Skip to content

Delingpole: Green Blob Bungs BBC Environment Reporter €100K ‘Prize’

November 19, 2019

By Paul Homewood


From Breitbart:



Congratulations to BBC Environment Correspondent Matt McGrath who has just won a €100K prize from the BBVA Foundation for ‘his extraordinary capacity to communicate complex environmental issues and science’…

…Or, as Ben Pile more cynically suggests, as a reward for lazily and uncritically regurgitating press releases favourable to the interests of the Green Blob.


I can understand Pile’s cynicism. The idea that any environment correspondent in the employ of the BBC should deserve any kind of award for their journalism is laughable. It has been many years since the BBC showed any interest in covering climate change and the environment fairly or accurately.

(For chapter and verse on this read Christopher Booker’s thorough and damning 2011 report for the Global Warming Policy Foundation ‘The BBC and Climate Change: a Triple Betrayal.’)

McGrath, like the rest of the BBC’s environment staff, is less a reporter than he is a propagandist for the cause of climate alarmism.

For example, McGrath recently wrote an article for the BBC website headlined ‘Climate change: Warming signal links global floods and fires.’

Befitting his role as the BBC’s Scaremonger General, McGrath found various friendly scientists to confirm his predetermined thesis that climate change is partly responsible for the recent flooding in Venice and South Yorkshire and for the wildfires in Australia.

But when Paul Homewood examined these claims — in the way that any capable environmental reporter should have done — he found them all completely unfounded.

That is, with regard to the South Yorkshire floods, he found no evidence that rainfall in England is increasing. Nor did he find any evidence that rising sea levels connected to man made warming have any plausible connection with the Venice floods. Nor yet, did he find evidence that droughts caused by ‘climate change’ were the cause of the wildfires in Australia.

McGrath’s article and the experts he cited, in other words, were talking the purest drivel.

Yet for this kind of drivel, regurgitated day in day out, McGrath has now picked up a cool €100,000. (That’s $90,000; or £85,000)

Why would any organisation give a very ordinary BBC hack a cash prize of this magnitude?

Well, here’s a clue. It’s an article in which BBVA, the company behind the award, promotes ‘green and sustainable bonds’.


It begins:

The first six months of 2019 have confirmed the undeniable importance of green bonds as a tool for financing the United Nations sustainable development goals and the commitments adopted in the Paris Agreement. These bonds have undoubtedly taken root among institutional investors and issuers alike.

The market in 2019 has witnessed record growth in volume, having exceeded $125 billion,  and BBVA forecasts that volumes will reach $220 billion by the close of the year. The number of such deals has also grown, fueled by first-time (inaugural) issuers across different sectors and countries.

$125 billion! And that’s just the size of the market now. No wonder BBVA can afford to pay out  €100,000 like it’s just spare change to whichever friendly journalists promote the ‘climate emergency’ scare which makes the green bond market viable.

One of the reasons for the BBC’s power, influence and market share is that historically it has been associated with authoritative and objective reporting. Some observers, then, might think it odd to find a BBC specialist reporter being given a bung — sorry ‘prize’ — by a vested interest industry when, theoretically, his scrupulously neutral reportage ought to be affecting its fortunes neither one way nor the other.

Ben Pile, I think, is quite right to raise an eyebrow:


We often hear from alarmists about all the Big Oil money that ‘climate deniers’ receive to sow doubt about ‘the science’ of climate change.

In truth, most of the money is on the alarmists’ side of the argument.

The Climate Industrial Complex is a Potemkin industry worth in excess of $1.5 trillion per annum. Not one cent of that vast sum of money would be spent if it weren’t for the propaganda machine helping to promote the scare.

This why journalists like Matt McGrath are so very valuable to the Green Blob. If I were him I’d get onto those cheapskates at BBVA and ask, given the sums they’re making out of this scam, why they couldn’t have paid him something closer to a million…

  1. November 19, 2019 2:13 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate-

  2. November 19, 2019 3:07 pm

    As I commented on the Dellers article:
    “Climate change is the world’s biggest ever scam and the BBC is the main propagandist for the scam. The BBC is totally corrupt and it should be closed down.”

    • MrGrimNasty permalink
      November 19, 2019 3:37 pm

      Add the ABC and CBC and most of the US channels by all accounts.

      • November 19, 2019 3:45 pm

        There isn’t enough time or space to list all the major propagandists: Channel 4, the Grauniad, etc etc, but the BBC seems to be the worst as it gets the greatest coverage.

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        November 19, 2019 7:54 pm

        Phillip: And, it seems the greatest kick-backs (sorry, awards – cough).

      • Gerry, England permalink
        November 20, 2019 2:02 pm

        Yes, because the BBC still has an undeserved reputation it can be considered the worst of the propaganda outlets. If the BBC is shut down then the Guardian will lose the bulk of its sales.

  3. Ray Sanders permalink
    November 19, 2019 3:08 pm

    For those readers who fancy a good laugh at “Energy” correspondents try this online Guardian article by the Queen of scientific ignorance – Jillian Ambrose.
    She states ” The faster than expected wind speeds could help increase the amount of renewable electricity generated by windfarms by more than a third to 3.3m kilowatt hours (kWh) by 2024.”

    Yep she quite confidently spouted a really, really big number and we all know her target audience counts -” one, two, three….erm….many?”

    So dear Jillian is confident that 3.3GWh represents “more than third”. Oh well she deserves an award for something but I am just not sure what.

    p.s. I have emailed her to try and educate her………..let’s see.

    • Ray Sanders permalink
      November 20, 2019 4:42 am

      Looking at the article again it has been amended to claim the increase relates to each individual turbine and was corrected by Cardiff University. Sadly though it seems that energy correspondents do not have much in the way of science education to notice such howling errors. A quick search on google shows literally dozens of alleged science publication have reproduced exactly the same mistake and have not been corrected.

    • dennisambler permalink
      November 20, 2019 2:53 pm

      Too much faster and they will have to shut them down!

  4. Pancho Plail permalink
    November 19, 2019 3:18 pm

    Many years ago when I worked in publicity for a large UK electronics company one of my jobs was to write and get published articles which went out under my boss’s name. One of the articles won an award, my boss pocketed the prize but out of the goodness of his heart bought me a rhododendron plant. I wonder if McGrath will get a potted plant from the Beeb or will trouser the cash.

    • MrGrimNasty permalink
      November 19, 2019 3:43 pm

      If McGrath believes what he spouts, that there genuinely is a climate emergency, then this is surely a test of the man’s integrity – faced with a wad of unexpected cash? If it isn’t donated to a tree planting scheme etc., well, we know what he is, like the rest of the scammers, in it for personal gain and political beliefs.

    • Keith Holland permalink
      November 19, 2019 4:33 pm

      Perhaps McGrath should donate it to Children in Need, or an I being silly?

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        November 19, 2019 7:58 pm

        Surely, to get into the meme that is CC he would need to donate it to ‘Grand-children’ in need (of CC-relief). /s

  5. Curious George permalink
    November 19, 2019 3:19 pm

    Every winemaker has at least one gold medal, which he awarded himself.

  6. MrGrimNasty permalink
    November 19, 2019 4:32 pm

    We knew about this MSM/activist collusion already, but even so…….

    (from GWPF Twitter feed).

  7. Huw Thomas permalink
    November 19, 2019 4:45 pm

    McGrath is a part of the BBC-the core of green propaganda and lies. It needs to be destroyed.

  8. Mack permalink
    November 19, 2019 5:23 pm

    At first glance, when I saw Dellers headline about McGrath’s prize, without the benefit of putting my bins on first, I misread the ‘€100k’ for ‘CROOK’! Bearing in mind the consistently misleading and untruthful nonsense he propagates on behalf of the Green Blob, my eyes may not have been deceiving me after all. Imagine the wails of consternation emanating from the Climate Pharisees if he had written an article stating that there was no empirical evidence whatsoever linking Californian & Aussie wildfires and Venetian and Yorkist flooding with man made global warming and then trousered a 100k bung, sorry prize, from Exon for his top notch journalistic and investigative skills. They might have thought he’d been bought. As if?

  9. Jackington permalink
    November 19, 2019 5:26 pm

    This award must make Roger Harrabin and David Shukman feeling pretty sick having been passed over. But perhaps there are 3 snouts in the trough?

  10. Broadlands permalink
    November 19, 2019 6:41 pm

    The C100K Prize looks a bit like a C-KOOK Prize. Maybe they got it right except for the money?

    Kook: (slang, chiefly US) An eccentric, strange or crazy person.

  11. john cooknell permalink
    November 19, 2019 8:39 pm

    This is a quote from the Otto (2018) attribution model paper on which all this climate change attribution depends.

    “We do this by simulating possible weather under current climate conditions to identify the likelihood of occurrence of an event in question in today’s climate and compare this with the likelihood of occurrence of the same kind of event in a counterfactual climate with the human-induced drivers removed.”

    The model predicts the model QED. Appears to be circular thinking at its most awful.

    Even then the uncertainty range includes no change at all, so what the f*** is this about? somebody please help I am going mad, or am I mad, or are they mad?

    • Wellers permalink
      November 19, 2019 9:42 pm

      Ninety years ago the likes of Dr Friederike Otto would have been publishing papers to justify eugenics for the Nazis, to whip up mass hysteria against the Jews. Now as the modern equivalent she creates pseudoscience to order for modern day green totalitarians, lavishly funded by the likes of Jeremy Grantham & Co. The BBC then slavishly reproduce whatever green tripe is sent their way to line their pockets.

      • john cooknell permalink
        November 19, 2019 10:02 pm

        Thanks for background, I am amazed the UK Met Office are getting mixed up with this stuff.

      • dennisambler permalink
        November 20, 2019 10:06 am

        Her PhD thesis was on the Philosophy of Climate Modelling. She is a real climate scientist….

  12. November 19, 2019 10:43 pm

    The BBC is shilling for shell oil … and Green-lovers are up in arms ?

    No the BBC is shilling for the BIG GREEN HEDGE-FUNDS …and Green-lovers say nothing

  13. November 19, 2019 11:14 pm

    There is a Smart Meter Sept 2019 cost benefit analysis
    .. That’s an interesting claim cos upto now they have relied on extremely old modelling
    as evidence of cost savings.
    I haven’t dug into the new PDF

  14. tom0mason permalink
    November 20, 2019 12:38 am

    I wonder how much of the BBC employee’s retirement funds are in the BBVA Green Bond scheme?
    My guess is that it is probably a large wedge.

  15. November 20, 2019 1:14 am

    BBC Woman’s Hour Facebook post
    “How do you talk to children and young people about climate change?”
    10 people noticed it , 8 were skeptical

    • Sheri permalink
      November 20, 2019 4:26 pm

      Women are gullible, harmful creatures destroying the planet. As for how to you talk to a kid about climate change? Tell them “Its a lie”. Simple, to the point….

  16. TomO permalink
    November 20, 2019 3:14 am

    Seems an appropriate moment to remind everybody

    Our Matty-boy is responsible in large part for keeping a big.fat.lie up on the BBC web site for 3 years – journalistic integrity?

    ickle little fishies eating plastic like kids at McDonalds – no mention of a “stolen laptop” or full scale retraction.

    The Pulitzer Duranty defence comes to mind.

    There is more but – I guess I’d be preaching to the converted 🙂

  17. November 20, 2019 7:51 am

    This from Simple Landlords Insurance (Is that insurance for landlords that are a bit simple?)

    rules on Minimum Energy Efficiency (MEE) standards and avoid a £4,000 fine
    From April 1 2020 all rental homes must be at a minimum of EPC (Energy Performance Certificate) band E, whether a new lease is being signed or not.

    This means existing tenants in properties below the new minimum standard have the right to demand to be upgraded.

    More than 300,000 properties are likely to be affected.

    Early indications are that by 2025 all properties will be expected to have an EPC rating of ‘D’, by 2030 “C”, by 2035 ‘B’ and by 2040 ‘A’. This is an ambitious timetable and will present significant challenges to landlords in the private sector – especially those with properties built prior to 1950. It has been estimated that the cost of improving a property and taking its energy efficiency from a ‘E’ to an ‘A’ would cost no less than an eye watering £30,000!
    My view is that whilst this is certainly a threat to a landlord’s business, I doubt very much that such an ambitious timetable could be delivered.

    As for Matt McGrath I am still waiting for the BBC to reply to my complain about there Fake News story about 11000 scientist signing report warning of untold suffering authored by Matt McGrath. The lie was exposed by RebelNews
    and sky news Australia.

    To be accurate the number of signatures is not 11000 scientists it is zero. There are no signatures, There is a list of names and job titles of people that may have clicked on a email link requesting support for a report (not peer reviewed not that I consider peer review independent scrutiny as apposed to an old boys backscratching exercise). With no requirement to read the report. The grand sounding Alliance of world scientist took down the list after the Mickey Mouse name was pointed out. But the list is still available at
    A search for the word scientist on this document returns 610 results. A search for the word student returns 972 results.

    Quite how any pretence of impartial news reporting can be made if cash prizes are given.

  18. November 20, 2019 9:14 am

    How times have changed.
    In olden days it would have been used banknotes in an envelope.

  19. dennisambler permalink
    November 20, 2019 10:04 am

    The new heroine in the attribution camp is Friedrike Otto, a product of the Potsdam climate scientist nursery. Her PhD thesis was on the Philosophy of Climate Modelling. She is at Oxford ECI where arch attributor Myles Allen is based.

    • john cooknell permalink
      November 20, 2019 10:19 am

      Their ” research” model study on an event period they themselves chose (cherry picked), gives an uncertainty range of 0 to 250 times more likely to be attributed to human climate change.

      I think they just proved how robust their method is!

      Perhaps the previous consensus of “we cannot be sure” is just as robust.

  20. swan101 permalink
    November 20, 2019 11:11 am

    Reblogged this on ECO-ENERGY DATABASE and commented:
    Excellent analysis – read and share widely please.

  21. It doesn't add up... permalink
    November 20, 2019 11:53 am

    If course McGrath, Harrabin, Shukman &Co. already won the prize of fat cat BBC salaries and expenses paid trips around the world funded by licence payers. This is a mere bauble by comparison. But the legacy of 28-gate is the real story. The whole corporation hijacked by Harrabin.

    • tomo permalink
      November 20, 2019 9:32 pm


      hijacked by Harrabin ? – his characteristic writing style / paw prints are littered across the state broadcaster’s output – even when the byline is someone else’s or uncredited. He fancies himself as an authority on public ‘elf matters too.

    • November 20, 2019 9:40 pm

      What is the difference between that BBC Green Team ..and David Icke ?
      .. Discuss

      • tom0mason permalink
        November 21, 2019 9:37 am

        The BBC hides the names of the guilty to protect them, David Icke doesn’t.


  22. Michael permalink
    November 21, 2019 6:48 am

    I wonder how HMRC will react, for once I hope it isn’t classed a prize and is taxed heavily

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: