Skip to content

Members of the CCC

February 7, 2019

By Paul Homewood


While John Gummer took £600k from green companies that stand to benefit from his advice to government, he is not the only member of the CCC who has a vested interest in climate alarmism and can hardly fulfil the Committee’s stated role of providing independent advice.

In addition to Gummer, there are seven other members, so let’s take a closer look at them:


Brown, an engineer by background, is up to her neck in work for low carbon, renewable and green related organisations. It is hard to see how she can have any sort of independent or objective view on climate change matters.

One position that sticks out is her directorship of the Offshore Renewable Energy Catapult (OREC), a company established by the government, and limited by guarantee.

OREC gets most of its income in the form of grants from Innovate UK, in turn part of UKRI, an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by BEIS.

According to Brown’s Register of Interests at the House of Lords, she is also a paid Board member for Innovate!

She is so immersed in the whole climate merry-go-round that she cannot possibly offer independent advice.


Nick Chater is an interesting one, as he has no background at all in climate change that I can see.

According to his bio, given by Decision Technology Ltd:

 Nick is Professor of Behavioural Science at Warwick Business School. He has over 200 publications and four national awards. He is a Fellow of the British Academy. Nick is on the advisory board of the Cabinet Office’s Behavioural Insight Team, also known as the ‘Nudge Unit’, and is the resident expert on Radio 4’s ‘Human Zoo’.

The Behavioural Insight Team was privatised in 2014, although still partly owned by the Cabinet Office. But what is interesting is how they describe themselves:

The Behavioural Insights Team exists to improve people’s lives and communities. We work in partnership with governments, local authorities, businesses and charities, often using simple changes to tackle major policy problems.

Over the last eight years, the Team has grown from a seven-person unit at the heart of the UK government to a global social purpose company with offices around the world. Our work spanned 31 countries in the last year alone.

Our mission remains the same. We generate and apply behavioural insights to inform policy, improve public services and deliver results for citizens and society. We have a track record of success across a range of policy areas, from healthcare to humanitarian aid, and we increasingly work to scale up our successful interventions.

Social purpose company! Heaven help us all.

I think that original nickname of the Nudge Unit says it all. The whole purpose of the BIT is to persuade us plebs that what the government wants us to have is actually good for us.

And it appears that Chater’s role with the CCC is exactly the same.

How dare with serfs object to paying hundreds of pounds a year each, just to satisfy our Lords’ and Masters’ green obsession! We must be brainwashed to correct our unsocial attitudes!

If that is not bad enough, we serfs are actually paying him for the privilege.



It was, of course, the Priestley Centre which recently helped write that shamelessly dishonest paper, Recipe for Disaster, which purported to show that Britain’s fruit and veg industry was at risk from climate change.

That alone should see him barred from any influence on public policy.




This is the same Drax who would be bankrupt without annual subsidies from bill payers of £700m.




Le Quere is former director of the Tyndall Centre, for which she still works as a Research Centre member. The Tyndall Centre is regarded as extreme, even by climate science standards.

As with Piers Forster, she has spent so long working in the climate science industry that she can no longer claim to be objective or to see the wider picture.




Skea is a founding member of the CCC, and is another who has long been involved with climate governance, including being Co-Chair of an IPCC working group.

Most recently, he was co-author of the alarmist IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C, which was widely regarded as a work of fantasy.


Summing up

The Committee on Climate Change is stocked full of fully paid up, card carrying members of the climate industry elite.

They have been so bound up in climate alarmism for so long, that their views must now be set in stone, and they are unable to see the wider picture.

Their fanaticism certainly makes it nigh impossible for them to admit that they might be wrong, or that there might be a better way.

The CCC is supposed to offer independent advice to government on building a low-carbon economy and preparing for climate change, but this is plainly not possible given its current set up.

  1. February 7, 2019 7:48 pm

    The name says it all. How can a ‘Committee on Climate Change’ possibly provide any other advice than the approved group-think endemic among supporters of the climate change fairy tale. Who needs scientific evidence?!

  2. Charles Wardrop permalink
    February 7, 2019 8:04 pm

    No more independent than a General staff in wartime.
    Complete disbandment fully justified.
    Enough info now to end it all, for UK at least and, for all it matters, the rest of the world.
    Whether a vast hoax or misunderstanding, no use now to continue: a false alarm, but who can enact a permanent truce, Nature having won!

  3. Dave Ward permalink
    February 7, 2019 8:07 pm

    “Social purpose company! Heaven help us all”

    What that REALLY means is: “Common Purpose company”

    “The Behavioural Insights Team exists to improve people’s lives and communities”

    Then stop closing down reliable power stations, you idiots…

    • The Man at the Back permalink
      February 7, 2019 8:19 pm

      NO NO Dave – you are thinking they actually mean what they say.

  4. February 7, 2019 9:05 pm

    There is no doubt that Private Frazer was correct. The trough is vast and the swamp is too big.

    • Dave Ward permalink
      February 7, 2019 9:24 pm

      And as Private Frazer also said “WE’RE DOOOOOMED!”

  5. Harry Passfield permalink
    February 7, 2019 9:20 pm

    This is a good reason why committees should be balanced. How would they like a committee on homelessness to be constituted by landed gentry? Or the defence committee full of pacifists? Or warmongers? The Ecclesiastical Committee full of Atheists? etc

  6. Gray permalink
    February 8, 2019 5:36 am

    Who is responsible for choosing the committee?

    • dennisambler permalink
      February 8, 2019 11:04 am

      Quite likely Michael Gove, who has just appointed Tony Juniper as head of Natural England.
      I’m just waiting for the announcement that George Monbiot (re-wilding for dummies), has been appointed as his deputy.

  7. Ian Terry permalink
    February 8, 2019 7:29 am

    Well in light of how politicians and their quango have performed in this area especially can anyone be actually surprised.? Drain the swamp? The CCC would be a very good place to start..

  8. Rowland P permalink
    February 8, 2019 9:54 am

    Prof Nick Chater is no doubt applying neurolinguistic programming to his job in the Behavioural Change unit and I wonder if he is a Common Purpose graduate.

  9. Thomas Carr permalink
    February 8, 2019 10:05 am

    We mistake the purpose of the Committee . It is a committee FOR Climate Change and is therefor appropriately constituted notwithstanding the academic preponderance. .

    • Gerry, England permalink
      February 8, 2019 2:00 pm

      Just as the IPCC is tasked to show how human activity causes global warming while duping the dumb into thinking it is a source of excellence.

  10. BLACK PEARL permalink
    February 8, 2019 10:21 am

    The more you read the more you disbelieve and the more disillusioned you become, in the disgusting Govt propaganda web
    The whole system needs taking down & reset
    We need another Oliver Cromwell or a good does of ‘Trump’ to sort it all out.

    Hope Booker picks this up and gives it a good run in the press

    Another excellent investigative ‘enlightenment’ piece Paul … thanks for even more education.

  11. February 8, 2019 2:19 pm

    Nookie factor : You need to look at their family & other factors.
    People don’t become a skeptic to get sex and for a low stress life
    .. Look at the green groupthink that David Cameron and Mark Carney spout
    .. We know that both their wives are Greenpeace like people

    Chater’s partnr is Louie Fooks “Managing editor” at The International Institute of Environment and Development
    “We promote sustainable development to improve livelihoods and protect the environments on which these livelihoods are built. We specialise in linking local priorities to global challenges. ”
    “Harnessing #MeToo momentum to drive climate action”
    quite a lot of publications about Climate

    • February 8, 2019 2:20 pm

      I expect you’ll find the same groupthink web when you check the rest of their families.

      Drax corp is the UK’s biggest direct beneficiary of UK Climate policy isn’t it ?

  12. February 8, 2019 3:03 pm

    Paul had a report on Climate Greta being a faked PR stunt
    I note this tweet from one of our old friends

  13. LIam permalink
    February 8, 2019 6:22 pm

    Ah yes.. the best “science” BPS can buy.
    It’s at least as scientific as the recent US national climate assessment.

    As Steven Koonin recognized, the only way to brake this boondoggle
    is to demand that which its members have long avoided: an open debate
    between these representatives of the climate industry and juggernauts
    of real science.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: