Fears that Rishi Sunak’s recent watering down of green targets will economically harm the U.K. are unfounded, says Ross Clark in the Telegraph. “If anything, it will do the opposite.” He writes:
Mark Carney did enough damage as Governor of the Bank of England, keeping the economy pumped up on quantitative-easing and ultra-low interest rates for so long that we are now suffering the inevitable consequences as the monetary policy under his leadership is unwound. But at least he isn’t my financial adviser.
Readers may just remember his speech to Lloyds of London in 2015 when he warned that investors exposed to fossil fuels faced potentially “huge” losses as coal, oil and gas assets became stranded. In fact, oil and gas shares have been one of the few ways to preserve your wealth over the past couple of years as much else – including Government bonds issued in Carney’s day – have crashed around them.
But it hasn’t stopped the former Governor from trying to tell Rishi Sunak that he has made a dreadful mistake in slightly relaxing some targets to ban electric cars and gas boilers and in granting new licences for North Sea oil and gas extraction. Apparently, in Carney’s world, it is going to harm inward investment into the U.K., as companies start tut-tutting at the Government’s backsliding on Net Zero. “What I find when speaking to companies is their first question is: am I getting clean power?”
He didn’t specify which companies these are, but I guess they don’t include, for example, German industrials giant BASF which has wound down some operations in Europe because of high energy prices and instead invested £10 billion in China. Nor, I would guess, does it include steel companies which similarly are being driven abroad by high energy costs, carbon levies and so on. Nor, surely, can it include Norwegian state oil company Equinor, which would not be investing in Britain had it not been allowed to develop the Rosebank oil field.
Worth reading in full.
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.
My understanding is that cousin marriage is also common in some traveller communities. That the resulting children are seen as a blessing and spend all their time in hospital. Since they are a blessing they should be discharged so that they can be with their families who then may no longer see them as a blessing.
Needs to be banned also the sake of the unfortunate infants born with these hideous defects.
FFS the commie bastards are rarely slow to ban anything on various spurious grounds.
Here the moral and scientific/medical case is absolutely undeniable.
Ban it with immediate effect. If this business continues the perps must be advised that “free NHS ” services will be withdrawn for life.
These people are costing law-abiding British taxpayers an absolute fortune, they are usually incapable of work and live off taxpayers their whole lives as do the parents who bred them. This has to stop.
Enough.
I haven’t fact checked this but I’ll assume it’s true. That’s a lot of Muslim mayors, and 130 Sharia courts in the England!
https://x.com/HilzFuld/status/1912914814608810458
EDIT: Just fact checked myself. 8 Muslim mayors as of last year;
”In 2011, the United Kingdom saw the rise of a new wave of mayors – Muslim mayors. Born in a country where religious faiths have long been a divisive and contentious issue, the election of the first British Muslim mayors was a momentous occasion. It was a sign of progress and inclusion, the first steps towards a multicultural and diverse society. Since then, the number of Britain’s Muslim mayors has grown, raising the question: How many cities in Great Britain have Muslim mayors? The answer is that currently, there are eight British cities with Muslim mayors: Leicester, London, Manchester, Birmingham, Blackburn, Bradford, Oldham, and Tower Hamlets.”
https://www.greatbritainmighty.com/how-many-cities-in-great-britain-have-muslim-mayors/
Yep, some years ago I had a Pakistani colleague who was married to his cousin and they had a son with a serious congenital kidney problem.
There is a reason why both Judaism and Christianity bans the practice.
Since when? In 1837 Queen Victoria, for example, was not banned from marrying her first cousin Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, or wherever it was.
Yes, and just look at the current lot.
It’s apparently only Harry that is keen to diversify the gene pool. Perhaps because he is already from diverse stock, if you know what I mean….
If he was Hewitt’s, he’d be devilishly handsome rather than a ardmann creation.
Dunno. My parents are beautiful and I look like a deformed rugby ball from a certain angle.
Yes, the Government very belatedly recognised the consequence of the generational incestuous Royal marriages throughout Europe.
The late Queen Mother was the first example of a change of policy: Bertie was allowed to marry a non-royal since he was never going to become King
And then Edward VIII refused to play ball and suddenly we got King George VI and non-Royal Elizabeth.
With Queen Elizabeth II they reverted to cousin marriage, albeit 2nd cousins, once removed ….. and Charles is the consequence. ‘Nuff said.
Judaism doesn’t ban marriage between first and second cousin.
Off-T
Yvette Cooper to Decide on Tulip Siddiq Extradition Request
Siddiq could soon be reunited with her cousins in Bangladesh. This should be an interesting case of Kneel’s Two-tier justice.
Looking forward to this.
“YVETTE COOPER TO DECIDE ON TULIP SIDDIQ EXTRADITION REQUEST”
https://order-order.com/2025/04/17/yvette-cooper-to-decide-on-tulip-siddiq-extradition-request/#:~:text=YVETTE%20COOPER%20TO%20DECIDE%20ON%20TULIP%20SIDDIQ%20EXTRADITION%20REQUEST
Allah is a nasty God, If you ask me
Read the Quran for confirmation. Ultimate hate book
I live in leafy Sussex and even here you see pakistani parents walking with their disabled kids. It’s a far bigger problem than this research shows.
Until a credible figure is put on the cost to both the NHS and the DWP of birth defects and their consequences due to cousin marriage, this subject will be dismissed as bigotry by the usual voices on the left and in Westminster.
When this study first emerged, a figure of £2bn a year was estimated as the cost to the NHS of birth defects, miscarriages etc. You could reasonably double that today. The long term cost in disability support to the DWP would be an order of many magnitudes higher. That is the figure that’s needed to stop this dreadful practice.
The real problem is that is repeated down the generations. As a one off it is usually fine.
“For the time being, raising scientific literacy may go some way to curbing the practice.”
I doubt it. It will continue to be imposed since it keeps any wealth within the immediate family and facilitates continual immigration from the sub-continent to the UK …… and a subsidised life c/o British taxpayers.