Author: croydonconstitutionalists

Information request to the PM and Treasury on repealing EU imposed laws.

Letter from Jeremy Wraith to the PM and Treasury asking why we are not repealing EU imposed laws.

To Mr Rishi Sunak, Mr Jeremy Hunt and John Glen

“As a result, after 47 years trading with the EEC/EU our total BOP is currently now, a DEFICIT (LOSS) costing us well over £2 trillion and still rising. Is that such a good deal?”

REPEALING EU IMPOSED LAWS

I understand that the proposal to scrap as many of the 4,000+ laws imposed on the UK by the EU has been shelved. The Conservative Party was responsible for the UK joining the EU in the first place on the massive and deliberate lie that our sovereignty would not be affected. The Conservative Party has lied, lied and lied again to the UK public on the so called “benefits” of EU membership ever since and for over 50 years.

Membership of the EU has been a total disaster for the UK, not only politically, but economically as well. For example:

  1. When we joined the EEC in 1973 we had a virtually zero balance of payments (BOP) with the EEC. From day 1 the EEC/EU took over all our trade policy as they believed they were more “competent”! As a result, after 47 years trading with the EEC/EU our total BOP is currently now, a DEFICIT (LOSS) costing us well over £2 trillion and still rising. Is that such a good deal?
    So, why do you want to keep so many EU imposed laws and make our BOP even worse?
    (NB Over the same period we made a SURPLUS, on our trade with the rest of the world. This surely proves where our best interests are!)
  2. In addition, being in the EU when we left could have cost our economy well over £200 billion/annum. The total accumulated cost of being in the EEC/EU for 47 years could therefore have cost our economy well over £13.22 TRILLION. That figure is still going up by your senseless and stupid decision to keep the laws in question.
    So, why do you want to keep the EU imposed laws which must STILL be costing our economy £ billions/annum?
    NB Two examples spring to mind.
    • The CPC for lorry drivers which probably takes about 1,000 lorry drivers off the roads and must cost our businesses and consumers a fortune. How much exactly? Why has it not been scrapped?
    • In addition, Royal Mail was denied it’s right to deliver all mail in the UK as the EU demanded, that postal deliveries must be opened to “competition”. This was obviously a “front” to enable EU postal services to take over mail deliveries in the UK as part of the EU’s asset stripping policy of UK businesses. The monopoly of Royal Mail to deliver all mail in the UK must be restored ASAP as UK consumers are probably still subsiding foreign postal companies.
  3. We also lost over £100 billion in our fishing rights which were taken over by the EU.
    So why have we still allowed EU countries fishing rights after we left and continued to destroy our fishing industry and the livelihoods of our fishermen and great fishing ports like Brixton, Grimsby and Hull?
  4. A report by Bob Lyddon, of Lyddon Consulting Services Limited and published by the Bruges Group as “The UK’s liabilities to the financial mechanisms of the European Union” shows that the EU’s financial institutions can call on the UK to contribute up to nearly £1 trillion in the event of a financial crisis. In addition, the EU could call for “extraordinary support” above that!
    So, are we STILL committed to saddle UK taxpayers with the liability of supporting bankrupt EU countries like Belgium, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Portugal and their banks when they go bust and by how much?
  5. Why are we STILL in the ECHR which is a political entity apparently dedicated to frustrating UK policy at every opportunity. It is a national disgrace and profoundly insulting that the UK government which is supposed to protect the UK citizens rights etc., is subject to laws and legal decisions by a FOREIGN country!

“They cannot bear the thought that the UK out of the EU can make a success of being a free, sovereign, and democratic nation again”

Don’t believe me, work it out for yourself! ALL glitches between the UK and the EU due to BREXIT are entirely due to EU spite and dog in the manger attitude to the UK’s departure. They cannot bear the thought that the UK out of the EU can make a success of being a free, sovereign, and democratic nation again.

Even Angela Merkel endorsed Brexit when she said, “Post-Brexit Britain will be a potential competitor to the European Union alongside China and the United States”. Angela Merkel obviously had more common sense than you. She recognised that while Britain is/was in the EU the EU could screw Britain to such an extent in their favour, particularly for France and Germany, that Britain would not be a potential threat to their economies! You, and the Conservative government are obviously either don’t recognise that or, want it to happen by retaining the myriad laws imposed upon us by the EU!

Yours faithfully

J G Wraith

Information request to Sir Ed Davey asking about LibDem plans to re-join the EU.

A letter from Jeremy Wraith to Sir Ed Davey asking about their plans to re-join the EU.

Sir Ed Davey
Leader
Liberal Democrat Party

“Leaving the EU has saved us at least £10 to 12 billion/year in EU budget contributions. Only half of which we got back, AND we were told by the EU how to spend it!”

Dear Sir Ed Davey,

You and the Liberal Democrat Party apparently want to reverse the democratically elected decision on Brexit, the reason, or reasons for which are not obvious. So, please explain, as a Freedom of Information request, why you and your party think re-joining the EU would be best for Britain, bearing in mind the following costs associated with our 47-year membership of the EU. 

  1. Leaving the EU has saved us at least £10 to 12 billion/year in EU budget contributions. Only half of which we got back, AND we were told by the EU how to spend it! The total thrown away on nett EU budget contributions has currently cost us over £300 billion.
    So why do you want to throw away £billions more to our competitors in the EU?
  2. When we joined the EEC in 1973, we had a virtually zero balance of payments (BOP) with the EEC. From day 1 the EEC/EU took over all our trade policy as they believed they were more “competent”! As a result, after 47 years trading with the EEC/EU our total BOP is now a DEFICIT (LOSS) costing us well over £2 trillion. Is that such a good deal?
    So, why do you want to give the EU the right to run our trade again and make our BOP even worse?
    (NB Over the same period we made a SURPLUS, on our trade with the rest of the world. This surely proves where our best interests are!)
  3. In addition, being in the EU when we left could have cost our economy well over £200 billion/annum. The total accumulated cost of being in the EEC/EU for 47 years could have cost our economy well over £13.22 TRILLION.
    So, why do you want to re-join the EU and make us pay even more every year as the EU imposes even more regulations on us, which we have absolutely no say or control over?
  4. We also lost over £100 billion in our fishing rights which were taken over by the EU.
    So why are you so keen to destroy our fishing industry again, and destroy the livelihoods of our fishermen and great fishing ports like Brixton, Grimsby and Hull?
  5. The next generation of UK taxpayers were liable to bail out EU pensioners due to the 32++ TRILLION EURO black hole looming in their pay as you go pensions.
    So, why do you want to saddle the next generation of UK taxpayers with the probability of horrendous costs of supporting EU pensioners?
  6. A report by Bob Lyddon, of Lyddon Consulting Services Limited and published by the Bruges Group as “The UK’s liabilities to the financial mechanisms of the European Union” shows that the EU’s financial institutions can call on the UK to contribute up to nearly £1 trillion in the event of a financial crisis. In addition, the EU can call for “extraordinary support” above that!

So, why do you want to saddle UK taxpayers with the liability of supporting bankrupt EU countries like Belgium, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Portugal and their banks when they go bust?

“Even Angela Merkel endorsed Brexit when she said, “post-Brexit Britain will be a potential competitor to the European Union alongside China and the United States”

Don’t believe me, work it out for yourself! ALL glitches between the UK and the EU due to BREXIT are entirely due to EU spite and dog in the manger attitude to the UK’s departure. They cannot bear the thought that the UK out of the EU can make a success of being a free, sovereign, democratic nation again. Even Angela Merkel endorsed Brexit when she said, “post-Brexit Britain will be a potential competitor to the European Union alongside China and the United States”. Angela Merkel recognised that while Britain is/was in the EU the EU could screw Britain to such an extent in their favour, particularly for France and Germany, that Britain would not be a potential threat to their economies! By trying to take us back in – despite the referendum result and that 80% of MPs undertook to get Brexit done – suggests that you also hold democracy in contempt.

I look forward to your reply in due course.

Yours faithfully

J G Wraith

Letter to the great and good on Global Warming

Our contributor Tim Duce sent a letter (published below) in March to the HRH King Charles III, Rishi Sunak, Sir Keir Starmer, Sharon Thorne, Zac Goldsmith, Nicholas Lyons, Rachel Reeves, Richard Moore and Tony Blair on the subject of CO2 and Climate Change.

He’s had little response although does note that Tony Blair has now made one anti climate change statement.  We are also in now seeing some delay to implementing NetZero policies from the government.

“When so many differing voices claim to quote ‘the science’, it’s important to listen to your own common sense and to see what is clearly visible”

Dear

At the recent WEF summit, Climate Change was discussed.

If we are indeed to save the planet, we must distinguish carefully between beliefs and facts. Saving the oxygen producing rainforests and oceans and controlling the production of toxic pollutants is self evident but the ‘CO2 and Global Temperature’ issue is far more murky. When so many differing voices claim to quote ‘the science’, it’s important to listen to your own common sense and to see what is clearly visible.

A clear answer is not hard to find. We already have the facts, but we have to join the dots between them. Let’s look at those facts together.

How Does a Greenhouse Work?

A greenhouse is covered in glass which is transparent to light, reflects light and refracts (bends) light. Having seen our reflections in a window and the effect of the lenses in a pair of spectacles, we all know this to be true. Light from the sun hits the glass fairly perpendicularly and most of it passes through easily (a tiny amount is lost due to reflection). It then hits the ground and plants. Some of it is absorbed as heat and some is reflected in all directions. Of this reflected light, some goes straight back out through the glass but some hits the glass at a shallower angle, causing it to be reflected and/or refracted back into the greenhouse again, causing a further increase in temperature. You probably knew this. Even if not, it is easy for anyone to understand.

Is There a Gas with the Same Characteristics as Glass?

One extremely plentiful gas has the same characteristics of transparency, reflection and refraction as glass. It is water vapour.

Again, our own experience confirms this. Water is transparent to light, reflects light and refracts (bends) light. We’ve all seen our reflection in water and we’ve seen how a stick half immersed in water looks bent. If we shine a light into fog, we are dazzled by reflected light. As for refraction, we have all seen a rainbow.

CO2 and methane are also transparent to light but reflection or refraction? If they do possess these characteristics, they are so infinitesimally small that we cannot see them.

Any greenhouse capabilities of CO2 and methane are so infinitesimally small as to be invisible whereas the greenhouse capabilities of water vapour are obvious for anyone to see with the naked eye.

Conclusion

Compared to the greenhouse gas water vapour, any greenhouse effects of CO2 and methane are infinitesimally small. Consequently, the effect (if any) of changes in CO2 levels on global temperature is insignificant.

“Greenland, which is currently covered in ice and snow, is called ‘Green-land’ because when the Vikings discovered and colonised it more than a thousand years before the industrial revolution, it was green“

To Illustrate:

  1. The Earth has heated and cooled since its beginning. Greenland, which is currently covered in ice and snow, is called ‘Green-land’ because when the Vikings discovered and colonised it more than a thousand years before the industrial revolution, it was green. Vikings lived and farmed there for about 450 years. For Greenland to be green, just imagine how warm the Earth was then!
  2. Didn’t Al Gore show that changes in CO2 levels and global temperature could be seen in polar ice? Yes he did but having got the answer he wanted, he stopped there. When other researchers duplicated the experiment, they found that the rises in CO2 level happened about 800 years after each rise in global temperature and not the other way around so:
    A rise in global temperature causes a rise in CO2 but a rise in CO2 does NOT cause a rise in global temperature. They also confirmed that the Earth has often been much warmer than it is now.
  3. I met a young woman from Friends of the Earth on an aeroplane. Ignoring the fact that she was, it turned out, the most well travelled person I had ever met, I asked her to send to me a copy of an email from her bosses which, she told me, “Proved once and for all that CO2 caused global warming”. I wasted the evenings of two weeks of my life reading through 40 published papers in which there was not a single proof. The writers all simply said that a CO2 climate change connection was probably true because they thought so. Opinion is not science. Science demands proof.

Qualification:

If CO2 is frozen it can crystallise as ‘dry ice’ which you may have seen in theatre, movies or a disco. These crystals do have reflective and refractive properties but they do not appear in this form in nature. CO2, which is heavier than air even at room temperature, remains close to the Earth while temperatures cold enough to freeze CO2 only occur at very high altitudes.

Some Climate zealots claim that CO2’s ability to absorb heat is a problem. This is pseudo-science. ALL of the gases, liquids and solids of the Earth’s atmosphere and surface absorb heat from the sun every day, but they ALL cool again by radiating heat into space each night. (Since heat invariably flows from warm places to cold.)

“Scientists soon learned that if they were to receive funding for a project, they needed to include the magic words ‘Global Warming’ and later ‘Climate Change'”

Why Has This Myth Gathered Such Momentum?

The ‘CO2 and Global Temperature/Man Made Climate Change’ story has gained popularity because of the benefits it provides to various interest groups.

Margaret Thatcher used it as a justification for closing profitable coal mines during the miners’ strike. She pressured the Science Research Council to fund projects with ‘Global Warming’ in the title to give the story credibility.

Scientists soon learned that if they were to receive funding for a project, they needed to include the magic words ‘Global Warming’ and later ‘Climate Change’ in the title and to keep quiet about their scepticism. The Hard Left and Anti-Capitalists used it to justify their cause. ‘Prophet of Doom’ journalists found that it sold column inches.

Bill Gates, a major sponsor of the WEF and the WHO is currently using it as a justification to stop normal farming (especially organic farming!) and introduce production of artificial meat according to patented processes. Ker-Ching! (The systematic destruction of farmers’ livelihoods is already happening in the Netherlands.)

The ‘Climate Crisis’ myth is being used to persuade national leaders to sign up to agreements set by the WEF. In essence, our right to self-determination is being taken from voters and national governments and handed on a plate to the WEF which serves the interests of its main sponsors.

So:

Just by consulting your own knowledge, it becomes clear that ‘Climate Change’ is a myth.

Worse still, it is a myth being used to reduce people’s freedoms and erode democratic accountability. Also, as we rush headlong towards a fallacious Net Zero, we risk destroying our economy and inflicting extraordinary hardship upon ordinary people. As you put your head on the pillow tonight, I suggest you ask yourself where you stand on all of this and, if you wish, send me a reply.

Kind regards,

Tim Duce BSc.

cc. HRH King Charles III, Rishi Sunak, Sir Keir Starmer, Sharon Thorne, Zac Goldsmith, Nicholas Lyons, Rachel Reeves, Richard Moore, Tony Blair

https://www.ipsos.com/en/obscop-2022

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/dont-believe-the-hype

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/03/05/new-scientific-evidence-suggeststemperatures-have-been-stable-in-greenland-for-60-years-save-for-asudden-1c-jump-in-1994/

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/12/12/global-poll-shock-four-in-10- people-believe-climate-change-mainly-due-to-natural-causes/

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/01/02/more-reasons-to-doubt-the-u-k-srecord-40c-temperature-was-attained-last-summer/

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/02/23/net-zero-to-blame-for-vegetableshortage/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics

Image from: kallerna, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Sid Cordle, Christian Peoples Alliance candidate for Mid Bedfordshire

Following the resignation of Nadine Dorries the Mid Bedfordshire by-election is coming up on the 19th October.  We’ve spoken with local Sid Cordle, who is the Christian Peoples Alliance (CPA) candidate for the election.

Can you introduce the party and say a bit about what it stands for?

The 5 core values of the CPA are

1. Support Marriage and the Family
2. Protest the sanctity of life from conception until natural death
3. Care for the poor. We help run foodbanks
4. Defend persecuted Christians worldwide
5. Fight crime.

We have a broad set of policies in other areas but these are our core values.

Can you introduce yourself to the people of Mid-Bedfordshire, and tell us what got you involved in politics,

I’ve been a Councillor and shadow chairman of a planning committee. I’ve also chaired a school governing body and also chaired a school finance committee. One resident told me “you are by far the best Councillor we have ever had”. I live in Hitchin and most of my working life has been spent as a Financial Adviser. I now work as a researcher for a DUP MP and am leader of the Christian Peoples Alliance party.  I am a firm believer that parents should have a say what is taught in all RSE lessons.

Politics is in my blood. I was elected to my school Council and was very active in University politics. The biggest inspiration for me was the persecution of Christians behind the Iron curtain I was very aware of and the blatant injustice of it carried out on people who just wanted to pray and read the Bible.  I was determined to stop Communism coming to the UK from my teenage years. 

If elected what are the local challenges you want to champion?

At the moment we feel the biggest issue is the sexualisation of children in schools. So our core message is 

VOTE CPA to Stop the Sexualization of Children
VOTE CPA if you believe an Innocent child is a happy child.
VOTE CPA if you think RSE in Schools has gone too far.
VOTE FOR MORAL EDUCATION

What would be your main national priorities?

In addition to our core values our economic policies are 

*Turnover Tax to to be set at 5% initially which will be a sellers VAT with the same threshold as purchasers VAT, £85,000. We would offset it against corporation tax (tax on profits) so British Companies would pay less. The idea is to get tax off Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, Starbucks, Shell etc. who send all their profits abroad and so don’t pay corporation tax. We would use the anticipated £40.5bn raised to

  1. Get rid of all Commercial rates to help small business and stores to compete with online retail. This will save our city centres. (£21bn)
  2. Restore the cuts to benefits to get rid of the 5 week waiting period a key reason why people attend food banks (£12bn)
  3. Support marriage and the family by giving a £12,000 grant before a first marriage and £6,000 grant before a first child is born if it is within wedlock. Family breakdown wrecks lives. (£3bn)
  4. Tackle homelessness and cut crime. Guarantee everyone who leaves prison a place to live to cut reoffending and guarantee everyone sleeping rough a night shelter and a free meal. (£4.5bn)

* Cut Quangos now costing over £90bn a year and save £30bn a year (£150bn over 5 years) to be spent on capital projects like a new hub airport in the Thames estuary to replace Heathrow which would make billions in revenue and create jobs.

* Make the only test for procurement value for money. This costs £379bn a year and we could save 10% so £37.9bn a year spent on cutting tax and cutting debt. It costs just over £5bn to take 1p off income tax so with his policy we could take 5p off income tax and raise tax thresholds and still cut debt.

*WE would reintroduce GP fundholding which worked so well in the 1990s and make the NHS much more efficient, make sure people get GP appointments and still spend what we spend now on health.

How can people find out more and get involved in your campaign?

Either e mail [email protected] or contact me on 07808474192.

Prime Minister: WHY IS NET ZERO BEING CONTINUED?

WHY IS NET ZERO BEING CONTINUED?

Image by Mojca JJ from Pixabay

Letter from Jeremy Wraith to the The Prime Minister asking ‘Why is net zero being continued?’

“More CO2 means more and greener vegetation. Commercial growers increase CO2 levels in their greenhouses to increase plant growth”

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST

Dear Prime Minister

WHY IS NET ZERO BEING CONTINUED?

“Climate Change” is being blamed on human production of CO2 or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). This is obviously an outrageous and dangerous lie as shown below.

CO2 FACTS

  • The earth produces CO2 naturally. 140 million years ago the CO2 level in the earth’s atmosphere was 2,500 ppm (parts/million).
  • CO2 is essential for life on earth.
  • If the CO2 level falls below about 150 ppm plant life cannot exist. Hence, all animal and human life will expire with it.
  • More CO2 means more and greener vegetation. Commercial growers increase CO2 levels in their greenhouses to increase plant growth.
  • Global CO2 level in 1850, beginning of the industrial revolution was 280 ppm.
  • Global CO2 level in 2021 was 410 ppm.
  • Hence, total increase of CO2 over that period, natural and man made, was 130 ppm.
  • 130 ppm increase over 171 years gives an average annual increase of 0.76 ppm.
  • Mankind is responsible for about 3% of that annual increase, or approx. 0.02 ppm.
  • There are about 200 countries in the world. This gives an average of 0.0001 ppm/country/annum! This gives some idea of the small quantities of CO2 involved, even on a global scale.

HENCE: Based on these average numbers it will take:

EACH COUNTRY 10,000 YEARS TO ADD JUST 1 ppm/YEAR  TO THE GLOBAL TOTAL!

  • However, some countries produce far more CO2 than the average. 70% of annual global CO2 emissions are produced by China, the USA, the EU, India, Russia and Japan combined.
  • The UK produces only 1% of total man made annual CO2 or 0.0002 ppm.

HENCE: Based on these average numbers it will take;

“to avoid adding 1 ppm to the worlds CO2 level over the next 1,560 years the UK’s Conservative government, (supported by the Labour, Lib Dem and Green parties) is….”

THE UK 5,000 YEARS TO ADD JUST 1 ppm CO2 TO THE GLOBAL TOTAL!

  • However, the CO2 level was possibly rising faster more recently than the average, perhaps about 2.13 ppm between 2021 and 2022.
  • The man made element of that would be 3% or 0.064 ppm of which the UK’s contribution to that at 1% would be 0.00064 ppm.
  • So, even taking one extreme result for CO2 increase it will still take:

THE UK 1,560 YEARS TO ADD JUST 1 ppm CO2 TO THE GLOBAL TOTAL!

“Threatening to fine objectors £15,000 with a possible 12 month jail sentence if they refuse entry AND legalising the use of brute force by fitters and the police”

  1. Banning the use of our diesel and petrol cars by 2035.
  2. Making us buy EV’s at a much higher cost and which are liable to burst into flames if their batteries get wet or damaged. (EV cars have numerous other disadvantages)
  3. De-carbonising the national grid which National Grid (NG) estimates will cost £3 trillion to decarbonise the Grid alone – by 2035 – i.e. at an average cost of around £120,000 per household – to which must be added the cost for industry, transport and agriculture.
  4. Banning the use of our efficient gas boilers and making us buy inefficient heat pumps at great expense.
  5. Making our homes unusable and un-sellable by insisting on unreasonably high and extremely expensive insulation properties.
  6. Decimating our power supplies by abolishing coal fired power stations.
  7. Relying for our electricity supply on unreliable and costly wind and solar farms which require substantial subsidies to be paid by UK consumers. All fossil fuelled and nuclear stations will have been decommissioned by 2035 and the national grid will be unable to meet the additional load of millions of EV chargers and heat pumps. By then the Grid will be almost totally dependent on solar and wind power – when on some days the output from those sources is less than 1GW, i.e. 2% of grid maximum demand – a demand which is expected to reach around 90GW by 2035.
  8. Making householders install smart gas and electricity meters, so that they can be switched off when electricity supplies are overloaded. It will also enable the supply companies to charge exorbitant prices during periods of high demand.  NB The use of these meters on householder’s health, (due to high energy pulses they emit) is highly suspect and has not been adequately investigated and proved safe by the authorities.
  9. Threatening to fine objectors £15,000 with a possible 12 month jail sentence if they refuse entry AND legalising the use of brute force by fitters and the police to make householders let smart meters be installed.
  10. Forming “15 minute” cities and severely restricting residents and visitors rights to travel and move around their cities.
  11. Banning practically all air travel and preventing people from enjoying foreign holidays and seeing their families based abroad.
  12. Severely taxing air travel to put people off from taking holidays abroad.
  13. Scrapping good farmland to re-wild it!
  14. Putting taxes on meat to encourage people to eat bugs.
  15. The key materials needed to meet net zero, range from copper, aluminium, nickel and silicon to rarer metals such as lithium All of which require substantial increases in their production to produce the quantities required for the expected demand in 2035.
  16. The irony is that increasing CO2 greens the planet more: which will increase the global plant life, which will increase the uptake of CO2 by the vegetation and produces more Oxygen!
  17. Paying £billions of UK taxpayers money to UN carbon funds and paying “reparations” to other countries for “polluting” the earth with CO2 during the industrial revolution and afterwards. A totally despicable lie as adding CO2 from 1800 to the present day has had a negligible effect on global warming, (see Figs below).

So, to avoid adding 1 ppm to the worlds CO2 level over the next 1,560 years the UK’s Conservative government, (supported by the Labour, Lib Dem and Green parties) is;

“ALREADY donated $2 billion of our, taxpayers’ money to the UK climate change fund. Was that penance payment REALLY just for adding 0.039 ppm to the global total over 171 years?”

NB In fact, of the total 130 ppm increase in CO2 between 1850 and 2021 the 3% man made element was only 3.9 ppm. Of that the UK contribution of approximately 1% was 0.039 ppm over 171 years.

Yet you, Mr Sunak, have ALREADY donated $2 billion of our, taxpayers’ money to the UK climate change fund. Was that penance payment REALLY just for adding 0.039 ppm to the global total over 171 years?

ALL THAT AND MORE TO PREVENT THE UK ADDING 1 ppm CO2 TO THE WORLDS CURRENT TOTAL OF 400 ppm OVER THE NEXT 1,560 YEARS, WHEN DOUBLING THE CO2 LEVEL FROM 400 to 800 ppm MAKES A NEGLIGIBLE CHANGE TO GLOBAL WARMING!

Hence, in view of the above I would like to ask you to justify WHY each of the points listed above are required and WHY:

  1. You still insist on applying “net zero” when it is so obviously a totally unjustifiable, unattainable and horrendously expensive scam and making the UK taxpayers and residents so utterly persecuted, all for nothing.
  2. You gave away $2 billion of taxpayers money to the UN for just adding 0.039 ppm to the global total over 171 years when doubling the global CO2 from 400 to 800 ppm has a negligible effect on global warming.

Please treat this as a Freedom of Information request.

Yours faithfully

J G Wraith

Podcast  Episode 86 – Samuel Kasumu: The Outsider  

We are joined by Samuel Kasumu. A former Special Advisor to PM Boris Johnson and 2017 Tory candidate in Croydon North, Samuel was recently in the running to be the Tory candidate to take on Sadiq Khan in next year’s London Mayoral election. Samuel talks to us about his experiences in Downing Street, Tory politics and his recently published book “The Power of the Outsider”.

You can get hold of Samuel’s book Waterstones and Amazon:

Spreaker

iTunes

Google Podcasts

Podchaser

Podcast Addict		Deezer

Spotify

Castbox

Amazon

YouTube Contents:
00:00 – Intro
01:40 – Conservative Candidate
06:20 – Croydon North & Steve Reed
10:05 – Downing Street Days
14:00 – Mayor of London
25:40 – New Book
31:55 – Website & Events
34:25 – Outro

You can find out more about Samuel on his website and on Twitter.

Wet summer, whilst Europe burns.  Is it weather or is it climate change? – Your Views (Part 4)

In the UK we’ve faced a wet summer, whilst we’ve been told Europe burns.  Are we being told the truth?  Are these problems man-made or due to climate change?  If climate change, what if anything should we do about it?

We asked our contributors for their views.

Back to Part 3

Duncan Forsyth, local Brexiteer

“there appears to be warming trend there. The trend is, however, consistently less pronounced than even the most conservative climate models have predicted”

“There’s a huge difference between weather and climate”, we’re told by the experts every time there is a cold snap. Trouble is, those same experts are in the habit of announcing that every sunny day is evidence of manmade climate change. Despite these endless pronouncements, I don’t think there is a huge amount of evidence that the number of extreme weather events has actually increased from pre-industrial times. So far, anyway.

That being said, I am not a total climate change sceptic. I have looked at the temperature graphs, as everyone else has, and there appears to be warming trend there. The trend is, however, consistently less pronounced than even the most conservative climate models have predicted, indicating that it may be less of an issue than some climate scientists think. It’s looking like we’ll see between two and three degrees of warning this century. Whilst there will likely be negative consequences to this (as well as some positive consequences), I think the people of our species have surmounted greater challenges in the past.

“There is simply no way to hit the arbitrary target of net zero emissions by 2050 without bringing about the mass immiseration of the British people”

I’m therefore of the opinion that the cure is overwhelmingly likely to be worse than the disease. There is simply no way to hit the arbitrary target of net zero emissions by 2050 without bringing about the mass immiseration of the British people. Undoubtedly the worst hit would be those on the lowest incomes. All of this would be little more than a gesture, as it’s now clear that the rest of the world would not follow our example. Large emitters like China and India will continue to prioritise rapid economic development over carbon emission reductions, leaving those countries that pursued net zero with all the pain and little or nothing to show for it.

Other Articles in this series:

“There almost certainly has been some recent warming as we emerge from the Little Ice Age of the 13th-19th centuries which followed the Medieval warm period” – Wet summer, whilst Europe burns.  Is it weather or is it climate change? – Your Views (Part 1)

“which makes no sense when you consider the religious cult of “The Science” where is totally acceptable to abuse people in the street for contradicting the first slightly official looking thing you found on Google” – Wet summer, whilst Europe burns.  Is it weather or is it climate change? – Your Views (Part 2)

“Let’s be honest – most of us don’t even know for sure how tomorrow’s weather will turn out. Consequently, I prefer to hedge my bets about climate change” – Wet summer, whilst Europe burns.  Is it weather or is it climate change? – Your Views (Part 3)

Back to Part 3

Photo by USGS on Unsplash

Interview and Q&A with Howard Cox Reform UK Candidate for Mayor of London – 18th October

Join us for an interview and Q&A with Howard Cox Reform UK Candidate for Mayor of London on Wednesday 18th October at 7pm.

Venue:

Upstairs, Whispers,
5 High St,
Purley
CR8 2AF

Part of our #ThirdWednesday drinks and events, we hold these in association with Dick Delingpole’s #ThirdWednesday Libertarian drinks club, and POLITICS in PUBS a group of people from across the political spectrum who value the freedom to question and to speak openly.

Join us Upstairs, Whispers, 5 High St, Purley CR8 2AF on Wednesday 18th October, from 7pm. Space in the room will be first come first served.

Facebook: https://fb.me/e/5F0PxTyIK

FoI to The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero

Image by Mojca JJ from Pixabay

Letter from Jeremy Wraith to the The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero.

“Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, “donated” $2 billion of UK taxpayers money to the UN climate change fund during his visit to the G20 summit in India recently. Please justify”

To the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero,
Department for Energy Security & Net Zero
1 Victoria Street, Westminster
SW1H OET                                                        

16th September, 2023

Dear Ms Couthino

Freedom of Information Request – UK Net Zero

I believe that the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, “donated” $2 billion of UK taxpayers money to the UN climate change fund during his visit to the G20 summit in India recently. Please justify and explain why he did this when he had no authority to do so from the UK public and UK taxpayers and;

  1. We have hundreds of schools plus an unknown number of hospitals, museums, libraries etc., which are unsafe due to crumbling concrete construction.
  2. Jeremy Hunt, Chancellor of the Exchequer, said that there was no money to repair the schools, so all school repairs would have to be paid out of the existing education budget.
  3. Why you, and the Conservative Party, have completely ignored the data provided by Professor Happer that PROVES adding more CO2 to the atmosphere has an imperceptible effect on global warming.
  4. So where did the £1.6 billion taxpayers money come from and why was it thrown away on a completely spurious and un-necessary fund when our schools, hospitals etc., have to be repaired at great cost to the UK taxpayers?
  5. That AGW climate change is a total scam, has never been agreed to by the UK public and taxpayers nor has any liability for global warming as such been fully justified by the government and accepted by the general public as it is a completely spurious and untrue concept.
  6. Why a policy of net zero is being actively pursued by the Conservative government, (despite our leaving the EU which imposed it), which is crippling us now and will cripple the UK and all it’s population for years to come, when the UK’s contribution to global CO2 production will take over 1,500 YEARS TO ADD 1 ppm TO THE GLOBAL TOTAL, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT EVEN DOUBLING THE CURRENT CO2 LEVEL TO OVER 800 ppm HAS AN IMPERCEPTIBLE EFFECT ON GLOBAL WARMING ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR HAPPER?
  7. Why I am now liable to a £15,000 fine and 12 months prison sentence for denying climate change, according to Rishi Sunak!! 

Yours faithfully

J G Wraith

#ThirdWednesday drinks – Wednesday 20th September

Come and meet-up with likeminded freedom lovers, at our #ThirdWednesday drinks at The George, Croydon on Wednesday 20th September, from 7pm. 

We will hold these in association with Dick Delingpole’s #ThirdWednesday Libertarian drinks club. 

Join us at The George. 17–21 George Street, Croydon. CR0 1LA on Wednesday 20th September, from 7pm.

Facebook: https://fb.me/e/5Zue3fh8R