Chris Packham goes deeper into the issue in an interview with Politics Joe:
Do you think you might?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Over to our on-the-spot (he’s somewhere green) correspondent for a quick rundown of all the facts you need to know about Rishi Sunak’s new North Sea oil and gas drilling contracts:
(I thought you might enjoy this before I get festive about Sunak with an article about how upset the Tories have got about a photoshopped image of him handing over a badly-poured pint of beer – contrasted with the fact that they created a mechanism for pumping out lies about themselves. Coming soon!)
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Facemask: the amount of pollution produced by the oil and gas production that Rishi Sunak has authorised and Keir Starmer (pictured) won’t rescind is enormous. Will we all need to go back to wearing face masks, just to save ourselves from choking?
Representatives of Keir Starmer’s STP (Substitute Tory Party, formerly Labour) have admitted that they will not cancel the new North Sea oil and gas drilling licences that Rishi Sunak has given to multinational companies – many of which have given work to his wife’s family business.
"So will Labour overturn these oil and gas licenses if Keir Starmer comes to power?"
"So we won't overturn existing licenses"
Labour MP Anneliese Dodds confirming that she came into politics to help the planet burn. pic.twitter.com/y5DQ9J61MU
See, Ms Debbonaire can talk until she’s blue in the face (and not just in her politics); we see the difference between what she’s saying and what her party is doing.
And what is the practical result of new oil and gas drilling licences? Here’s a handy snapshot of what has happened already:
New oil and gas licences for the North Sea approved in the past two years will alone produce as much carbon dioxide as the annual emissions of nearly 14ml cars, or the entire yearly emissions of Denmark.
So an eightfold increase would produce as much carbon dioxide as the annual emissions of nearly 112 million cars – on top of the 14 million already being produced.
The Tories – and Keir Starmer’s mob – are literally trying to choke us to death, it seems.
So there seems very little point in supporting either of these two genocidal gangs.
What would the left gain from voting Labour?
At this juncture sweet FA other than a huge Labour majority with a PM who hates socialists and socialism.
— Chelley Ryan #EnoughIsEnough (@chelleryn99) August 1, 2023
How about giving the Greens a chance instead, then – or any socialist alternative that offers genuinely green environmental policies?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Grant Shapps: he likes to spout a lot of nonsense from his base in Welwyn Hatfield (this image is from a BBC interview in 2020) but he’s not so smooth when faced with an interviewer who has checked the facts before talking to him.
The 100 new contracts granted by Rishi Sunak for energy companies to drill for gas and oil in the North Sea do not mean those fossil fuels will be used in the UK, as he falsely claimed.
The drilling will be done by commercial firms who will then sell the fossil fuels they find on the international market. Some of it may come back to the UK but most of it probably won’t.
Here are the facts, presented by Sky’s Jayne Secker to a spluttering Grant Shapps:
Notice how he tried to change the subject when the facts were presented to him?
Oh, these substances have to go to the UK because they are processed here. But that doesn’t mean they are used here.
Oh, but not all of them are used for fuel. Some are turned into plastics. But plastic pollution is harming the planet as badly as global warming.
Oh, but some of it is used for medical devices within the NHS. But that’s a tiny amount that would not justify the granting of any more drilling licences.
It seems ever-more-clear that the new licences are more likely to be a way for Sunak to corruptly reward companies like BP for signing contracts with his father-in-law’s firm Infosys than to improve the UK’s energy security.
If Sunak and/or his government wish to deny this, then there is a simple way to clear the air:
Let’s have an independent public inquiry into the awarding of these contracts: what they are intended to do; the way they have been presented to the public; what the actual consequences are likely to be – and who benefits?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
It should come as no surprise to anybody that the oil and gas contracts Rishi Sunak announced in the middle of a global boiling crisis come with a suggestion of corruption.
Remember Infosys, the firm owned by Sunak’s father-in-law, in which his wife Akshata Murty has 38.9 million shares? The information on my screen says they’re estimated to be worth £89 million but that is likely to increase hugely now.
You see, Infosys has just “won” (it says here) a $1.5 billion contract with BP – one of the energy firms that will profit from those North Sea oil and gas contracts. People are suggesting that there’s something fishy about it all, and it isn’t just the water:
Infosys already has ties with Shell, as part of a partnership with “two of the top five integrated oil and gas companies, three of the top four oilfield services providers, and five of the top 10 upstream enterprises across the oil and gas landscape”:
Rishi Sunak's family's business Infosys boasts of its partnership with "two of the top five integrated oil and gas companies, three of the top four oilfield services providers, and five of the top 10 upstream enterprises across the oil and gas landscape.”https://t.co/JGWQiIGljspic.twitter.com/VPiKDthqar
The Byline Times article – from July 19 last year – warned us about Sunak’s ties with the fossil fuel industry:
Infosys’ intimate partnerships with regional as well as global oil and gas giants represent a potential conflict of interest for Rishi Sunak.
According to the UK Ministerial Code, ministers are required to fully disclose and explain the business interests of their spouses and families “which might give rise to a conflict” with the duties of Government.
Despite Sunak ostensibly committing to the Government’s net zero goals – now deemed unlawful by the High Court for not going far enough – he also said in the televised debate … that Britain must not move “too hard and too fast” on climate action.
His victory [in the Conservative leadership contest that was ongoing at the time] could represent a win for firms like Shell, which said it expected to revise upwards the value of oil and gas assets it had previously written down, triggering a jump in share prices.
When Sunak eventually released a list of his business interests – correct me if I’m wrong – the connections between his wife’s family firm and the oil companies that have just won very large and valuable contracts were not mentioned.
Scottish news organisation The National has also – just – published a list of fossil fuel polluters and climate change deniers that donate money to the Conservative Party. Have some of these won contracts in Sunak’s recent bonanza?
The Tory donors with links to fossil fuel interests and climate denial – see the list https://t.co/mtnrzjU8h5 Worth looking at
Taking it in the round, it seems unlikely that Sunak had the interests of the eco-system in mind when he was considering the possibility of new oil and gas contracts in the North Sea.
Indeed, it seems unlikely that he considered the well-being of anything other than his own financial affairs and those of his family.
It seems to This Writer that this entire situation – the contracts, the Business Council, the donations to the Tory Party – requires scrutiny, and by somebody entirely independent of Sunak and his Tories.
Can anybody recommend a mechanism by which this can be secured?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
This is fine: Rishi Sunak will burn down not only your house but your country and planet if he thinks he can get something out of it.
Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government has announced around 100 new contracts to extract oil and gas – polluting fossil fuels that cause global warming – from the North Sea.
He has claimed – unconvincingly – that this is in line with plans to make the UK a “net zero” polluter – one that does not contribute to global warming – by the year 2050, saying that the nation will still rely on fossil fuels for some of its energy needs for many decades to come, and it is less harmful to source it domestically than import it from abroad.
He is deliberately missing the point – of course – that if the UK doesn’t mine these substances and instead invests in more renewable energy, there would be no need to buy polluting crap from any other countries.
But logic isn’t his strong point. After all, this policy is based on his party’s sliver of success in the July by-elections, when its candidate in Uxbridge and South Ruislip narrowly kept that constituency out of Keir Starmer’s hands.
The win has been pinned on opposition to the Ultra-Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) that charges owners of polluting cars to travel in central London. In fact, it was probably a statement on Keir Starmer’s inability to lead a political party but, as Starmer won’t face that possibility, both parties have been attacking the ULEZ instead.
Well I didn't see that coming: that the next election is going to be about the Tories staking out claims for more oil, cars going faster, dirty cars carrying on pumping out fumes in cities, killing people…And the mandate for this is: 'we hung on in Uxbridge'? Is that it?
— Michael Rosen 💙💙🎓🎓 (@MichaelRosenYes) July 31, 2023
Yes.
There is now a big Tory campaign to claim that they are on the side of motorists while Starmer’s party is not. This involves attacking the Opposition party’s transport plans and claiming that it sides with media-maligned environmental campaigners like Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil (on the basis of a single donation from a supporter of the latter group):
✅ The Welsh Conservatives would reverse Labour's barmy road building ban, scrap their blanket 20mph speed limits and say no to congestion charges.
🥀 Meanwhile, Labour are in bed with Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion.
It’s a typical Tory tactic: divide and rule. They want to convince you that Starmer’s party is financially dependent on people who have already been vilified as crazies for their attempts to inform us about the genuinely insane pollution policies of the current Tory government. And who do the Tories depend on, financially?
The idea is to keep us from asking what is probably the only pertinent question about this affair:
Why are the Tories giving massive new oil and gas drilling contracts to the same giant energy companies that have been massively ripping off their customers to make obscene amounts of profit?
Only today, I notice that BP has announced £2 billionin profit, to go alongside British Gas’s nearly £1 billion. That is money that could have been revitalising the UK’s economy instead, but Sunak and his cronies have no interest in that.
Put it all together and it’s a massive political endorsement for global warming. And it’s utterly insane.
This Site has already reported on the wildfires sweeping across other parts of the globe. As the situation worsens – as it undoubtedly will with national governments blindly extending their reliance on fossil fuels and the companies that provide them – crops will fail.
We will run out of food and have to buy substandard cast-offs from other countries that will also be struggling.
And I have also mentioned scientists’ expectation that the flow of the Gulf Stream, that warms the UK, will be halted, meaning much colder winters and hotter summers. We don’t have the required infrastructure for either.
So it is no surprise that people who actually, genuinely understand the issues are using the social media to post messages like this:
Please screen-grab this tweet and keep it handy when food prices soar , water-wars break out , your house burns down , your business is washed away , polar bears are extinct or in a few years time when a desperate and angry young person asks you who was responsible for killing… https://t.co/BlD9BBi8dG
Oh, and by the way, regarding the last part of Chris Packham’s tweet: it won’t even be Rishi Sunak, or Keir Starmer, who will be responsible.
If you vote either of them into power so that they can enact these disastrous policies, then responsibility for killing the world rests on you.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Starmer and Sunak: perhaps the reason there’s little difference between them and their parties is that they are chasing sponsorship from big business for their own personal gain, rather than doing what the public pays them to do – which is find solutions to the problems being created by the firms they are courting.
Economist Richard Murphy has published a column highlighting concerns that Keir Starmer’s STP (Substitute Tory Party – formerly Labour) is too “timid” to challenge right-wing claims about immigration, climate change or anything else, or to articulate an alternative vision.
Is it that they spent too much time watching Top Gear over the years and now live in fear of that culture?
Could it be that they have a deep-seated insecurity when it comes to standing up to the interests of big business when the latter so clearly want what the country does not?
Or is that they simply do not do ideology-based politics and so go where the money is, with money filling the vacuum where their convictions should be?
It comes down to the same thing. Starmer has decided to do what the Tories always do: chase the cash that comes from big corporate sponsorship for his own personal gain.
The national interest can go hang, as far as he is concerned.
I’m willing to bet we’ll find evidence of this if we have a look around. Or have you found some already?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Crete wildfires: unless action is taken, these fires will spread. Crops will fail and the UK will be unable to afford to buy supplies in from countries that will also be struggling. Your leaders know this and are doing nothing. You need different leaders.
UK opinion pollsters are recording an unlikely boost for Keir Starmer’s STP (Substitute Tory Part – formerly Labour) over climate change.
Despite the fact that he says he hates “tree-huggers” and wants the London ULEZ (Ultra-Low Emissions Zone) scrapped after he blamed it and not his own poor leadership on his party’s failure to win the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election, the i‘s Editor’s Choice newsletter tells me his party is enjoying a “bounce” of support over the issue:
Our poll results … show a Labour bounce after days of Conservative backtracking over net zero pledges. Sir Keir Starmer is now on 44% support, compared to the Tories’ 27%. If replicated at a general election would hand Sir Keir Starmer a landslide majority on a scale not seen since 1997.
Note that, like This Writer, the i can apparently no longer bring itself to refer to Starmer’s party as Labour!
But it isn’t all roses for the party that colours itself red. While
only 15 per cent trust Rishi Sunak to deal with this crucial issue. Sir Keir Starmer fares slightly better (21 per cent) but nearly half of those polled placed no trust in either of them – a stat that is hugely worrying.
As if the “era of global warming” wasn’t a serious enough threat, this week, the UN secretary-general declared that we had entered “the era of global boiling” after scientists confirmed that July was on track to be the world’s hottest month on record.
We all have our part to play in the climate fight but there is only so much we can do without governments around the world stepping up to the challenge. And that needs to start at home. Now.
And it’s not happening.
Instead – and for example – the Starmer party’s shadow Climate Change secretary, Ed Miliband, appeared on TV to push a false claim about its current policy:
Ed Miliband: "Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has done more than any shadow chancellor before her to put [tackling climate change] front and centre of our agenda"
Reeves recently withdrew her promise to spend £28 billion a year on tackling the climate crisis.
Her – and Miliband’s – party’s current policy on climate change is to do nothing. There’s a vague offer to spend some money on it after being in office for an unspecified number of years.
Let’s remember (again) that Starmer himself – their party’s leader – used the ULEZ (Ultra-Low Emissions Zone) in London as the reason his party couldn’t win Uxbridge and South Ruislip in the recent by-election there and has tried to pressurise London Mayor Sadiq Khan to scrap it (in fact it seems that discontent with his own leadership had more to do with the failure to win that seat).
It is his stance that has encouraged Tory prime minister Rishi Sunak to water down his own policies on climate change. So perhaps it is poetic justice that Sunak’s own poll ratings have plummeted as a result.
But none of this does anything to stop the “global boiling” that is happening as I type these words. Our home is burning to a cinder and the men and women in suits are squabbling about money as though it matters.
They seem to have forgotten that money is made by using the natural resources produced by our planet and its eco-system. Destroy that system and those resources – in the way that these people have been doing (and yes, I mean Keir Starmer, Ed Miliband, Rachel Reeves, Rishi Sunak and all the shadowy businesspeople who employ them) – and not only will there not be any more money, but whatever they have will not be worth anything.
While they argue over whether cleaning the planet is cost-effective – like the imbeciles they are – some of us have been pointing out the obvious flaw in their thinking:
Even if you don’t believe climate change is man affected… the actions we need to reduce it leave us with clean air, less pollution , clean waters and cheap secure energy? Why the anger against that?
If Sunak, Starmer and the other stuffed suits can’t get their policies in line with that, then we need to fill Parliament with people who can.
I mean, it’s only a matter of survival. Ask your non-political friends how their non-voting – or even tactical voting – philosophy measures up to that.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
