I watched two people talk about climate change on television yesterday. One was Rishi Sunak. The other was Chris Packham. One of them told the truth. The other talked nonsense that was far from the truth in almost every way possible. Packham was described by Sunak as an extremist, albeit not my name. The reality is that Sunak is far more dangerous.
Let me leave Peckham aside for a moment. I have already posted my reactions to what Sunak was saying, as he said it, which I put on Twitter. Reading those comments you might sense my anger, because I have little doubt that I, like Chris Packham, am an extremist as Rishi Sunak would define it. My anger was not, however, just about climate change.
I was angry that the British prime minister announced a whole new change in policy outside Parliament, which went into recess the day before. The indifference that he showed for the democratic process should, in my opinion, be sufficient for him to be treated as being in contempt of parliament, like his predecessor. Whilst claiming that he was starting a new form of politics (without offering anything of substance to justify that), what he made clear was that parliament would be sidelined. Of course, I was angry about that.
I was also angry at his contempt for the businesses whose plans he disrupted. This has been a consistent failing on the part of the Tories. Cameron and Osborne virtually blew apart the solar panel industry with their policy changes. Now Sunak is undermining the move to electric vehicles by delaying the requirement that only they be sold by 2030, and by failing to invest in the infrastructure that they require. Simultaneously, he pretends that there is a cost problem with heat pumps when the reality with regards to heat pumps is twofold. One is that the government needs to invest to create the capacity to build enough of them, which capacity does not exist at present. The other is that it needs to take control of the national grid to build the capacity to transmit all the electricity that will be required for this green transition to take place. So far it has given no indication of an appetite to do so, which will be absolutely disastrous in the long-term.
I was also angry about his use of the right-wing trope that suggests that because the UK only produces 1% of global emissions anything we do is a little consequence. In a world where leadership is required, that is irrelevant. Given the fact that there is only one planet, the comment is crass. And given the fact that we have more opportunity than most to do this transition because of the capacity that we have to generate electricity from wind, sun and tides, we have the duty to lead. But, as ever with a cowardly politician, Sunak wishes to put himself at the back of the pack.
And then I was angry about the claims on climate change. The suggestion that he made that we are so far ahead of the pack that we can let things slip a bit and still achieve net zero by 2050 is just wrong. The Climate Change Committee has made it clear that this is what they think. Lord Deben, who chaired that committee and who as Tory MP John Gummer served in Margaret Thatcher's cabinet, made that abundantly clear in Chris Packham's programme. He rubbished the idea that the government is on target. As he made clear, the exact opposite is the case. I am quite sure that Sunak knows that, but he made these changes anyway.
Finally, I was angry that Sunak claimed that what he was saying was not political. I can only presume that he thinks that those watching him are stupid, because the only explanation for what he did was political. The explanation for them comes down to just one word, which is Uxbridge. Sunak thinks that backtracking on green commitments will help the Tories at the next election, and that is precisely why he is making these disastrous decisions. There is nothing more to them in the most base politics. His only motive is fear. His indifference to the long term is absolute.
Then, I should mention that I am, of course, angry with Labour. They have already said they will not reverse the policy on heat pumps.
So, why was Chris Packham so good when Rishi Sunak failed so miserably? The answer comes down to honesty. Packham honestly declared his uncertainty as to whether he thinks it might be acceptable for him to now break the law to achieve the change that is required to manage the transition that our planet must go through when the law is so very obviously now set against that goal. He was candid. His uncertainty was apparent. His agony was clear.
Unlike Sunak, Packham came across as an honest man trying to address a known fact. That he did not answer his own question was quite acceptable as a conclusion. His uncertainty was in itself a sufficient answer at this moment.
Sunak rather bizarrely said that he was launching a new sort of politics with his speech. He didn't. He just played to the gutter. In contrast, Packham went high. Both will get abuse for what they did. Only one of them is on the right side of history.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I thought that ChrisPackham’s programme was a brilliant exposition of the existential angst that many of us repress to get through the day – I so admire his bravery and integrity. I weep at the indiference of Sunak and his tribe.
Well at least we have title for the PM’s official biography, volume two:
‘Seven Bins Sunak: The Waste Years’
For me the most important factor is that parliament has effectively been prorogued again – this time more cunningly than even Johnson would operate.
What’s bad about this is that such is the leverage that the Tories backers have, that they can get politicians to effectively disown their own democratic processes. This includes HM Opposition.
This is being done in plain sight.
Sunak is just an avatar for vested interests – our foe is not actually political or a politician – our foe is the unaccountable, self interested manipulative back seat drivers, the funders, ‘political advisors’ and speech writers who give these things to say to elected people.
So if you are like Chis Packham then maybe you ought to think about that for a minute and thoroughly assess the un-democracy we are up against. Let the scales fall away from your eyes, stop wanting to believe in the system that is designed to hurt you, a system that actually works against your interests.
The key is to forget about the politicians and look at the people behind them. How about this self interested waste of flesh and organs here for start:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/20/one-of-tories-biggest-ever-donors-frank-hester-profited-from-135m-of-nhs-contracts
Once you’ve got your head around that – the un-democracy – you/we will find it much easier to do what it is you/we feel we must do.
Basically we cannot take our democracy seriously anymore. And none of its outputs either – laws, contracts, agreements, its institutions – everything.
Yes I agree and have been saying for a long time the media are actually calling the shots. All of these so called ‘policies’ are lifted straight out of the readers comments of the Telegraph/Mail and their ilk.
If you want to generate an eye catching headline on the tabloids do what Sunk did yesterday. It is 100% theatre, it could/will change tomorrow (or maybe the day after).
Until we somehow neuter the press, and I include every much the BBC in this, we will continue along this path.
Shall I write another letter to Chris Chope, will it make any impact?
Immense anger too that he apparently ‘did not have time’ to attend the UN conference on climate change (presumably preferring to use this time to announce his staggering U-turn while Parliament was on holiday – how cynical can you get?). I read that the only person from the UK present was Sadiq Kahn in his capacity as the leader of a city and that the UK was missing from from the final declaration signed by 17 countries (including I’m glad to say France & Spain).
As someone whose only access to UK TV is BBC World, I was unaware of Chris Packham and had to google him! Having seen a report of the programme in question, I can only say Well Done Mr Packham.
Humza Yousaf the Scottish FM has been at the UN climate talks since Monday. I think that’s called leadership.
Nick Robinson on r4 Today programme in the hours leading up to his interview with Sunak sounded enthusiastic to the point of ecstasy – that govt was doing this.
He did ask Sunak some awkward questions – but seemed only too pleased to collude with the prime minister operating entirely outside parliament and just making this a ‘media’ operation.
As Green MP, Caroline Lucas MP noted he managed to unite the Ford Motor Co with Green party.
So depressing that BBC sort of colludes with him portraying all climate action as ‘costs’ on ‘ordinary families’ rather than investment in future prosperity and health.
I heard the interview
I have to say I thought Robinson gave him a tough time
Confess – Ii only heard Robinson building up in the two hours before the interview – when he sounded jubilant. People on Twitter also said he did put tough questions to Sunak – fair enough, but the whole excercise, with parliament banished just seems grotesque.
Churchill said, ‘A politician thinks of the next election, a statesman of the next generation.’ Nuff said, Guv.
And I hope Mr Speaker demands that he attend the House to give him a rocket about, yet again, policy being announced beyond Westminster.
I despair for our children and wildlife. Apart from our planet being sacrificed for vast profits that can only be short lived, where are these super rich people going to be when it all goes wrong? If they are the only ones to survive because they have somehow protected themselves from the worst impacts of climate catastrophe then these rich people will again be the ones who rule over us.
Patricia Bleasdale:
“these rich people will again be the ones who rule over us. ”
I am sorry, but I think you are wrong. There won’t be an ‘us’ for them to rule over.
I agree with everything you say, but feel in all this comment that the emphasis should be moved from electric cars to public transport. Of course we need the infrastructure for electric cars, but we need a much bigger, MASSIVE, investment in public transport, buses, trains (rail freight), trams (electric-no batteries), to get people out of cars and lorries off the roads. When we start looking at the resources necessary and the environmental damage caused by mining the minerals for batteries, we will realise that electric cars can only be a small part of our transport system, if we are to get to carbon neutral.
They seem to have realised all this in many EU countries.
How do we change the narrative? If we in the UK don’t, we are doomed.
Agreed
We also need to move less.
In recent years I have tried hard to do this
Watch we own it tonight, 5pm, on youtube. They are with Andy Burnham, talking about buses and trains, etc., in Manchester.
Sorry – I was distracted.
It should be on YouTube
It will be. It was really good. They have contacts with Jamie Driscoll for the North East mayor next year who has been doing a lot of work on the transport network.
There is a Bee- Day event on Sunday at Bolton Interchange for anyone who lives near there.
Sunak will know that the vile-tories will lose @ the next election – the question is by how much. Thus what he was doing was adjustments which he thinks (I use the term losely) to perhaps mitigate the size of the defeat. Short term expediency coupled to a “follow my leader” party game – seeing how far vile-tory-lite (Liebore) will follow him. Quite a long way it would seem, such is the hunger for power amongst Liebore apparatchiks & assorted politicos. The contempt amongst polit-sickos of all stripes for the veiws/desires/wishes of UK serfs is palapable. Apologies for posting this a second time:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/21/revealed-one-in-three-europeans-now-votes-anti-establishment
The end result in the UK will be something akin to national socialism – given the political vaccum (caused by vacuous power-hungry polit-sickos). One does wonder, is it the power or the prospect of B.Liar-like riches afterwards? perhaps a combo.
Thank you for sharing this information. I’ll try to find a way to watch that documentary from overseas. Found a nice article from the Guardian on it too: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/sep/20/chris-packham-is-it-time-to-break-the-law-review-the-bravest-most-anguished-tv-of-the-year
Thanks Jerome O for adding the link. That was report I saw and should have included the link in my post above.
The Sun has a picture on the front page of Sunak filling up a red car.
I saw a the video of it. The car is a KIA.
Is he trying to show he is a common man?
He is as likely to drive a KIA as I am to drive a Rolls.
What are you doing, looking at the s*n?
Apart from that, is that not an old photo, where he did not know how to fill up a car/ did not notice it was electric/ could not use a visa card to pay as he’d never done so before?
Has anyone seen any fact checking being done on his statement? That should be in the MSM but won’t be.
I watched Chris Packham’s programme through twice last night as I fell asleep halfway through and couldn’t remember what I’d seen the first time. I wondered at the end whether I had missed a word, even though I was lipreading and had hearing aids in, as I do for all important programmes.
Clever ending, and I can’t wait for the lawbreaking episode. He obviously wouldn’t say on that programme.
I look at the BBC news site where they have the newspapers front pages.
Yes, it is an old picture and I should have said his supporters in the Sun are trying to show he is ‘like the rest of us”.
Some will believe it. He is trying, IMHO, to appeal to the lowest common denominator, or as Richard puts it, to the gutter.
Sunak’s argument that getting people to pay out up to £15,000 to get a heat pump installed ignored the fact that before considering the heat pump replacing existing gas boilers you need good insulation first otherwise the limited warmth from a heat pump is wasted and insufficient. Even the puny support for helping households with insulation costs under Cameron and Osborne were soon withdrawn. Investment in insulating all the mostly badly insulated UK housing would be a far more efficient way of saving vast amounts of energy and expense for householders. Regarding the Chiris Packham’s interviews he was very clear really that some form of mass disobedience was needed as inferred by Roger Hallam though he did point out that sometimes when people lose hope an unexpected incident can stir up huge public support..
Young people sitting on M25 gantrys do draw attention to the climate crisis but their suffering of imprisonment is largely ignored by the public. Only large scale campaigns a la Gandhi. Luther King and Mandela have lasting effect..
[…] Sunak heads for the the gutter as Packham takes the lead: a tale of two climate interventions Funding the Future […]
May I remind everyone that when back in the naughties the building regs for E&W came up for review the v proposal was for the standard to be net Zero energy for new builds will before now. For some reason the building companies opposed it, probably because they would have to build properly to achieve it.
If the Government of the day had listened to experts then rather than potential funders then less than 15 years later, we would have been in a much better position than we are now.
It seems both major parties are happy to burn out grandchildren for a few more years in power.
Johnathan Pie’s response.
There is the usual fruity language, but it hits home the truth.
Rishi “Seven Bins” Sunak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAleHFLP03A
It will be on here in the morning.
Thanks
I don’t know if I am misunderstanding something here, but everyone seems to be discussing how dreadful this will be. As I understand it, there is a good chance that in 100 years time the human race will be in its death throes. Isn’t it time that this ‘fact’ (if it is a fact) was being screamed loud and clear?
Even better. Something useful.
https://goodlawproject.us11.list-manage.com/track/click?u=f1c42fae5214b3ee59aab75ab&id=f5cf31f635&e=00443cdc17
I wonder if rich people concerned about climate change could subsidise The Good Law Project. Cases like this cost a lot of money, and do not get into the MSM when they win.
They need supporting more.