According to the Telegraph, Al Carns has issued a “veiled attack on Ed Miliband’s Net Zero policies”. In the same newspaper – a curious organ in which to set out leadership bids in anticipation of a contest for Keir Starmer’s job – Carns sets out his mercifully short argument for putting ‘security’ at the centre of everything. “Energy is not an environmental issue, but a security one,” he writes. “North Sea oil and gas, small modular reactors, energy storage and, of course, renewables, are all options that would reduce our exposure,” he continues. “A serious country would be using all of them,” he says, bemoaning that “we are not” and that “this is a choice, and we are paying for it”. But what really are the implications for Labour’s flagship policies – Miliband’s agenda?
Many in the wake of both increased geopolitical repolarisation and the consequent exposure of Britain’s military incapacity have welcomed Carns’s comments. They seem, at face value, to put realism at the centre of policymaking, where commitments to abstract concepts – i.e., emissions-reduction – have been put before cost, security of supply, and practically every application that requires energy. The problems are obvious to all but the green agenda’s dwindling number of advocates, who continue to promise benefits.
But this welcoming of realism is a naïve hope. It isn’t realism. On these pages, we’ve discussed the Conservative Party’s new attachment to Net Zero scepticism, then the growing tensions within the green blob itself, and ultimately this tension pulling the Labour
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Off on a bit of a tangent, Lt.Gen Richard Nugee is brother-in-law of our Em, of white van man infamy. The people pulling our strings are all linked.
Ed m, is, it is a clown show or a horror movie depending on how you look at it, but day after day the poor Brits have to read the same dribble about them both. sooooo boring.
What a paranoid analysis!
However clear sighted Al Carns (or even Tony Blair), is just another spear carrier for the old Universal Davos Policy Elite – which is finally on its way out.
Having watched his interview with the Daily T podcast I came to the conclusion that he sees that Miliband’s obsession is nonsense on stilts but wanted to avoid saying anything that would wreck his prospects in the Labour Party. I felt a bit more generous about the ‘security state’. That he wanted to build national resilience based on apple pie issues. Good education, good jobs, good prospects for the young and the country exploiting its strengths. He seemed to believe that if there is a Reform led government after the next election the union would be doomed. That seemed to be the only thing stopping him jumping ship to Reform.
Except that none of those “apple pie issues” are possible while millions of termites are swarming into your house and eating the pie as fast as they can…
A prime example of a Security State is the former East Germany. Which is exactly what the Prime Liar has been trying to create anyway.
We don’t need a Security State, we need a resilient one. The Establishment has, for decades, been deliberately destroying our resilience.
We know Blair did a huge amount of damage, but was fully aided and abetted by Cameron, May, Johnson and Sunak. Not one of them did anything to slow the green madness down. In fact they turbo charged it.
Not one of them has the slightest knowledge of science and instead relied on their civil service climate zealots. I still don’t think people fully understand how bad the Tories have been for the UK.
They literally didn’t put a foot ‘right’.
The people who still do not understand how bad the Tories were probably still have a quaint notion that they are conservatives and not the socialists they really are.
Why would a serious country be using “renewables” at all? The only one that makes any sense at grid level is always-on hydro.