Maybe countless scientists around the world are wrong then. I’ll bow to yours Trump and Farage’s superior knowledge about the subject. At least Trump and Farage have an excuse for their ignorance given the people who fund them. https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ed-to-prevent-climate-breakdown-warn-experts/
Hmm, my brother and his mates,when they were teenagers , as a wind-up to their teachers signed a paper that said the earth is flat. What does science know huh... An acknowledged point is, yes transition to, by and large, eliminate carbon emissions... has to managed and afforded . Rather than import gas whilst we build up our renewableas I would frack!
The only sensible way is to use gas, nuclear, and wind. But we have too much wind capacity now, and virtually no storage.Wind producers are often paid not to produce electricity because it would affect the grid . The only viable storage we gave is a fifty year old facility which pumps water up a hill in the night and releases it during the day. This is mainly used to manage demand and balance the grid, a critical issue which is quite understandably not known about by most. Battery storage will help a bit, but it is fantastically expensive, not working really even now, and will only ever provide back up four a few hours at most. The wind can and does fall for many days at a time,, usually in the cold winter months. Cryogenic storage is by far the best bet. It works and could provide much longer back up. Only one is being built, and it it is being very badly hampered by competing QUANGOS. It is pretty established engineering work, but in the UK now, knocking on a door requires a hundred forms to satisfy multiple bureaucrats . We have a lot of gas. Whatever happens, we will be using a lot of it for at least the next twenty or thirty years. It is insane to be importing so much at such a cost.
I dont think she will go but it does appear that she has been economical with the truth. Surprising that for a politician
I have to say, takeaway the fact that politicians lie to get elected, which sadly they all do, I seem to be one of the few really positive about the child poverty decision and the principle that people should pay more for good services. My criticism of the budget is that those much higher up haven’t been hit harder instead. I honestly think no one stands a chance until that happens. The moaning from the mansion brigade is frankly embarrassing.
Am I right in thinking that the monied who own the system are going after Reeves because she’s dared taxed the wealthy, tax dodging landowners and corporations in the last two budgets? She should have gone all in on them and taxed excess wealth? It says to me that they need sorting out and controlling so they are less powerful than the government
Misleading the public is one thing. This clearly happened, and can be seen by the timeline of events now known. There is a good reason why all chancellors used to go into " purdah" in the weeks before a budget. Every nod and wink, every hint, every statement and u turn costs money. So you stay quiet . Misleading the markets is another. That is actually an offence in law, if proven, never mind the huge cost of spiking gilt yeilds it has caused. Behaviour like that would normally result in the PM sacking the minister concerned. But in this case, Starmer is complicit, saying he knew what was happening. Few PMs survive a chancellor's departure, so he'll not sack her. But the trust of the markets has been lost, and that will cost a great deal of money in higher borrowing costs. Is be very surprised if either were still in post at the next GE. I doubt they will see next year out .
I suspect it is more to do with it being a shambolic budget that will bring more financial challenge to our country personally. And maybe because she wasnt honest enough.
I find it mind boggling she can be so certain she has done nothing wrong. Either she is utterly clueless, or deceitful. It is one thing after another with her it seems right now. Starmer needs better around him. I am convinced the way Cooper and he went into a huddle with Reeves as Badenoch attacked was to try and prevent more public tears. She looked completely lost. Whilst I hate the sort of attacks Badenoch did, Starmer and Reeves have made a habit of it so maybe what comes around goes around. I just think se looks horribly out of her depth. The question of the thread asks who will be last standing. It wont be Reeves at this rate. She is currently a drag. Politicians eh.
I am not prepared to takeaway the fact all politicians lie to get elected mate. Sorry, but that is to ignore the core problem in our country. These people can get away with blue murder. Until we have honesty, based on scrutible evidence, we will continue to get governments like this one, the last, the one before etc etc. In othet words a small number of politicians who value personal station and their future CV over the people who are working their arses off to keep the country moving and their family rising above the misery of what is a country ran by folk who have not got a clue.
There are no easy answers, but exploding the benefits bill is the opposite of the right direction. So is leaving entirely untouched the public sector in all it's forms. Not even a tiny hint of any reform or increase in efficiency, just here are a few billion, more to come. But "lying" to the public, or exaggerating, goes back to Cicero. The problem Reeves has is that she clearly lied to the public, implicitly lied to the HOC and did the same to the markets. As long as she is in post she is a stuttering weak link, but as I think I said earlier, a PM and a chancellor are difficult to separate and in this case, Starmer is just as guilty as Reeves as he agreed to the deception. Whatever anyone else thinks about it, the markets do not like it and they will extract their price.
