Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« IPCC: climate misinformers | Main | Pyrotechnics: feature or bug? »

Rudd to meet climate untouchables

The news that DECC minister Amber Rudd is to meet with Nigel Lawson in the near future is intriguing. After years of DECC bigwigs refusing to meet anyone who wasn't an environmentalist or attached firmly to the taxpayer's teat (or preferably both), one can only wonder what civil servants are making of it all. You can almost picture the horror on the faces of the Whitehall greens.

Rare though it may be, one should not expect too much from such an occasion. Ms Rudd seems quite clear that she is seeking to persuade Lawson of her views rather than trying to learn anything. And as we know from the Slingo correspondence from 2010, the climate bureaucracy sees its role as rebutting anything Lawson says. One therefore assumes that Ms Rudd's staff will be particularly attentive in the hours and days after Lawson leaves the premises.

We can only wonder what the government seeks to gain from this meeting. Perhaps Mr Cameron sees it as a sop to the Tory right, many of whom are taking up arms after the government started to set out its stall on the EU referendum (although there are signs of a rapid retreat taking place). Then again, perhaps Ms Rudd is, underneath it all, just interested to learn. We will have to wait and see.

In the meantime, let's enjoy the wails of the greens.


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (44)

So the fossil fuel industry representatives, who meet with DECC more than anyone else, are 'attached firmly to the taxpayer's teat'?

Glad you agree, I had thought you were disputing that.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterGubulgaria

I think that this is a positive move, although it would be easy to be cynical.
At least we can be sure that Amber Rudd wil be made aware of the other side
of the story.
The rest is up to Amber.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:12 PM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

The political left has always led the anti CO2 movement, and rebranded it, and themselves as Green.

The UK civil service has supported the Green movement since it realised what a wonderful job creation and preservation scheme it was for ALL civil servants, in all departments.

Sir Humphrey Appleby would be so proud that so much money could be spent on so many people, without being able to prove they had actually achieved anything. The UK can claim to be leading the world in this. It does not fill me with pride.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:16 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

The most widespread disease on the British political scene these days is the blinkered inability of anyone even vaguely involved to see other than what they want to see.
I have no idea what Ms Rudd is planning to say to Lawson or what he is planning to say to her. I would assume (hope) that she recognises a senior and well-respected member of her own party for what he is and at least is looking to find out why he appears to take such a different view from her officials on the subject of climate.
We will, as you say, need to wait and see but hopefully Lawson will be able to convince her at least that the science is not settled, that there are legitimate alternative points of view on what the data mean and that she would do well to do a little research on her own account without axe-grinding officials breathing down her neck.
As for your other point, Bishop, as Downing Street was forced by the increasingly grubby shit-stirring Telegraph to re-state, Cameron has already made it abundantly clear that during negotiations over the EU he expects his Cabinet to be on-side. What happens after that and once the campaign on the referendum itself begins is a different matter. Cameron has not been "forced to backtrack" over anything.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:19 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Gubulgaria, how much money do you get back from the taxman everytime you fill up with petrol? How much money do the oil companies get back from the taxman everytime you fill up with petrol?

Why with all the taxpayer funded subsidies do we have to pay for renewable electricity, and which bit, apart from the subsidies is renewable?

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:26 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

golf charlie@1:16

nail on head there .... "climate change"( افتح يا سمسم‎ ) is the magic incantation that opens the taxpayer treasure chest.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:29 PM | Registered Commentertomo

Whale song can be relaxing, particularly accompanied by music.

Green wails can be excruciating, but satisfying at the same time.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:35 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Amber Rudd is a green politician. She came by these views not by examining data and interrogating the methodologies used by climate modellers. Her green politics are a faith, based upon so called experts.

'You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into'.

She will try to 'conver't Lawson based upon her faith. This is a missionary meeting.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:44 PM | Unregistered Commenterconfused

As a former chancellor of the exchequer, Lord Lawson is supremely qualified to advise on the economic implications of green policies, for instance by dissecting Stern. Ms Rudd would be well advised to heed any such advice.

Jun 8, 2015 at 1:51 PM | Unregistered Commentermike fowle

The question is, will she?


Jun 8, 2015 at 2:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterMailman

Amber Rudd, just another RED Tory [in the wrong political party]......... who is in the job because of screaming green Tossers' rigid adherence to all things Political Correctness and equality quotas. Hells teeth, what other justification does yer need?

Rudd, like Liz Truss, Nicky Moron another one - they remind me very much of Bliar's babes - every time you hear any of them utter a word, your mind fills with appropriate descriptors; halfwit, brainwashed and clueless - not necessarily in that order. Furthermore, and that's not to say, other than one or two - male or female, the rest of the executive are any better.

I cannot fathom why Rudd [would] - is consulting with Lord Lawson. Moreover, even if Nigel keeps away from the technical stuff - like trying to explain just how useless are 'renewable' gewgaws at generating any meaningful electrical power. Still less, attempting to emphasize the importance and fundamental necessity of BASE LOAD capacity. And then, if Lord Lawson, uses easy to understand metaphors and articulates in words mainly consisting of one or, two syllables. Even then, making headway in any meaningful communication between the Lord and the clueless - is going to be a uphill task and very hard slog at that.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterAthelstan.

Confused @ 1.44 : "Her green politics are a faith" - yes but how deep is the faith? "Conviction" politics has a short career span in the modern world. When "environmentalism" becomes a liability - as it may well after Paris, no politician likes to be on the loosing side. "you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into" - but there is ALWAYS a reason whether rational or not. Watch for the signs of bets being hedged and exit lines being rehearsed. Lord Lawson need only paint an alternative picture of the issue.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:22 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenese2

Amber Rudd is my MP in Hastings and to date she has been excellent; taking the seat from the incumbent Labour MP in 2010 and increasing her majority in a an area which boasts one of the most deprived unemployment densities in the UK along with a high unmarried multiple-children-by-multiple-fathers rate (and I believe the largest in the south east). She's done this not by appeasing the left (indeed, she was pilloried a while back, as I recall, by claiming that there are so many dole claimers because they've come down from London en masse "Why be on the dole in the city when you can be on the dole by the seaside"; she was not wrong in her assessment), but by showing she is actually capable of getting things done by listening. One example is her effective campaigning for the fishermen of the town who suffer dreadfully due to the Common Fisheries Policy (or whatever the current equivalent is); and she holds regular surgeries in town, in the shopping centre and in some of the scummiest council estates (and boy, do we have some). She's shown that she can be swayed by reasoned argument and is her own person. I suspect what's happened to bring this meeting about is that she's up to now been fed the 'official' lines but now she's taken her position she wants to be seen in the same light by finding out for herself. Possibly against the wishes of the Sir Humphreys.
I hope so, anyway.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobert Tressel (not)

Most politicians have great faith in whatever they believe will get them re-elected next time. They bet their careers on it. The Labour party bet on Ed, and the other Dave won.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:30 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Not just Climate Skeptics but EU Skeptics too.

Amber Rudd new Tory minister making conciliatory overtures.
Perhaps the UK sets its own independent CO2 reduction targets.
Add Cameron U Turn on Human Rights.
And Cameron laying down the law on the EU Referendum to his Cabinet.
Repeal the Human Right Act and the Climate Change Act.
Two good reasons to get out of Europe.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:31 PM | Unregistered Commenterjamspid

Robert Tressel

Thanks for your interesting coment.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:40 PM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

As climate change minister there probably isn't a lot else to do.

Jun 8, 2015 at 2:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

As a result of the coment by Robert Tressel, I have E-Mailed Amber Rudd
and welcomed the meeting with Lord Lawson.
I also apologised for certain asumptions that I had formed prior to Roberts coment.

Should anyone want to contact Amber Rudd by E-Mail

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:05 PM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

JamesG, I am sure that Amber Rudd is very busy, waiting for the climate to change. Some people have made a career out of it for 30 years, and still nothing has happened. It pays more than watching paint dry, and that is the most important thing about it.

Robert Tressel, good to know she has been a good constituency MP. If only more MP's could find their constituencies in between General Elections, it would be a good thing.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:09 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie


...So the fossil fuel industry representatives, who meet with DECC more than anyone else, are 'attached firmly to the taxpayer's teat'? Glad you agree, I had thought you were disputing that....

Er.. how much money do they get from government, compared to from their customers?

Everyone should pay attention to the place they get paid from. The difference is that fuel companies sell a product of use to consumers, while activists take money and offer nothing....

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterDodgy Geezer

Ms. Rudd would do well to remember that prior to being Chancellor, Lawson was the Minister for Energy.

He is no ingénue in these circles. And with the GWPF he has some heavyweight advisers, too.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

From the 'Indy' article that GWPF have posted it is quite clear that she seeks to persuade Mr Lawson that he and his
scientific think-tank are wrong about everything.

“In my experience as minister I found there were just as many Labour MPs as Conservative MPs who spoke out with their doubts about it. I’m not in denial – I’m aware that some of my colleagues aren’t as committed as I and the Prime Minister are. But I’m going to be engaging with them, talking to them and hopefully winning them over,” she says.

Interesting that she is aware of cross party skepticism but chooses to insult their intelligence by attempting to "re-educate" them.

So - listening - but not listening.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterJazznick

Let's hope the scales drop from the Rudd's eyes.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterNCC 1701E

Phony, 5th column GWPF opposition. Who does Lawson represent ?

Global warming is a massive banking scam exemplified in the figure of Lord Stern and his $100 billion dollar carbon hedge fund owning organ grinder, Jeremy Grantham.

Lying, little rascal, Lord Stern today

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:37 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

I would be more impressed if, rather than trying to win them over she attempted to find out why they had doubts and then investigated for herself.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:41 PM | Registered CommenterDung

As global warming has turned out to be a ridiculous fabrication, a wonderful new scam has been put forward. 'Keep it in the ground'. With benefits for big oil.

George Monbiot

If a global deal is signed in December to keep most fossil fuels in the ground, then compensating the losers will be key, according to Michael Jakob, a climate change economist at the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change in Berlin.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:44 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

Hmm jazznick - certainly sounds depressingly predecided. Being good at being a constituency MP obviously does not necessarily translate to the bigger stuff.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobert Tressell (not)

I expect Rudd is hoping to impress Lawson with the pause busting paper by Karl.

They might both end up in tears. Not necessarily for the same reason though.

Jun 8, 2015 at 3:55 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

How depressing, a lightweight piece of fluff politician (female quota?) in charge of the highly technical subject of energy production.

Blair was just another Tory, Cameron is just another lefty.

Jun 8, 2015 at 4:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterMikky

We could know by Wednesday whether Rudd is as clueless as Miliband, Huhne and Davey, because that is the date she could make the decision whether to give the go ahead to the most expensive intermittent electricity in the world - namely the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon at £168/MWh.

Jun 8, 2015 at 4:50 PM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Just read the Guardian headline on the G7 phasing out fossil fuels by 2100, guess we should get going on now....

Jun 8, 2015 at 4:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterRob Burton

E.Smiff @ 3.44: "keep it in the ground". With benefits to big oil. OPEC have tried this a few times -all it did was cost them market share. They also tried pumping to force out competitors - that didn't work too well either as it forced efficiency, strengthening them. When has any COP seriously acted to suppress the DEMAND for fossil fuels?Renewables cannot touch it - the market will always win. Like the G77 will vote for de- development? Michael Jakob is having a wet dream.

Jun 8, 2015 at 5:06 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenese2

The simple idea is this. Identify an oil field, close it down and pay beneficiaries (oil company and country) compensation.

No doubt someone will think of a wonderful way to raise the money from us peasants. Yes, the price of oil will rise. More benefits for big oil.

I agree there has been no serious attempt to reduce fossil fuel consumption.

Jun 8, 2015 at 5:15 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

Smiffy - paying producers not to produce, brilliant, just like wind. Not new though witness the EU common Ag. Policy and the philosophy of " set aside" as being cheaper than a guaranteed price.
In Catch 22 wasn't it Major Majors father who grew rich not growing alfalfa. Investing his profits in more land on which not to grow alfalfa. Perhaps this is what is needed to really stimulate oil exploration.

Jun 8, 2015 at 6:10 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenese2

The timing and PR of Ms. Rudd's approach to Lord Lawson seems to indicate something more than nipping around for a working lunch / natter. There's political purpose at play here - it'll be interesting to see what it is.....

The Grantham bent eco-twerp circle jerk team are going into overdrive for COP21 which I earnestly hope descends into absolute mayhem. The quite incredible arrogance and stuff on display from Monbiot, Jakob et al truly deserves a reward!

Jun 8, 2015 at 6:16 PM | Registered Commentertomo

Any silly Bulgar should know that, when the meetings between Buff Huhne and Potato Ed Davey as Secretaries of State were listed two or three years ago, there were 23 with the likes of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Green Alliance, Renewable Energy Association and Renewable UK. During the same period there were a total of 11 with Oil and Gas UK, Urenco (nuclear fuel), Cuadrilla (shale gas/'fracking'). And, out of that 11, 7 were with BP at the time of the Gulf of Mexico spill.
So yet again this twerp comes on here spouting brazen porkie pies.

Jun 8, 2015 at 6:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterMartin Brumby


Do you have any data to support your assertion? My suspicion would be that fossil fuel companies rarely meet with DECC at all, while DECC readily have meetings with their favourite consultants, green issue campaigners, EU energy bureaucrats and other international energy politicians, OFGEM and other energy quangos, and MPs pushing for subsidies for wind farms/tidal barrages or to prevent wind farms etc..

Jun 8, 2015 at 7:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterIt doesn't add up...

"So the fossil fuel industry representatives, who meet with DECC more than anyone else, are 'attached firmly to the taxpayer's teat'?"

This would suggest not but it's from 2010.

DECC meetings

Do you have more up to date info Gubulgaria? Genuinely interested.

Jun 8, 2015 at 8:16 PM | Registered CommenterSimonW

"She will try to 'conver't Lawson based upon her faith. This is a missionary meeting."
Could be true, but I rather think that she would not wish to associate with Lord Lawson if she was not interested in his views for a reason. I seem to recall Cameron uttering negative thoughts about renewables a couple of years ago and a couple of rumours some time ago associated Osborne with some doubts about "Climate Change". Furthermore her department has just lost £70 million in Osborne's latest round of cuts. She will be looking for good reasons to for her choice of where to cut and Lawson might give her some ideas and backing. I would say there is uncertainty around her motives and objectives. Wait and see would be my advice. They could start by cutting funding to green organisations.
Why does Montford use American spelling corrections? Quite irritating.

Jun 8, 2015 at 10:57 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Peter

If your Rudd is as bad as our Rudd was, God help you. Hopefully you haven' got a Gillard lurking in the background waiting to take over.

I'd certainly like to be paid not to mine coal, I could sit at home and watch the ocean rather than beaver away in a windowless office or underground.

Jun 9, 2015 at 12:24 AM | Unregistered CommenterDocBud

Jun 8, 2015 at 8:16 PM SimonW

This was published on 15 March 2015:

Good luck.

Jun 9, 2015 at 11:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterBrownedoff

When any current politician looks the camera in the eye and says something to the effect that, 'Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, its a fertilizer and the basis of all life on Earth', I will begin to hope the end of the scam is coming.
Until that time I will remain cynical and sceptical of ALL politicians motives in this arena.

Jun 9, 2015 at 12:20 PM | Unregistered Commenterconfused

My impression of Amber Rudd is that she likes to cool-the-heat and keep everybody talking to each other.

I also have the impression that the Government feels it's carbon taxes are the wrong policy and are slowing edging out of them.

The Nigel Lawson meeting could well address both items.

Jun 10, 2015 at 10:43 AM | Unregistered Commenteranng

Not sure what to do with the connection, but ..... does Rudd think she should meet with Lawson before the Paris meetings for some reason. Lawson is obviously a credible figure who disagrees with the current government policy...perhaps she feels like having a conversation with Lawson is just good politics. A box she can check before the Paris meetings.

She might have no intent of changing her mind, but wants to get credit for opening up the channels of discussion with dissenting views. This can open up escape routes if necessary in the future.

Not sure, but there seems to be a significant component of the Tories who are not on board with CAGW. Maintaining reasonable relationships with multiple sides of the issue seems like good politics. It may be no more than that.

Jun 12, 2015 at 2:20 AM | Unregistered Commenterleon0112

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>