Speaker Hoyle Wants Lockdowns For Climate Change
By Paul Homewood
Speaker sets the alarm bells ringing:
THE TYPE of restrictions on daily life introduced to fight coronavirus could command public support if brought in to tackle the threat of climate change, the Speak of the House of Commons has suggested.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle told a gathering of counterparts from some of the world’s most powerful countries that the pandemic shows people are prepared to accept limitations on their lifestyles – if they recognise it is for the greater good.
He was surprised by the willingness of millions of people to wear masks and accept new rules, and said the urgent response the world has shown to deal with Covid-19 should now be harnessed to address climate change.
Speaking online at the G7 Speakers’ Meeting, he said: “If one lesson from the pandemic is that taking serious action in a timely manner is key – then shouldn’t this also be true in terms of climate change? With Covid, what surprised many of us in the UK was how engaged most of the population became once the seriousness of the situation was made clear.
“People were prepared to accept limitations on personal choice and lifestyle – for the good of their own family and friends. No-one could ever imagine that we would be wearing masks so readily and that we would all be so compliant. Perhaps we ought not to underestimate the ability of people and communities to work together for the common good, if there is united and clear leadership.”
The prospect of coronavirus-style restrictions being introduced to save the environment alarmed a leading Conservative critic of the measures.
Sir Desmond Swayne, the Tory MP for New Forest West and a former international development minister, said: “My immediate reaction is: Dream on. I think people have had quite enough.
The conference at which Sir Lindsay made his remarks was hosted by one of the most powerful figures in US politics, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives.
Sir Lindsay said it was “sobering to face the reality that the people and nations who benefited least from rapid development and growth were those most adversely affected by the impact of climate change”.
The Speaker argued that “the tragedy is that unlike the pandemic, the climate crisis is not simply an external threat, but one in which we have had a clear hand”.
He said: “In other words, it seems that we have brought this on ourselves. While this is again sobering, surely, it is in our hands to rescue it, if we have got the will to do it?
“I believe that working together must mean listening to – and drawing on – the wisdom of those disadvantaged people who are most directly affected…
“The situation is not just far away, but also close to home – as we in the UK saw in February, when we experienced the ‘wettest month on record’ with some of the worst flooding we have known. Our conversation, and the power of our voices together is important, because it is beyond time to do something about this.”
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1334816/climate-change-rules-lindsay-hoyle-G7
It is hard to know where to start with this authoritarian nonsense from the Speaker, who has always seemed to be a common sense type of bloke.
The public have only knuckled down through lockdown, because they believed their lives were at risk. Apart from a few nutters, nobody seriously believes that about climate change.
But more importantly, restrictions on life here won’t make the slightest difference to either our climate or the world’s, even if it was a threat.
One wonders what sort of restrictions he has in mind. Travel restrictions? Meat rationing? Ban on private motoring? Three day weeks? Energy rationing? Ban on foreign holidays? Rationing of luxury goods?
Sorry, Mr Hoyle, you may think we are all sheep, but I can assure you the British public are not that stupid.
He makes two statements which underline how badly he understands the issue of climate change.
1) It was “sobering to face the reality that the people and nations who benefited least from rapid development and growth were those most adversely affected by the impact of climate change”.
This merely proves that developing countries need economic growth, as it will help protect them from bad weather. Degrowth helps nobody.
2) The situation is not just far away, but also close to home – as we in the UK saw in February, when we experienced the ‘wettest month on record”
Except it was not the “wettest month”, it was only the 38th wettest. By far the wettest was October 1903, which recorded 29% more rain than February 2020.
We survived bad weather back then, without restriction personal liberty, and we will do so again.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Words fail me……he is supposed to be an intelligent person, I guess he was just saying what the Democrats told him, when they paid his expenses. Maybe!!!!!
It is hard to understand how anyone who has seen what social and economic devastation has taken place because of the COVID travel lockdown could recommend we keep doing it because of climate model forecasts. This shows how far off the general public has been driven by such dire predictions, along with the mistaken belief that rapid lowering of carbon dioxide emissions can somehow lower global temperatures.
The UK Establishment is equally dopey.
They brook no alternative to zero carbon.
Heaven help us.
” “If one lesson from the pandemic is that taking serious action in a timely manner is key – then shouldn’t this also be true in terms of climate change? With Covid, what surprised many of us in the UK was how engaged most of the population became once the seriousness of the situation was made clear.
“People were prepared to accept limitations on personal choice and lifestyle – for the good of their own family and friends. No-one could ever imagine that we would be wearing masks so readily and that we would all be so compliant. Perhaps we ought not to underestimate the ability of people and communities to work together for the common good, if there is united and clear leadership.”
Translation: what climate can learn from the covid is that fear works and renders the hoipoloi compliant. Therefore all we need to make the climate work is to keep raising the fear level until the hoipoloi become compliant. What we need to raise the intelligence level of the inbred nobility is another matter of course.
Fear was the weapon used by the ‘fire & brimstone’ preachers at the beginning of the 20th century. It turned many away from the church in the end.
You can almost hear the narrative unfolding: Let us create a problem, frighten the people with it and we shall control all! Climate change is just a minor moment in one of the Earth’s cycles which have been occurring over millions of years. The environmentalists have tried to
brainwash us, some politicians must have a vested interest in renewables, surely not ALL politicians can be THAT stupid to be conned by false predictions, faked data and the dismissal of long standing scientific evidence.
Yes eventually we need to find alternative energy sources, but so far we’ve made a total mess of it.
Brilliant summary of it all. Thank you.
Cancel my remark above, please!
Oh dear, and he was supposed to be sensible.
What a plonker!
Send him a copy of ‘Apocalypse Never’ and ‘False Alarm’. Lomborg still seems hung up on the “CO2=Warming which will be bad” meme but his ideas for adaptation — especially as far as the poorest countries are concerned — makes a lot more sense than what’s coming from the enviro-freaks.
But then they don’t believe and the objective has nothing to do with climate, does it?!
Or a copy of blog posts at this site
Mortality in the UK involving cycling has doubled since lockdown. We should immediately ban bicycles to keep people safe.
He is obviously a Globalist, UN Agendas here we come.
Similar comments in the Express article – no-one there agrees with Hoyle or believes in climate emergency. Does anyone? All those people flying off on holiday this year and then complaining about returning early – they’re not bothered about the climate. I have yet to meet anyone who claims to be concerned about the climate but actually lets if affect their lives. Sorry about Hoyle – like others thought he was sensible.
No surprised. So sad to see our political class so removed from reality. Even Boris has become a climate change nutter together with Gove. What influence has ‘the wife’ on his views on this subject? Gove will change with the wind.
Is there anything in law that says that the speaker should be neutral on political issues – and let there be no doubt that “climate change” is a political issue as the BBC is sooner or later going to have to be made to accept.
It may not be law but this country was built on convention – which says the Speaker is neutral – apolitical. He should not be taking sides and should have had the nous to refuse the invitation to speak.
With nothing set in law you rely on the decency of the people in office to do the right thing. And then along came the sawed-off little runt Bercow to besmirch the office of speaker. Gorbals Mick had been pretty poor but had nothing on the poisonous dwarf. Very pleased that he has been denied a seat in the Lords.
With such a gullible and malleable public who’ve meekly accepted the restrictions under Covid diktat, they don’t realise that they have been softened up for the next phase of restrictions in the name of “tackling climate change” – probably the most fatuous phrase ever to be uttered!
The letters ‘M’ and ‘P’ after somebody’s name do act as a very good indicator that they will be thick.
In many cases: ‘Major Plonker’!
My Pocket!
I used to think that British people would never submit to control over their lives as in the communist countries and in Germany before the war. The meek acceptance of mask wearing in this country is terrifying. It just shows how even the British would accept almost anything they are told and how so few are activated to challenge all the Green climate change nonsense. The scientific experiment where test subjects are told that a person will suffer pain if they press a button comes to mind.
There’s only one way that these fraudsters can possibly hope to generate comparable levels of immediate and existential fear re. climate change and that is to literally hype every extreme weather event and/or weather related natural disaster as being directly attributable to demonic CO2. We’ve seen them trying to do this with heatwaves, cyclones, hurricanes, wildfires etc., with limited success. My guess is they will ramp up their efforts considerably and maybe even generate a few ‘natural’ disasters of their own just for good measure. In addition, every critically endangered species of animal or plant which goes missing presumed extinct, will be the first terrifying manifestation of the coming Sixth mass extinction, aka the ‘ecological crisis’. I still have my doubts as to whether even this will work, but we must counter their every effort.
Listen, the two lessons from this pandemic and the response are firstly, that governments believe they are all-powerful and secondly, that they are bloody well right.
The UK (& the global) population has indeed bowed the head and followed the orders of their ‘betters’.
I once believed that free-born Englishmen would have refused to submit to house arrest, would have refused to allow law enforcement authorities to stipulate how many people they can entertain in their own homes and would have refused to accept limits on the right to free association and protest. No longer.
All public powers are eventually abused and now our masters have realised how far they can go.
If the Climate ‘Crisis’ is the next emergency, be sure that all the powers of repression will be brought to bear
The books (and utube lectures) of Professor Bob Carter and Ian Plimer are much better. They make it clear that the planet needs more atmospheric CO2 not less.
How can they sign themselves as
“Obedient servant” with any sincerity?
But that’s what they’re there for, always to get the voters the best deal!
This is totally unacceptable and shows an unprecedented lack of judgement from a speaker of the House of Commons. This is so serious he should be immediately sacked
Lockdowns for Climate Change/Disruption/whatever?
Greenie infrastructure changes aren’t destructive enough?
Public compliance with face mask wearing, not only in the UK but worldwide, is only happening because of the threat of fines. Even Germany, with one of the scamdemic´s lowest death rates has now introduces a €250 for noncompliance. Here in Spain, there is the suspicion that fines are now the government´s main source of income! The people are being cowed into submission, a situation which could well provoke a backlash (but I´m not holding my breath).
Sorry, should read “has now introduced a €250 fine for noncompliance”
When ‘dobbing’ on your family and neighbours was no guarantee of safety:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-483230/Traitors-family-Stalins-informers.html
This is the route we are heading down with covid marshals, and climate marshals: ” I can see smoke from a chimney two blocks away . . .”
He seems to be saying is that if the public in this country have proved compliant in the matter of lockdown, they can be expected to be similarly compliant as regards the climate “emergency”. Given the level of media propaganda in this country, he may well be right.
New I’d seen it somewhere, BBC no less
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54074733?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science_and_environment&link_location=live-reporting-story
“While emissions of CO2 plummeted during lockdown, concentrations of the long-lasting gas have continued to rise in the atmosphere.”
So even the BBC are admitting that human emissions of CO2 make little difference.
He was surprised by the willingness of millions of people to wear masks and accept new rules
What? People don’t want public transport bans, fines and/or run-ins with shops, the police, other citizens etc.? Not to mention they don’t want a harmful disease. How surprising 🙄
We all know it’s a test run
“willingness of millions of people to wear masks” yeh like wear one or pay up £100 fine, be banned from getting on a bus, be refused to enter a shop for your food.