More Revelations Emerge of How the Climate Change Committee Dupes Parliament into Voting for Net Zero Measures
By Paul Homewood
Having been caught using just one high wind year to persuade British parliamentarians to donkey-nod through an insane rush to Net Zero in 2019, interest is growing in some of the other stunts pulled by the Climate Change Committee (CCC) to promote the green collectivist agenda. In 2020, the CCC used a supposed finding of the Citizen Climate Assembly to promote to Parliament the idea – found in its Sixth Carbon Budget – that meat and dairy consumption should be cut by up to 40%. In fact only a third of the 108-strong assembly discussed the matter, and only 10 people expressed priority support for such severe reductions in the diet. The assembly was largely curated by the CCC, while £200,000 of funding for the event organiser was supplied by the European Climate Foundation, a green activist operation drawing heavy financial support from Extinction Rebellion funder Sir Christopher Hohn.
Full post here.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Cutting meat and dairy out of diet = veganism
Veganism is not good for everyone https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/05/veganism-contributing-vitamin-deficiency-pregnant-women/
meat and dairy consumption should be cut by up to 40%
By what means – ration coupons?
Kill 40% of the people.
Perhaps should read- Veganism is not necessarily good for anyone
None of what is being proposed is good for anyone.
It is no different to the agenda of the people in the shadows pulling Biden’s strings. They cannot get it so wrong 100% of the time, unless what is being done is intentional.
What a sad state of affairs.
It looks like the so-called Mother of Parliaments cannot organise a Committee capable of reaching conclusions on the basis of fair and objective evidence.
And to double-up on cynicism: it looks like the so-called Leader of the Free World cannot organise a two-horse election without descending into accusations of vote-rigging and insurrection.
If they tried reaching conclusions on the basis of fair and objective evidence they wouldn’t get the answer they want.
You can’t vote on Climate Change. But their hand-picked focus group can.
It seems that recent governments have been duped by the Climate Change Committee by people who are prepared to lie in order to ensure that their lucrative grants keep flowing into their bank accounts, and it is clearly having a major negative effect on government decision making. We can already see what a catastrophic effect just one MP, Sir Ed Davey has had on the Post Office fiasco when, as Post Office Minister he refused to see the representative of many people who were wrongly imprisoned. As a government representative of the people, he didn’t want to upset his fee-paying Fujitsu who were paying him to keep quiet over their computer failure. How many other grants does he receive from other companies I wonder?
We are now learning that the Climate Change Committee falsified their reports to government which brought about the ridiculous Net Zero programme which was hastily put into law by Teresa May supported by a pliant parliament and without question. It has now come to light that The Chief Executive of the CCC committee is also receiving attractive grants from outside organisations, and we know that the current CCC Chairman also receives fees from companies. The government must surely need to ask if and what grants are being paid to all other members of the CCC. This is all very serious stuff. It effectively means that, as a nation, we are being governed to a large degree, on the back of money being paid for favours from MPs and Ministers! This just cannot go on. Mr Sunak should ask a number of questions without delay. First, he should ask every minister or MP sitting on important committees or other government bodies to divulge what grants, if any, he/she is receiving from outside companies and other organisations. Secondly, every MP and others who are working on government projects should be enforced by law to divulge what grants they are receiving. Every MP seen to be receiving grants should also have their parliamentary statements and actions back- checked for five years, or since taking on their parliamentary job to see whether they have been influenced in any way by their grant providers. Thirdly, every company and outside organisations paying grants to MPs should be required by law to inform parliament of the name’s of the MPs and how much they are paying, and should be heavily fined if they try to cover up such grants. All MPs receiving grants should be listed for constituents and the public to see.
Finally, one must ask the question – why are grants/fees paid to MPs who are supposed to be working for the people? It must only be to influence the grantees decision making in favour of the fee-paying company, which in itself, must be a very questionable practice ,even approaching illegality!
Skidmore (Net Zero Champion ) advised two companies working on green technologies, that stood to benefit from NZ. He was paid £80,000 for 10 days work by one and the same by the other one, although this one dropped off. My main point is that he declared this income, who actually decides if it is a bribe or allowable payment? It is going to take lot to drain the swamp!
Whether a recipient of grants or fees reveals what he is receiving is not quite the point. Yes, hiding such payments is a disgrace, but the real question is should he accept any grant or fees at all that are offered ostensibly to support that company even when they are patently wrong. (Sir Ed Davey!) MPs choose to put themselves for election knowing the salary that goes with the Job. They are elected to represent their constituents in Parliament, and vote in the interests of those constituents. What right has an MP to secretly secure what is in effect, another income on top of the salary for which he has agreed to serve his constituents? By receiving secret payments from an outside company he has decided to cheat on his commitments, and if necessary vote against the interests of his constituents. This cannot be right, and there cannot be any argument that justifies this. Fees, grants and back pocket payments to MPs should be against the law in principle, and those who benefit in receiving money for votes should be expelled from Pariament.
The offshore Wind lobby have a major supporter on the Climate Change Committee, Baroness Brown.
https://www.renewableuk.com/news/news.asp?id=452421
Tuesday 21st May 2019
The Offshore Wind Industry Council says a major programme of work has just begun to ensure that the UK’s low-carbon energy system makes the best use of the increasingly large proportion of electricity we are generating from renewable sources, including offshore wind.
The task force is led by Baroness Brown of Cambridge, the industry’s Offshore Wind Sector Champion, and includes senior representatives from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the Scottish Government, the Committee on Climate Change, National Grid, the Offshore Renewable Energy Catapult, the Energy Systems Catapult, Atkins, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and companies including ITM, Good Energy, Shell, Equinor, Vattenfall and Ørsted.
Baroness Brown has been on the Climate Change Committee since it started in 2008 and is currently chair of the Mitigation sub-committee. She joined the Board of Ørsted in February 2021.
https://renews.biz/66254/orsted-to-anoint-king-as-new-board-member/
Ørsted board of directors chairman Thomas Thune Andersen said “She possesses a deep knowledge of renewable energy and government policy perspectives from positions, among others, as member of the Committee on Climate Change and non-executive director of the Green Investment Bank.
HoL Register of interest shows Baroness Brown receives £40,000 per annum as a non executive director of Ørsted
These grants / fees are simply bribes.
However when governments are ‘lobbied’ to receive these bribes, it seems to make them acceptable.
Parliament is not fit for purpose.
Does anyone know what the difference between a wage and a bribe is legally? As I would have though using fake jobs to hide a bride would have already being thought of and there would be some kind of rule/test.
Government – any government now – is well-practised at the art of setting up (very long) arms-length ‘advisors’ who are, in fact, acting as de-facto government departments – but without the responsibility of having to resign when it all goes tits-up. It should be a law that government cannot act on advice from non-govermenatal committees without a vote in the house. People like Gummer – and others – have feathered their nests very nicely (and I wouldn’t exclude a few MPS from taking advantage of insider knowledge) and this is a scandal that needs ANY party to get to grips with….but I fear it is now endemic on our politics.
Are our MPs really that thick …don’t they even do basic research
The Citizen Climate Assembly didn’t “find” anything. They were subjected to intensive seminars from carefully selected so-called “experts” who brain-washed them and lead them to the conclusions they wanted them to have.
I wonder if The Citizen Assembly members names are available and can be contacted to get their views?
Stinks like a wrestler’s jockstrap!