Some months back I posted about the climate change denying
efforts of Conservative MEP Roger Helmer.
It seems my interest has led to me to get on the mailing
list for his electronic newsletter. It's the second Tory newsletter I've
suddenly started receiving. My MP James Gray has also been sending me one. I
wrote to him asking for his support for a couple of freedom of information EDMs
(which he gave).
Must be an election in the offing soon (certainly June 4 for the euros).
Anyway Mr Helmer's newsletter has so many delightful little morsels that I’ve
cut them out to form a stream of conservative consciousness. (elipses show where I've edited stuff out).
My favourite is the bit where he warns that the EU could send tanks onto the
streets to enforce its will. A variation on America's black helicopter
conspiracy theory. "Am I being alarmist?" asks Roger. OF COURSE YOU ARE.
In the interests of fairness the full missive can be found
via www.rogerhelmer.com
STRAIGHT
TALKING
Welcome President Obama
Despite my well-known Republican sympathies, it would be
churlish not to welcome in-coming US President Barack Obama. But I did notice that both the
Dow Jones Index and Senator Ted Kennedy collapsed on Inauguration Day.
Wind Farms
Whatever view you take of the Great Carbon Myth, wind farms
are simply unsustainable, in either economic or environmental terms. There
are many things we need to do to reduce our dependence on imported fossil
fuels, but building wind farms is not one of them. We saw earlier this
year, during the long cold snap, the way that wind farms produced scarcely any
power at all, just at the time when we needed it most. Wind farms are the
worst kind of gesture politics. They may salve the consciences of the
chattering classes, but they blight lives and villages and local
communities. They further reduce property values. They pose health
risks to nearby residents. We should not build them at all, and
especially not within two miles of existing dwellings.
Travellers' camp sites
Friday Jan 16th saw me, along with David Tredinnick
MP, in a packed protest meeting at the Plough Inn in Earl Shilton.
Local residents are up in arms about a proposed travellers' camp in the
village. We have the EU seeking to earn our gratitude with a
succession of Declarations and Charters of Human Rights, but the good people of
Earl Shilton feel that while we all have equal rights, some minority groups are
more equal than others. ... was told that during a consultation on a similar
proposal in Bedfordshire, 4000 objections were sent in, but 3,900 of them
(including one from the Police) were rejected as "racist". I
don't know what the powers-that-be regard as "racist" in this
context, but I guess it would include observing that around travellers' sites,
crime tends to increase and property values tend to go down. But these
are facts, proven time and again, not racist comments.
Pennbury "Eco-Town"
On the evening of same day, Jan 16th, I spoke alongside
Edward Garnier MP at another packed protest meeting, in Oadby, Leics, this time
against the proposed Pennbury eco-town...One priceless insight: the plans
assume one parking place for every two dwellings. That's right, you
get half a parking place. They say that residents will use buses and
bicycles, and will walk. And presumably pigs will fly. We need to
reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels, and it may well be that in ten
years we shall all be driving electric cars, or hydrogen cars. But you
can bet that half a parking space per dwelling will be less than half of what's
needed.
The BBC and the Gaza appeal
...we might have greater respect for the BBC's
independence and impartiality had they not spent the previous few weeks of the
conflict acting as unashamed cheer-leaders for the Palestinians, and as the
primary accusers of Israel.
Could the EU invade Britain? Lessons from history
In recent months my historian colleague Rupert Matthews has
been looking at the political and constitutional debates that took place in the
USA in the build-up to the
attempts by some states to secede from the Union
– a move that sparked the American Civil War. He wondered how they look
compared to the position of Britain
and the EU today.... look at the current EU. Could the EU deploy military
forces to try to stop Britain seceding?
The answer lies in the Treaty of Lisbon (aka the EU Constitution).
First, the newly created High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy will also
head the European Defence Agency (EDA) and have a right of initiative for
proposing EU-led military operations. Second, Article 28b allows EU armed
forces to be used to deal with any “crisis”. An event will be defined as a
crisis by the Council and Commission. Article 28a allows the EU armed forces to
be used to protect the strategic interests of the EU; again these are to be
defined by the Council and Commission. Finally Article 188r allows armed forces
to be deployed to any part of the EU without the agreement of the government of
the member state in whose territory they are deployed.
These provisions are scattered widely through the Treaty
(probably deliberately), but taken together they create an EU armed force that
can be deployed anywhere in the EU for any purpose decided upon by the EU
Commission and Council. Never mind getting Ireland to vote again – the tanks
might be on the streets. Are we being unduly alarmist? Well maybe. So perhaps
somebody could tell us why the EU wants these powers?
...Red Hot Lies, by Chris Horner of the Competitive
Enterprise Institute,Washington...
I should declare an interest: Chris Horner is a friend of mine who has worked
with me on climate-related issues....To give you a flavour of the book, I
can do no better than to quote from the blurb on the dust jacket: "The
global warming lobby, relentless in its push for bigger government, more
spending and more regulation, will use any means necessary to scare you out of
your wits -- as well as your tax dollars and your liberties -- with threats of
rising oceans, deadly droughts and unspeakable future consequences of 'climate
change'. In pursuing their anti-energy, anti-capitalist and
pro-government agenda, the global warming alarmists -- and unscrupulous
scientists who see this scare as their gravy train to federal grants and
foundation money -- resort to dirty tricks, smear campaigns, and outright lies,
abandoning scientific standards, journalistic integrity, and old-fashioned
notions of free speech and open debate".