Jump to content

UK Politics - Closing Down Sale


Derfel Cadarn
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Fez said:

Liz Truss, setting the stage for a royalist revolt

Be nice if Charles responds by using those powers he's not supposed to use and dissolves parliament, setting the stage for both a legitimate Labour government and a serious discussion about the position of the monarchy in democracy in the 21st century (it should probably not have one).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can Truss really stop Charles from going if he's invited by someone else, or even of his own accord? She can exclude him from the official UK delegation I assume, which would certainly be a signal. I assume when the UK monarch speaks at such events they will be speaking in alignment with govt policy, hence the govt more or less has editorial control over the speech. If the monarch refuses to say what the govt wants them to say, then the monarch does not get to speak as the UK Head of State.

Though perhaps he could be invited to speak not as Charles King of the UK, but as Charles King of New Zealand, or Charles King of Australia, or Charles King of Canada. All these countries have governments that at least try to present as supporting robust climate change action. None of us is beholden to the UK govt for who we invite to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is the govt so hell bent on bringing fracking in? Is there that much oil under Britain that it will make the UK oil independent and / or significantly lower the global oil price?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Why is the govt so hell bent on bringing fracking in? 

I'm sure it has absolutely nothing at all do to with this:

Liz Truss Campaign Funded by Donors From Pro-Fracking Groups and Climate Denier

Tories received £1.3m from fossil fuel interests and climate sceptics since 2019

 

 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess there is some sense in trying to develop oil fields in places that are not corrupt and dangerous, and / or nation non grata. But is there good geological evidence that there is an economically viable amount of frackable oil under the UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Anti-Targ said:

I guess there is some sense in trying to develop oil fields in places that are not corrupt and dangerous, and / or nation non grata. But is there good geological evidence that there is an economically viable amount of frackable oil under the UK?

So not the UK then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Anti-Targ said:

I knew I'd be inviting that response, but I wrote it anyway.

It was a very obvious joke, but it was just sat there and I couldn't help myself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

 is there good geological evidence that there is an economically viable amount of frackable oil under the UK?

No. It's a meaningless political gesture, targeted at cretins who don't understand a thing about how the world actually works because they get all their news from the Mail and Express. 

Fracking won’t work in UK says founder of fracking company Cuadrilla

Quote

 

He said that when Cuadrilla had operated here, it had discovered that the geology of the UK was unsuited to widespread fracking operations. “No sensible investors” would take the risk of embarking on large projects here, he said. “It’s very challenging geology, compared with North America [where fracking is a major industry].”

Unlike the gas-bearing shale deposits in the US, the shale resource in the UK is “heavily faulted and compartmentalised”, making it far harder to exploit at any scale.

 

 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Why is the govt so hell bent on bringing fracking in? Is there that much oil under Britain that it will make the UK oil independent and / or significantly lower the global oil price?

I'd assume that Oil isn't the issue, natural gas is. Tbf, there seems to have been some technological advances, so that it doesn't involve pumping a fuckton of chemicals into the soil. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the UK as corrupt as the US when it comes to handing out government contracts and tax benefits/write offs? If so, that could be as attractive as extracting the minerals themselves.

ETA: Things seem to be going smoothly...:

 

Edited by Tywin et al.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Is the UK as corrupt as the US when it comes to handing out government contracts and tax benefits/write offs? If so, that could be as attractive as extracting the minerals themselves.

This. Truss will give them a deal where they get money up front for even looking and a guarantee that everything they produce will get brought at some inflated price paid for by the taxpayer. We have already seen something like this with the planned EDF nuclear power stations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now he's not specific here, but when this notion has been floated in the past 'business regulation' was understood to include minimum wage, protection from unfair dismissal and data protection rules. Every business under 500 people exempt from all of that. And that's a government minister saying so on the record. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The word is 'overwhelming' majority. Though of course because of how numbers work, most employees in the country work for one of the small number of businesses with over 500 employees.

Still, we're talking about a huge number of people lacking employment protections and for consumers, a huge number of interactions (many unwilling) with unregulated businesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...