded, and a British patriot. Why hasn’t he stepped forward? He could well be a great PM.

        • I agree, Pat. I had high hopes for Owen Paterson myself, having watched his interviews on TV and read about his success at his job.

          There are people about, who are capable and logical, but…. where have they gone and why don’t we hear more from them?

          • competent, strong-minded, and a British patriot capable and logical

            I think you have answered your own question there. Such characteristics have no place in the modern political world any more than those who are honest, honourable and forthright are.

          • I lied about my postcode and send Paterson a message to step forward. I asked him whether Winston Churchill’s effort was stillborn, to see the UK dissolve away.

        • Pat Frank

          “Paterson became part of Leave Means Leave’s political advisory board.”

          That’ll be the reason.

        • Pat,
          Owen was useless — only he could blame badgers for “moving the goalposts” when asked why his department had failed to shot them.

    • “…some suggest were promoted beyond their executive abilities.”
      Here in the States we call that the Peter principle. Just be glad she didn’t survive long enough for the Inverse Peter principle to take effect. That is where someone is promoted to the level where their incompetence is no longer obvious.

  5. If Brexit works as well for you Brits as the Trump revolution is working for us here in the USA, you’re in for some good times ahead. The business of conflating Brexit with climate change is nothing but an utterly futile attempt to be relevant.

  6. Sorry, you can’t seriously be paying attention to anything that woman says on absolutely anything. Ignore her. 60 million Brits already do.

  7. Sometimes I think the Germans just play along with French and UK stupid to not reveal their more determined industrial and economic strategies. The power market was the exception with uniform stupid.

  8. “Just as we must listen to scientific warnings that a chaotic Brexit will threaten our economy, so we must listen to the businesses and economists about the risks of manmade climate change.”

    • we must NOT listen to politicians who have already demonstrated that they lie and chronically misinform us to gain support for their privately held ideas and issues.

  9. There is something rotten in the heart of British politics.

    We have crime levels increasing and prisons minister stating that prison does not work.

    We have an aid budget, giving money to foreign governments who have armed forces and space programs larger than the UK.

    We are unable to order any substantial project with any hope of success (delivered on time/to budget) or even just working:
    We have new royal navy vessels which can not operate in warm seas;
    We have NHS computers systems ordered then canceled with a spend of £10bn;
    We have a failing education system as demonstrated in international tests;
    Our train system is crumbling;
    They insist we live the green dream with all that entails;
    Not enough housing for the size of the increasing population.

    The only major success of British politicians is their continued smooth transfer into well paid jobs when they leave politics.

    • Western democracy is failing as we elect people who only toady to our basic greed and irresponsibility by bankrupting our nations to give us unnecessary services and low taxes.
      If we don’t introduce constitutional changes to inhibit government borrowing we will fall like Rome.

      • There is a lot of strategy in letting a system decay to the point of failure. Only at that point can you get permission to rebuild that system in your own image.

        That appears to be what most Western governments are doing. They let society fail to the point that the people demand revolution, and at that point, they implement revolution with the cheers of the people. Only to discover that you’ve been duped into agreeing to something far worse than what you had originally.

          • They did use this strategy for a specific target. I’ll quote wiki:

            Cloward and Piven “proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system – by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice – that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy.”

            I’m not aware of any government that has been toppled this way. I thought the Chinese communist revolution may have been it, but my reading of this just now, tells of a long drawn out fight for control over a nearly 30 year period.

            Others may know more of history than I do.

  10. Bizarre argument in her opinion piece in the Sunday Times – Rudd is proud to say that she took a huge gamble with the security of supply of Britain’s electricity when she was Energy and Climate Change Secretary in 2015…
    “I stood up and said that we would shut every coal-fired power station in the country within 10 years. We were not certain exactly how we would achieve that goal…”
    Even admitting that “Action [in curbing carbon dioxide emissions] by us alone will make little difference.[to Climate Change]”
    Tellingly, she thinks that the gamble was a “political” one. No, it’s real and we are all paying for it now, daily.
    So remind me, who is it that was/is “… being cavalier with people’s future”?
    I guess it’s OK to be cavalier if your beliefs coincide with Ms Rudd’s. Anyone who doesn’t share those beliefs is “yawningly” open for insult and a “denier”.

      • So, the people she asked didn’t know. And the people who consulted with the government didn’t know. But she believed that we should go ahead with it anyway.

        She obviously doesn’t feel any pain in her hip pocket from her own decisions or failures. Nor does she care (or probably know) if anyone else is hurting. These are the people who are a danger to society.

  11. “…as those who deny that the belching of fossil fuels into the atmosphere is warming the planet.”

    Someone is belching fossil fuels into the atmosphere? What a waste of perfectly good fossil fuels! Why aren’t they burning them for transportation or to make electricity?

  12. The Brexit vote was a rare and precious display of guts these days from a nation that was once the greatest ever. I didnt think there was any of this adventurous spirit left, bogged down as it is by fears and entitlements wrought by a seemigly metastasized Old World marxbrotherism. That over half voted to leave was a huge surprise.

    The languishing since on closing the deal, however, shows the Lilliputians are still running the show. I’ve heard Brits point out that the Conservatives were in power over the last number of years. They dont get it do they.

    • Sadly there are too many “Conservatives” like Rudd who shouldn’t be in the Party. We need a real centre – right party that espouses policies close to those in the last UKIP manifesto.

  13. Last year I read that the EU did their own internal poll to find out how the Brits felt about the EU. This poll illustrated Britain had no interest in the EU. Wish I could re-find the link for that.

    Three times we have had a vote.
    One with Cameron promising the referendum- he won.
    The referendum- won by Brexiteers.
    May won the election thus cementing the desire to leave.

    Further polls-

    “Arch-Remainer Tony Blair has been humiliated after a poll by his Institute for Global Change asking if Britain should stay in the EU found an overwhelming majority in favour of ‘Hard Brexit’.

    and recent polls seem to favour the above though as we know polls are not that accurate.

    • If “No Deal Brexit” is the only way then get on with it. I assume the U.K. would fall back on WTO rules and negotiate from there. It’s hard to believe that they would do worse than the free trade deal that Canada has with the E.U. and many other trade deals await investigation.
      I learned a long time ago (labour negotiations) that you can’t negotiate effectively from a position of weakness. Brexit is a threat to the ongoing harmony ( if we can call it that) of Europe.
      Leave or at least declare that you are going without a deal and you will instantly be in the drivers’s seat.

      • John Harmsworth

        I believe Mother Theresa’s expression was “No deal is better than a bad deal”. So she proposed a deal and immediately her Brexit Secretary (David Davis) and Her Foreign Secretary (Boris Johnson) resigned.

        At that point, most rational people would say to themselves “Hang on a minute”.

      • I learned a long time ago (labour negotiations) that you can’t negotiate effectively from a position of weakness

        That is the real tragedy here. It isn’t the UK that is in a position of weakness. That is what is so insane about the whole thing. Exports from the EU to the UK are massively greater than UK to EU. The UK pays 20% of the EU budget. The UK financial markets support huge swathes of EU business. Much of the EU fish supplies comes from UK waters. We truly do not need the EU for trade given we have the Commonwealth and many other countries ready and willing to strike deals, deals that would not be hampered by the EU protectionism. FFS in any sensible world they should be paying and bribing us to salvage what they can and to keep trading with them.

      • “EU fires warning at Britain: End ‘unfair’ tax breaks or WE WILL SUE”

        another reason to leave – Eu admitting we will be better off without their interference.

        “Barnier: We must STOP UK having unfair advantage: May plan gives Brits ‘competitive edge'”

        Barnier admitting the UK will be better off outside the EU- with competitive edge.

    • EU says ‘no’

      EU says ‘whatever you want you aren’t getting it so its no deal or stay in and we have a fear campaign to make sure when you get the second referendum you will vote to stay in. Oh and we own your government and the opposition anyway, so put that in your urinal and pee on it.

      Oh and as a result of all this trouble when you do decide to stay in you wont have a vote and the price will be double.

  14. I don’t mind the comparison at all. Logical, analytical people who don’t like being manipulated with false fears. There are people out there who feel compelled to say whatever nonsense they think will eleveate their standing in society. She appears to be a chronic liar!

      • Modern TV-based (and now Internet-based) democracy actively selects for charismatic psychopaths. Politicians who can lie convincingly have a much higher chance of being elected.

  15. Amber Rudd always was one of the establishment idiots. She was useless as energy and climate change minister.

    • Phillip

      “Energy and Climate Change Minister”

      Lets face it, with a department title like that, anyone taking charge of it can’t possibly be any good.

  16. Could someone explain British dentistry to me? What is unique about its practice and insurance design? I just like to compare systems before Bernie or others declare some other national social system superior without full detailed explanation like Denmark’s tax rate utopia.

    • It’s more than a decade since I left there, but, at the time, Britain had a two-tier dentistry system, and I don’t believe it’s changed much:

      1. Private. You pay the bills, and treatment is as good as anywhere in the world.

      2. NHS. The government pays the bills out of your taxes, but pays significantly less than the market rate, so dentists prefer to go private, and those who do take NHS patients typically don’t offer the same kind of services you could get in a private dentist.

      Still, at least it’s better than when I was a kid, when the only two NHS services on offer seemed to be filling teeth or pulling them.

    • Though to be fair, rabbit incisors are a quirk of how your genes arranged your teeth, not a sign of bad dental care.

      For myself, I ended up with elongated canines. I never needed fake fangs to dress up as a vampire for Halloween. Just had to pull back my bottom lip. 😮

      • Well, she did a number on U.S. forests clear cutting them for wood pellets. That beats an army of wood chucks.

  17. select your virtue signalling template
    Construct your devastatingly illogical attack based on the prevailing idiot-view.
    Rake in the shekels from your sponsors.

    No wonder she’s smiling…

  18. Perhaps she is right. Being skeptical of climate change religious thought may be analogous to being skeptical of the EU as a useful form of governance for the UK. Both thought processes may be rooted in the same clear headed analytical thinking that non-sheep are capable of.

  19. Funny how ‘climate-denier’ seems interchangeable in terms of usage as ‘blasphemer’.
    And they keep telling us it’s not a religion.

  20. She sings the same old tune, ‘submit to authority’, whether politics or science, ‘submit to authority’.

    • The “serious” left (Slate/Graun style) hates authority and submits to it on
      – climate
      – vaccines
      – Putin intent
      – exfiltration of DNC emails

  21. Extraordinary shroud-waving from the remainers. No food, no medicines, state of emergency – who do they think they are kidding? In any case, the EU will come to a deal at the 11th hour, and the harder we push them the better. Second referendum? I shall vote leave again. Sadly our UK politicians are largely incompetent and useless at present. I wish it were otherwise.

    • Indeed. If Trump was in charge, Britain would have had a deal a year ago, and the EU would be paying money to Britain so the British would allow them to continue trading.

      May has to have been picked to intentionally do her best to get the worst possible deal. Either that, or the Tories are literally too incompetent to organize a piss-up in a brewery these days.

  22. As a former Energy Secretary, was she involved in the mass clear cutting of U.S. forests for wood pellets to feed UK boilers?

  23. So npw Brexit is another form of climate denial. Sorry that Amber feels that way. Both are questionable products of environmentalist pseudo-science. Just a look at a global warming crve such as the one from HadCRUT3 will convince you that no way can carbon dioxide cause global warming. HadCRUT shows the entire length of the global carbon dioxide curve as entirely smooth, with only a slight upward curvature due to human influence. Not so with global temperature curve of HadCRUT. It zigs and zags up and down. Carbon dioxide curve at points where the temperature curve changess, like in years 1910 and 1940, remains completely undisturbed by that. This is impossible if any heat transfer has taken place between carbon dioxide and its surrounding atmosphere. But heat transfer is required to make the greenhouse theory of warming work. And this lack of heat transfer makes the greenhouse theory invalid. t. Not to mention the fact that there is no way to lower air temperature by using carbon dioxide.

  24. Rudd is an authoritarian socialist so these comments should come as no surprise.

    The Prime Minister is from the same political sphere as Rudd.

    • No she is a right-winger. A member of the Conservative Party.
      A senior member. She has served in the Cabinet under two Conservative Prime Ministers.

      • MCourtney

        The Conservative Party itself is just an extension of the labour party.

        The only reason I’ll vote for it next time round is if labour is still a threat. Otherwise, I’d rather vote UKIP, at least they have a published climate policy which is entirely sceptical.

        • HotScot
          The limp dems, Labour and fake conservatives are ALL a threat. (At least Labour is honest, they actually tell us they’re going to wreck the economy!) Our only hope is everyone votes UKIP regardless of who might or might not get in.

  25. An example of the vile remain campaigners.

    “This is one of the abusive emails sent to Brexiteer Tory MP Andrea Jenkyns last night. Warning: unpleasant content.”

    As one poster on Guido Fawkes said: “Jenkyns is doing exactly what she was elected to do in the manifesto upon which she stood, and is representing the interests of the majority of her constituents who voted to Leave.”

    Unlike Amber Rudd.

  26. Now I know with great certainty that leaving with no deal is an excellent idea – and that AGW is a hoax .

  27. You can’t leave the EU until we negotiate an agreement.
    Oh, by the way, we have no intention of ever negotiating an agreement.

  28. Brexit is the crisis that just keeps looming….

    >In the words of chief Remoaner Alastair Campbell, ‘No deal Brexit means no food Brexit and no medicines Brexit…’. Imagine being Alastair Campbell. Imagine giving the green light to the destruction of a foreign country and the deaths of tens of thousands of people in the name of delivering democracy, only to decide 15 years later that you don’t believe in democracy after all and so you devote your entire life to overthrowing the largest democratic vote in British history. Scientists should study Mr Campbell to discover how such a human being manages to sleep at night. Also, no one is saying there will be ‘no food’ after Brexit. Campbell is lying now as surely as he was when he said Saddam could bomb Britain in 45 minutes.

    There’s years more of this to come.

    • That’s terrible. There won’t be any medicines available to manage Alistair Campbell’s manic-depressive psychosis.

  29. Abandoning “climate change mitigation” is one of Brexit’s top advantages which will favour, not threaten British economy. Extremely likely.

  30. It is however quite possible to be sceptical of AGW and still be against brexit. And vote DEM, for that matter.

    • As the planet seems currently to be on fire I am rapidly losing my faith/belief in cagw scepticism; like Julian the Apostate am rapidly returning to paganism.

  31. This pretty much answers the question. Climate alarmism and the European project are elitist causes, supported by the same bubble-dwellers. Well, Britain has its own deplorables and they will not take well to being messed with.

  32. Anyone who thinks mangoes taste good is being as cavalier as those who believe that belching the exhaust of fossil fuels into the atmosphere has no effect on climate.

    Now you try it — just put together two totally unrelated circumstances, and pretend like their juxtaposition constitutes a rational statement.

  33. There’s a reason why many of us Brits begin her name with a “C” because she speaks so much of it.

  34. I tend to agree with her to the extent that the two views fall about the same place on the good-bad spectrum. The difference is that I put them squarely on the eminently sensible, good end.

    • “claiming Brexit ease” = “denying human-caused planetary warming”

      The two presumptions are not even logically parallel. How is claiming something like denying something? Claiming is NOT like denying.

      A seemingly more logical statement might look something like, “Claiming that Brexit is easy is like claiming that transitioning away from fossil fuels is feasible.” Here the presumptions would be logically parallel — with one claim compared to another claim — one instance of presumed difficulty compared to another instance of presumed difficulty — “claiming” = “claiming”, rather than “claiming” = “denying”.

      So, not only is her statement conflation, but also it is false equation of terms.

      This belongs in the just-making-shit-up department.

  35. There once was a girl named Rudd,
    Whose statements were naught but mud.
    The fool redhead’s newest being,
    Brexit and climate conflating,
    Is clearly naught but a dud!

    Sorry, couldn’t pass-up the opportunity.
    That said, we still have to many of “them” in government here in the U.S. and unfortunately, they are mostly in the Republican party. They say they believe in the rights of the individual but pander to groups when in office.

  36. Winter is coming. Sooner or later they will realize that solar and wind wont do it for Europe.
    How happy they will be when they realize that they are not tied by rules from Brussels…

  37. It is a close-run thing deciding which of them, Rudd or Perry is the thicker when it comes to running the energy portfolios they had/have. They both really believe that wind turbines are becoming the cheapest means of power generation – next to solar.

  38. I think clumsy is the key word. From the quotes given, she didn’t herself actually appear to use the D-word.

    I am myself currently OK to go along with the idea that CO2 may well have a warming effect on the planet. But so what? That is not the real substance of the debate. Quantity and timing has always been paramount. She indicates that she hasn’t even come close to properly considering the issues.

    Ms Rudd has merely shown that she is not, and never was, up to speed with either the science, the economics, or the politics. It seems best that she does not achieve such high office again.

    • Correct. by saying ““those who deny that the belching of fossil fuels into the atmosphere is warming the planet,” she was attacking a strawman, because almost all prominent skeptical scientists are lukewarmers who accept AGW but deny CAGW.

  39. I find the idea that the risks of Brexit and AGW are similar quite plausible. In both cases, the small contingent of scientists/economics forecasting catastrophic harm have no established track record of successful predictions to back up their dire forecasts.

  40. We have had four Secretaries of State for Energy and Climate Change. Ed Miliband (of Edstone & bacon sandwich fame), Chris (convicted perjurer) Huhne, (Potato) Ed Davey and Amber Krudd. All four, and Greg Clark – Secretary of State for Business (and Energy), have been unmitigated disasters. All should be incarcerated in The Tower for the rest of their miserable lives for wasting hundreds of Billions on virtue signalling solutions that don’t work for problems that don’t exist.
    The idea of believing absolutely anything that any of them say on any subject is simply preposterous.
    All, and Theresa the Appeaser, are solidly behind the latest Project Fear campaign and clearly intend to come up with a deal that is blatantly unacceptable and will then move to a second referendum where they hope the “correct” answer will be forthcoming. And will doubtless stuff ballot boxes to be sure.
    But if we are going to be a satrap for the EU Commission to control, why do we also need the incompetents, toadies and traitors in Westminster?

  41. Islamo-socialist progressives doing what Islamo-socialist progressives do best ‘demonisation’ of their political foes,………. until its legal to kill them.

  42. A hard Brexit will immediately benefit the UK some 50 billion dollars the EU says the UK owes as a divorce bill. Walk away from the table. The EU needs the UK’s money a lot more than the UK needs the EU debt.

  43. The UK would be much better off making duty free trade deals with everyone. Look around the world. Duty free areas have booming economies as compared to their neighbors, because of the lack of barriers to business.

    For example. you want to import something from China into the EU. When it arrives in the EU, it has the wrong spelling on the label, so it is refused. Do you ship it back to China, or over to the duty free UK to fix the label?

    Pretty soon everything headed for the EU ends up going through the UK first, because nothing attracts business like the lack of regulations. Especially when compared to the EU with their mountains of regulations.

  44. Americans on this thread must be completely baffled!

    They will have got the idea that Amber Rudd isn’t everbody’s favorite politician. In fact she provokes a similar response to Hillary Clinton by male Trumpers.

    One little bit of background – She used to be married to the late AA Gill, who was the most bitter, twisted, misanthropic and generally unpleasant restaurant critic for the Sunday Times. That must have been an experience that would warp anyone for life. (Nil nisi bonum).

  45. Politicians like Rudd, Mandleson, Blair and commentators like Alastair Campbell, have declared a Psyops war on folk in the UK who voted for us to become an independent trading nation again by taking back democratic control of our money, borders and laws. It’s now beyond ridiculous with relentless daily tales of looming disaster. When historians look back to the Brexit Civil War they will have to do so with the eyes of psychiatrists desperately needing to unravel the Remainia suffered by an establishment who lost a democratic referendum about the return of democracy. They are beyond pathetic.

  46. Did folks in the UK get their spines removed? Here in Canada we are doing well without towing the EU line. And before you complain about your neighbors, try having them live with you for 300 years.

    Probably the biggest economic mistake we made in Canada was not giving Quebec independence. Now they are sort of like Cuba, stuck in time as no one wants to invest. Make a clean break. Nothing worse than a divorce where you continue to live in the same house.

    • Every time I see the results of the Quebec referendum, I wish we could go back in time and convince a few thousand more people to vote ‘Leave’. Canada would be a much better place if they’d chosen freedom.

    • ferdberple

      The remainers had their spines removed, the Brexiters didn’t. Unfortunately, the establishment is overrun with treacherous remainers like Rudd, Mandleson, Blair, Campbell and of course Theresa May etc., none of whom have the balls to commit to the democratic decision of the country.

      The only two I have any time for are David Davis (always respected him, should have been PM long ago) and Boris Johnson. They had the guts to resign from Theresa May’s cabinet when they witnessed the betrayal of the British electorate.

  47. The noisome Amber Crudd ought to be tarred & feathered for such an appalling statement.

  48. She apparently regards AGW as a religion. The problem wit AGW is that it is based on only partial science and full of holes. The reality is that based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, one can conclude that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rational to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. The AGW conjecture is based the existence of a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases in the Earth’s atmosphere with LWIR absorption bands. Such a radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere, or anywhere else in the solar system for that matter. The radiant greenhouse effect is science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is science fiction as well. It is all a matter of science,

  49. I could detail some of the things this woman has said, but why bother, she is the epitome of low intelligence and high education. There is a vast difference between highly educated and highly intelligent. She demonstrates it quite well

  50. Rudd is wrong on both counts, but the comments are also quite wrong about her. She was a very capable Minister. She did mislead Parliament on the question of the policy regarding deportations, but did so because of having been given wrong advice by her department civil servants. Her resignation was honorable.

    Why she was misinformed by her department? That is a question we will probably never get an answer to. What we do know is that those at a senior level who were responsible for it were first censured and then quietly relocated to Siberia.

  51. ““Such an endeavour will not be straightforward. Anyone who claims it will is being as cavalier with people’s future as those who deny that the belching of fossil fuels into the atmosphere is warming the planet.”

    What a stupid statement. Power stations do not emit fossil fuels into the atmosphere. They emit carbon dioxide, which is a completely different thing.

    Even after allowing for that mistake, like any other believers she doesn’t even know what sceptics think. I would be fairly confident that the vast proportion of sceptics here at WUWT do acknowledge that increasing CO2 levels will have some warming effect, though a lot smaller than what the corrupt IPCC claims. And of course the fact that the climate is nearly always changing is an important sceptical argument.

    So, Amber, how can someone who believes that the climate is always changing be a “climate change denier”.
    The stupidity of these green believers is beyond contempt.

  52. “There is no doubt that post Brexit, many British greens will miss their generous former friends in the European Union. ”

    Maybe so – but “Brexit” under May is a sham… we will not be leaving.

    Customs union – in
    Fishing rights – lost
    freedom of trade without EU veto – nope, not getting that back
    Unrestricted Mussie invaders pretending to be “refugees” – check… not stopping them.

    EVERY single thing that traitorous bitch has said she’ll stand up for…. she has rolled over and taken it up the arse from the EU over.
    She has fucked over 17 million people who voted to leave. I bet she is getting a very good £££ back hander from the EU… and Soros…

Comments are closed.