Skip to content

Labour discusses plans to bring in a 10-hour week and slash pay by 75 per cent under a radical scheme to tackle climate change

June 10, 2019

By Paul Homewood



h/t Dave Ward



Brits could work for just 10 hours a week and take home up to 75 per cent less pay under a radical scheme to tackle climate change being discussed by Labour.

The report by the Autonomy think-tank called for ‘rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society’ to cut carbon emissions, including dramatically limiting how long people spend at work.

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said of the document: ‘This is a vital contribution to the growing debate around free time and reducing the working week.’

Leo Murray, who advises shadow Treasury minister Clive Lewis, backed the report’s findings, saying: ‘I like this take a lot’.

The document, called The Ecological Limits of Work, was savaged by critics who said its suggestions would wreck the economy.

Brandon Lewis MP, Conservative Party Chairman, told The Sun: ‘The reality is this policy would slash people’s earnings and hammer the economy.

‘It could mean businesses having to cut jobs and wages. People could be left out of work and workers would take home less in their pay packet each month.

‘Labour don’t know how to handle the economy and it would be working people who would suffer with fewer jobs, lower wages and higher taxes.’

Will Stronge, director of Autonomy, said last month: ‘Becoming a green, sustainable society will require a number of strategies – a shorter working week being just one of them.’

It comes after Theresa May was locked in a row with Philip Hammond after he warned her plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050 will cost the country £1 trillion.

The Prime Minister is expected to put the target into law in the next few weeks as one of her final acts before she leaves No 10.

But in a leaked letter to Mrs May, the Chancellor raised concerns that it will have profound implications for households, businesses and the Exchequer.


I don’t know what the fuss is all about.

If we carry on with plans to reduce emissions to zero, we’ll be lucky to get ten hours work a year!


“Send in the loonies.

Don’t bother, they’re here!”

(With apologies to Barbara Streisand)!


  1. Colin Brooks permalink
    June 10, 2019 2:16 pm

    If they manage to remove all CO2 from the atmosphere then it will not cause a problem: all life on the surface will be ended so nobody to complain.

  2. June 10, 2019 2:16 pm

    May might want to bring this emissions target into law, but that will depend on Parliament approving it. Even the current crop of MPs aren’t that stupid. There would still be nothing to stop a future leader or government repealing it. It smacks of May just wanting to make some sort of name for herself. She’s probably thinking that if I do this I’ll be able to rake in millions from the “green blob” when I’m kicked out of parliament.

    • Colin Brooks permalink
      June 10, 2019 2:18 pm

      They really ARE that stupid.

      • Philip of Taos permalink
        June 12, 2019 11:59 pm

        The way it works is that after everyone starves to death their carbon footprint will take a real nose dive

    • Colin Brooks permalink
      June 10, 2019 2:39 pm

      As a child I always thought the fable of the Emperor’s new clothes was silly, now I know they were pretty switched on. All the Conservative leader candidates are dressed in what they think are beautiful green clothes; Oh dear!

    • Mack permalink
      June 10, 2019 2:53 pm

      May is an interesting example of the danger of over promoting hopeless and deluded non-entities to positions of power. A useless Home Secretary, an even more incompetent P.M. with a penchant for antagonising her core support at every virtue signalling, self-flaggelating turn. And, having mortally wounded her own party and plunged the country into crisis, it seems her parting gift to the nation will be to hitch it’s economy and future prosperity to the Kamikaze ‘Zero’ climate change aircraft. Well, like everything else she touches, you don’t need a ouija board to work out how well that’s going to turn out do you?

    • matthew dalby permalink
      June 11, 2019 2:28 am

      I’ve never understood how laws on reducing emissions to zero or whatever by 2050 can be enforced. If we get to 2050 and emissions are the same as they are today then who has broken the law, the government of the day or every government between now and 2050? If the law has been broken then someone should be punished, but if the government has broken the law how can it be punished? A massive fine would be paid by taxpayers not government and since any fine would go to the government then there is no point in a government fining itself. Alternatively the individuals make up the government could be held responsible, but would this be ministers, all M.P’s from the party in power, or all civil servants working for the government? Laws exist to punish offenders but also act as a deterrent, what exactly is this law trying to deter the people in government from doing? Is the thought of being punished in 2050 going to affect the decisions that the people in government make now? Clearly the climate change act and (any changes to it) isn’t worth the paper it’s written on and is nothing but pointless virtue signalling, even in the highly improbable need to reduce emissions.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        June 11, 2019 10:13 am

        Sadly it is one of the most expensive Acts ever passed – an economic suicide note. Amazingly it now has competition from Corbyn’s marxists and anyone who really thinks a no deal Brexit is a sensible move.

    • George Let permalink
      June 11, 2019 12:06 pm

      Bonny Prince Charles might like it.
      He was in a room for an hour lecturing Trump on “climate change”. Now that is something that should have on live TV. I would pay to see that.

  3. June 10, 2019 2:34 pm

    In a normal world this tosh would be enough to consign Labour to electoral oblivion, but you can be sure that the fawning MSM will not mention the suicidal nature of these proposals, …

    … but actually would anybody notice a shift to 10-hours working of NHS managers, civil servants, academics and many others? The self employed would of course continue as normal, so a useful shift of economic balance could take place.

  4. Alan Taylor permalink
    June 10, 2019 2:35 pm

    Trees absorb CO2 and give out life-giving oxygen a perfect ecosystem. But for decades the Green loonies have been chopping down trees to plant palm oil and burn in power stations that then release that stores CO2 again … CO2 that isn’t counted in the lunatic EU system as trees are replaceable and classed as nett zero, despite taking 100 years to grow a tree that is burned in a few minutes and hours – The usual green lie!

  5. bluecat57 permalink
    June 10, 2019 2:41 pm

    And you thought they are sane.

  6. john cooknell permalink
    June 10, 2019 3:02 pm

    10 hours a week! I am not working extra for any reason!

    • Gerry, England permalink
      June 11, 2019 10:16 am

      You will need all the other hours to grow food to keep yourself alive, gather firewood to keep you warm in the increasingly cold winters. There probably won’t be any work even for 10 hours in their New Venezuela plan.

  7. June 10, 2019 3:19 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate- Science.

  8. cajwbroomhill permalink
    June 10, 2019 3:34 pm

    Unbelievable, until you consider all the Greenies’ policies, even when it’s not All fools’ day!

  9. mikewaite permalink
    June 10, 2019 3:44 pm

    Look on the bright side. A Corbyn Govt will mean, by definition, that we are still in the EU.
    We will have all the benefits of EU membership, the most relevant of which will be unrestricted immigration to other European countries with more rational leaders (there must be at least one).
    The only problem is that the reduction of national income by 75% will mean a corresponding loss in the value of your assets. So as soon as the election result is announced, sell to “we buy any house ” or similar, ahead of the crowd, and buy that property in Limousin, Andalusia or Puglia that you have always dreamed off but lacked the impetus to progress.

  10. Broadlands permalink
    June 10, 2019 3:50 pm

    “If we carry on with plans to reduce emissions to zero, we’ll be lucky to get ten hours work a year!”

    Has anyone noticed that reducing CO2 emissions to zero keeps carbon in the ground but still leaves 415 ppm in the atmosphere, certain to go higher? That feat, when done, would leave the climate right where it is? Who are these fools?

    • Mack permalink
      June 10, 2019 5:32 pm

      Yup. These morons seem completely oblivious to the fact that man’s contribution to atmospheric CO2 levels is tiny in comparison to those from the natural world. Mankind could go to ‘zero carbon’ tomorrow and it wouldnt do diddly squat to the climate nor the rise in atmospheric CO2, although human civilization would probably end up being ‘Pol Potted’! The concepts of ‘Zero carbon’ and the ‘Year Zero’ seem to have some synergy.

  11. Mervyn Hobden permalink
    June 10, 2019 4:03 pm

    In a world where the largest single user of energy is networked computers and servers and in the West, few are capable of productive work and spend their lives trapped in offices, desparately struggling with the deficiencies of badly written software, we should be considering raising productivity of human energy, not decreasing it!
    Climate change is the least of our problems when we have eight billions of population and technologies that in terms of productivity are stuck in 1913. Rather than cutting working hours we need to put more human energy into the goods and services we really need, not less. In our power stations, Dr Parson’s turbines drive Professor Faraday’s electrical machines, our roads echo with the cacophony of the good Dr Otto’s magic cycle and our ships with the din of Dr Diesel. Dressing up these antiquated technologies with electronic techno-trash provides no real answer. The corporate entities that shipped our manufacturing capabilities to the third world with the lure of slave labour and a quick buck have much to answer for. It is now clear that corporate goverance is not efficient, overheads have increased far faster than productivity and long before ‘global warming’ destroys the planet we will have drowned in our own rubbish.
    It is not progress that causes our problems, but our lack of it. We have the techologies to make small scale manufacture very efficient – what we lack is a population willing to learn the skills to make it happen. But, what can be done with that plethora of the skill-less, presently condemned to a life of key-tapping idiocy, permanently? Why, those whose qualifications in the arts once seemed so certain to provide lucrative if unproductive employment? – they are eminently suited to wait at table! – the servant class for the new productive class……

  12. Barbara Elsmore permalink
    June 10, 2019 4:06 pm

    Is this Will Stronge of Autonomy? Lecturer in Philosophy
    ‘Will has studied philosophy and critical theory at Kingston University and the University of the West of England where he has also taught for the past 3 years. He is broadly interested in post-Kantian and Marxist critical theory and his current research focuses on the writing of Antonio Gramsci on the function of intellectuals in the context of today’s political economy.
    Alongside that project, he is reading and writing on the concepts and history of anti-work theory’.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      June 10, 2019 7:30 pm

      Makes me wonder, what is a ‘political economy’ and why would I have any concerns about the ‘functions of intellectuals’ within it? It sounds like Will Stronge has got hold of an updated jargon/gobbledygook card.

  13. Gamecock permalink
    June 10, 2019 4:18 pm

    THIS is why you don’t give government control over employment or the economy.

  14. tom0mason permalink
    June 10, 2019 4:35 pm

    Yep, with the run-away global climate change happening all around, with accelorating sea-level rises, melting ice, and increases in the many life threateningly hot summer’s days, we have to do something. < /sarc-off >

    Meanwhile back from the computer games machines, where is it getting hot because it sure as hell isn’t in the UK, or in California where my sister and family live. And it’s still winter in June for many of the breadbasket central and northern states of the USA.
    That said 2019 will probably be, according to NASA, the 7th or 8th warmest on record 🙂

    So lets throw the economy away all for an unproven supposition that CO2 warms the planet better than the sun.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      June 11, 2019 10:20 am

      If I hadn’t been out last night I would have lit the fire as it was cold enough to have triggered the central heating had it been on.

      • Adrian, East Anglia permalink
        June 11, 2019 3:02 pm

        We did light the fire, and with good reason! Outdoor temperature around 9 C, blustery winds & tipping down with rain. On the plus side, it seems like our emmissions contribution might help towards a warmer turn next week.

  15. Barry Capsey permalink
    June 10, 2019 6:58 pm

    Utterly the most laughable tripe labour has yet spawned. Their collective gullibility is becoming legendary, and the idea of these imbeciles actually acquiring Parliamentary control is simply frightening. -Particularly as they’re now using convicted postal vote-riggers to ‘ensure’ their desired ‘victories’ at all forthcoming elections!!

    • June 10, 2019 7:43 pm

      Its worse than we thought, Labour will only have a majority with support of the Lib Dems, Greens and SNP, who of course will demand their pounds of flesh.

  16. June 10, 2019 7:02 pm

    Well I think these MPs & think tank folk should demonstrate their sincerity by taking a 75% pay cut immediatley; after all we have a climate emergency dont we!

  17. Tom O permalink
    June 10, 2019 7:30 pm

    I think you are missing the brilliance of this consideration! By reducing the work week from 40 hours to 10, that frees up all those workers for something else. All you need are a few million bicycles set up to generate electricity, and during those unused 30 hours, you have the workers peddling that butts off, generating the “baseload” electricity to backup the whirly gigs and the solar panels, and keep the industries rolling! What brilliance! And yes, you can reduce their wages because they will be too exhausted to do anything but sleep when they are done, so they won’t need the money anyway. As for the losses in taxes, well, you can’t solve all problems at once, so the bank just goes back to printing the money that is needed! Now, really, do I REALLY have to add the tag?

    • June 10, 2019 10:34 pm

      What industries? Most of them will have faded and died.

  18. June 10, 2019 8:25 pm

    Will the 10 hour rule apply to Wind turbines?

  19. Bertie permalink
    June 10, 2019 9:26 pm

    This is a spoof – right?!

  20. I_am_not_a_robot permalink
    June 10, 2019 10:06 pm

    It’s a strategy of the Left, similar to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s so-called Green New Deal, viz. to stretch the Overton Window of acceptable policy ideas beyond the outer fringe “with the intention of making less fringe ideas acceptable by comparison” (Wiki).

    • June 11, 2019 8:09 am

      Thanks, had never heard the term. A quote by Anthony Trollope from the wiki article:

      “Many who before regarded legislation on the subject as chimerical, will now fancy that it is only dangerous, or perhaps not more than difficult. And so in time it will come to be looked on as among the things possible, then among the things probable;—and so at last it will be ranged in the list of those few measures which the country requires as being absolutely needed. That is the way in which public opinion is made.”

      Sounds a lot like zero emissions by 2050 to me.

      • dave permalink
        June 11, 2019 9:17 am

        “…the function of intellectuals…”

        In the Left Wing world, it is to be a YOUNG MAN lying around in dirty underwear ‘deciding things,’ while GURLS (preferably posh totty) serve him hand and foot and sexually, and also bring him daddy’s money.

        Well, it would have worked for me!

  21. June 10, 2019 10:13 pm

    Heard about something like this before – an old idea…ah yes, here it is…

    Big Rock Candy Mountain

  22. jazznick permalink
    June 11, 2019 9:54 am

    The Streisand ‘Send in the clowns’ video is not entirely appropriate here as, through the Streisand Foundation, Babs helps to fund the clowns.

  23. Phoenix44 permalink
    June 11, 2019 11:13 am

    Are these people really this stupid? A 75% reduction in work means at least a 75% reduction in everything – food, education, health, bicycles, everything.

    So either all starve pretty quickly or only 75% of us do.

    This is worse than life in say 500BC.

  24. George Let permalink
    June 11, 2019 11:50 am

    Bonny Prince Charles
    Was in a room for an hour lecturing Trump on “climate change”. Now that is something that should have on live TV. I would pay to see that.

  25. saparonia permalink
    June 12, 2019 1:41 pm

    Without carbon dioxide trees will not grow. Crops will fail anyway as we get deeper into this super-grand solar minimum. The important thing is to be earthed, be aware of the natural world around you and harmonise yourself to it. We can’t stop volcanoes and the emissions from our ocean. No amount of population control can hold back the cycles of the solar system. This Labour suggestion is Communism, surely people with brains won’t buy into such crap.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: