Those embassies - by Richard... Friday, January 22, 2010

Those embassies - by Richard... Friday, January 22, 2010

The 13th Spitfire blog is chiding us very gently for not writing on the scandal of the FCO closing down embassies – ostensibly on cost-saving grounds – while at the time, the EU is opening up a whole raft of new embassies.

However, this is hardly news. We wrote about it on 12 April 2009, then noting that we had first written about what was happening on 8 June 2005. We also wrote pretty strident pieces inJanuary 2008 and May 2008.

The EU has not been at all secretive in its intentions – even if the British government has been – and this was one of the reasons why we should have opposed the constitutional Lisbon treaty. We (our government) didn't, and Cameron's Conservatives have also pulled out of the fight.

Thus, progressively, British embassies are going to be replaced by EU embassies, with a few British officials renting desks in a common building. The writing has been on the wall for years, we warned it was going to happen and now it is happening. It is a bit late complaining about it now.

The only answer, of course, is to leave the EU – and until the British nation (and their politicians) wake up to that reality, we are going to see a lot more of this sort of thing. But then, come the next election, an awful lot of people are going to vote for the three main parties, all of whom support this sort of thing.

They deserve what they get. As for us - we have gor past the point where we want to write about the EU, or analyse developments. We just want to destroy it, before it destroys us.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

I guess - by Richard...

... some people are not taking this very seriously. But some people certainly are. Pachauri has now decided to give a press conference tomorrow, Saturday, about 10 am our time.

PACHAURI THREAD

Print ready

Keeping it in the family - by Richard...

An article in The Times in March last year appears to have excited little interest, even though the subject was of some concern to most of us. "Climate-change damage may double cost of insurance," the headline screamed, with the strap declaring: "Weather-related problems have been underestimated by scientists."

These were the supposed findings of the Association of British Insurers (ABI) reflecting "a growing belief in the industry that the consequences of changes in weather patterns have been underestimated," but they were not alone in their dire predictions.

Also mentioned was a forthcoming (at that time) report from an obscure agency called theInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), based near Vienna in Austria.

This was to forecast that there were financial implications for governments as well, showing that the EU Solidarity Fund, which is worth €1 billion and is supposed to cover "uninsurable risk" for government-owned infrastructure such as roads and bridges, is not enough to cover the damage caused by the more frequent storms and flooding that are expected. The study, incidentally, was funded by the EU Commission. 

But this was by no means the only foray into climate change for the IIASA, which seems to have a very active climate change programme. One particular researcher, Dr Anthony Patt, was lead author on a report, "Estimating least-developed countries’ vulnerability to climate-related extreme events over the next 50 years," and it is fair to say that a constant theme emerging is the need for public money to support those who suffer from climate-related catastrophes.

Such themes are also of very great interest to Dr R K Pachauri and his pet institute, TERI, and it may come as no surprise that he and Dr Patt are often seen sharing the same platform or, at the very least, singing to the same hymn sheet.

But references to Patt are very often seen alongside another Pachauri – not Rajendra but Shonali Pachauri, who seems to share his concerns about climate change.

This, though, should be unsurprising. Dr Shonali Pachauri is the deputy programme leader of the population and climate change (PCC) programme at the IIASA, and has been since 2008, having joined IIASA as a research scholar in October 2005.

Incidentally, she also works one-third of her time with the Global Energy Assessment (GEA) in the energy programme, as of 2008. 

Given that they are covering the same territory, it is also unsurprising that the GEA and representatives from Dr R K Pachauri's TERI often share the same platform, and there is obviously some degree of liaison between the two operations.

In fact, the "liaison" might be closer than the public record indicates as there is a certain relationship between Drs R K Pachauri and S Pachauri. Shonali is, in fact, Rjaendra's youngest (of two) daughter.

Shonali is undoubtedly well qualified for her current posts, She has a background in energy and environmental economics and received her PhD from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETHZ) in 2002. She also holds a master's degree in environmental and resource economics from University College London. 

However, it can do RK Pachauri no harm at all having his well-qualified daughter in such an important and prestigious post, working in the same field. One is almost tempted to call the old firm, "Pachauri & daughter", so closely allied are they in the climate change industry.

As for the elder daughter, she is Rashmi Pachauri – and often calls herself Rashmi Pachauri-Rajan. She, like her mother, Dr Saroj Pachauri, works on population issues, the latter being regional director, South and East Asia Regional Office, Population Council, working out of New Delhi. Mother and daughter have at times worked together.

Until relatively recently, Rashmi seems to have been based in New Delhi – and may well have been there while a visiting scientist, a certain Andy Reisinger, was based there, helping her fatheron the IPCC synthesis report. Reisinger, however, moved back to New Zealand were it seems, for not obvious reason, Rashmi Pachauri currently lives (spool down - pg 180).

Is there a connection? We could not possibly say, but with Andy currently on paternity leave, it would be interesting to know the name of the mother of his recently-born child. New Zealand is a small country and someone must have that little bit of information. It certainly would be interesting to learn whether Dr R K Pachauri's family connections are even wider than we thought.

PACHAURI THREAD

Print ready

Changing the climate - by Richard...

Pace The Daily Mail this morning, Dr R K Pachauri now seems to have acquired the permanent tag of "controversial", which hangs over him like the proverbial albatross. The description of "lobbyist" can't help either.

Another tag now firmly lodged is "former railway engineer", as in The Daily Express, which carries somewhat less of a cachet than "world's leading climate scientist". 

Meanwhile, we are awaiting the outcome of the press conference Pachauri promised reportersyesterday. Despite the time difference, there are no reports as yet, which makes one wonder whether the promise was yet another bit of Pachauri bluster.

Either way, the "climate" is definitely changing, and it isn't the one Pachauri is making money out of.

PACHAURI THREAD

Print ready

The agendas merge - by Richard...

Regular readers might recall a time when a man called David Cameron – although we most often called him something else – was quite often the subject of our attention. But he is now rarely mentioned.

This, to a great extent, reflects his betrayal over the EU referendum, putting us in the position where have little interest in what he has to say and believe little of what he does. The very small residue of trust we had in Cameron's Conservatives has been totally and irrevocably destroyed.

If it were not for his destitute EU agenda, however, his obviously genuine enthusiasm for greenery – probably the only thing genuine about the man - would undoubtedly prove a similar barrier, as any man who can embrace the warmist creed with such gusto has to be all bad.

Yet another odious characteristic of the man is his insistence on a soft-left social agenda, draped in Tory clothes, demonstrating his credentials as a caring, family-orientated "leader".

But now, naked in tooth and claw, we are seeing the ugly side of "Compassionate Conservatism", where "call me Dave" is planning to combine his greenie obsession with his families package.

Thus we hear that motorists and air passengers face higher "green taxes" under Conservative plans to fund tax breaks for married couples. The money raised will be earmarked for a new "family fund" to cut income tax for families. 

Options for taxation range from an increase in petrol duty to new levies on flights and firms that "pollute". But the Tories are also considering reintroducing the fuel-duty escalator - abandoned by Labour following widespread protests over the high cost of filling up.

Needless to say, "call me Dave" and boy George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, are cautious about discussing these taxes "after earlier plans backfired," and not least because some MPs (rightly) fear they could lose the party votes. 

But this dire pair remain insistent that, in time, "green taxes will be necessary". Osborne even says: "Green taxes on environmentally-damaging activities and consumption will fund our family policies in the long term. We are committed to them."

Despite all that has happened in the last few months, and the very obvious signs of a change in public sentiment on "global warming", this pair have not yet cottoned on to the fact that green taxes will be about as popular as a Moslem fundamentalist at a BNP meeting.

But the ultimate stupidity, which clearly has not percolated into what passes for brains in this dire pair, is the failure to join up the dots, and understand that the "families" they purport to want to help are the very ones which will be hit hardest by "green" taxes under consideration.

Only thus could they come up with such a moronic idea of easing the financial plight of [some] families, only to claw it back in accordance with a greenie mantra that is long past its sell-by date. The only possible explanation for this is that, stupid as Cameron and Osborne undoubtedly are – they believe they are smarter than the electorate they are trying to con.

Poster courtesy of Andy Barefoot.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Now that's robust - by Richard...

Despite the ["glaciergate"] controversy, the IPCC said that it stood by its overall conclusions about glacier loss this century in big mountain ranges including the Himalayas. "This conclusion is robust, appropriate, and entirely consistent with the underlying science and the broader IPCC assessment," it said.

That is from the distinctly wimpish report in The Times, which does not hesitate to retail one of the IPCC's favourite words - robust. But, on the other hand, we get an Indian blogger give us his "take" on the affair:

Pachauri now says "I don't want to stoop to the level of muck that some people are trying to create." The muck is in your face Mr Pachauri, and it is pretty dirty and it is sticking. You need to clear it. 

All that you have to do, if your conscience is clean, is to disclose your and TERI's earnings, the sources thereof, and the details of how all that money is being spent by the non-profit organisation you have been part of since 1981. If you and Hasnain and others like you really have nothing to hide, or be ashamed of, why the hesitation?

Now, that's robust – but then, so are the comments on The Times piece.

PACHAURI THREAD