Furious Greenpeace, Oxfam Suing the French Government Over Macron’s Carbon Tax Retreat

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

NGOS including Oxfam and Greenpeace are furious at President Macron’s frantic retreat from yellow vest protests against higher fuel taxes.

1.7 million people have signed a petition in favor of suing France over climate-change inaction

By Annabelle Timsit in Paris
December 27, 2018

More than 1.7 million people have signed a petition in favor of suing the French government, accusing it of inaction on climate change.

Four NGOs—Oxfam, Greenpeace, Notre Affaire à Tous, and Fondation pour la Nature et l’Homme—have initiated legal proceedings saying France has defaulted on its environmental obligations. The initial Dec.18 filing gives the government two months to formulate a response, after which the organizations can choose to move forward with their lawsuit (link in French) in administrative court.

Recently, Macron’s government tried to implement an increased carbon tax to limit fossil fuels used in cars. But the resulting backlash from a group of populist protesters known as “yellow vests” has led to billions of euros in damages, hundreds of arrests, and the deaths of at least four people (link in French).

Some within the government have said these kinds of demonstrations discourage political action on climate change. But Toussaint believes the movement for climate justice and the yellow vests’ demands are not mutually exclusive. “What they [yellow vests] want first and foremost is social justice and financial justice,” she told Quartz. “And there will be no social justice without action for the climate. Global warming feeds on inequalities and strengthens them. It strikes the most fragile first. It is destroying our economy and our territories. So, it can be a process that can be done in parallel.” She argues the carbon tax should be balanced out with social subsidies financed through a tax hike on large corporate greenhouse gas emitters.

Read more: https://qz.com/1507841/petition-to-sue-france-over-climate-change-is-signed-by-1-7-million/

Personally I think the NGOs are being optimistic in assuming the yellow vests would have accepted a subsidy for carbon tax deal.

Carbon tax advocates seem to assume fossil fuel demand is elastic – higher taxes reduce demand, by encouraging people to choose less carbon intensive alternatives to personal road transport. But many of the yellow vest protestors are farmers and rural workers, they live in regions with poor public transport. Many of them have to transport large payloads of rural supplies to or from their farms.

The livelihoods of rural yellow vest protestors are utterly dependent on their inelastic access to affordable diesel. Our access to affordable food is utterly dependent on keeping costs down for rural workers.

Update (EW): Breitbart reports the European Union is also piling pressure on France, with a statement that Macron has “lost authority” after offering concessions to protesters.

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
neil watson
December 27, 2018 6:06 pm

Just what is un met, un gars to do? Patatras! The whole charade crumbles.

Reply to  neil watson
December 28, 2018 1:06 am

I think that a certain faction of the French citizenry – in this case – 1.7 Million citizens – are either self destructive lemmings, or, because they are somehow immune from starvation, wish to make lemmings of the rest of the population.

This is insanity!


Jon Jewett
Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 7:59 am

Boys and Girls, listen up. The idea that Lemmings commit suicide by jumping off of cliffs is a lie. When Lemmings become overcrowded they migrate. Some choose paths that are dangerous and get killed. Their mass suicide is only a another HOAX. However there is a source for the suicidal Lemming story.

Disney made a movie “White Wilderness” that showed a mass suicide of Lemmings. BUT……

“according to a 1983 investigation by Canadian Broadcasting Corporation producer Brian Vallee, the lemming scenes were faked. The lemmings supposedly committing mass suicide by leaping into the ocean were actually thrown off a cliff by the Disney filmmakers”.

Thousands murdered to make a Roman Holiday (but I mix my metaphors).


OK, the fundamental principle is this: A Disney movie is not real life and confusing the two is dangerous. E.G. A liberal woman moved to Colorado. There were bears in her neighborhood and they were just so cute and precious. So, she fed them. Of course she was warned and ticketed several times, but she had been raised on Disney movies. She knew better. And then, and then one day……. the cute little bears killed and ate her. The real tragedy of the story is that the bears had to be hunted and killed.

Reply to  Jon Jewett
December 28, 2018 10:42 am

Ah . . . the Rent-a-Mobs again. Wonder what they boys behind the curtain are having to pay for them these days?

Reply to  Jon Jewett
December 28, 2018 11:17 am

It’s a muddy memory but I think I remember hearing that the filmakers didn’t even have that many lemmings… less than a dozen???? Maybe when they unfreeze Disney’s brain, he can tell us.

Reply to  Jon Jewett
December 28, 2018 2:00 pm

And the film was made in Alberta, the lemmings were forced off the cliff into a river. It only looked like an ocean in the film.

One Disney guy admitted in the expose that it was faked, but it wasn’t really fake because “everybody knows lemmings commit mass suicide”. It was just a matter of convenience, they had schedules and couldn’t wait around for the actual event in order to film it.

Reply to  neil watson
December 28, 2018 1:15 am

And this person seriously needs some education in basic economics!

Toussaint believes the movement for climate justice and the yellow vests’ demands are not mutually exclusive. “What they [yellow vests] want first and foremost is social justice and financial justice,” she told Quartz. “And there will be no social justice without action for the climate. Global warming feeds on inequalities and strengthens them. It strikes the most fragile first. It is destroying our economy and our territories. So, it can be a process that can be done in parallel.” She argues the carbon tax should be balanced out with social subsidies financed through a tax hike on large corporate greenhouse gas emitters.

This person wants to 1. Destroy the economy, 2. Starve – first of all the “fragile” and then the general populace, Take money from corporations who will simply raise their prices in an attempt to remain viable, (which will further stress the public).

What insanity do we have in our midst?




M Courtney
Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 2:55 am

Also it is worth remembering that the demand to reduce GHG emissions is not justified as there is no rpoven link between the effect of mitigation activities and any future climate change.
So any court case is based on fringe science, at best.

This is according to the IPCC.
From page 258 of the IPCC WG 3 AR5:

• Despite the importance of the cost of mitigation, the aggregate cost of mitigating x tonnes of carbon globally is poorly understood. To put it differently, a global carbon tax of x dollars per tonne 259 Social, Economic, and Ethical Concepts and Methods 3 Chapter 3 would yield y(t) tonnes of carbon abatement at time, t. We do not understand the relationship between x and y(t).
• The choice of the rate at which future uncertain climate damages are discounted depends on their risk profile in relation to other risks in the economy. By how much does mitigating climate change reduce the aggregate uncertainty faced by future generations?

Russ Wood
Reply to  M Courtney
December 30, 2018 3:51 am

Sorry, but I have to repeat what my wife (an incorrigible punster) had to add to this: “Well, it may be fringe science, but then the case will have to be heard in a FRENGE court!”
You are allowed to go “ouch!”

Stephen Skinner
Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 3:07 am

This paragraph is the most… I’m speechless at this self important ignorance and I was trying to articulate the points you made. Judging by the choice of words I doubt Toussaint can be argued with.
What kind of education did this person have because they must have missed out on all that kid stuff followed by meeting the real world.
“It is destroying our economy and our territories.” !?!?

Sam Pyeatte
Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 6:22 am

Greenpeace is a truly revolting and nasty organization. They threw-out their founder, Dr. Moore, because he would not support the madness that had infected the original organization. The only purpose Greenpeace provides is “what not to do”.

Reply to  Sam Pyeatte
December 28, 2018 7:14 am

Seriously, why are these foreign organizations allowed to interfere in French politics? Every last one of them should be tossed out of the country.

Reply to  MarkG
December 28, 2018 9:37 am

They always have local affiliates.

Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 7:29 am

The Big Lie again: “carbon tax”

It’s in fact a CO2 tax

C is a solid, CO2 is a minute trace gas which grows plants.

The Big Liars would have you believe that charcoal croutons are flying through the air.

Don’t use their language or we’re screwed.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 1:21 pm

And the tax/spend spiral continues until USSR, Venezuela, ad nauseam. Gotta love socialism. And the UN, through the IPCC, wants to give a lot to us.

Paul Skippen
Reply to  neil watson
December 28, 2018 7:17 am

Greenpeace has become a joke. Hippocrates

Reply to  Paul Skippen
December 28, 2018 7:27 am

They have always been hypocrites. Have never lived by their so called principals, always sucking up all the money they could and doing nothing to actually help people.

Reply to  2hotel9
December 28, 2018 1:40 pm

Have you not noticed that practically all environmental activists only take actions to harm some group of people with any excuse that has an environmental tinge. With climate change, they seek to harm the entire world. No action is ever taken that actually helps people. They only pretend to champion nature while waging war on mankind.

Reply to  Rocky
December 29, 2018 2:09 pm

Notice? I pointed it out, loudly, 40 years ago. And here we be at. Rather sad, no?

Jeffrey P Price
Reply to  Paul Skippen
December 28, 2018 9:33 am

I don’t see them going after China for decimating reefs in the South China Sea.

Reply to  Jeffrey P Price
December 28, 2018 9:51 am

Nothing kills a reef faster than burying it under sand. Oh, yea, concrete may be a bit quicker!

Reply to  Jeffrey P Price
December 29, 2018 1:28 am

They know full well thar the Chinese Navy would sink their dinghys with gunfire ans leave any surviving activists in the water.

Hot under the collar
Reply to  neil watson
December 28, 2018 11:04 am

Greenpeace, Oxfam and the other NGO’s need to remind themselves about the French Revolution.

Suing the French Government because the people of France have forced them to postpone a “reverse Robin Hood tax” could lead to a further Storming of the Bastille. They may as well be saying: “let them eat wind and solar” while making the French people bankrupt paying for it!

Have they kept the guillotines?

Vive la liberté!

Reply to  Hot under the collar
December 28, 2018 5:15 pm

Oxfam started out as “famine relief” for poor Greece in WW2.

75 years later they have evolved into advocating for famine related policies.

Curious George
December 27, 2018 6:11 pm

Courts know best what’s good for the planet.

December 27, 2018 6:22 pm

I don’t get the legal basis for the suit. What is the evidence that the French government has an “environmental obligation” to levy a carbon tax according to French law? I don’t know squat about the French legal system but it sure appears to be nothing but an attempt to appease the radicals knowing that there is no real legal recourse to begin with?

Reply to  rah
December 27, 2018 8:25 pm

Same question rah.

I wonder what “environmental obligations” France defaulted on that is capable of being sued in the French administrative court? It cant be the Paris Agreement, unless that is binding on the French government in France.

Same old NGOs in lock-step with the UN, trying to use international treaties to over-rule the ability of nations to determine their own direction (its called sovereignty).

After all, the protests of the “gilets jaunes” are nothing more than the democratic process at work. Oh wait…..dont tell me these NGOs dont accept protest as part of the political process?

J Mac
Reply to  DaveR
December 27, 2018 9:41 pm

That’s why they are derisively called ‘GreenFleece’….

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  J Mac
December 28, 2018 1:20 am


Greg Woods
Reply to  Henning Nielsen
December 28, 2018 5:01 am


Reply to  Henning Nielsen
December 28, 2018 11:22 am

GreenFeces, I thinks.

Reply to  J Mac
December 30, 2018 9:15 am


Reply to  DaveR
December 28, 2018 4:40 am

NGOs only accept THEIR protests as legit dontcha know;-)

R Shearer
Reply to  rah
December 27, 2018 9:04 pm

Everyone in France should have frog legs, except for the frogs of course.

Reply to  rah
December 27, 2018 9:47 pm

They’re socialists, and don’t expect to need a legal basis we’d accept.

Reply to  peterh
December 28, 2018 7:30 am

Call them what they are: communists

Reply to  rah
December 27, 2018 10:07 pm

This looks suspiciously like sue-and-settle.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Hivemind
December 27, 2018 10:16 pm

The ‘Yellow Vests’ will have veto power over any settlement that involves increased fuel costs.

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  rah
December 28, 2018 1:17 am

This lawsuit nonsense is nothing more han a desperate last attempt to force governments to do as the NOGs demand. The legal basis is extremely thin, to say the least. But good feeding for lawyers.

I also wonder about the1,7 million supporters. Have they signed personally, or is it just likes on a website appeal?

michael hart
Reply to  Henning Nielsen
December 28, 2018 6:50 am

Yes, I have strong doubts about the 1.7 million turkeys too. It has about as much ring-of-truth about it as does the “97%” claim.

Reply to  michael hart
December 28, 2018 8:38 am

Oh, I’m pretty sure Greenpeace could whip up a million or two of their followers and fellow travelers to sign a poll.

Why, some of them probably even live in FRANCE!


December 27, 2018 6:24 pm

If Greenpeace, Oxfam and other NGO’s are furious with the French Government about Macaroon’s Carbon Tax Retreat, then the news is even better than I thought. Something is really tilting their apple-carts.

Reply to  nicholas tesdorf
December 28, 2018 1:21 am


Reminds me of my Grandpappy over Germany in WW2. “When the flak is getting heavier ya know your getting close towards the target”



Reply to  Roger
December 28, 2018 2:50 am

My grandfather used to say the same.

Which always confused me, because he drove tanks in the war.

Richard of NZ
Reply to  Archer
December 28, 2018 3:45 am

Assuming he was driving American tanks in Europe it is quite logical. The most feared anti-tank gun was the Flak 8.8 cm.

Reply to  Richard of NZ
December 28, 2018 7:25 am

Yep, a dual purpose gun.

December 27, 2018 6:25 pm

Macron’s retreat has flushed them out quite quickly. The greenies’ campaign is all to do with bringing down the democratic process, not fighting global warming at all. Even when it means the breakdown of civil order and the deaths of the citizenry, they will not compromise. They will murder babies, children, women and cripples. Unbelievable.

Curious George
Reply to  Richard Treadgold
December 28, 2018 7:52 am

They are not carbon-based life forms. They are virtue-based.

Bill In Oz
December 27, 2018 6:25 pm

There is a solution ! just suppress Greenpaece, Oxfam etc.. After all they are jeopardising the french people and civilisation with their Greenist demands for taxing diesel, petrol etc.

bill johnston
Reply to  Bill In Oz
December 27, 2018 6:43 pm

A message which should be loudly and repeatedly broadcast.

Reply to  Bill In Oz
December 28, 2018 12:40 am

Do Greenpeace, Oxfam etc still have “tax free ” status in France?.

Just remove that tax free status and apply standard business taxes,

plus heavy taxes for every little bit of CO2 that they use, anywhere, any time.

Reply to  fred250
December 28, 2018 7:10 am

Wow, wish I could up vote this!!!! It is exactly what we need to do in America, to all these ngo idiots!

Tom Abbott
December 27, 2018 6:27 pm

These are some of the consequences of CAGW lies.

The perpetrators of this climate change fraud should be held accountable for all the trouble and losses they have caused. It’s horrendous what they have done to humanity.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 27, 2018 6:49 pm

Most of the true villains will be able to claim plausible deniability. They will claim that they were just as misled as the rest of us. Mind you, “I was just following orders” didn’t work very well at the Nuremberg trials. (Yes, I know about Godwin’s Law.)

Reply to  commieBob
December 27, 2018 6:58 pm

Forget Godwin and the National Socialists. Go for second place, Soviet Socialists, and first place, Chinese Communists. And the selective, opportunist, congruent doctrines of their contemporary peers. For some reason, decarbonization seems to be a common cause for these seemingly disparate factions.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 30, 2018 4:47 pm

Perhaps in addition to the non profit tax status reclassification of environmental NGO’s affiliates by executive order or Parlimentary Legislation, the French Dept of Justice should counter sue GreenPeace, Oxfam, etc for the public property damages related to the Macron proposal to raise diesel taxes?

December 27, 2018 6:29 pm

If the courts overturn this the revolution will start in Ernest- Viva La Guillotine!

Reply to  Ted
December 27, 2018 8:31 pm

Yeah, I think you are right. All hell will break loose…..and not just in France.

Reply to  Joey
December 27, 2018 10:12 pm

This is one of the major reasons (I think) that the British voted for Brexit. And also one of the major reasons that May’s Brexit-In-Name-Only (BINO) is so objectionable. It leaves the European Court of Justice (ECJ) above all of the British courts. And the ECJ has already shown how sharp its teeth are with its decision to ban baseload power from the British.

Adam Gallon
Reply to  Hivemind
December 28, 2018 12:25 am

Wrong, right & wrong.
Multiple reasons for our leave vote, migration was probably the major one. May’s deal is very much suboptimal & the ECJ ruled against the capacity market auctions.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Adam Gallon
December 28, 2018 1:11 am

No it wsn’t it was sovereignty.

michael hart
Reply to  Hivemind
December 28, 2018 7:34 am

In some ways it is no bad thing, in that if the source of green-created misery can be traced back to a decision by the ECJ a political target/remedy is thenin sight, even if it means civil unrest and ignoring treaty commitments.

My wider concern is that if fossil fuel use is curtailed in the way that the green-shirts intend it will simply lead to negative economic growth for many, many years (until nuclear takes over or we have complete societal collapse. We cannot feed the existing population of the world without the energy of fossil fuels).

The continuing hardships of higher energy costs is spread so diffusely that nobody of any political persuasion can easily point to the cause when trying to get votes to reverse such inhumane policies. The ‘invisible hand’ of cheap energy costs helped propel the American empire beyond the British empire. Many in China understand that this is the route to economic and political power. The green-shirts are foolish nihilists who simply wish to destroy everything the West has built, while not being smart enough to realise how much it will affect both them, their families, and they people they associate with.

December 27, 2018 6:30 pm

I so enjoy this scrap in France (watching it from a safe distance!). There is only one way to go for heads of governments who will increasingly be forced to do just what Macron was forced to do. Just “Come Out” openly (like President Trump) and stop paying lip service to the fanatic climate change brigade. You’ve got to be straight. Expect more countries to follow the United States soon – including many in Europe. We will find that the majority of us really won’t worry much about rising CO2 levels – and alarmist opinions will fizzle out.

Bob boder
Reply to  AndyE
December 27, 2018 6:42 pm

It’s France, what ever the outcome it will be stupid.

Dave Fair
Reply to  AndyE
December 27, 2018 8:31 pm

So the U.S., under President Trump, was the first domino to fall; all others will follow as the over taxed/over regulated working peoples see what tilting at climate windmills is costing them. [Go ahead, have fun with windmills.]

Additionally, industrial corporations will explain, harshly, the international economic realities of competition to die-hard CAGW politicians and bureaucrats.

Jon Jewett
Reply to  Dave Fair
December 28, 2018 7:15 am

“So the U.S., under President Trump, was the first domino to fall”

I would rather say the first to stand up to the Eco-Nazi bullies

December 27, 2018 6:37 pm

So Greenpiece (sic) want to sue the French Government for not doing enough under the voluntary Paris Agreement?

Javert Chip
December 27, 2018 6:37 pm

I have the solution: people who want to pay more than the standard French taxes can simply pay more taxes. People who don’t want to pay more the standard French taxes simply don’t.

This was actually tried in Massachusetts back in the 1980s – a huge number of people were in favor of it. The state even changed the tax form to allow for voluntary additional taxes. The problem was, people were in favor of OTHER people paying more tax. People who weren’t paying much, if any tax, were all sweaty excited about “rich” paying more. Needless to say, the state collected a laughably small amount of “extra taxes”.

Last paragraph of my rant: the top 1% of US taxpayers earn 20% of total income and pay 40% of total taxes.

Lewis p Buckingham
Reply to  Javert Chip
December 28, 2018 2:07 am

This is a good idea.
Those who beleive that a carbon tax will save the planet and is a justice based imperative can always be the ones who pay the tax.
Those who believe that it will only impoverish themselves and the country and cannot measurably change the climate future need not pay.
It seems fair.

Reply to  Javert Chip
December 28, 2018 7:11 am

I don’t know when the office was created. I first heard of it several decades ago.
There is an office where you can mail checks to the US government, if you happen to feel you aren’t being taxed enough.

Last I heard, they were averaging just a few thousand dollars per year.

December 27, 2018 6:39 pm

Trudeau is trying to impose the same stupid idea here in Canada. The carbon tax is supposed to wean us off fossil fuels and move us toward renewables. I heat my home with a high efficiency (96%) gas fired furnace. Oh wait. I get it. I’ll counter the carbon tax by raising the efficiency to 110%.

Reply to  Trebla
December 27, 2018 7:18 pm

Eastern Canada doesn’t even have natural gas as an option. Auto propane is almost impossible to find.

Where are these carbon free fuels the government wants us to buy? Or is it simply a tax grab.

Reply to  Trebla
December 27, 2018 7:20 pm

When I bought my present house many years ago, I upgraded the insulation a lot. As a result, I could cut my heating bills in half (or better) by replacing the windows and installing heat recovery ventilation. Unless fuel became very expensive, it would never pay for itself. link

It’s possible to build a house that costs almost nothing to heat, even in a Canadian climate. It’s a lot more expensive. link

If fuel became hugely more expensive, we could still stay toasty warm in the winter, if we could afford the energy efficient renovations. One way or another, we would have the choice of freezing in the dark or going broke.

You could argue that a ground-coupled heat exchanger is more than 100% efficient because it produces way more watts of heat than it takes in from the grid. An acquaintance bought a house with such a system. It’s good that he’s a mechanical engineer because I don’t think normal humans could cope with some of the ‘issues’ he’s experienced.

Reply to  Trebla
December 27, 2018 8:50 pm

Ah but will Justin pay for your new furnace. I doubt it. Pray that he will be gone next October.

Reply to  Jim
December 28, 2018 5:35 am

Justin is a far-left socialist and a Quebec-first politician. He is also an imbecile, inheriting his mother’s looks and her lack of brains. His far-left advisors are deliberately harming the Canadian economy in the same way that Mugabe destroyed Zimbabwe and Chavez destroyed Venezuela – this economic destruction, the $120 billion lost in the anti-pipeline fiascos and the apparently imbecilic energy policy are not accidental incompetence – nobody, not even Justin, and especially his advisors, are that stupid. They are traitors to Canada and they belong in jail.

Reply to  Trebla
December 27, 2018 8:51 pm

Don’t forget that, at the same time Trudeau wants us to produce less CO2, he wants to increase the population of the country to 100,000,000.

Simplest way to stop producing more CO2 would be to stop immigration immediately. Wonder why he doesn’t just do that?

Flight Level
December 27, 2018 6:41 pm

They shot themselves in the leg. My guess is that now streets are not safe for GP and other NGO public relation stunts.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
December 27, 2018 7:14 pm

How helpful it is that Greenpeace, etc., pop their heads up so that the yellow vests (by implication, the people everywhere), can identify who the enemy is.

Not very clever Greenpeace.

But thank you.

December 27, 2018 7:16 pm

“She argues the carbon tax should be balanced out with social subsidies financed through a tax hike on large corporate greenhouse gas emitters.”

Who pass those costs onto the public. Tax the corporations to subsidize the poor, who pay for those taxes in increased costs for the stuff those corps produce.

Reply to  icisil
December 27, 2018 8:32 pm

Green terrorists aren’t real good at economics.

Reply to  icisil
December 28, 2018 1:37 am

But think of all the civil servants you can employ to administer the taxes and subsidies.

The deep state will be very happy.

Lucas K
December 27, 2018 7:21 pm

If thew French government fell and a new one would not raise the carbon tax and if the UN would not make them, would Greenpeace or Oxfam raise their own army and wage aggressive war against the French people?

Harry Passfield
Reply to  Lucas K
December 28, 2018 2:31 am

[…]would Greenpeace or Oxfam raise their own army and wage aggressive war against the French people?

That would be interesting. Would they make it a ‘carbon-free’ war?

Reply to  Harry Passfield
December 28, 2018 2:51 pm

They dont need to. The EU is talking about a new European army. For sure that will be used across member states to enforce EU rules – and you guessed it, that will include enforcing all UN directives. The NGOs are already working closely with the UN on energy and climate change regulation.

December 27, 2018 7:38 pm

financed through a tax hike on large corporate greenhouse gas emitters
In Canada large emitters have exemptions from the carbon tax. The average small taxpayer has no such exemption.

Zig Zag Wanderer
December 27, 2018 7:48 pm

I propose the yellow vests on one side, green piece (ie pieces of green = money) on the other. Let them choose their weapons, and battle it out.

In a perfect world, with background music ‘choose you weapons’ by fatboy slim.

I demand 10% of the viewing profits in commission for the idea.

Ian Macdonald
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
December 27, 2018 10:37 pm

That could end badly for anyone living on the same planet. As we don’t currently have a spare one..

J Mac
December 27, 2018 7:49 pm

The Greenies seriously think their going to co-opt the Yellow Vests?
Note to self: Buy more popcorn….

December 27, 2018 8:10 pm

Wait!? France, the only major developed country that derives the majority of their electricity from non CO2 sources should be singled out and sued for not doing more for climate change?

No greater example of how the greens have lost their minds.

Reply to  Jerry
December 27, 2018 10:17 pm

Not so much. They saw how Macaroni gave in to the yellow vests and realised how weak he is. So they are trying their usual trick of sue-and-settle on him.

December 27, 2018 8:10 pm

Well GP and Oxfam certainly showed their colors. This ought to be good. In reality the activists/eco fascists are a small minority of the population in any country. They also bend with the wind and can’t be expected to last very long in a battle unless they think they can bully the victims. Try bullying the greater population and see how that works out.

December 27, 2018 8:29 pm

But as the Paris Accord is “nonbinding”, there is no breach to sue for. These green fascists really need a bloody nose.

December 27, 2018 8:36 pm

To all members of Greenpeace and Oxfam:
a) stop flying, at least until YOU successfully fund solar powered dirigibles.
b) stop driving, you can take public transit and Uber rickshaw.
c) don’t use iPhones. Apple’s carbon foot print is too high; something like 27 Mtonnes.
d) crowd fund a global warming relief fund. I’m sure (ha ha) that the 1.7 million petition signers will contribute lots and lots of money.

I’m serious Greenpeace. Time for YOU to walk YOUR talk.

Perhaps it’s time for governments to have a no fly list for all Greens. The planet is at stake!!! 🙂 🙂

Reply to  joe
December 28, 2018 12:46 am

“Perhaps it’s time for governments to have a no fly list for all Greens.”

Any “charity” tax-free status should be removed everywhere, IMMEDIATELY..

And back-dated 20 + years.

CD in Wisconsin
December 27, 2018 8:41 pm

Perhaps President Macron doesn’t realize it, but Churchill’s quote about an appeaser feeding the crocodile (hoping he will be the last ones to be eaten) seams to apply here quite aptly.

Macron has been feeding the climate alarmist crocodile since he came into office, and now the croc is in the process of biting him right in the……..

Regardless of whether the legal action the NGOs are taking actually yields their desired end, I somehow can’t seem to generate much sympathy for the French President. And the EU getting on his case certainly doesn’t help matters any.

Macron is between a rock and a hard place…he’s damned if he does, and he’s damned if he doesn’t. Why do I have a vision of Trump with a grin on his face?

December 27, 2018 9:17 pm

A commenter at Climate Scepticism, Phillip Bratby, has a long thoughtful assessment of the situation in France.

This small group of citizens have dominated the business, banking, legal and political scenes for decades.

The ruling class comes from a small group of grandes ecoles, or elite colleges. There are only 3 or 4. The top of the top? L’Ecole d’Administration Nationale (ENA).

Emmanuel Macron’s journey is typical of the ruliing class. He completed a Master’s of Public Affairs at Institut d’Études Politiques de Paris(called “Sciences Po”), the #2 elite college, before graduating from ENA in 2004, age 27. He then worked as a senior civil servant at the Inspectorate General of Finances (The Treasury), before getting a high paid gig ad an investment banker at Rothschild & Cie Banque.

See how fast Macron worked his way into the senior civil servant position in the Treasury, before flipping into an exclusive investment bank? That is normal in France. It’s a never-ending protected cycle of patronage, promotion, favors and cronyism.

Here’s another French word: parachutage. It is normal for young ENA graduates to be “parachuted” into senior civil service positions at a very young age, some as young as 25 years of age, without even interviewing for positions.

Imagine this. You’re an American, working in a French corporation. You’re a very talented executive with 20 years experience and stellar performance reviews. Suddenly, your boss’s position becomes available. You apply.

A week later, a 26 year old is sitting in your old boss’s chair. Your new boss has been “parachuted” into the position.

This happened to one of my best friends in France, a bi-lingual MIT/Stanford graduate with 21 years of superb work experience across the world.

The French kid? A graduate of ENA.

ENA has a complete stranglehold on the French state. Only 100 students graduate every year.

by 1970, ENA’s meritocracy had become a self-replicating elite caste – and a ticket to the French ruling class. Astonishingly, every French President since de Gaulle has been an ENA graduate, excepting Georges Pompidou, who attended Sciences Po. Eight of the last ten French Prime Ministers have been enarques. All key civil service/government departments are run by enarques. How about business? 84% of the 546 top executives in France’s 40 biggest companies are graduates of a handful of elite colleges. 48% come from ENA and Sciences Po.

Get it? If you want to be part of the French ruling class, graduate from ENA or Sciences Po.

Otherwise, screw you.

There’s a lot more in this comment.


December 27, 2018 10:23 pm

Civil War is inevitable.

December 27, 2018 10:29 pm

Let Greenpeace and Oxfam pay the taxes, then! That should cool their jets!

December 27, 2018 10:36 pm

I gave up on Oxfam about 50 years ago when it stopped doing famine relief and became a political lobby group looking after its own bosses.

Ian Macdonald
December 27, 2018 10:42 pm

I don’t understand how Oxfam can be involved in this, unless charity rules differ in France. Here, a charity cannot be a political campaigner. Unless of course they have two mirrored organizations like Greenpeace – but I don’t know of anything like that with Oxfam.


Global Cooling
December 28, 2018 12:05 am

This is like drug cartel sues Trump due to the wall.

Jimmy Haigh
December 28, 2018 12:23 am

You’d think it was all just about the money!

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
December 28, 2018 12:51 am

That Greedpeace is up to its neck in this should surprise no one, but Oxfam is now clearly in politics and not concentrating on what it should be doing. Yet more evidence of how reckless and out of control NGOs have become. Democratic politics is being subverted by these extremist groups and politicians worldwide need to wake up and see the consequences of not enforcing proper control and accountability on the whole Gang of Four and other such increasingly anti-progress NGOs.
The clock is near midnight for proper democracy with these elitists in the political field.

Steve Borodin
December 28, 2018 1:24 am

Somebody should sue loathsome genocidal Greenpeace for their part in the slaughter of millions using the weapon Malaria. They were aided and abetted by the UN (WHO), WWF, Sierra Club and other corrupt NGOs.

E J Zuiderwijk
December 28, 2018 1:30 am

Snowflakes against yellow shirts. The yellows have it!

Reply to  E J Zuiderwijk
December 28, 2018 7:17 am

Would that result in more yellow snow?

December 28, 2018 1:48 am

I don’t know French law, but there is a clear moral case for consistency in government.

If the government says something is necessary to prevent catastrophe, then it has a moral duty to do that thing. So the government either has to admit that man made CO2 is not a problem or it has to do something about it.

December 28, 2018 1:56 am


You might find this interesting courtesy of politico.eu. It shows the percentage of people in each country in the EU who are concerned about certain issues, including climate. Interesting reading


Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  tonyb
December 28, 2018 2:17 am

Tonyb, “https://www.politico.eu/article/what-european-voters-worry-about-election-209-facts-figures/”

please differentiate between “people answering to polls”


“voters” driving SUVs and flying to holly day resorts or for shopping cities.

Johann Wundersamer
December 28, 2018 2:04 am

“NGOS including Oxfam and Greenpeace

are furious

at President Macron’s frantic retreat from yellow vest protests against higher fuel taxes.”


gilets jaunes protests hijacked by worldwide travelling far left / far right violent activists:


( violent black clad “protesters” with ski masks mostly green / left activists / terrorists )

December 28, 2018 2:07 am
Rod Evans
December 28, 2018 2:08 am

The easy option for the French government who are being challenged by Greenpeace and Oxfam is to rule their charitable status is suspended, while the court action takes place.
That way the government are not subsidising the opposite side , in the action against them.
The loss of status would immediately prevent the organisations from receiving tax credits for all donations they receive, and would also cause the loss of charitable fiscal privileges.
Let us then see how determined the NGOs then are, in their desire to resist the will of the people.

Robert of Ottawa
December 28, 2018 3:09 am

Who made Greenpeace and Oxfam a world government? End their charitable status now.

December 28, 2018 3:35 am

Charities that get too big for their boots is getting more common.
The RNLI (Royal National Lifeboat Institution) in the UK, has become a bloated bureaucracy. The volunteer crews are mostly men, and it’s a dangerous job. The number of non-crew employees (all bureaucrats who’ve never done a dirty or dangerous job) has trebled in the last twenty years, and it’s not as if they need to raise much cash, as the amount they have been left in legacies is almost embarrassing, and they have quite a pile of investments. So there is now a small army of the usual snowflake diversity & safety consultants, and the crews find themselves the targets. Accusations of unauthroised launches, reprimands for coffee mugs with girlie pictures on them, sackings for ‘unacceptable behaviour’ a.k.a. blokes horsing around.
Worse, there are now pre-launch briefings and insistence on contingency plans, even just to launch the RIB to pick up a tourist on a lilo who can’t get back to shore.
Some crews have resigned from the RNLI and set up independent operations.
The RNLI had a singular mission, so it’s taken time for the standard PC diversity/inclusive/safe space disease to infect them, but it’s happened nonetheless.
Greenpeace and Oxfam on the other hand are fully assimilated into the green blob.
They’ve got the usual army of NGO/charity snowflakes, plus the swivel-eyed green ideology.
That’s a toxic mix.
I hope they get their fingers burned.

December 28, 2018 3:36 am

Perhaps Oxfam (The Oxford Committee for Famine Relief) should stick to their original remit, and stay out of the ‘climate change’ fiasco?

December 28, 2018 5:30 am

I’d like to think the core reasons for Les Gilets Jaunes protests represents the beginning of the end of this nonsense, but experience of human nature teaches us that things that are both well established and wrong, have to become blatently untenable before enough ordinary people turn round and say ‘Bollocks to this’. Hope I live long enough to see the day…

Joel O'Bryan
December 28, 2018 5:37 am

WTF is “climate justice”?

NewSpeak apparently meaning more taxes.

Bruce Cobb
December 28, 2018 5:54 am

Gang Green have their backs to the wall now, and have decided to try using the only weapon they think is available: the law. Yeah, good luck with that.

Mickey Reno
December 28, 2018 5:58 am

The French ‘yellow vests’ have climate alarmists really alarmed. The protesters represent a real threat to their rent-seeking, the end of the road for climate junkets to exotic locales on the public dime, and a loss of status and power (an elite bureaucrat’s authority). Which is why I have a conflicted but real rooting interest in the yellow vest movement, even though, in general, I’m not in favor of political discourse by blocking roads and burning cars, and have been appalled by French populist violence in many instances in the past.

December 28, 2018 6:47 am

The solution is, as always.
Tax someone else and give the money to me.
Leftists are so predictable.

Andy Pattullo
December 28, 2018 8:30 am

Many might happily support this litigation once they see proof the organizations leading it are operating completely without the benefits of fossil fuels, plastics, energy sources or other benefits derived from fossil fuels. Let them lead by example and then we can take them semi-seriously. As long as they jet around the world with smart phones in their pockets and fois gras on their plates talking nonsense about sacrifice and social justice they are simply proving the hypocrisy of self-proclaimed virtue sold for money and power.

Steve O
December 28, 2018 8:32 am

“She argues the carbon tax should be balanced out with social subsidies financed through a tax hike on large corporate greenhouse gas emitters.”

The quality of work in developing a strategy of what to do based on findings in the field of climate science are even worse than the quality of work in the field of climate science itself.

This proposal would likely lead to a large increase in CO2 emissions, as it would be very effective in shift production to China — where production can be performed using coal-based energy, and then shipped from China to Europe using diesel-based energy, on ships built in China using coal-based energy.

December 28, 2018 8:38 am

“By Annabelle Timsit in Paris
December 27, 2018

More than 1.7 million people have signed a petition in favor of suing the French government, accusing it of inaction on climate change.”

One point seven million, whatever.

Now, specifically identify French voters who’ve actually signed that petition!
I wouldn’t be surprised if the number is much much lower, making the petition pure bunko sham

Tasfay Martinov
December 28, 2018 9:20 am

Greenpeace, Oxfam etc.
Go ahead and broadcast your membership of the global climate elite-landlord-aristocracy.

Should WUWT set up a mirror site in French?

December 28, 2018 10:43 am

Remember this when Dems craft the next carbon tax push in the U.S. to go after all those new SUV owners. It will take a lot of overselling by the PR consultants to pull that one off.

December 28, 2018 11:23 am

There is a Greenpeace petition circulating in France and one official claimed it was a “reply to the yellow vest” movement…
Except that there are doubts as to how the million support for the petition has been counted, virtually impossible unless numbers are made up
That these multinational organizations would sue to get their agenda enforced against the population shows beyond any doubts that they are enemies of the people, complicit of the tyranny and thus should be fought the same way Orban is getting rid of Soros NGOs.

Joel Snider
December 28, 2018 11:31 am

Sue them right back.

James Newman
December 28, 2018 1:00 pm

Well if these NGO’s demand people pay these taxes then level the taxes against everyone that belongs to these NGO’s and everyone that signed their petition. I’m sure a 75% tax on their incomes and all of their assets worldwide should do the trick nicely. 🙂

old construction worker
December 28, 2018 2:29 pm

There is an old saying” Let them freeze in the dark”. How you can add “Let them freeze and starve in the dark”

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights