The expectation beaters here are Johnson and Stewart. The fear for Johnson that the pledges wouldn't translate haven't happened and he's in a very strong position.
Stewart is the surprise package and, while he's still an outsider, I think he's every chance of passing the next hurdle.
Javid and Hancock just haven't got the momentum. If Stewart can see them off, there are some votes there for him.
Gove has stayed in the game, but Hunt is still better placed. Neither will be thrilled today.
And I forgot about Raab. I'd not be surprised if he drops out. His selling point was that he was the acceptable face of Johnson, but not enough bought it, frankly.
Agreed. His best angle now is to get a top job from Boris. Then ask his supporters to transfer their votes. Which could indeed result in a coronation.
Boris is PM by the end of next week?
No. I think both Boris and any opponent would want to avoid the May/Brown situation. Both, with hindsight, lost authority due to the lack of a contest. And doing it via an early election would be very brave indeed.
An interesting possibility - and just a possibility - is that Johnson got some votes from anti-Johnson people in this round that they can withdraw in future rounds, giving the sense of him going backwards!
Nah. They'd be hidden by new votes coming on board, is my guess.
The danger for Boris is that he starts losing votes in further rounds to people like Rory Stewart.
Stewart would need a massive turnaround in the polling over the weekend.
Will anyone commission a poll to do fieldwork after the TV debate to publish before the next round? It's a tight schedule.
I know Survation are selecting the audience for Channel 4 so it is a representative sample. They might also be arranging a snap audience poll after, but that's just me speculating. Of course, that wouldn't be a poll of the selectorate.
Johnson will now divert votes to Stewart and Hancock in order to try and knock out Hunt and Gove - he can almost chose his own opponent in the final 2
Does he have enough votes to play with to do that?
Gavin Williamson strikes me as someone who thinks he's cleverer than he is, so may believe that he does so and that he can order votes around in such a way. But there are limits to everyone's stupidity.
IMO if one person had voted differently and Hancock had got 19 and Stewart 20, Hancock would be considering dropping out over the weekend. But getting more votes than Stewart when Stewart clearly isn't going to drop out makes it unlikely.
Rory fabulous on Politics Live. He is absolutely right about the deal being the deal take it or leave it. Problem is that Tory members either don't believe this or don't care.
How does his strategy differ from May's, exactly?
It doesn't. But it is the real world.
The Deal No Deal No Brexit
And the other candidates (and Jezbollah!) are talking rampant bollocks about renegotiating with the EU. If we leave with a deal we leave with May's deal
Er, what? What about Labour's offer to support the deal if it either included a custom's union (a change to the PD that the EU would have accepted) or was subject to a confirmatory referendum? Why aren't those options in your list?
Because thats not our position. Jezbollah will allow a referendum over his dead body and keeps saying that it won't include remain. And its not just a customs union (which as you say is the back stop enacted permanently) its full alignment and access to single market with no free movement and no payments - also known as bullshit.
Nor will the Jeremy ever support any Tory deal under any circumstances. He'd want a Labour deal negotiated to be clearly different to the May deal. Which he can't have not that he will have a chance to ask for cake and be told no
An interesting possibility - and just a possibility - is that Johnson got some votes from anti-Johnson people in this round that they can withdraw in future rounds, giving the sense of him going backwards!
Nah. They'd be hidden by new votes coming on board, is my guess.
If it were closer I could see Boris stalling - but not now
Where does Rory Stewart pick up votes from the three that have dropped out? Same for Hancock. Both will probably get fewer votes in second round - mostly to Hunt. Small increase for Boris Of the rest is anybody's guess
He could pick up most of the Mark Harper votes.
Changing what I write as I go. Assuming remainers coalyse around one candidate... Possibly. Could just Gove support drop, Then it's who can make it past 33 votes. If Rory can with momentum then he has a fighting chance of nicking 2nd spot from Hunt.
Raab - Will stay in the race with prospect of Leadsome/McVey transfers. Javid - Too far adrift of Gove/Hunt - Likely withdraw. Hancock - As Javid Rory - Nothing to lose - Will stay in the race.
Raab will pick up a few from EMcV and Mother Leadsom?
Hancock has to be the next one to be eliminated. Now Rory has got through, I can see his base switching over to get Rory further.
Raab should pick up some votes from all of the three eliminated so I think he stays in for a while. Also Brexiteers will want to have someone in the later rounds in case Johnston starts to stray.
Javid will be disappointed with his number, especially given the positive noise for his launch.
I can also see a way here for Gove. Hunt loses momentum, Gove picks up the anti-Johnson vote.
I think the last four will be Johnson, Gove, Rory and Raab.
Rory fabulous on Politics Live. He is absolutely right about the deal being the deal take it or leave it. Problem is that Tory members either don't believe this or don't care.
How does his strategy differ from May's, exactly?
It doesn't. But it is the real world.
The Deal No Deal No Brexit
And the other candidates (and Jezbollah!) are talking rampant bollocks about renegotiating with the EU. If we leave with a deal we leave with May's deal
Er, what? What about Labour's offer to support the deal if it either included a custom's union (a change to the PD that the EU would have accepted) or was subject to a confirmatory referendum? Why aren't those options in your list?
Because thats not our position. Jezbollah will allow a referendum over his dead body and keeps saying that it won't include remain. And its not just a customs union (which as you say is the back stop enacted permanently) its full alignment and access to single market with no free movement and no payments - also known as bullshit.
Nor will the Jeremy ever support any Tory deal under any circumstances. He'd want a Labour deal negotiated to be clearly different to the May deal. Which he can't have not that he will have a chance to ask for cake and be told no
Yes. Fate has dealt him some fortuitous political cards. He can whine all he likes about a Labour Deal knowing that he won't get the opportunity to try to negotiate one and that it wouldn't look very different to May's deal if he did.
I still however think it is a legitimate Opposition position to say "we wouldn't have started from here" but he is not bright enough nor indeed is there the need to be logical or sincere.
The danger for Boris is that he starts losing votes in further rounds to people like Rory Stewart.
Stewart would need a massive turnaround in the polling over the weekend.
Will anyone commission a poll to do fieldwork after the TV debate to publish before the next round? It's a tight schedule.
I know Survation are selecting the audience for Channel 4 so it is a representative sample. They might also be arranging a snap audience poll after, but that's just me speculating. Of course, that wouldn't be a poll of the selectorate.
Who has confirmed for the Sunday C4 debate ? Some might stay in just to raise their profile on that show.
Andrea Leadsom going out leaves me with just Rory Stewart as a possible losing bet in this race. I'd have thought Jeremy Hunt would be Boris Johnson's preferred opponent. Not that he will be too concerned about any of them.
I've decided to go red on Sajid.
He underperformed my expectations and see no path to the last 2 for him now.
Very interesting there is no talk of anyone dropping out as yet. Was not expecting that at all.
Rory The Tory and Hanky Panky should both drop out and endorse, IMO.
Javid too perhaps...
Rory has been hitting the airwaves hard to say he is doing no such thing.
Well it's up to him...
People who ultimately have no chance of becoming PM stringing this out beyond how long it needs to be strung out for looks tremendously self indulgent but just as long as Rory is enjoying himself...
Raab - Will stay in the race with prospect of Leadsome/McVey transfers. Javid - Too far adrift of Gove/Hunt - Likely withdraw. Hancock - As Javid Rory - Nothing to lose - Will stay in the race.
Leaving 5 candidates.
Yep, that sounds right.
I think Javid has been a bit unlucky with his launch yesterday lost in other noise. He should have got that video and his pitch out earlier.
Raab will pick up a few from EMcV and Mother Leadsom?
Hancock has to be the next one to be eliminated. Now Rory has got through, I can see his base switching over to get Rory further.
Raab should pick up some votes from all of the three eliminated so I think he stays in for a while. Also Brexiteers will want to have someone in the later rounds in case Johnston starts to stray.
Javid will be disappointed with his number, especially given the positive noise for his launch.
I can also see a way here for Gove. Hunt loses momentum, Gove picks up the anti-Johnson vote.
I think the last four will be Johnson, Gove, Rory and Raab.
If it ends up like that likely a Gove or Raab v Boris runoff as more of their supporters once eliminated will back the other than Rory
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
If the ballot was public instead of private, there could be a system where you declare Boris as through to the members because he got at least 105 votes, and then allow the 199 MPs who didn't vote for him to vote for the second candidate.
Raab - Will stay in the race with prospect of Leadsome/McVey transfers. Javid - Too far adrift of Gove/Hunt - Likely withdraw. Hancock - As Javid Rory - Nothing to lose - Will stay in the race.
Leaving 5 candidates.
Yep, that sounds right.
I think Javid has been a bit unlucky with his launch yesterday lost in other noise. He should have got that video and his pitch out earlier.
Indeed. Javid had a very good launch but it was lost in the mire of the HoC vote.
Very interesting there is no talk of anyone dropping out as yet. Was not expecting that at all.
Rory The Tory and Hanky Panky should both drop out and endorse, IMO.
Javid too perhaps...
Rory has been hitting the airwaves hard to say he is doing no such thing.
Rory isn't campaigning to win this leadership contest - he's campaigning to get a (slightly) better job and be in position to win the next contest.
Stewart will not be in Cabinet if Johnson is PM.
So he seats on the back benches as someone to watch while Boris screws things up. Once again not a bad position to be in unless Boris performs miracles..
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
Surely that assessment rests upon the probability that the theory is right, and if it is the probability of being able to rescue things later if we do nothing now. Simply saying that the costs are high and the probability of correctness isn’t 100% is logically insufficient?
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
"probably an effect from atmospheric CO2": wrong. There is an effect, there's really no debate about this so whatever you have been reading it hasn't been science. "difficult to predict": yes, there's a fair amount of uncertainty, but unfortunately it's mostly on the downside, so a really poor argument for not taking action.
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
I agree with some of that.
However: there are other advantages to moving to green energy. As a simple example, the move away from burning coal means much less crud into the atmosphere and less radioactive waste (flyash is slightly radioactive). And fewer IC cars, and more electric, in our cities will immeasurably improve the quality of life for residents.
It may also increase our energy security - both in terms of supply and sourcing fuel - but only if we get storage sorted.
There were many grumbles over the various clean air acts from the ?1950s? onwards, and they undoubtedly had penalties for our industries. But who would go back to the days of the London smog?
I can see the same being said in fifty years over the current CO2 debate. And the environmentalists will have moved onto something else ...
Rory has said he will not serve under Boris. He will become the leader of the not Boris backbench Tories though.
Useful place to be if Boris makes a total arse of things in the remainder of this year. The media will go to him constantly, his profile rises, and he's in a great spot if there's another leadership election soonish.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Rory isn't staying in to win this or to get a job in a Boris cabinet, he's staying in to ensure that the increasingly faint voice of Conservative sanity isn't completely lost.
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
"probably an effect from atmospheric CO2": wrong. There is an effect, there's really no debate about this so whatever you have been reading it hasn't been science. "difficult to predict": yes, there's a fair amount of uncertainty, but unfortunately it's mostly on the downside, so a really poor argument for not taking action.
"The UK is, reportedly, already resorting to the use of "creative accounting" as it attempts to meet its current obligation of reducing emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. However, that hasn't stopped the government considering an even bolder promise: net zero.
This will have no meaningful impact on temperatures because the UK is responsible for just one per cent of global emissions. If it eradicated its entire emissions forever, global temperatures in 2100 would be affected by less than 0.014°C. Yet while the benefits of reaching net zero are negligible, the cost of delivering this pledge would be massive."
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
The biggest mistake the Tories are making is to confuse the marmite politician he is now with the generally popular politician he was back in the day.
The danger for Boris is that he starts losing votes in further rounds to people like Rory Stewart.
How many rounds do you think there will be?
5 most likely.
I think fewer. Some will probably drop out over the weekend. The minimum number goes to 32(I think) next time. There comes a point when people have to get a bit more realistic and sell their support to those who might still have an incentive to offer anything.
Looking at these numbers Javid must be very disappointed.
The gloves are starting to come off, and there are several stories about the age thing, all of a sudden.
All of a sudden because all but 5 of the field, including O'Rourke, are not even registering in Iowa. And, of course, Biden is not the candidate of MSNBC - sorry, I mean the left of the party.
Rory isn't staying in to win this or to get a job in a Boris cabinet, he's staying in to ensure that the increasingly faint voice of Conservative sanity isn't completely lost.
And, so I can continue to make money by laying him at 25s.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
Rory has said he will not serve under Boris. He will become the leader of the not Boris backbench Tories though.
Useful place to be if Boris makes a total arse of things in the remainder of this year. The media will go to him constantly, his profile rises, and he's in a great spot if there's another leadership election soonish.
No it isn't. Rory needs to achieve something. Look at all the Labour wannabes who have sunk without trace since turning down a shadow cabinet job. If he really can't stomach working with Boris, Rory should angle for the Chairman's job and get on the rubber chicken circuit to try and charm the members who vote in HYUFD's polls.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
Rory isn't staying in to win this or to get a job in a Boris cabinet, he's staying in to ensure that the increasingly faint voice of Conservative sanity isn't completely lost.
Also. If you want to Stop Boris, he has ascertained that you actually have to attack Boris...
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
In a poll based on vague name recognition Boris polled well enough that a system generated a majority for him.
I suspect after a 5-7 week general election campaign the result may be very different.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
Polls can change - which is why other candidates should stick in as long as possible and avoid the coronation.
Given Theresa May has virtually bankrupted the party I'd not be surprised...
.. and the country with her zero-carbon-by-2050 idea.
What a stupid comment.
Why is that a stupid comment? Plausible estimates suggest a cost in the order of trillions. As with so much of this climate stuff, the cure currently proposed will do far more damage than the disease.
Please do some reading about the science.
I have. A lot. Probably more than 99.9% of the population, and at least 70% of posters here.
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
I agree with some of that.
However: there are other advantages to moving to green energy. As a simple example, the move away from burning coal means much less crud into the atmosphere and less radioactive waste (flyash is slightly radioactive). And fewer IC cars, and more electric, in our cities will immeasurably improve the quality of life for residents.
It may also increase our energy security - both in terms of supply and sourcing fuel - but only if we get storage sorted.
There were many grumbles over the various clean air acts from the ?1950s? onwards, and they undoubtedly had penalties for our industries. But who would go back to the days of the London smog?
I can see the same being said in fifty years over the current CO2 debate. And the environmentalists will have moved onto something else ...
It's also important not to think that 'costs of trillions of pounds' means trillions of pounds being lost... those costs get recycled through the economy.
Rory has said he will not serve under Boris. He will become the leader of the not Boris backbench Tories though.
Useful place to be if Boris makes a total arse of things in the remainder of this year. The media will go to him constantly, his profile rises, and he's in a great spot if there's another leadership election soonish.
No it isn't. Rory needs to achieve something. Look at all the Labour wannabes who have sunk without trace since turning down a shadow cabinet job. If he really can't stomach working with Boris, Rory should angle for the Chairman's job and get on the rubber chicken circuit to try and charm the members who vote in HYUFD's polls.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
You'd have said the same about Theresa May. At this stage all the polls tell you is people have heard of Boris but not Esther McVey. Whoever becomes leader will get a recognition boost. And that is without, as May discovered, the reality of an election campaign.
To be fair to Boris, on that last point, he does at least realise there is more to politics than Brexit.
That's a bit disingenuous. He said he was minded to support it, but caveated that he had not yet read the proposal. Once he had done so, he decided against.
Which seems fair enough - though it'd be interesting to know what bits of Labour's proposal put him off.
One reason I thought Conservative MPs would have the sense not to elect Boris when he so clearly takes the heat off Labour. I must have not factored in that these were the same MPs who had declined three opportunities to dump Theresa May after 2017.
Boris is the only candidate who wins a Tory majority v Corbyn in the polls, without Boris it is likely a Corbyn minority government
Once upon a time I remember a rumour going around the Scottish Tories would consider being their own party if May's Brexit deal looked like it would split up the Union. Do we see a situation where Ruth decides it's better off to be SUP? Is Boris a big threat to the union in and of himself?
Comments
30 votes from McVey (Brexity), Leadsom (Brexity) and Harper (middle ground)
Not much for Hunt or Rory to pick up there.
Harper to Gove but the lady backers may go straigh to Bojo.
Nor will the Jeremy ever support any Tory deal under any circumstances. He'd want a Labour deal negotiated to be clearly different to the May deal. Which he can't have not that he will have a chance to ask for cake and be told no
Assuming remainers coalyse around one candidate...
Possibly. Could just Gove support drop, Then it's who can make it past 33 votes. If Rory can with momentum then he has a fighting chance of nicking 2nd spot from Hunt.
Raab - Will stay in the race with prospect of Leadsome/McVey transfers.
Javid - Too far adrift of Gove/Hunt - Likely withdraw.
Hancock - As Javid
Rory - Nothing to lose - Will stay in the race.
Leaving 5 candidates.
Raab should pick up some votes from all of the three eliminated so I think he stays in for a while. Also Brexiteers will want to have someone in the later rounds in case Johnston starts to stray.
Javid will be disappointed with his number, especially given the positive noise for his launch.
I can also see a way here for Gove. Hunt loses momentum, Gove picks up the anti-Johnson vote.
I think the last four will be Johnson, Gove, Rory and Raab.
Javid too perhaps...
I still however think it is a legitimate Opposition position to say "we wouldn't have started from here" but he is not bright enough nor indeed is there the need to be logical or sincere.
He underperformed my expectations and see no path to the last 2 for him now.
People who ultimately have no chance of becoming PM stringing this out beyond how long it needs to be strung out for looks tremendously self indulgent but just as long as Rory is enjoying himself...
Must be good chance Hancock and Javid drop out this time.
Hunt/Gove = Spurs
I think Javid has been a bit unlucky with his launch yesterday lost in other noise. He should have got that video and his pitch out earlier.
Bojo/Hunt/Gove/Rory
The science essentially says that there is probably an effect from atmospheric co2, the size of which is exceptionally difficult to predict, and which involves a load of feedback mechanisms we don't really understand, and as we've currently only one earth to experiment with has proved really difficult to model.
This is not the level of certainly one requires to impose trillions of pounds of costs on our society, especially in a context where doing so unilaterally is of no global significance at all.
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1139141747609612293
The gloves are starting to come off, and there are several stories about the age thing, all of a sudden.
Andrea famously fell out with Boris when he started messing her around over that weekend when he want to play cricket.
Boris could have lent Leadson a few votes to get her into the second round today and didn't...
I could see both Leadsom and McVey endorsing Raab to be honest.
The Labour party...
https://twitter.com/AllieRenison/status/1139153580571746304
There was plenty of bedwetting along the way!
"difficult to predict": yes, there's a fair amount of uncertainty, but unfortunately it's mostly on the downside, so a really poor argument for not taking action.
I'm thinking of something on film. A bit grainy but undeniably him.
Rechon he's still a good shout to make the final 2.
Probably an accurate summary.
This is where science clashes with the 'precautionary principle', and where politics/subjective views come into play.
However: there are other advantages to moving to green energy. As a simple example, the move away from burning coal means much less crud into the atmosphere and less radioactive waste (flyash is slightly radioactive). And fewer IC cars, and more electric, in our cities will immeasurably improve the quality of life for residents.
It may also increase our energy security - both in terms of supply and sourcing fuel - but only if we get storage sorted.
There were many grumbles over the various clean air acts from the ?1950s? onwards, and they undoubtedly had penalties for our industries. But who would go back to the days of the London smog?
I can see the same being said in fifty years over the current CO2 debate. And the environmentalists will have moved onto something else ...
Useful place to be if Boris makes a total arse of things in the remainder of this year. The media will go to him constantly, his profile rises, and he's in a great spot if there's another leadership election soonish.
Everyone’s heard it all before. Priced in.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/06/10/theresa-may-spend-1-trillion-pointless-policy-climate-madness/
"The UK is, reportedly, already resorting to the use of "creative accounting" as it attempts to meet its current obligation of reducing emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. However, that hasn't stopped the government considering an even bolder promise: net zero.
This will have no meaningful impact on temperatures because the UK is responsible for just one per cent of global emissions. If it eradicated its entire emissions forever, global temperatures in 2100 would be affected by less than 0.014°C. Yet while the benefits of reaching net zero are negligible, the cost of delivering this pledge would be massive."
I think Rory would find that very hard to resist.
O'Rourke's aren't particularly relevant, as he's highly unlikely to win. Which is why he's one of the first to go gloves off.
Looking at these numbers Javid must be very disappointed.
Thanks Rory.
He should do BBC and/or ITV though.
I suspect after a 5-7 week general election campaign the result may be very different.
To be fair to Boris, on that last point, he does at least realise there is more to politics than Brexit.
Which seems fair enough - though it'd be interesting to know what bits of Labour's proposal put him off.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1139155440959463425