by Toby Young
Robert Jenrick has promised to tear up the Climate Change Act if he becomes Tory leader and eventually Prime Minister. The Telegraph has more.
He has said he will scrap major pieces of Blair and Brown era legislation including the Climate Change Act, Equality Act and Human Rights Act under a “Great Reform Act” if he makes it to No. 10.
His plans include scrapping carbon budgets and unburdening businesses of equality laws which have been criticised for driving positive discrimination and political correctness in the workplace.
He described carbon budgets as “Soviet-style five-year plans” and claimed they impede the building of critical national infrastructure projects.
He would also take aim at the public sector equality duty in the Equality Act and section 6 of the Human Rights Act, which gives the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) force in British law.
“The next Conservative government must do better to deliver a genuinely conservative country. We must repeal and amend the Climate Change Act, Equality Act and Human Rights Act and restore decision-making to ministers accountable to parliament,” Mr Jenrick told the Telegraph.
He accused the Prime Minister of “planning a second disastrous Blairite revolution” and suggested he could repeal laws brought forward by the current Labour Government, including a mooted Race Equality Act that was included in Labour’s manifesto.
He has also pledged to scrap new quangos promised in Sir Keir Starmer’s manifesto, including Great British Energy, the Nationwide Climate Export Hubs and an Office for Value for Money.
Mr. Jenrick argued the Public Sector Equality Duty has “led to recruitment based on identity, not merit” and that “the chief beneficiary has been EDI consultants and those that peddle divisive and false narratives about Britain’s past”.
On carbon budgets, the Tory leadership candidate said: “It is ludicrous to set out soviet-style five-year plans at a sectoral level which specify where you plan to reduce carbon emissions. The state does not have sufficient understanding of the economy to do that well. It’s impeding us from building the critical national infrastructure we need.”
Mr. Jenrick’s plan is inspired by the Great Reform Act of 1832 which expanded democracy and swept away corruption in the British political system.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: In another crowd-pleasing intervention, Jenrick has called for whole-life sentences for people convicted of grooming underage girls for sex. The Telegraph has more.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You Tories have had 14 years to undo the Climate Change act of 2008, yet in stead you weaponised in under Teresa May, and now you think you, on your own, can do all this, against a party that is rotten to its core with left wing globalists,.
If you want to make a difference Jenrick, join Reform UK. And if you dont join Reform UK, we will know you are not serious about saving your country.
Well said!!!
Simple question, are your globalists, communists and warmongers together aligning against citizens like they are in the U.S.?
In Europe we are about three decades ahead of you, Obama-Biden-Harris regime is catching you up quickly.
You are arguing about political tactics, not principles. The Tories have been a party and a movement for hundreds of years in the UK. Persuading such a party to change course is much easier done than convincing voters to vote for a party which has no history of governance. True, the UK parliamentary system is friendly to minority parties … but to really effect change, it is necessary to persuade a majority to make the change …. rather than play parliamentary games that only produce unstable coalition governments that can disappear in a moment.
The UK does not need “saving” – it’s going to exist for a very long time to come and be a major nation and culture. But the UK does need recalibrating and moving in a different direction.
The beauty of the form of government we have in the US with Presidents elected by the people, rather than parties who appoint their Prime Ministers, is that the resulting two-party system forces compromise and the building of actual governing majorities. Any party that fractures due to internecine ideological arguments loses, period.
“… for a party which has no history of governance. “
Because the Parties that have, have done such a good job since 1945?
What the British people want is a Party with a clear vision and sense of direction, working in their interest towards restoration of our culture, society and economic progress, not Parties of social and economic destruction dancing to the tune of globalist influencers whose interests they serve.
The problem with voting these days, is the names of people actually governing us do not appear on the ballot paper, just the names of their puppets.
It is why Farage and Trump are hated by the Establishment, they are not under the command of Globalist Mission Control.
it’s the old “devil you know vs. the devil you don’t know”
In 1933 the German voters elected the Nazis to power, thinking that it could not get worse than the incumbent parties of the Weimar Republic. It turned out otherwise.
Yep, the establishment has become the Nazis
There was always a majority who didnt vote for Nazis under the proportional representation.
The last free election was Nazis 33%, less than the communists and socialists at 37%
The Nazis needed the conservative and catholic party’s to gain power , and they then swept away all parties and ruled by decree.
The number one reason to vote for D.J.Trump is: HE CAN’T BE BOUGHT.
Trump also doesn’t listen to his department heads and tries to do whatever he wants which generally involves making other countries pay higher duties …and nobody, including Trump, knows enough of the interactions to run the various aspects of a country, so failure to listen to advisers will be an Achilles Heel for him.
Why listen to “Deep State” advisors?
He initially listened to Fauci and that proved to be a big mistake.
Listening to advisers can make a lot of sense – if the advice they give is worth listening to.
Exactly That! He has proven it, many times over.
I think he has been bought a few times. Ask Vlad.
Have you found that pee pee tape moron?
Every party representative is a puppet. It is the core of the system which cannot operate otherwise. Anyone who gives credence to electioneering parties or their puppets are gullible and have a convenient memory.
John,
inpractice a party witha clear vision etc will not conform to the beliefs and understanding of the general public, who in turn have been woefully misled by the main stream media.
The majority believe completely the AGW CO2 idea and that wind and solar are an effective answer to CO2 reduction and can replace proper generators..
So an enlightened party will not get the votes they deserve, that is the weakness of a democratic system, it relies entirely on a public that are accurately informed.
‘The beauty of the form of government we have in the US…is that the resulting two-party system forces compromise and the building of actual governing majorities.’
I don’t think our ‘system forces compromise’ any more than any other approach, and from my perspective, the compromise ‘arrow’ (basketball metaphor) has been consistently pointed in the direction of the Left for my entire lifetime. The real ‘beauty’ of our system is that we have written foundational documents, i.e., the Declaration and the Constitution, that clearly stipulate a very limited form of national governance. The problem, of course, is that these presume / require the existence of a rational and moral electorate, which we ain’t got at present.
Actually, it does. Parliamentary systems allow minority parties representing only a small proportion of the voters to create coalition governments that are very unstable and not representative of where the majority of voters actually are. Israel is a good example of that – they elected 15 governments over the last 24 years.
Sorry for being obtuse, but you need to explain why a handful of smaller parties banding together to form a coalition government is any less of a ‘compromise’ than having, say, one’s supposedly rock-ribbed Republican legislators habitually breaking ranks to support the Left’s agenda.
Also, witness the gazillion pages of the Federal Register, maybe what we’re all missing here is that it should really be a lot harder to pass legislation, and that most of our problems of governance today stem from the fact that there has been way too much compromise in the past.
I would say there hasn’t been enough of the right kind of compromise.
I think Israel has a very similar problem to ours in that many of their institutions have been captured by the Left.
Aren’t you contradicting yourself here?
You say a new party is useless for having no history, then say to trust an ancient party which changes its history.
Personally, I’d trust someone new more than someone who changes his mind every few years.
Except now, instead of having individual Congressmen who represent their constituencies, we have 2 party blocks. If you do not vote as directed by party leadership, you are punished, silenced, disempowered, and have little party support for re-election.
Except now, we have a Democratic party that perceptibly is driving towards a one party autocracy.
AND… those we elect do not actually draw up the laws and regs…. lobbyists do… and the elected officials most likely do not read the ‘fine print’.
I would also argue that the great strength of the USA, apart from the constitution itself, is that it is a federation of states. That alone leads to freedoms and to choices.
Agree but what is required is only citizens with photo ID to vote. Then all counting should be televised and compulsory scrutineers (from every party and even outside observers) at every polling place and counting place. There is no doubt there has been cheating and it is very likely there could be cheating by both majors parties but democrats more likely.
Persuading such a party to change course is much easier done than convincing voters to vote for a party which has no history of governance.
Ever heard of the Labour Party? In the early decades of the twentieth century they were in much the same position as Reform is today. By the 1930s they had replaced the Liberal Party as the alternative to the Conservative Party. The Liberal Party went from being a government with a huge majority in 1906 to a party with a handful of seats. The Labour Party went from being a party with a handful of seats to being a government with an absolute majority.
Whether Reform can achieve the same transition as the Labour Party remains to be seen but don’t dismissively write off parties with no history of governance.
The Tories? You mean Labour2 !
Ever since Brexit, the Tories have been controlled by an inner group of die-hard remainers (including Carrie Johnson). Because this inner group also controls the Tories’ internal voting process, it has taken this long for good candidates to break through. IMHO, Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick are worthy candidates, but regrettably they have a long struggle ahead of them to overcome the trainwreck that those powerful remainers have left them – (a) 5 years of two-tier Kier, (b) a surging Reform party, which was surely a result of the remainers remaining long past their use-by date, (c) a national electricity grid and national economy both on their last legs, and still with years of Keir Starmer to survive.
Again agree. 5 years is far too long. In USA you have 4 years with midterm elections which can change the balance in parliament. In Australia there are federal elections every 3 years. Another step in democracy is to have like in Switzerland citizen initiated referendum and recall. USA would have been in a better place if Biden and Harris could have been recalled for personal incompetence.
Well, doesn’t that sound great. But I’m far from convinced. Remember our riots a short time ago?
“”Robert Jenrick: Rioters Are Anti-British””
https://www.facebook.com/fawkespage/posts/1244428336520739/
And now that he’s running for leader…
“”Guido Fawkes – Jenrick: Celebrating English Identity… – Facebook””
“” Left? Hard-Right? Does even Robert Jenrick himself know which way he will turn next?””
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13977941/DAN-HODGES-Left-Hard-Right-Does-Robert-Jenrick-know-way-turn-next.html
Bottom line: a blue-rinse Starmer.
Early on in the campaign the Guardian tried to nobble Kemi Badenoch…
“”Badenoch became the last leadership candidate to confirm, to Tory MPs, her commitment to the UK’s climate targets as she said she would not backtrack on pledges to hit net zero by 2050 “” – iNews
I’ll be sticking with Reform.
Somewhat off topic, but I recently heard on the tube (Newsmax?) that Labor was ‘assisting’ Kamala’s campaign efforts in Pennsylvania. If true, I think that would be a big deal re. future UK / US relations. Of course, our spooks have probably been interfering in UK politics since forever, so I guess that’s only fair.
Politicians are perhaps the worse manifestation of human nature in the belief that any one person can reliably speak for many thousands or even millions of individuals who they have never seen, talked to, or even know of. Natural leaders is what we seek – slimy politicians are what most collectives end up with.
Democracy is at the mercy of those charlatans who pretend they can make it work when they cannot even organise safe and certain voting processes or even have the desire to do so.
Indeed. If only we really had a democracy. But you know how Parliament works. If you cast your mind back to the expenses scandal ~2010, David Cameron in a fit of contrition promised the voting public the right to recall an MP. Normally in other jurisdictions 5% of the electorate needs to sign the petition. Cameron doubled that to 10%.
But then they had another think…
“”Cameron’s abandonment of the right to recall shows the death of “the new politics“
The constitutional transformation promised by the coalition in 2010 has entirely failed to materialise.””
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/camerons-abandonment-right-recall-shows-death-new-politics
So, now only Mr Speaker (the MPs trade union rep) can initiate a recall process. If you don’t like what your MP has been doing, sit tight and wait for the next election. The MP will be.
Democracy means political power (kratos) is spread equally across the demos so no person has more power than any other and cannot impose their political will on others. In other words anarchy.
The alternative is concentration of political power in one place – this is tyranny and the inevitable bribery, corruption, cronyism, abuse of power and oppression. I think we have a full-house there, now in our cherished “free” democracies.
Voting away your power so it is concentrated in one place is tyranny that is called democratic government. It’s an illusion, a delusion.
Emended: “Liberal Democracy”
Political power is centralised and concentrated by political parties. If parties did not exist democracy would still work just fine. Power would not be centralised. It would float and shift according to the democratic majority of the constituents and the issues before them.
Better yet, minimize government so that any pretense of speaking for everybody is recognized as hogwash.
Yep. In my ideal world, the power a politician has should be inversely proportional to the number of people it can affect. So a mayor would have a lot of power to deal with local issues, but a president or prime minister could only deal in vague generalities, eg, directing provinces to “do more about cleaning up litter” or somesuch.
Campaign: “We need change! Trust me!”
The rest is rhetoric and noise.
Changing the leader will not get rid of the One Nation Liberal Conservative MP’s who still bow to the CO2 global warming religion or the Civil Service who will just carry on. You had 14 years and did nothing but confirm the commitment to Nut Zero.
Liberal Conservative is an oxymoron.
…and a clear indication of how debased political discourse has become, most likely intended by those who rule over us.
Beware what wannabe political leaders say when standing for office. Sunak, for example, when running against Truss for the Tory leadership, said he was ‘absolutely’ in favour of fracking (with the caveat ‘if the people want it’). Truss, in her brief premiership, lifted some of the restrictions on fracking, which Sunak, upon taking over, immediately reversed.
“We must repeal and amend the Climate Change Act, …”
Which is it Robert? Repeal or amend?
Him speak with forked tongue.
Yes.
Interesting reading the comments. Most seem to have little faith in Jenrick’s sincerity, but at least he is saying things that need to be said out loud by someone running for office. Maybe he is only a slimy pol, or maybe he has heard enough from people suffering from the lunatic climate policies that he has decided to take a position against the lunacy. Naïve thinking maybe, but one can hope that he is in fact sincere.
The man may be sincere and I support his intentions but, even if elected leader, what are the chances he’ll still be leader (and in a position to become PM) come the next election? Tragically, the Tories are too invested in nut zero for a U-turn of that magnitude to be credible to the electorate.
The honey poison in their ears is fed by the Conservative Environment Network (CEN):
Conservative Environment Network (cen.uk.com)
The organization proudly claimed credit for creating the lie that increasing gas prices were due to the Ukraine war (blithely ignoring the increase in the previous year which led to all the “energy suppliers” going bankrupt BEFORE the war).
CEN Funding (from their own website):
“Grants from foundations (65% of our income), including the European Climate Foundation, Wates Family Enterprise Trust, Oak Foundation, Montpelier Foundation, and the Clean Air Fund.
Alumni (ie indoctrinates) list has been decimated by the recent election but they previously included:
Peter Bottomley, Tobias Elwood, Michael Fabricant, Liam Fox, Damian Green, Matt Hancock, Kwasi Kwarteng, Oliver Letwin, Amber Rudd, Theresa Villiers, Jeremy Hunt, Grant Shapps, Sajid David and of course the wonderful Theresa May.
Sadly even my own right wing MP Desmond Swayne.
And from their previous manifesto what they have been feeding to the Conservative MPs:
“2050 Global temperature hits 1.5℃ above pre industrial levels:
Warm air holds more water, meaning extremes of drought and flooding become common, causing displacement and conflict.132.5 million people are exposed to severe drought and 28 million people face coastal flooding every year.Sea levels rise 48cm and ocean acidity rises 17%, leading to decline of 70-90% of all coral reefs, leaving half a billion people without their main source of protein.Almost no summer sea ice cover left in the Arctic and 10% chance of a summer with no ice at all with dramatic effects on habitats and species across the northern hemisphere.Frequency of extreme heat in Africa rises by 332%.47% likelihood of ‘unprecedented’ summer heat in Britain.Total number of severe heat waves in India rises by 500%, and each lasts twice as long.Water shortages affect 4 million people in Southern Europe and Mediterranean, 79 million people in Southeastern Asia and 48 million people in Eastern Asia. Average Mediterranean summer suffers 41% increase in area burned by wildfires.
The ocean is not acidic.
People do not eat coral.
Pointless to comment further on such ridiculous rhetoric and lies.
You have to ‘admire’ the implicit precision, e.g., 332%, the Left cloaks their lies in.
How can he be sincere? He doesn’t own his own mind or conscience. He will do as his masters direct. They are all the same.
I take your point. Given the almost universal support by UK MPs of all parties for climate change hysteria to date, it takes a certain something to propose the opposite. We want MPs to change their minds on this. The problem is that from bitter experience we are apt to assume he’s just another ‘slimy pol’. Would be delighted to be proved wrong in his case.
He will never get the chance as he will be replaced before the next election, his past history of U turns is another reason to disbelieve him.
Jenrick u-turns on decision not to call in controversial Cumbrian coal mineThe communities secretary has reversed his position and called in the controversial proposal for a new coal mine at Whitehaven in Cumbria for a public inquiry, claiming that fresh carbon targets have been published since his initial decision not to intervene in the case, while “controversy about the application has increased”.
He is “pulling a Harris.”
Sincere today, until Whitehall starts throwing up roadblocks and the green machine starts throwing up JSO protestors outside his manor house and his townhouse. Then it will be a different story entirely, and it’ll all be the fault of Labour, the ECHR, or whatever else.
“Jenrick has called for whole-life sentences for people convicted of grooming underage girls for sex”
It’s expensive to lock someone up for life. Much cheaper to have capital punishment.
Or just deport them, they normally have dual citizenship.
Other measures can ensure no repeat offences.
Depends. If the grooming is for self, then yes. If the grooming is for sales, no.
I have always been puzzled by the decision to provide food, shelter, medicine, entertainment to convicted criminals for life since that is a burden to society, especially when society provides so very little to the victims. Seems backwards to not have capital punishment, especially given the judicial system is tilted to allow criminals too go free rather than risk an innocent be convicted.
Yes, there are rare, scattered cases, where decades later new evidence is found and a conviction is overturned. However those new techniques and technologies did not exist then but they do exist now.
Another puzzle: Sentenced to 6 consecutive life sentences but is paroled for good behavior?
They could have paroled him for 5 life sentences- then hung him for the 6th. 🙂
Same old story… other peoples money.
There’s a leadership race for the Conservative (in name only) Party. The contenders are now going to “rip up” all the policies they supported whilst in Office, and which they were repeatedly told would lose them the election, for policies now advocated by Reform UK which took a huge number of former Tory voters, in the vain hope they can win them back.
Alas the last 14 years of Tory Government has seen a litany of deceit, lies, broken promises, meaningless reassurances and incompetence. Now nobody believes a word they say or trusts them as far as they could throw an elephant.
You omitted destructive policies and laws.
Every political party has always been manipulators, users and abusers. This is the way of parties. Their collectivism gives them that power. Reform UK, if they ever gain power, will be the same. The only thing that seems to stay constant is the blind stupidity of the voters.
Real headline:
‘Promising Candidate for PM Destroys His Entire Political Career in Single Interview’
He is trying to make a clear distinction between him and Kemi Badenoch who is a fully paid up member of the net zero insanity. Unfortunately, Kemi Badenoch is the odds on favourite to win the election.
Jenrick has to get elected twice first. Leader of the Party and then Prime Minister. So it is all very premature. Kemi Badeoch’s Approach makes far more sense.
I am not sure the leader of the Tory branch of the Uniparty that has run the U.K. for the past twenty five years will make any difference to the woke movement now controlling the institutions in the U.K.
i say this and I actually have a vote on who will run the Tory party next Jenrick or Badenoch.
Butskelism de nos jours.
As an outsider, the Tories seemed like Mitt Romney, a squish version of the opposition party.
…and we should believe that Jenrick would keep his promise because..?
..because he is a free man who is master of his mind and conscience and beholden to no master except God. Just joking.
Sounds good to, let’s get started.