Net Zero target is an asphyxiating straitjacket bound around body of Britain, says Darren Grimes
I’m afraid to say, folks, those leadership contenders who promise the cost-of-living crisis is their number one priority, aren’t being honest with you
The Conservative Party leadership election is heating up, and the blue-on-blue action is getting hotter than the cost of fuel today, with arguments over taxation, debt and gender self-ID.
It looks like it could get into the debate around immigration, a necessary and important one.
But one area I think is essential to discuss is the Net Zero debate, with four out of five of the candidates uncritically accepting the policy.
I’m afraid to say, folks, those leadership contenders who promise the cost of living crisis is their number one priority, aren’t being honest with you on the trade-off required thanks to this legally-binding policy of the green extremes.
You see, I reckon the Net Zero target is an asphyxiating straitjacket bound around the body of Britain; the prices at the pump, your food shop, on your energy bills and elsewhere are but a trailer of the horror that Net Zero will be.
Now, I’m going to give you a few examples from around the world that I think give us an idea of what could happen here in Britain.
In Sri Lanka, thousands of angry protesters stormed their president's vast residence and set the Prime Minister’s house on fire.
Civil unrest is taking place after power cuts; schools shuttered and dwindled supplies of fuel, food and medicines.
Why? Because last April, the government imposed a ban on the import of fertilisers and pesticides, telling their nation’s farmers that they must go green and organic.
The UN says more than three-quarters of the population has reduced their food consumption due to severe food shortages.
In seeking to appease the big nations by worshipping their green gospel and offering up their farmers like sacrificial lambs, Sri Lanka has suffered the consequences: a shattering impact on feeding its people.
Their leadership spoke of being in “sync with nature” to the technocrats at COP 26, the UN Climate Conference in Glasgow full of private jets and discussions around how to immiserate those much poorer than them.
The World Economic Forum that championed the art of the lockdown that started much of the world’s inflationary strife, advocated Sri Lanka move to organic farming, pushing its people into poverty.
And we’re supposed to sit here and wait for it to happen to us?
Closer to home, in Europe, protests took place that we heard precious little about.
Dutch farmers used their tractors to dissent against the government and the EU technocrats pushing at them targets to half the use of nitrogen compounds by 2030; this means farmers have to get rid of loads of their livestock, destroying their livelihoods.
Construction projects have been placed on hold too.
And our Australian cousins, their previous government, a conservative coalition that also enshrined Net Zero by 2050 into law, saw voters opt instead for the real deal: Green Party politicians or independents standing on eco-extreme platforms.
When conservatives try to out Labour Labour or out Green the Greens, people ask why they shouldn’t just vote for the genuine article.
And look, climate change is occurring, but in a country like Britain or Sri Lanka, Britain emits less than a tiny 1 percent of global CO2 emissions.
Yet, we’re willing to cross our fingers and hope that reducing our access to energy, heat, and food will end up a sensible idea?
This is the People VS the privileged, who delude themselves into being seen to do the ‘right thing’ at their dinner parties and gatherings of the world’s leaders; it makes me sick.
Candidates like Tom Tugendhat talk a good game on the realm's defence in his pitch for the top job.
I’m telling you now; there is no surer way to hand control to the likes of Russia on gas than by refusing to extract it ourselves.
There is no more certain a way to give power to the likes of China by ensuring the West doesn’t help the world’s developing nations with their energy needs.
You cannot have global security without access to cheap and plentiful energy that enables human flourishing.
At a time when a spell of hot weather, also known as summer, acts as an excuse for the green extremes to demand further damaging action, I fear folks, if we continue down this path of the pursuit of Net Stupid by 2050, we'll see similar such revolt against a global elite that spends too much time in Davos and not enough in Darlington.