Who rules Britain? Activist Judges. Paris is the excuse to let the deep state run amok. Get out now.

PlanesThe non-binding unenforceable Paris agreement was always a theatre show on the international stage, where most countries promise to do nothing, and the rest make promises they don’t keep. But it’s an excuse for the domestic Deep State to do whatever they want.

The zero carbon goal by 2050 was also a Grand Theater Promise. But here the two symbolic acts of nothingness met like anti-matter and threaten to blow up an economy.

Climate campaigners win Heathrow expansion case

By Tom Espiner, BBC

Controversial plans for a third runway at Heathrow Airport have been thrown into doubt after a court ruling.

The government’s decision to allow the expansion was unlawful because it did not take climate commitments into account, the Court of Appeal said.  Heathrow said it would challenge the decision, but the government said it would not appeal.

The judges said that in future, a third runway could go ahead, as long as it fits with the UK’s climate policy.

Since when were Judges appointed to decide if an elected government stuck to its policies? Isn’t that what the voters are supposed to do?

Fears Heathrow eco-bombshell could pose a threat to ALL future transport projects after court ruled the £14bn airport expansion was illegal

Colin Ferdandez, Daily Mail

British ambitions of becoming a global economic power after Brexit suffered a major blow yesterday after a court ruling suggested future airports, motorway and energy projects could all be blocked to prevent global warming.

The Court of Appeal ruled that the £14 billion expansion of Heathrow airport was illegal – because the Government failed to take into account its legal duty to curb climate change.

Green campaigners said the victory was ‘groundbreaking’ and warned the legal precedent sounded the death knell for big infrastructure projects that increased greenhouse gases.

But critics said the move would hand a huge economic advantage to the UK’s competitors.

Boris didn’t want it anyway, his constituency is near it and hates it. But the legal precedent is a bomb.

The Court of Appeal ruled that this case was one of ‘exceptional public interest’.

It noted that ‘the issue of climate change is a matter of profound national and international importance of great concern to the public – and, indeed, to the Government of the United Kingdom and many other national governments, as is demonstrated by their commitment to the Paris Agreement’.

 Some commitment — Most nations are failing to meet their own voluntary Paris Agreement Goals.

Must be grounds for appeal — judge didn’t do his homework. The public are bored to death of climate change which is why 98% of them don’t offset their flights with even $2 worth of carbon credits. And most nations are barely even committed enough to update their agreement.

h/t Pat.David Wojick

Photo by Samuel’s Photos on Unsplash



8.5 out of 10 based on 57 ratings

50 comments to Who rules Britain? Activist Judges. Paris is the excuse to let the deep state run amok. Get out now.

  • #
    Curious George

    I don’t know about UK judges, but I know the difference between God and a federal judge: God knows that He is not a federal judge.


  • #

    As far as I understand it from listening to numerous experts here in the UK, is that it seems clear that the Govt broke its own laws as they don’t specify that when they originally approved the Heathrow expansion that they took into account environmental concerns such as climate change and didn’t specify whether the laws surrounding it had been addressed.

    apparently it would take a very simple addition of a couple of lines to the Heathrow bill saying the climate emissions laws had been taken into account and the law would be satisfied.

    However I think it would be a very brave govt willing to risk the wrath of environmentalists as in effect you would be diluting the deranged climate change ambitions.

    All this is probably not helped in as much that Boris is passionately against the new runway so probably welcomes the decision and is unwilling to rattle the cage.

    Mind you, Heathrow is in a terrible geographical location. I would not dream of using it unless absolutely necessary, as it is a long drag for me from the West country and in a crowded part of the country with bad traffic congestion.

    far better to develop the regional airports which are far more convenient.

    So it may be that these huge airport hubs like Heathrow are out of date and lets not forget that something like 30% of all passengers coming into Heathrow are merely in transit, so are of no benefit at all to our country and arguably through their noise and pollution are positively unwelcome


    • #

      Here are some actual figures on Heathrow transit passengers

      “Heathrow had about 18 million transfer passengers in 2011, out of around 66 million passengers. That is about 27%

      Documents for the Airports Commission indicate that the number would be about 30 million transfer passengers by 2050.

      The additional 22 million passengers would take up over 50% of the new runway capacity, (ie. 22 million out of the extra 45 million) and would provide little or no economic benefit to the UK. They do not pay APD. Transfer passengers do not leave the air-side at Heathrow.”

      all in all it is difficult to see why locals would want hundreds of thousands of extra flights many of which are carrying a proportion of people merely using Heathrow as an interchange, with no financial benefit to the UK and a considerable increase in noise and pollution.

      I would stress that I live nowhere near the airport so am not affected by it but I can see why locals are not impressed by the business case.

      Spreading passengers out to the regional airports makes much more sense than adding to this cumbersome behemoth that is Heathrow, that exists in the wrong location for historic reasons. If the govt has the will they can conform to their own laws by slightly rewriting either the Heathrow or climate change acts. I am not sure they would want to do so as the time for a vastly bigger Heathrow has probably passed.


      • #

        tonyb, the big problem is not so much the passengers but the goods that are shipped out from there. In fact Heathrow shifts about 29% while Gatwick only ships 0.2%(most of the other shipments are by sea).


        People are strange when it comes to airports. Many live near them because the value of the homes goes up, why else is there new developments around airports? People don’t have to live there but those new ones that move there tend to be the ones that complain.


        • #

          I agree about the complainers Ivan – My position is that anyone who has bought and/or moved into an area affected by an airport, including under flight paths, since the start of the jet age should have no grounds for complaint about noise. So effectively, only those who bought before the late fifties can complain which means anyone who has bought in the last sixty years should have no say.


    • #
      Kalm Keith

      Take away the carbon environmental thing and there are still too many reasons not to build it.



  • #

    As Tony B points out above, this was just a procedural decision. That is, the government did not specify how the new runway fits into their climate commitments. The Court did not rule that the present plans prohibit the runway, or prohibit anything, as this judgement is widely being incorrectly reported.

    However, the Guardian reports that BoJo said a few years ago that he would block the runway if he could, and he now can simply by doing nothing.


    • #

      Just to continue, adverse procedural decisions can be almost as bad as substantive ones. In the U.S. our NEPA (national environmental policy act) frequently blocks federal projects, and federal permits for private projects, entirely on procedural grounds.

      I call it the Black Hole of Environmental Assessment. NEPA says the Feds have to do an environmental impact assessment for the project. They do a draft and the greens sue saying that x was not considered. The Court agrees. So the Feds assess x and then the greens say y was not considered. Again the Court agrees. Since there is no end to possible considerations the Feds can never finish the EIA.

      Historical aside: I was there. NEPA was passed to stop the U.S. flood control dam building program. I was working my way through grad school designing dams for that program. One of my projects became a test case. Our first EIA was ten pages long. By the time I left it was 14 inches thick and had again been remanded by the Court, this time for failing to consider aesthetics. That dam was never built and so too for many others that were designed. So we still get catastrophic floods, which the greens blame on climate change. My rage runs deep.


  • #
    Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7

    Amended Heathrow expansion plan:

    This expansion is consistent with the government’s climate committments, in as much as we will ask Princes Charles and Andrew to purchase an equal amount carbon offsets.


  • #
    Fred Streeter

    When HMG authorises policies like the Heathrow 3rd. Runway, the Planning Act of 2008 states that it must:

    “include an explanation of how the policy set out in the statement takes account of Government policy relating to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, Climate Change”.

    Consequently, HMG was bound by the 2008 Act to explain their policy with regard to an Agreement that they had ratified, and any other such Commitments.

    Had they to done so, the 3rd Runway would have sailed through, all other objections having been set aside.


    • #
      Peter C

      Thanks Fred.
      It always helps to read the judgement. Your comment implies that the activist judges applied the law.

      The challenge for the government now is to amend the Planning Act 2008, if they dare.


      • #
        Fred Streeter

        I have a cynical streak which notes that Boris did not want a 3rd Runway, and that omitting details of the Climate Change impacts ensured that the will of Boris was obeyed.


  • #

    We are witnessing the very early stages of the collapse of the West. We have a long way to go so enjoy the remainder of the ride.


  • #

    Meanwhile the BBC confirms it needs radical change. The presenters also shows the UK education system needs major improvements.



    • #

      Ross –

      UK Expresss has it too:

      28 Feb: UK Express: Miners attack BBC for claiming colliery workers joined Extinction Rebellion demo
      THE BBC has come under fire for its coverage of the latest Extinction Rebellion protest after one of its main presenters claimed miners had joined activists in a demonstration against the expansion of a coal mining site in County Durham.
      By Luke Hawker
      Martin Raine, a miner at the site, has insisted there was no alliance with the protest group and said the actions of the Extinction Rebellion demonstrators had put jobs at risk…

      The firm (Banks Group) has applied for planning permission to extend the mine in order to extract a further 90,000 tonnes of coal and 20,000 tonnes of fire clay…
      The Banks Group spokesman Mark Dowdall condemned the demonstrators for targeting the site.
      Mr Dowdall said the actions of the protest group could “exacerbate the problem” and increase pollution.
      He explained the UK would be forced to import coal from distant countries such as Australia or Russia.
      He said: “Extinction Rebellion’s ill-conceived demands will directly exacerbate the problem they are looking to solve.


  • #

    Posted by Old Arthur at Morning Mail on this topic;

    Essentially, the soft-hearted judges decided that the framers of the constitution probably meant to exclude all aboriginals and descendants of aboriginal from the definition of what an alien is, they just forgot to put that bit in, so we are doing it for them.
    BUT there is a bigger problem, and it won’t be saved by the judges who go purely on the constitution as written.
    It is this.
    The UK signed up to the Paris Agreement and passed it into their laws. Now they want to build a third runway at Heathrow. Not so fast.
    A court ruling has just been made and was made solely on the grounds that, in approving a third runway through the Airports National Policy Statement, the government HAD BROKEN ITS OWN LAWS.

    “…in particular, the provision in section 5(8) of the Planning Act, which requires that the reasons for the policy set out in the Airports National Policy Statement ‘must… include an explanation of how the policy set out in the statement takes account of Government policy relating to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change’. We have concluded, in particular, that the designation of the Airports National Policy Statement was unlawful by reason of a failure to take into account the Government’s commitment to the provisions of the Paris Agreement on climate change.”
    The judges said they had no beef with CO2 levels, nor any green ideas.
    Now then, we want to build dams, we want to pass regulations about bushfires. We will end up having to face a High Court challenge every time.
    Trump is no lawyer but he saw the danger of foreign entanglements and soft headed lefties who know better than us.


    • #

      Agreements, treaties and related tribunals, councils, commissions all created outside of government departments, add funded non-government organisations.


  • #

    It ought to be warning to politicians here that ‘virtue-signalling’ legislation can have real-world consequences.


  • #

    28 Feb: iNewsUK: Tory MPs step up battle with judges after Court of Appeal decision to block Heathrow expansion
    Exclusive: Senior backbenchers have accused the judiciary of blocking the will of Parliament
    By Richard Vaughan
    Senior Tory MPs have attacked the High Court’s ruling on the expansion of Heathrow as a direct challenge to Parliament in an escalation of the party’s feud with senior judges…

    Former Tory justice minister Crispin Blunt suggested the High Court had overreached in its ruling against Heathrow. “Parliament voted by a large majority for the expansion of Heathrow,” he told i. “This is a challenge to Parliament from the judiciary.”
    Another senior Tory backbencher said they were concerned that judges were “putting their noses into decisions made by politicians”.
    “One of the reasons why the High Court ruled against the third runway was because the environmental impact wasn’t considered, but before this was voted on in Parliament it was debated and debated again until the vote was cast,” the MP said…
    Heathrow Airport insisted it will press on with expansion and will work with the Government on the climate change issue, with a spokeswoman saying it is “eminently fixable”…

    Giving their ruling on Thursday, Lords Justice Lindblom, Singh and Haddon-Cave said the expansion decision was unlawful because then-Transport Secretary Chris Grayling failed to take account of the Government’s commitment to the Paris Agreement – which commits signatories to tackling climate change by taking measures to limit global warming to well below 2C.
    The Conservative Government has proposed limiting the use of judicial review to challenge ministers’ decisions. One possible option is to block campaign groups from bringing the cases to court, with only those personally affected by Government policies allowed to launch a judicial review.

    Boris Johnson and his allies have been angered by a series of high-profile court verdicts on sensitive constitutional issues, including the prorogation of Parliament and the triggering of Article 50.
    In their election manifesto the Tories pledged an inquiry into constitutional reform, with judicial review likely to be the first item on the agenda when it starts in the coming weeks.


  • #

    I found it quite interesting the way Brenda Hale tried to block Boris Johnson/Brexit, and the way the progressive left applauded her as a hero for putting up a serious road block to implementing the people’s decision.

    It was a good insight into how these people see the world and are prepared to operate.


  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    Heathrow, Rocky Hill, I wonder which will be next?


  • #

    29 Feb: Daily Mail: Rival firm lodges appeal in bid to build Heathrow expansion as bullish airport bosses say they are confident of winning permission at Supreme Court and Gatwick pushes ahead with new runway plan
    •Heathrow bosses have insisted the planned runway expansion should go ahead
    •Firm developing rival extension plans also launched own Supreme Court appeal…
    By Danyal Hussain
    The Arora Group said it lodged appeal papers in the Supreme Court in a bid to ‘put Heathrow expansion back on track’ as the west London airport’s bullish owner, Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL), also stated it will appeal.
    Pending an appeal, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps must review the NPS if the Government wants the project to go ahead. The Arora Group was an interested party in the Court of Appeal case.
    It wants to build and operate a new terminal serving a third runway at Heathrow and what the firm claims will be a quicker and at a lower cost than HAL…

    It comes as Gatwick said today it would push ahead with plans for a second runway of its own by Spring.
    A consultation will be held in April or May to bring Gatwick’s northern runway into full time use – which could see 15 more flights per hour launched from the airport.

    Heathrow chiefs meanwhile have played down the significance of yesterday’s court decision, which blocked runway expansion plans.
    A Heathrow spokesman told Mail Online: ‘Heathrow’s North West runway remains Government Policy.
    ‘The Court of Appeal ruling does not stop Heathrow expansion and the process issue identified by the Court is eminently fixable. Failure to fix it rules out airport growth anywhere in the country.’…
    The spokesperson added that Heathrow would work with the government to amend its policy, while a Supreme Court appeal is ongoing.
    The airport also insisted its plans were in line with the Paris agreement, pointing out that the government policy is what needs to be modified.
    Yesterday’s ruling suggested future airports, motorway and energy projects could all be blocked to prevent global warming.

    Green campaigners said the victory was ‘groundbreaking’ and warned the legal precedent sounded the death knell for big infrastructure projects that increased greenhouse gases.
    But critics said the move would hand a huge economic advantage to the UK’s competitors…
    Former transport secretary Andrew Adonis said: ‘The only winners from a refusal to expand Heathrow as agreed by Parliament two years ago will be other international hubs that will take the extra traffic, especially Amsterdam, Paris and Dubai.
    ‘There won’t be fewer flights – they just won’t come to Britain.’…
    ‘The benefits of a third runway would extend far beyond south-east England. Hundreds of UK companies are already invested in the supply chain for expansion, and tens of thousands of additional jobs will be created if the project goes ahead.’

    Former chancellor George Osborne criticised Mr Johnson’s lack of leadership. He tweeted: ‘Judges kill off Heathrow third runway and Britain getting the modern air transport infrastructure we need, despite the elected Parliament voting for it overwhelmingly. Presumably this is the kind of over-reaching undemocratic judicial activism Boris wants to curb…or perhaps not.’…

    Clare Farrell, a co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, added: ‘The recognition of this appeal will support citizens all over the world who are begging for policy-writing in line with the truth.’
    Dr Phillip Williamson, from the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, said the Court of Appeal judgment ‘shows that the Paris Agreement is legally binding, not an aspiration, and will require many other policy re-thinks’

    Environment minister Zac Goldsmith, an opponent of Heathrow expansion, tweeted that the court’s decision was ‘HUGE!!!’ He also criticised a tweet by Greens MP Caroline Lucas which asked, ‘How can we trust Government pledges on climate when it has taken the courts to end climate-wrecking projects like Heathrow?’
    Mr Goldsmith wrote: ‘Sometimes wonder if Greens actually prefer the bad news! How else to interpret this reaction to this good news (and this judgment combined with the Government’s decision not to appeal certainly is good news).’…

    An act of self-harm to make us all poorer: Commentary by Alex Brummer
    What few people realise is that Heathrow is enormously important for freight and exports. In terms of value, it is the UK’s biggest port for global markets excluding the EU and Switzerland, and handles 33 per cent of Britain’s exports to very fast-growing international markets which are at the heart of ‘global Britain’…
    Heathrow says the third runway would be worth billions of pounds in exports.
    The battle over London’s vital global transport hub is a sharp reminder of how the economic costs of a green agenda threaten the prosperity of the nation…READ ALL

    behind paywall. imagine some will say why ship Scottish salmon to London?

    28 Feb: UK Telegraph: A ‘global’ trade policy with no Heathrow third runway is a joke
    by Juliet Samuel
    Every year, tonnes of Scottish salmon are shipped down to London and then go on their way to destinations all across the globe, getting from sea to supermarket shelf in places like Taipei within 18 hours. The remarkable hub that enables this to happen is Heathrow airport, where Scottish salmon is the heaviest trade good passing through. Overall, Heathrow is the country’s most valuable non-EU port. It handles more than £100 billion of goods per year…


  • #

    GWPF is carrying this:

    27 Feb: Melanie Phillips: It’s ministers not judges who are skidding off the policy runway
    As readers may know, I have been banging on for years about overreaching judges straying inappropriately and dangerously into the political arena. And as I wrote here (LINK) only last week, my view of the carbon net-zero policy is that the governing class has taken leave of its senses altogether.

    But leaving aside the question of whether a third runway at Heathrow is desirable or not, the court’s critics have got this one wrong. The people to blame are not the judges, but the politicians who created the law they themselves were breaking.
    As ever, it’s worth reading what the judges actually said; which you can do at this link (LINK) to the full judgment, and at this one (LINK) to the summary…

    In other words, the court didn’t even say the runway decision must conform to climate change policy — merely that the government must explain just how it is taking that policy into account.
    But the government won’t even do that. It is also declining to appeal to the Supreme Court, a course of action now being taken independently by Heathrow itself…

    Second, there is no way the government can show how it is taking its Paris commitment into account. And that’s because there’s no way it can reconcile the expansion of Heathrow with its commitment to achieve carbon-zero by 2050, a policy which would necessitate a drastic reduction in air traffic – thus indeed crippling the British economy – and could even mean the end of air travel altogether, along with a number of other totally impossible objectives.

    What’s stopping this third runway therefore is not the courts – it’s the government itself which, as a result of the environmental derangement to which it has fallen victim, is now skidding off the runway of reason altogether.


  • #

    Australia is not in the EU, has never been in the EU. Yet are we any less of a crash dummy? Will the UK be any less of a crash dummy now, especially with the City of London growing new wings (and claws and tentacles)?

    I prefer the term “pervasive state” to “deep state”. “Deep state” is an expression like “conspiracy”: just by saying it you get relegated to the potty corner. Alex Jones will do his job and make sure such concepts are associated with frothing mouths and popping eyeballs.

    “Pervasive state” is more accurate. The control isn’t underground, it’s out in the air and freely accepted. Don’t like the idea of blowing up coal power plants? You’ll be startled the first time, as with your first oyster, but after a few it’s just natural and enjoyable. A bit like a TV show where people marry for an audience. Or like some Scandinavian professor telling you it’s time we considered eating granny. It’s all in the open, and after a bit (well, actually, a lot) of conditioning, everything’s cool.

    But if we turn off their poisonous media, maybe, just maybe…


  • #

    A manufactured concept….confected by a handful of Global Governance Fabian nutcases , plutocrats and tree-huggers-come-rich international agents of influence…all enabled and facilitated by Socialist activists posing as journalists…becomes the hoax of the millennium sold as a sacred covenant .

    Turns out the supposedly non-binding Paris Agreement and the hysteria its lying premises invoke…used as an alibi by weak sectarian ‘leaders’ even in a secular country like Australia…now has the power to dismantle not just the health and prosperity gains of the 20th and 21st centuries…but many elements of the Enlightenment.

    Australia’s the country that should be leading the resistance…not leading the holy compliance with the scam that our government likes to brag about…but the resistance….as the only 1st world country that is under existential threat from its madness.

    Of course Australia’s leaders ..if one of the UK’s many zombie academics has her way…would then be liable for prosecution in the International Criminal Court for the new crime of ‘postericide’…ie ‘intentional or reckless conduct fit to bring about the extinction of humanity.’

    That could be embraced as an opportunity to get at the truth…to force the cult to prove its hypothesis or desist.

    The Heathrow decision on curtailment that’s also a current issue with other major airports around the world ..could be a warning signal from those judges re what’s to come if legislators succumb to the hysteria…but more likely is yet another sign of elected government being neutered and sidelined…subjected to virtual takeover by unaccountable unelected entities ….even foreign actors and the mobocracy…all empowered and emboldened to the point of virtual coup by the government’s own supine grovel to a classic moral panic.

    Governments like the UK’s and ours are cravenly relinquishing everything that constitutes democracy without any permission whatsoever from voters….relinquishing much of their own role and powers to Marxist activists and business leaders ,bankers and financial behemoths who claim to believe the science and claim they’re acting on risk [that their own cohort deliberately manufactured]….but show in their justifications that their chosen line of sight deliberately blinkers out everything but the huge fortunes to be made from being favored early-adopters of global compliance for Global Socialism.

    It remains to be seen if business will be so concerned for the planet that they’ll welcome the end of long-haul and medium-haul aviation and shipping….and thence of tourism…junketing…conference-hopping…and much of their wealth .


  • #

    28 Feb: ClimateDepot: Freeman Dyson, Princeton’s legendary theoretical physicist, dies at 96 – A climate skeptic: ‘I like carbon dioxide’
    Nat Geo excerpt: Freeman Dyson’s criticism of climate science grew out of his own involvement with the JASON group and developed amid the nuclear winter debate with Carl Sagan and others. In his own simple climate model, Dyson underplayed the effects of greenhouse gases. Atmospheric physicists savaged his model for going against a broad consensus. That stung Dyson, who insisted that “global warming is grossly exaggerated as a problem.” His skepticism continued to bring scathing criticism during his final years, as evinced in a New York Times Magazine article headlined “The Civil Heretic.”…

    Dyson is also featured in book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change.

    Excerpt from Freeman Dyson’s email to Climate Depot’s Marc Morano on March 3, 2018: Dyson: “Congratulations for the success of the book and for the serious attention it is getting from people who matter. The experts will of course continue to put you down with a sneer. The people who matter are those who are not experts but can tell when they are being scammed. Keep up the good work! Yours sincerely, Freeman Dyson.”…READ ON

    don’t think SciAm cares to focus on the above:

    28 Feb: ScientificAmericanBlog: Scientific Rebel Freeman Dyson Dies
    The iconoclastic physicist rejected the idea of an endpoint to the human quest for knowledge and happiness.
    By John Horgan


  • #

    I have been in contact with my Federal MP on this already and reminded him that this is the thin end of the wedge. Any commitments like zero emissions (a la ALP) will cause catastrophic issues for our economy as we have needed developments scrapped over spurious “climate change” issues..

    He has replied and confirmed the LNP will leave this to Labour.

    It may seem a waste of time but I engage with my Federal MP and govt ministers on the Climate Change issue. If we all do this then they will get the message. It is done in a professional manner with evidence, like Jo provides and I have spoken personally with them where possible.


  • #

    28 Feb: ClimateDepot: CPAC shocker: “RepublicEN” astroturf group launches character attack on Princeton physicist (Will Happer)
    By James Taylor


  • #

    28 Feb: BristolPost: Defiant Greta Thunberg is a leader of a generation – but I cannot cast my cynicism completely to one side
    Bristol Live editor Mike Norton joins the crowds to see world famous climate activist
    by Mike Norton
    To the rhythm of raindrops on thousands of coats and umbrellas, a tiny teenager brought hope and happiness to Bristol today…
    Among others, we heard from Bristol Birdgirl Mya-Rose Craig, whose intelligent speech was slightly lost on a crowd distracted by its own machinations and the unrelenting rain.

    Then, half an hour later than expected, a ripple of cheers at the front of the crowd. They had spotted Greta…
    Greta’s unmistakable Scandanavian accent cut the sodden atmosphere with an uncompromising message: “This is an emergency. Nothing is being done to halt this crisis despite all the beautiful words and promises from our elected officials.
    “I will not stand aside and watch. I will not be silent while the world is on fire. Will you?”…
    “Thank you. And let’s march!”
    And march they did…

    There was no denying the power of her presence and its effect on the young people who strained to see her or marched proudly behind her…
    Despite that power, however, I cannot cast my cynicism completely to one side. At times, the messages on College Green were frustratingly simple. There was, for example, much cheering for the decision not to allow the Bristol Airport expansion. Greta, in her speech, said it had been “cancelled”. The truth, of course, is much more complex with any appeal against the decision likely to allow a plan which was recommended for approval by North Somerset council officers…
    But it is also clear that she speaks to a generation of young people who feel increasingly disenfranchised by the decisions of the generations before them…

    PICS: 28 Feb: Bristol Post: Incredible aerial shots show scale of crowd at Greta Thunberg protest
    VIDEO: 1m19s


    • #

      Bristol Post claims 30,000 in one of the aerial pics. doubt that figure. for once at a “climate protest”, BBC also mentions the police figure – 15,000 (probably more accurate).
      ***if only the politicians, media and OTHERS in power were ignoring CAGW:

      28 Feb: BBC: Greta Thunberg Bristol climate strike: ‘The world is on fire’
      The teenager was welcomed by chants of “Greta, Greta” as she addressed some 15,000 people at the Bristol Youth Strike 4 Climate (BYS4C) event…
      Wet weather failed to deter thousands of people turning out for the 17-year-old, who appeared on stage at about 11:45 GMT.
      “Our leaders behave like children so it falls to us to be the adults in the room. They are failing us but we will not back down,” Greta told the crowds.
      “This emergency ***is being completely ignored by the politicians, the media and those in power…

      Police said 15,000 are in attendance, although organisers believe the figure is closer to 30,000.
      At the scene
      By Steve Mellen, BBC News
      The roar when Greta stepped in front of the microphone echoed across the green and her speech was regularly punctuated with roars of approval, especially when she mentioned the decision not to grant Bristol Airport planning permission to expand…


  • #

    taking the easy way out!

    28 Feb: Deutsche Welle: Greening the city: How Brussels is planning for climate change
    The Belgian capital is known for its terrible traffic. But in the city of the EU Green Deal, new plans aim to give the streets back to pedestrians and help residents counter the crisis of a warming planet
    by Martin Kuebler, Brussels
    Choked with traffic and often blanketed by smog, the Belgian capital is notorious for having some of the worst traffic jams in Europe. Just 28% of journeys here are made by public transport, compared to 44% of trips with private vehicles. In 2018, the European Commission issued Belgium with a formal warning over its failure to address illegal levels of air pollution in its capital…

    The European seat of power is now trying to clean up its act.
    A 10-year plan developed by regional authority Brussels Mobility, in consultation with municipal authorities and local residents, is aiming for a 25% reduction in car use by building new tram and metro lines, and encouraging walking and cycling.
    To make private cars a less attractive option, the “Good Move” plan will also impose a 30-kilometer per hour (just under 20 miles per hour) speed limit across the Brussels region starting in 2021. Within the next ten years, the city will also eliminate 65,000 street parking spots and provide a 100% electric bus fleet.
    Still, the plan hasn’t been without detractors.

    In a report published in October, Inter-Environment Bruxelles (IEB), a regional NGO focused on ecological and social issues, criticized the plan’s reliance on the private sector — ride-hailing services, rental scooters — to replace private cars, and said it lacked details on how it would pay for its grand ideas.
    Shifting the problem
    But IEB says the “true blind spot,” of Brussels’ plans to tackle traffic is a proposal to divert cars toward the ring road circling the city — outside the Brussels low-emissions zone.
    And the neighboring region of Flanders, under whose jurisdiction most of the ring road falls, has controversial plans to expand the highway…


  • #

    just switched on Sky Australia – toy companies going green.

    switched to Sky UK, reviewing the weekend papers. one Bidisha was saying UK Times front page had the only good story. police in Bristol roll out green carpet for Greta Thunberg – which isn’t online as yet. apparently, Bristol Police have 2 electric cars, and they were happy to drive Greta from the train station to the protest venue. she’s so inspiring etc.

    Sky presenter asked is it right for the police to drive her? Bidisha said there would be thousands of people and, even tho they would all be fans, it wouldn’t be 100% safe, so it was okay. found the usual over-the-top DM coverage which mentions this:

    28 Feb: MSN: Greta Thunberg brings Bristol to a standstill: Roads are closed as teenage activist tells 30,000 at UK climate rally she ‘will not be silenced when the world is on fire’ after she arrives by train then gets a police escort in an electric car
    by Jack Wright, Daily Mail
    She arrived in Bristol by train earlier today for the mass climate change rally, where she transferred to an electric Red Nissan Leaf before enjoying a police escort from Temple Meads station to College Green…

    Police together with Bristol City Council have issued a number of warnings of multiple road closures and bus diversions for locals as at least 20,000 people are set to flock to the demonstration…
    Event organisers Bristol Youth 4 Climate, which is part of an international movement that organises climate change protests in schools, claimed earlier today as many as 30,000 attended the strike…

    Among the thousands of faces in Bristol for the strike today is celebrity chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, who posted to social media that he was with his sister and family to listen to Greta speak.
    He tweeted: ‘In Bristol with my sister and family to support climate striking students and hear Greta Thunberg. The weather looks horrendous – but nothing compared to what we’ll get if we don’t take climate action NOW!’…

    One coach company revealed that it was providing transport from 13 places around the UK, including Oxford, Birmingham, Brighton, and Cardiff, to enable thousands of children to skip school today.
    The climate activist has already cancelled her anticipated visit of a 50ft-high mural of herself, showing Greta half submerged in melted icewater, painted against the redbrick wall of the Tobacco Factory in Bedminster…

    Meanwhile, two local schools announced they had closed ahead of the demonstrations, with Colston’s Girls School writing to parents citing police fears over adults ‘coercing’ youths…
    According to the Bristol Post, acting principal Kerry McCullagh expressed fears of ‘criminal acts of damage’ and of young people being in ‘great danger’ ahead of today’s rally.
    The school authority had referred to warnings by Supt Andy Bennett of Avon and Somerset Constabulary, who claims to have seen ‘coercion from adults’ in previous Bristol Youth Strikes.

    Parents whose children may attend the march are concerned about the potential for ‘crushing’ as Greta, who came to international prominence two years ago, leads thousands through Bristol…
    Bristol Youth 4 Climate hit back at ‘patronising’ public safety fears ahead of the mass demonstration, before declaring: ‘The world’s youth are taking up to and taking action on the climate crisis.’

    why would Bidisha love the Greta electric car story?

    Wikipedia: Bidisha: Publishing and broadcasting under her first name only, Bidisha began writing professionally for arts magazines, such as i-D, Dazed and Confused, and the NME, at the age of 14, and published her first novel at 18. She writes for The Guardian and The Huffington Post and works as a TV and radio presenter for the BBC, presenting programmes such as Woman’s Hour.
    She also does outreach work in UK detention centres and prisons, in affiliation with literary and human rights organisation English PEN…
    She is a regular guest on The Big Questions and Sunday Morning Live (BBC One), and also appeared as a regular panellist on BBC Two’s Newsnight Review (BBC Two). For BBC Radio 4 she has contributed regularly to and presented Saturday Review, Front Row, Archive on Four, Heart and Soul and Woman’s Hour. She was one of the regular presenters of BBC Radio 3’s flagship arts programme, Night Waves.
    On the (BBC) World Service, she was a guest presenter of the books programme The Word, and was the regular presenter for The Strand…


    • #

      the Sky Australia toycos going green piece was from the US, and probably about the New York Toy Fair. California led the way:

      26 Feb: Forbes: Green Is The Hottest Color In The Toy Box, As Manufacturers Embrace Sustainability
      by Joan Verdon
      The manufacturers are rushing to make these changes due to demands from today’s parents, but also because retailers are requesting them.
      “Sustainability is becoming much more important both to this generation of parents and retailers,” said Steve Pasierb, president and CEO of The Toy Association, which hosts the annual New York Toy Fair…

      “It can make a difference in terms of sales,” said Jim Silver, editor-in-chief of industry trade publication Toys and Family Entertainment, and CEO of toy, and baby and pet products review site TTPM. “If even 10 or 20% of people are looking for that type of item then you need to do it,” he said.
      James Zahn, senior editor of The Toy Insider and The Toy Book, said he’s seen a surge in the industry’s sustainability efforts over the past six months.
      “We’re seeing packaging made with recycled materials, soy-based inks and other plant-based inks. Even the plastic fasteners in the packaging are becoming sugarcane-based,” he said…

      California-based Green Toys has been making toy trucks, cars, and boats from recycled milk jugs for more than a decade and has grown from a small startup to an important player. It has moved from specialty toy stores to deals with big box giants like Target…

      Toy companies that ignore the consumer demand could find customers have a sustainability plan of their own – buy fewer toys.
      “You’ve got to think about everything that you’re doing because consumers want it,” Pasierb of The Toy Association warns. “Otherwise they’re going to say, ‘Look, I’m going to buy less’. And that’s in nobody’s interest.”


  • #
    Gerald the Mole

    The judiciary should not be involved in matters of government however a third runway at Heathrow is a bad idea. Extra capacity should be provided by expanding airports in the north. Already there are too many “near misses” in the crowded London airspace. I wonder what public opinion will say when an airliner crashes into west London as it will some time.


  • #

    26 Feb: Daily Caller: Report: Green New Deal Will Impose A $75,000 Per Year Cost On Swing-State Households
    by Chris White
    The Green New Deal would cost households an average of between $74,287 and $76,683 in Colorado, Michigan and Pennsylvania, among others, a report (LINK) from the Competitive Enterprise Institute noted. CEI worked with Power the Future and the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on the report…READ ON

    29 Feb: Townhall: Study: Green New Deal Would Destroy America’s Dairyland
    by M.D. Kittle
    MADISON — It’s been pretty clear that the New Green Deal would be a disaster for business and for consumers. Now a new study (LINK) confirms just how disastrous the environmental/wealth redistribution plan would be for Wisconsin.
    Wisconsin families would be shackled with $40,000 in new costs, and the Dairy State’s struggling agricultural sector would be crippled, according to the multi-state analysis authored by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and Power the Future. Will Flanders, research director for the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, contributed to the study…

    In Wisconsin, households in the first year of implementation would face $75,000 in additional costs on the Green New Deal’s expensive ride to zero CO2 emissions within a decade. The increased costs would top $40,000 every year thereafter…


  • #

    excellent open access piece by Greg Sheridan. read all in case it disappears behind paywall:

    29 Feb: Australian: Asia in no hurry to do without energy sourced from coal
    by Greg Sheridan
    Don’t mention Asia. And if you must mention Asia, don’t mention China. And if you must mention China, for goodness sake don’t tell the truth about it…
    Scott Morrison pointed out on Friday that precisely four countries have concrete plans for getting to zero by 2050. They are: Marshall Islands, Suriname, Switzerland and Norway…

    Virtue leaders tell us the world is moving towards zero emissions by 2050. That formulation only works if you exclude China and the whole of Asia, and indeed many others, from the definition of “world”.
    Australian commentators will do anything for Asia except examine what it actually does…

    More broadly, and this is a key point, decarbonising is only an option for rich nations. It makes rich nations much poorer, but if you feel that’s necessary to save the planet, so be it. But no poor nation is going to choose to remain poor in order to meet an emissions target.
    The Australian debate is much given to demonising coal and all its works. China produces and uses more than half the coal used in the entire world…

    One thing we would have to do to embrace zero 2050 is get rid of our gas industry. Yet Australian gas has been critical in China becoming less carbon intensive. If we withdraw our gas, presumably the Chinese will use even more coal. And if we withdraw our coal, which is the most thermally efficient coal, they’ll presumably use more dirty coal.
    However, another way that China is becoming less carbon intensive is by replacing old coal with new coal. China is not abandoning coal. China is committed to coal…

    By miles and miles, China has provided the biggest increase in coal since 2000. According to Beijing’s own statements, in 2018 it had 1006 gigawatts of coal power. By 2026 this will increase to 1084GW, an increase of 78GW. In 2018, from coal alone, China produced 475 billion tonnes of carbon emissions. This is nearly 10 times Australia’s total emissions from all sources of 539 million tonnes.

    Now, the folks in Australia who promote the most radical and economy-destroying measures for us, always try to pretend that China and the rest of the world are on the same path…
    So when China builds a new such plant, that is a wonderful sign of the world embracing zero emissions. But when the Morrison government considers providing the paltry sum of $4m to look into building an ultra-super-critical, high-efficiency, low-emissions, coal-fired power plant at Collinsville near Mackay in Queensland, this is somehow the work of the devil…

    Matt Canavan, who strongly supports the proposed Collinsville plant, is now seen as an outlier in these matters. In fact, he is one of the best-informed federal politicians from any party on energy and climate issues…

    ***The idea of saying the world is moving to zero emissions by 2050 is a sick joke and involves the typical Australian inability to take any serious account of Asia.
    The world does not consist solely of elite west European opinion, plus New York.
    ***try telling that to theirABC. Julia Holman’s “70 countries” are committed to net zero by 2050 on ABC Breakfast this week was being parroted by Nicholas Reece on Sky News a couple of days later.

    pathetic Albo:

    VIDEO: 1m: 29 Feb: Sky News: Albo calls for carbon emissions reduction while backing in coal
    Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese maintains Australia will export coal for years to come in a call to cut carbon emissions rather than end mining.
    Mr Albanese travelled to the NSW Hunter Valley for a Labor conference in Singleton.
    He used a key speech to criticise the Nationals for engaging in ‘lazy cynicism’ and for selling out regional communities by opposing action on climate change.
    The Labor leader said a 2050 net-zero emissions policy means more jobs for blue-collar workers.


  • #

    I disagree. Sometimes, the right decision is taken for the wrong reasons. I’m in favour of stopping airport expansion for every reason except CO2. I used to get woken up by planes flying into Heathrow. The noise, the CO, the waste of fuel flying rather than going surface, etc…


    • #

      the waste of fuel flying rather than going surface, etc

      How exactly do you expect people to realistically go by surface to Australia, Africa, USA etc, etc ?
      And i wonder when / why was it you moved to an area under a flight path to H’row ?
      Its been an international airport long before you were born .


  • #
    Gerry, England

    The premise of this article is wrong! The judges are applying the law that the government has enacted but at the back of it is a European Directive – the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive. No Directive – no law. And before we get bleating that we are no longer members of the EU, the transition period requires everything to stay the same until the end of the year AND beyond that the regulations created to make the Directive UK law will still be there until they are revoked!