I don't know whether I was being a bit hard on Blairgowrie Liberal Democrats in my post Just when did you write this? My complaint of their election campaign consisting of 'a' leaflet being probably 5 months out of date. Should I apologise, should I have expected better or more from a political party that wants to be taken seriously. If the Lib Dems think they deserve an apology then have one.
I had read Tartan Hero's Campbell Tests Brown for Coalition Job, basically the "vote Ming get Gordon" ticket, (why is it nearly every time I type Gordon I have to go back and correct Gorgon). Then I had this Lib Dem Focus leaflet. The Lib Dems have set out their climate change policy, to be fair the only ones yet with something I can really assess.
They want to tax heavy polluters then give the money to (via shifting tax burdens) to "hard working and particularly low paid Scots". So who are these heavy polluters, the energy industry, the transport industry etc? We live in a market economy, if you increase these costs, they still get passed on to "hard working......". There is no net gain financially. Even if there was a financial benefit to them what are they going to spend the money on, increased consumerism and foreign holidays? Adding to the problem they tried to resolve.
In my post Carbon Offsetting I did the rough overall calculation for politicians to start basing their environmental policies on. We are damaging the environment, this is a cost, this damage if not repaired and stopped will lead to the demise of us all. These (all) polluters cause damage. What the Lib Dems are not doing is using the tax revenues to repair and improve the environmental situation, they have not recycled the money back to solve the problem of the damage caused. Ergo, they do not have an environmental policy. So why have a "wee pretendy go" that they have.
When I had the discussions with the Government's consultants to run the Millennium Dome as a global environmental management centre these were penetrating and incisive. There again they must have realised I knew my subject, because it was them who wanted to support my proposal. Until that is it may have been undermined, Isn't it iconic. Even 10 Downing Street won't deny the facts. As such I feel I have a right to feel annoyed and frustrated at politicians pretending they have solutions to the environmental challenge. We won't let Roger do it, it is much better for our ego and kudos if we can get the public to believe we know what we are doing. This is putting my life, my families, my friends, every bodies life and the future of this planet in danger for the sake of political posturing.
Sometime I want to get the Stern report and everything a politician presents on the environment, get a red pen mark it and send it back to them with see me on it. There again perhaps that was why the Cabinet Office did want me to proof and comment on their Regulatory Impact Assessment guide. (And produce the outline agenda for the G8 Summit in Perthshire, Climate Change and Africa). Why should I or anyone else with more than 40 years study of how this planet works have any confidence what so ever in someone who wanted to be a lawyer and in the last few months thinks they are an expert in planetary ecology just because it became fashionable to do so. Solicitors and politicians don't fix my central heating boiler or MOT my car so why should I trust them with a planet.
There I was feeling alone in my frustration when I read Doctor Vee's tribute to Chris Lightfoot. "read each manifesto until you encounter something really offensive or stupid, then stop and reject that party." Bye Bye Lib Dems.
I do agree with MacNumpty about negative comments. My view is critique as much as you want, but be prepared to outline the better alternative as well. So Ming, Gordon, Jack, Alex, Annabel, Dave, Nicol, Tony, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all are you going to turn up at Blairgowrie Town Hall at 7.30 Weds 28th March.
I had read Tartan Hero's Campbell Tests Brown for Coalition Job, basically the "vote Ming get Gordon" ticket, (why is it nearly every time I type Gordon I have to go back and correct Gorgon). Then I had this Lib Dem Focus leaflet. The Lib Dems have set out their climate change policy, to be fair the only ones yet with something I can really assess.
They want to tax heavy polluters then give the money to (via shifting tax burdens) to "hard working and particularly low paid Scots". So who are these heavy polluters, the energy industry, the transport industry etc? We live in a market economy, if you increase these costs, they still get passed on to "hard working......". There is no net gain financially. Even if there was a financial benefit to them what are they going to spend the money on, increased consumerism and foreign holidays? Adding to the problem they tried to resolve.
In my post Carbon Offsetting I did the rough overall calculation for politicians to start basing their environmental policies on. We are damaging the environment, this is a cost, this damage if not repaired and stopped will lead to the demise of us all. These (all) polluters cause damage. What the Lib Dems are not doing is using the tax revenues to repair and improve the environmental situation, they have not recycled the money back to solve the problem of the damage caused. Ergo, they do not have an environmental policy. So why have a "wee pretendy go" that they have.
When I had the discussions with the Government's consultants to run the Millennium Dome as a global environmental management centre these were penetrating and incisive. There again they must have realised I knew my subject, because it was them who wanted to support my proposal. Until that is it may have been undermined, Isn't it iconic. Even 10 Downing Street won't deny the facts. As such I feel I have a right to feel annoyed and frustrated at politicians pretending they have solutions to the environmental challenge. We won't let Roger do it, it is much better for our ego and kudos if we can get the public to believe we know what we are doing. This is putting my life, my families, my friends, every bodies life and the future of this planet in danger for the sake of political posturing.
Sometime I want to get the Stern report and everything a politician presents on the environment, get a red pen mark it and send it back to them with see me on it. There again perhaps that was why the Cabinet Office did want me to proof and comment on their Regulatory Impact Assessment guide. (And produce the outline agenda for the G8 Summit in Perthshire, Climate Change and Africa). Why should I or anyone else with more than 40 years study of how this planet works have any confidence what so ever in someone who wanted to be a lawyer and in the last few months thinks they are an expert in planetary ecology just because it became fashionable to do so. Solicitors and politicians don't fix my central heating boiler or MOT my car so why should I trust them with a planet.
There I was feeling alone in my frustration when I read Doctor Vee's tribute to Chris Lightfoot. "read each manifesto until you encounter something really offensive or stupid, then stop and reject that party." Bye Bye Lib Dems.
I do agree with MacNumpty about negative comments. My view is critique as much as you want, but be prepared to outline the better alternative as well. So Ming, Gordon, Jack, Alex, Annabel, Dave, Nicol, Tony, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all are you going to turn up at Blairgowrie Town Hall at 7.30 Weds 28th March.
No comments:
Post a Comment