Monday
Sep162013
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Empathy, EU style
Sep 16, 2013 Bureaucrats Climate: Parliament The cynicism of the bureaucrat knows no bounds, but EU Climate Change Commissioner Connie Hedegaard really takes some beating:
Regardless of whether or not scientists are wrong on global warming, the European Union is pursuing the correct energy policies even if they lead to higher prices, Europe’s climate commissioner has said.
Bureaucrats operate under perverse incentives, that much is understood, but when, as they tend to do, these reveal themselves as such wholehearted contempt for the general public the revelation takes the breath away every time.
Reader Comments (60)
know bounds --->> no bounds
[Corrected, thanks. BH]
"Connie" really does sum it up.
Well... I guess that just about says it all.
Vindication for us old gimmers who have maintained all along it was not about the science. Scant comfort as there is every chance they will get away with it.
Once again with feeling: "Please tell me why we should not all rise up and slaughter the lot of them?"
This should be good publicity for UKIP. It vindicates everything they have said about climate change, energy policy and getting out of the EU.
Hedegaard says:
A typical 'command and control' leftie take on how the market works. On this basis - her logic - mobile phones would be more expensive than they are now because so many people wanted them. The thing is, she knows that cheap energy is the life-blood of a secure economy and the democracy that comes with it.
It was never about global warming it was all about control and money. Keep everyone fighting for survival and you have a compliant peasantry. Give a few some scraps to feel superior the police and some halfwitted greens to shout its for the children, pay the media to toe the line and you have your unassailable authority. Shame about the Internet, but they will keep on trying so must we.
There’s lots more goodies in this article, which is by Bruno Waterfield, Telegraph Brussels correspondent.
It’s adorned with a photo of Hedegaard which could have been staged deliberately to demonstrate the fact that she is deranged.The Telegraph knows what it’s doing. Not as intellectually solid as the Mail or the Sun, but fun nevertheless.
This is a common, (peculiarly European?) way of thinking. They think they have their backs covered.
Sep 16, 2013 at 8:18 PM | Snotrocket
Your quote, is that not the extreme peak oil type mentality showing. Clearly people like Blair and Bush were peak oilers lead by people like David King I believe. The thing is Shale Gas has the potential to really change things significantly, for the UK in particular. Are we not currently in a big clash of heavily subsidised renewables against promising looking unexpected fossil fuel source argument at the moment.
By the way I'm somewhat of a (standard liquid stuff out of the ground style) peak oiler myself.
"Climate Change (or Action) Commissioner" is a job title that should not exist. It is an affront.
Sounds like a dictator to me. Can we send in the Yanks?
I wrote to her office towards the end of last year, requesting some sort of clarification on one of her utterances.
I didn't even get an acknowledgement, never mind a reply.
Accountability rating : 0 out of 100.
The EU is a tyranny. A tyranny of bureaucrats, but a tyranny nonetheless, all the more so in that none of have ever voted for it. No wonder the Russians are pissing themselves watching us go down the same path of destruction that they did.
It seems that they finally see that climate change has run its course and that they can reveal the truth at last, sustainability is the name of the game as we said on BH about two years ago. At least we can beat them easily on this argument if that is, they are into listening for a change. Lord Deben was the first to let it slip when he was interviewed for the chair of the climate change committee.
Robert Zubrin's book "Merchants of Despair" knocks these ideas on the head pretty completely including the fact that we have enough resources to provide nuclear power for billions of years. As always the answer is technology.
I love the quote in the front of his book:
William Pitt 1783
Someone please remind me when it was she was democratically elected to her position...?
As Peter Oborne correctly points out, a vote for UKIP is a vote for Labour, especially in a marginal (following Lord Ashcroft's recent polling).
The question I haven't yet been able to answer is which is better: (1) being inside the Tory party arguing your point of view and at least in government, Hannan and Carswell style or (2) being outside of the possibility of government in UKIP, splitting the Right and ensuring the Left win the next election.
If the next Tory party manifesto is shown to have been influenced by UKIP pressure in some ways, surely that's your job done for now and a vote for the Tories in 2015 in order to keep Labour out would be a good idea.
And they wonder that EU gets less and less support by the masses?
Who put this clown there in that role? Unelected, irresponsible bureaucrat put on roles that they do not even understand.
Slowly but surely, the real reasons for driving cheap energy out of the market place, is becoming clearer.
Tim Yeo has convinced himself that he is implimenting "no regrets" policies. this is catastrophically naive.
Connie Hedegaard is the unacceptable face of "Agenda21" which appears to be preparingthe fallback
position in the event that the IPCC is revealed for what it really is.(...................................) fill in as appropriate.
These policies will be the meat in the precautionary sandwich, fed to the unthinking by the environmental
fanatics in order to win the day.
I think that we may have been side tracked into thinking that we could win the argument by proving that the
science was suspect.
We now know for sure (if we didn't before) that the science is irrelevant.
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever."
Orwell got it.
Robinson
Cameron is a Blairite with Blairite policies, we have a two party state with LibLabCon versus UKIP. We the voters are disenfranchised and whichever party we vote for we get the same corrupt policies. The cycle must be broken and UKIP is the party I will vote for (I am a lifelong Tory).
I have been banned numerous times from the Guardian for saying that. AGW is an oil company scam to raise energy prices (and more). There is too much oil in the world. #
Ian E
Exactly right.
If 50% of the voting population of the UK vote for UKIP ity cannot be a vote for labour or any other bunch of clowns. A vote for UKIP is the only way to break the circle. Come on brits follow your cossins in Auz. Vote the crooks out for good.
Come ON!! Get out of europe and Germany will follow because it is them that would have to replace the £billions that the UK will not be paying. Ignore the business people and the germans they need you in to line their pockets.
Europe's climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard is to set out the case for a unilateral 30% EU cut in CO2.
"It is too soon to kill off Kyoto. And the carbon markets can provide us with more finance for clean development if we can drive up the carbon price somehow. "It's not an accident that China is now developing trial carbon markets with major firms."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10109088.stm
I don't understand how you can accuse Cameron of being like Blair as if it's some kind of insult when Blair won 3 elections in a row (with massive majorities) and himself occupied much of the ground Thatcher prepared during her 3 terms. Regardless, it's just plain wrong to say the Tories and Labour are "the same". Clearly they aren't as any nuanced study of politics could easily show.
If there's consensus in the centre that's because there are certain facts of life that even UKIP wouldn't be able to ignore. At the moment they're free to say they'd ignore them of course, because when you're a protest party you can say pretty much anything you like to attract the disaffected.
I think Connie, Alex Salmond and Ed Davey & others who are green behind the ears should have smart meters fitted to their houses so that they can have 100 % of their electricity from wind & solar, since they are so keen on it. On the windless nights they will just have to go to bed early without any supper.
Maybe that is a bit extreme, do as you would be done by ( as the golden rule says ) so maybe we should just programme their smart meter to make them first in line to be cut off when there is load shedding aka rolling black outs. That way they can test to see if they like it before inflicting it on others.
Maybe they will find that living in the stone age isn't as fun as Fred Flintstone made out.
I don't fancy becoming a Skinflint Skintstone due to spending my spare cash on higher electric bills.
" Can we have the heating on dear ?", "Watt's that ? Sorry, just cosy up round the paraffin lamp "
The cynicism of the bureaucrat knows no bounds, but EU Climate Change Commissioner Connie Hedegaard
Indeed and one of the very worst hypocrites, when she tried to introduction the 'European airline tax ' which up being throw back in her face by the USA and Asia , she was herself clocking up lots of air-miles in China .
A typical eurocrat mixing world class arrogance, and sense of entitlement big enough to make its own black whole and massive incompetence . The sad part is even when she losses her post she will go out with more cash than most people earn in a life time . In shorty the type of bureaucrat that makes you wish for a bloody revolution just so they could 'enjoy' a short smoke by a wall.
"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony...
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world."
- Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/06/well-worth-a-read-self-damning-words-of-alarmists/
Piano wire and lamp posts........
We are increasingly being subjected to all aspects of EU policy and as you aware, countries like Germany have horrendous ideas on energy and green taxation. Soon we will come under pressure to embrace all of that.
Labour wish to remain in the EU and have not ruled out joining the Eurozone. The Lib Dems are fanatical about all aspects of Europe. David Cameron wishes to remain in the EU and promises not to join the Euro if he is PM in the next parliament. That isn't much of a promise since he may never be PM and it is probably a safe bet that it will take the politicians a little bit longer to win that particular argument.
The EU is heading for political and economic union. The bail outs were a fudge and not allowed under ECB rules and the German constitution. The Germans benefit hugely from the Euro and Merkel knows that Germany will have to pour money into the poorer countries for ever more. The fiscal transfer will require economic union to control the finances of the Eurozone countries and political union to introduce gradually a finance minister, common taxation and the final transition into a single nation or federation. The national countries will morph into the regions and it is the EU intention that national identities will disappear.
Our politicians are all well aware of this plan since it has always been the purpose of the project. They continue to adopt the same policy which is to pretend none of this is happening and it doesn't affect us anyway. The policy is clearly a good one because 85% of our legislation now comes from the EU but most of our electorate think the EU is irrelevant. Our politicians know that it will take a while, but we will end up being another region if the country of Europe. Their policy has taken us most of the way in fifty years. A little longer to complete the journey is no problem.
Only this week, Barosso announced that he is spending £5m to publicise to the people of Europe that the EU now makes most of their laws. They need to be told sometime soon because the commission will launch their integration proposals in about six months from now. By that time, the Germans will have re-elected Merkel and she can give the news. The good news is that Germany will control the new country of Europe. The bad news is that the German taxpayers will have to pay for it for ever more.
I wasn't going to bother mentioning David Cameron's initiative to change the EU and our relationship with it, but there, I just have. A couple of final points, we don't have to be in the EU to be in the single market, we can re-join EFTA. That would also allow us to attend the meetings and look after our own interests. We buy more from the EU than they do from us and the Germans will not wish to jeopardise their car sales to the UK.
I don't welcome an EU referendum while most of the public are ignorant about these matters and the Europhiles lie about the loss of trade, jobs, etc. The BBC and most of the press are anxious for us to be part of the great project and they will scare the public into voting to remain in the EU. If we lose the referendum and today we would, then that would be taken as a yes to the rest of the project.
I don't rate UKIP for all sorts of reasons, but mainly because we need a detailed exit strategy that gains the confidence of corporates, SMEs and everybody else. UKIP hasn't got a policy other than to say that we are leaving.
They say vote UKIP and get Labour. Maybe not if UKIP has enough votes to have the balance of power. A tricky one...
She'll be saying "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche" next.
They say vote UKIP and get Labour. Didn't they say that about voting LibDem?
The world according to Connie (from a 2012 speech accepting an award):-
In truth, though, very few people think the euro is the cause of Europe's financial woes. Greece has financial problems not owing to but in spite of the EU and the euro. Now massive help is being provided on the basis of European solidarity. Nor can Ireland's problems, particularly in the banking sector, be blamed on the EU, and soaring youth unemployment in Spain is not Europe's, but Spain's responsibility.
and
How to balance a growing population and an ever-increasing demand for goods and thus for growth on the one hand, with on the other hand mounting pressures on the climate, environment and resources which will become impossible to withstand unless we change our ways. This balancing act can only be achieved by means of a targeted and far-reaching green transformation of our economies.
Oh - and she has an MA in History & Literature.
If a medical doctor has proscribed* a drug, that had not been tested for effectiveness, nor for harmful side effects, according to laid down standards, there would be sufficient grounds in striking them off. If they had not taken due care in the diagnosis, and falsely claimed a terminal illness, there would quite separately be sufficient grounds for striking them off. When they admit to making a false diagnosis and then say that, for instance, the nausea and feinting that the drugs cause are good for the patient (they may cause weight loss for instance), then this would be more than grounds for saying that that medical professional was not acting in the best interests of the patient. If it turned out that medical professional was only advised by the pharmaceutical company who supplied the drugs, and that same business decided the testing criteria those on the left would be calling for an enquiry and the shutting down of the business.
So why do they not apply the same standards to the environmentalists and politicians?
[* prescribed? BH]
Robinson on Sep 16, 2013 at 9:48 PM
"I don't understand how you can accuse Cameron of being like Blair ...."
Cameron said he was the heir to Blair, so what is there to discuss? Life father, like son.
"[Blair] occupied much of the ground Thatcher prepared during her 3 terms."
You mean she ensured that we could put money by for a 'rainy day', and Blair and Brown were the rainy day!
Cameron didn't implement what he said he would during the election, he has carried on with existing policies. That makes him "the same".
If there's consensus in the centre ....."
You will find that consensus is centre Left ! An EU, big government / big business approach, with big taxes! Just what Connie Hedegaard is enthusing about! Denying it, when her statement is at the top, does not help your case!.
Robinson.
Cameron is the problem. He may have once been a Conservative, and he certainly cuts the mustard as a class act political performer, but the inescapable fact is that he is married to a deeply committed green ideologue whose values not only colour his judgement but appear to dominate it. It started with the green logo, the Svalbard husky media stuff and not just the support, but the bidding up, of the Climate Change Act targets. It extends to Foreign Aid, the EU, gay marriage and so on. The problem is intractable. It has caused an exodus of faithful party members and supporters unparalleled in recent British politics, and probably irreparable.
Her comments are a microcosm of the whole EU bureaucratic model. As long as this approach remains a career with very real prospects, you will be subject to more of the same.
Well at least it's out in the open.
One of the problems I have with this type of conspiracy theory is that oil companies do not collude as much as people imagine. I wish they would, sometimes, but they are at each other's throats.
However without $85/bbl oil there would be no shale industry - it took a sustained period of oil at that price and above to stimulate the development of technology and exploitation methods that eventually brought gas prices down.
I've heard it said that, if energy sources were shorn of all special taxes and subsidies, oil would have to be around $2,000/bbl to make wind and solar cost-effective. If that is true, then two things follow:
1. Subsidies on alternatives and penalties on hydrocarbons will never make the alternatives into viable replacements, merely add to the cost of the existing sources that we'll have to continue to use anyway.
2. Long before the $2,000 mark is reached , vast amounts of hitherto "too expensive" oil and gas will become financially viable, (we've barely started on deepwater) with similar effects to .the shale revolution.
The real "winners" among alternative technologies will not really emerge until oil , gas and coal prices have risen higher than any government dare make them, and that day might be several generations down the line.
Any comment on this CBI report that claims growth and jobs from green policies:
"One only has to look at the statistics to see the size of the
opportunity. In trying economic times, the UK’s green business has
continued to grow in real terms, carving out a £122 billion share of a
global market worth £3.3 trillion and employing close to a million
people. And in 2014/15, it is expected to roughly halve the UK’s
trade deficit. Many of the case studies in this report illustrate the
commercial realities of the opportunities presented by tackling our
energy security and climate challenges."
http://www.cbi.org.uk/media/1552876/energy_climatechangerpt_web.pdf
Maybe Connie gets her energy bills on expenses?...
Robinson
I hazarded a guess a few days ago that you were a Conservative party member (rare breed these days) or maybe an MP, now I am even more convinced. Your comments show that you truly do not understand what is happening, why UKIP are growing stronger, why Cameron is not perceived as a true Tory and why Tory voters are deserting you in droves. I do not believe that Farage really wants to lead a government but he does want this country to be a democracy again and nobody else appears to be offering that.
JamesG
All jobs in renewable energy are paid for by taxpayers (either here or in other countries) and in answer to your question "it is total bollocks" ^.^
Dung
You might have bothered to read it. They are the captains of industry after all and most of the committee that produced it are not even in renewable energy industries. I'm skeptical but not blindly so. A more cogent argument than just 'bollocks' would have been welcome.
Bureaucrats are not liable for their errors. Thus, their arrogance.
"Regardless of whether or not scientists are wrong on global warming, the European Union is pursuing the correct energy policies even if they lead to higher prices"
This Hedegaard is a tease. What are the "correct energy policies?" Are higher prices a bug or a feature of "correct energy policies?"
JamesG
You did not ask for arguments and although I have now read half of it and scanned the rest (you made me feel guilty) I am angry that I wasted my time and my earlier comment was bang on. I do not care who makes rubbish statements (in this case the CBI) I just give my opinion. The Nissan Leaf all electric car as an example of a successful green project? Give me a break.
"...pursuing the correct energy policies even if they lead to higher prices,...
If any nation within the EU does not see the bovine stupidity of that remark then they deserve all the hardship that will come their way. For the rest, they know that it's either that policy changes or leave the EU.
This Orwellian doublespeak would make even Orwell cringe.
The former US senator Tim Wirth (the scumbag who opened the windows the night before Hansen's testimony in 1988, resulting in a sweltering hearing room) said much the same in 1990-
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”
Spain, Hungary Poland and Czecko have all announced they will cut subsidies to zero. Greece, Portugal and Italy cant afford any more renewables. Connie is living in a fantasy world.
Hedegaard is from Denmark, the biggest exporter of wind turbines, follow-the-money....