This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
How does "climate alarmists" go with the Government supposedly being all in on the green agenda?
This Government wants it both ways, some day these two ideas are going to smash into each other. Fundamentally this Tory Government is holding together two coalitions, perhaps they will last. Perhaps they won't
The number of climate alarmists who vote Tory now are miniscule, if climate change is already your main concern you will already be voting Labour or Green.
The working class voters in the North who won the Tories their majority however will not be happy if the government abandons this proposed new mine
Yeah, but Carrie writes the policies now, not Dom.
The tuition fees is an absolute disaster, a ticking time bomb with most fees never being paid off, rendering the whole system pointless.
Graduate tax and be done with it
Surely that's worse, I paid off my student loan ages ago. Under your system I'd still be paying 9% of my salary above £18k in perpetuity which to me is a disaster and I would absolutely have not bothered with university.
The fees/loan system is broken, but a graduate tax is completely rubbish and disadvantages people for their whole lives just for wanting to get educated.
Especially if a graduate ends up in the same job a non-graduate has, which is not that unusual, then suddenly the non-graduate is on 9% less tax.
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
Ed Miliband confirmed Labour is now the party of North London, not the working class North
FFS you are fooling nobody. The tories have an 80 seat majority. If they wanted this to be done, it would be.
It should be, hence there will be a mass revolt of northern Tory MPs if the government does not go ahead with the mine
Is there anything for them to revolt on? Why would there be a vote if the idea is not to go ahead? And if one was engineered somehow, why does the Government give a damn with Labour onside? Northern Tory MPs don't have a lot of good cards to play here.
Why is the British Green Party so moronic? They make me feel like jacking in my career and founding a single issue dedicated environmentalism party.
When May was PM, Labour was led by Corbyn and the Lib Dems were going down their Ignore Democracy rabbit hole, my prevailing feeling was a “plague on your houses”. At that point I’d have loved to be able to vote for a party that campaigned on a single issue of appropriate state intervention to cure the market failure of environmental damage and nudge the private sector in the right direction. But the Green Party are such morons, I didn’t vote at all.
Are the various European Green parties so batty?
You're not specific about what you dislike, but the British Greens are unusual in that they politically very close to Corbyn's agenda but culturally very different from Labour - their conference is distinctly counter-culture, which Corbyn and McDonnell really are not. Caroline Lucas is good at what she does, though, and punches well above her weight.
German Greens are close to power and have become strikingly centrist, to the point that coalition with the Christian Democrats is not an outlandish idea - they are anti-nuclear but then so are the CDU. French Greens have two choices, one left-wing and one centrist.
Can you talk me through how the Greens are counter-cultural and Corbyn/McDonnell aren't please?
Corbyn and McDonnell are fairly conventional old left.
The Greens have a more millennial vibe of counter culture, perhaps best shown in their refusal to have a single leader, and those having little executive power. The contrast is that the Greens are more anarcho-syndicalist than communist, mistrustful of all power structures.
Yes - and the conference has lots of vegan stands, horticultural stands, organic food stands, etc., with a fair number of hippie-like people. You couldn't call Corbyn a natural hippie, could you? They approve of any left-wing policy you can think of, but it's secondary to wanting a fresh new culture close to the land and natural living. Conversely the Labour left are all in favour of the green industrial revolution etc., but it's secondary to equality and workers' rights. There were zero union people at the Greens.so far as I could see -I'm sure they favoured unions in the same way as I favour ocelots, without ever having met one.
The full-on socialist (with a capital S and three exclamation marks) left usually throw charges of "liberal" at the Greens, because they aren't true revolutionaries and believe in a bit (not a lot) of decentralisation.
And they aren't tripping over themselves all pretending to be working class, even if they aren't any more (let's not get into vanguardism and the lumpen-proletariat).
It's quite a funny problem Laurie Penny used to have whilst trying to become the megaphone for the far-left during the street-demo period around 2010. It never quite washed with them; they all believed she really wanted to become a writer for the Guardian.
Does "Scotch" in "Scotch Corner" refer to the country, the people, the "water" OR the corner?
The country. It's the corner where you turn off if you're going to the Scotch country - i.e. Scotland. I assume it has had its name for ages, hence the archaic use of language. That said, I always thought it slightly odd; if you're heading north up the Great North Road, either of the two main routes from there will take you to Scotland. My Edinburghian granny deemed this obscurely important, for reasons I can't fathom now and don't think I could when she explained it to me.
If you assume there are only two main roads from England into Scotland (a couple more might qualify) Scotch corner is where you decide between them. Straight on for east route, left for west route. Look out for the camels a few miles on. (From a far north west England perspective it it the finest left turn in the entire country. Gallowgate may think differently.)
If you make the mistake of travelling M1/M6 for Scotland then you never get the choice, its the west route or nothing. But on a busy wet Friday you will be lucky if you get there at all. Plus, if you go that way you miss Blyth services and Travelodge in Nottinghamshire, a quaint spot, reminiscent of 15th century Florence.
Scotch Corner is the site of the worst traffic jams in London.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
I think a lot of us are like that.
I love churches, I love the calmness, like Christmas Carols, music on Good Friday, and I even like the cantor of some of the priests. I was married in a church, christened in a church, and would like to have my funeral service in a chirch. However, whenever I hear the Jesus stuff or read the preachiness about saving yourself and sacrificing and giving yourself over to Him in the Bible I think it's barkingz and I have the same reaction as I have to anti-vaxxers.
I think I'm basically culturally Christian, and a very English CofE version at that too as I dig The Queen heading it up, so for me it's simply a matter of tradition and identity. Something I do and an institution I like.
Sorry about my syntax and grammar there. God knows what happened.
Anyway, you get the gist.
It's a perfectly respectable sort of Christian. Not a good idea to think that only narrow minded and simplistic sorts are the only real ones.
However I expect 'no religion' to top the poll in the 2021 census. The figures have shifted dramatically in various surveys since 2021.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Why is the British Green Party so moronic? They make me feel like jacking in my career and founding a single issue dedicated environmentalism party.
When May was PM, Labour was led by Corbyn and the Lib Dems were going down their Ignore Democracy rabbit hole, my prevailing feeling was a “plague on your houses”. At that point I’d have loved to be able to vote for a party that campaigned on a single issue of appropriate state intervention to cure the market failure of environmental damage and nudge the private sector in the right direction. But the Green Party are such morons, I didn’t vote at all.
Are the various European Green parties so batty?
You're not specific about what you dislike, but the British Greens are unusual in that they politically very close to Corbyn's agenda but culturally very different from Labour - their conference is distinctly counter-culture, which Corbyn and McDonnell really are not. Caroline Lucas is good at what she does, though, and punches well above her weight.
German Greens are close to power and have become strikingly centrist, to the point that coalition with the Christian Democrats is not an outlandish idea - they are anti-nuclear but then so are the CDU. French Greens have two choices, one left-wing and one centrist.
Nonsense like the 6pm man curfew.
A curfew like that could find a lot of self-identifying women around after 6PM.
I could easily see us getting a strongly Woke take on this in the aftermath of this terrible tragedy, with a WLM or FLM equivalent movement off the back of it with months and months of narcisstic self-absorbed virtue-signalling by the usual fanatics, whilst pompously preaching the trendiest language to use and behaviour to exhibit at everyone else.
Ugh. Companies, banks, corporations and HR departments will all get in on the act, and your Facebook and LinkedIn will be full of it, and you'll be encouraged to join in, and it will be extremely irritating.
I'm not even sure I'm joking. These are the times we live in.
Been on the sauce early again?
I really detest the use of woke by the likes of you. Today's "politically correct" - so tiring and lazy
Nope. Stone cold sober.
Woke has a very specific meaning, as I've explored on here many a time before. Much of the population is only too happy to listen and learn from tragedies and other people's experiences, but they hate being pompously (and incessantly) lectured at by needy preening narcissists, and they get infuriated when they're almost inevitably called reactionary or bigotted for telling them to button it.
If the likes of you can't see that then maybe that's because you're also.. a needy preening narcissist.
The tuition fees is an absolute disaster, a ticking time bomb with most fees never being paid off, rendering the whole system pointless.
Graduate tax and be done with it
Surely that's worse, I paid off my student loan ages ago. Under your system I'd still be paying 9% of my salary above £18k in perpetuity which to me is a disaster and I would absolutely have not bothered with university.
The fees/loan system is broken, but a graduate tax is completely rubbish and disadvantages people for their whole lives just for wanting to get educated.
Especially if a graduate ends up in the same job a non-graduate has, which is not that unusual, then suddenly the non-graduate is on 9% less tax.
Is that reasonable?
There are arguments either way, but surely the alternative way to view it is that the non-graduate is getting a discount because they are doing the same job but without having asked the state to pay for a load of education which, as it turned out, was arguably rather pointless.
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
I'd disagree. Looking at the numbers we can well handle the C02 emissions within our targets, and the idea that making that coal be dug up in eg Poland or China will be greener is loopy.
Utterly hilarious, he's the most unpopular leader in Scotland by far.
it is a very odd question, with the reference to 'this year'. Few people on reflection are going to advocate legislation, campaign and vote in pandemic year. 2022-3 is the earliest feasible time.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
I think a lot of us are like that.
I love churches, I love the calmness, like Christmas Carols, music on Good Friday, and I even like the cantor of some of the priests. I was married in a church, christened in a church, and would like to have my funeral service in a chirch. However, whenever I hear the Jesus stuff or read the preachiness about saving yourself and sacrificing and giving yourself over to Him in the Bible I think it's barkingz and I have the same reaction as I have to anti-vaxxers.
I think I'm basically culturally Christian, and a very English CofE version at that too as I dig The Queen heading it up, so for me it's simply a matter of tradition and identity. Something I do and an institution I like.
Sorry about my syntax and grammar there. God knows what happened.
Anyway, you get the gist.
It's a perfectly respectable sort of Christian. Not a good idea to think that only narrow minded and simplistic sorts are the only real ones.
However I expect 'no religion' to top the poll in the 2021 census. The figures have shifted dramatically in various surveys since 2021.
Maybe, though of course the fastest way for religion to grow here again is mass immigration.
Catholics from Poland and Eastern Europe, evangelicals from Africa and Hindus and Sikhs and Muslims from South Asia would soon push the numbers back up again
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
I'd say it's part of my cultural identity, but I simply don't believe in any sort of god so no religion was the most accurate.
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
Well, I agree with you but according to the stats upthread we'd seem to be in the minority!
Really? I can’t read the earlier pages because of the fabled iPhone loading errors. Can you summarise?
I think we're only 9% of respondents, or something.
To be fair, I'm not sure that's right but I haven't checked myself.
It does seem rather low.
Really? What do most people put then?
REPOST:
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
A poll 3 years later found only 25% identified as Scottish not British, 25% said they were more Scottish than British but still partly British, 33% said they were equally Scottish and British and 20% only British.
Only 18% of English respondents said they were English only
I think I would much rather take the evidence of the census than an opinion poll.
The census didn't offer as many options as the poll did, the fact No is back in front in the latest independence polling confirms most Scots still feel at least partly British even if Scottish is their main identity
Why don't we invest in finding alternatives to mining
Since this is coke for steel then alternatives like importing coke from overseas supposedly exporting our emissions?
While probably increasing net emissions overall because we're then shipping in dirtier coke from abroad?
It's net zero, not gross zero. If we have one or two very small coal mines for very specific reasons (niche industrial applications or heritage fuels, for example) then I'd be ok from that so long as we had a good strong balance in the round and it wasn't a cop out.
Nothing good ever comes from being dogmatic about anything.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Every religion has its equivalent of Matthew's Pharisees, obsessed with the external forms but unable to open their hearts to the true message.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
Well, I agree with you but according to the stats upthread we'd seem to be in the minority!
Really? I can’t read the earlier pages because of the fabled iPhone loading errors. Can you summarise?
I think we're only 9% of respondents, or something.
To be fair, I'm not sure that's right but I haven't checked myself.
It does seem rather low.
Really? What do most people put then?
REPOST:
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
A poll 3 years later found only 25% identified as Scottish not British, 25% said they were more Scottish than British but still partly British, 33% said they were equally Scottish and British and 20% only British.
Only 18% of English respondents said they were English only
I think I would much rather take the evidence of the census than an opinion poll.
The census didn't offer as many options as the poll did, the fact No is back in front in the latest independence polling confirms most Scots still feel at least partly British even if Scottish is their main identity
No being back in front is primarily driven by the SNP shenanigans. It has very little to do with how 'British' they feel.
Yes, it looks frothy. I’d expect Yes to settle back into the lead if and when the SalmStur row ebbs away.
It is not just that, it was the risk of No Deal and Covid which drove the Yes lead last year, now No Deal has been avoided and the vaccinations are bringing down the Covid caserate UK wide and hence No is back ahead again
The tuition fees is an absolute disaster, a ticking time bomb with most fees never being paid off, rendering the whole system pointless.
Graduate tax and be done with it
Surely that's worse, I paid off my student loan ages ago. Under your system I'd still be paying 9% of my salary above £18k in perpetuity which to me is a disaster and I would absolutely have not bothered with university.
The fees/loan system is broken, but a graduate tax is completely rubbish and disadvantages people for their whole lives just for wanting to get educated.
Especially if a graduate ends up in the same job a non-graduate has, which is not that unusual, then suddenly the non-graduate is on 9% less tax.
Is that reasonable?
There are arguments either way, but surely the alternative way to view it is that the non-graduate is getting a discount because they are doing the same job but without having asked the state to pay for a load of education which, as it turned out, was arguably rather pointless.
Fair point. Though I'm not sure education should ever particularly be viewed as pointless.
I think you're probably on the money. The other aspect to it is it's arguably a lose-lose game for them if they actually get another referendum. If they don't win it then the leader(s) will be for the chop, and a third referendum genuinely will be a generation away, and a lot of the indy vote will move to another indy party out of frustration. On the other hand, if they do win it, once the goal was achieved the party would ultimately break up - perhaps not immediately, but ultimately it would - and which *party* wants to voluntarily break itself up? Some individuals may be preparing and indeed hoping for the day when that happens, but not sure the machinery of any one party is ever intentionally gearing itself up to render itself moot at some point in the future.
There's an argument that says the SNP will be quite happy with being by far largest party but just shy of outright majority for the very reason you say. Get to do pretty much what they want within the context of devolution, probably with an effective majority with the support of the Greens anyway, without the need to truly press the case for indyref2 (despite the fact that for all intents and purposes an SNP+Green majority shouldn't really make any difference to an outright SNP majority).
On the flipside, the schism that's wide open in the indy blogosphere now suggests sheer status quo is not going to keep the SNP in this advantageous hegemony indefinitely. They might get through this election and be very successful (although perhaps not quite as successful as was looking just a few weeks ago), but if something doesn't change then the subsequent Holyrood election is probably going to have a very different feel.
I’d say you and others are possibly over thinking this. The suggestion that the case against Salmond, the subsequent enquiry, the schism over the GRA & the Hate Crime bills, the clash of competing ambitious personalities, fundies falling out with gradualists etc are all part of some Machiavellian plot to keep the SNP in a devolved electoral sweet spot of power without independence strains credibility. Sturgeon is smarter than the average politician but not to that degree, and she knows full well that much of the current situation is outwith her control and therefore dangerous.
Personally I feel that we’re at a point where the SNP (which is a coalition just like other parties) has reached a deciding point on how it defines itself for the foreseeable future. A new Gammons for Indy party might be a necessary development though it has to be said that the current contenders seem like a bunch of fecking amateurs. I’m still standing by my prediction that the ISP and what ever other TLAs are floating about won’t win a single list seat in May unless Salmond throws his weight behind them, and he’s leaving it a bit late to do even that.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
I'd say it's part of my cultural identity, but I simply don't believe in any sort of god so no religion was the most accurate.
It was the ONLY answer that was at all accurate. I mean, I belt out Christmas carols with the best of them, and love a lot of hymns. Doesn’t make my answer anything other than No Religion.
I’m amazed you are even troubled by this Pulpstar. Even Professor Richard Dawkins describes himself as a cultural Christian!
GSK? I guess the EC will be slagging it off shortly.
It's actually an American drug discovered by Vir Biotechnology, GSK is just the partner.
Glaxo seems to be terribly out of fashion at the moment with the 6+% dividend yield and 11 x eps.
I think you are probably underwater with your GSK shares aren't you? At least you are getting a good divi. I don't know why it is so out of fashion. Dividend cover is a bit tight.
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
Massive amounts of steel are needed to "bootstrap" any green industrial revolution. There is no viable way to avoid using coal in that process. Impractical handwaving about potential alternative technologies and planning on the basis that they already exist will lead to disaster in this area as well as for energy production.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Every religion has its equivalent of Matthew's Pharisees, obsessed with the external forms but unable to open their hearts to the true message.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
Eh? Have you just gone all weirdly pious on us - or is this a joke?
Why don't we invest in finding alternatives to mining
Since this is coke for steel then alternatives like importing coke from overseas supposedly exporting our emissions?
While probably increasing net emissions overall because we're then shipping in dirtier coke from abroad?
It's net zero, not gross zero. If we have one or two very small coal mines for very specific reasons (niche industrial applications or heritage fuels, for example) then I'd be ok from that so long as we had a good strong balance in the round and it wasn't a cop out.
Nothing good ever comes from being dogmatic about anything.
Precisely.
Especially if the alternative is to import dirtier coal from elsewhere.
People confuse coal for electricity and coal for steel, they're not the same thing. If coal makes steel which makes wind turbines which replaces carbon generating fuels then the environment is better off not worse off. But hey, lets just moan about any development at all. 🙄
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
In 2019, China approved 17 new coal mines. In 2019, the UK imported 6.5 million metric tonnes of coal because we NEED it. Clearly you find it more acceptable to import coal (burning a great deal of fuel in the process) from other countries, rather than getting it out of the ground in this country. It's pathetic flimsy hypocrisy.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Every religion has its equivalent of Matthew's Pharisees, obsessed with the external forms but unable to open their hearts to the true message.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
Eh? Have you just gone all weirdly pious on us - or is this a joke?
No, I have been a Christian for more than two decades. I was brought up Atheist.
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
I'd disagree. Looking at the numbers we can well handle the C02 emissions within our targets...
GSK? I guess the EC will be slagging it off shortly.
It's actually an American drug discovered by Vir Biotechnology, GSK is just the partner.
Glaxo seems to be terribly out of fashion at the moment with the 6+% dividend yield and 11 x eps.
I think you are probably underwater with your GSK shares aren't you? At least you are getting a good divi. I don't know why it is so out of fashion. Dividend cover is a bit tight.
Nah I bought in around the same price they are now, reinvested dividends in purchasing new shares so ahead overall.
Why is the British Green Party so moronic? They make me feel like jacking in my career and founding a single issue dedicated environmentalism party.
When May was PM, Labour was led by Corbyn and the Lib Dems were going down their Ignore Democracy rabbit hole, my prevailing feeling was a “plague on your houses”. At that point I’d have loved to be able to vote for a party that campaigned on a single issue of appropriate state intervention to cure the market failure of environmental damage and nudge the private sector in the right direction. But the Green Party are such morons, I didn’t vote at all.
Are the various European Green parties so batty?
You're not specific about what you dislike, but the British Greens are unusual in that they politically very close to Corbyn's agenda but culturally very different from Labour - their conference is distinctly counter-culture, which Corbyn and McDonnell really are not. Caroline Lucas is good at what she does, though, and punches well above her weight.
German Greens are close to power and have become strikingly centrist, to the point that coalition with the Christian Democrats is not an outlandish idea - they are anti-nuclear but then so are the CDU. French Greens have two choices, one left-wing and one centrist.
Nonsense like the 6pm man curfew.
A curfew like that could find a lot of self-identifying women around after 6PM.
I could easily see us getting a strongly Woke take on this in the aftermath of this terrible tragedy, with a WLM or FLM equivalent movement off the back of it with months and months of narcisstic self-absorbed virtue-signalling by the usual fanatics, whilst pompously preaching the trendiest language to use and behaviour to exhibit at everyone else.
Ugh. Companies, banks, corporations and HR departments will all get in on the act, and your Facebook and LinkedIn will be full of it, and you'll be encouraged to join in, and it will be extremely irritating.
I'm not even sure I'm joking. These are the times we live in.
Been on the sauce early again?
I really detest the use of woke by the likes of you. Today's "politically correct" - so tiring and lazy
Nope. Stone cold sober.
Woke has a very specific meaning, as I've explored on here many a time before. Much of the population is only too happy to listen and learn from tragedies and other people's experiences, but they hate being pompously (and incessantly) lectured at by needy preening narcissists, and they get infuriated when they're almost inevitably called reactionary or bigotted for telling them to button it.
If the likes of you can't see that then maybe that's because you're also.. a needy preening narcissist.
Think about it.
It has a very specific meaning for you. Others reasonably differ, and have likewise explained that to you at some length.
Why is the British Green Party so moronic? They make me feel like jacking in my career and founding a single issue dedicated environmentalism party.
When May was PM, Labour was led by Corbyn and the Lib Dems were going down their Ignore Democracy rabbit hole, my prevailing feeling was a “plague on your houses”. At that point I’d have loved to be able to vote for a party that campaigned on a single issue of appropriate state intervention to cure the market failure of environmental damage and nudge the private sector in the right direction. But the Green Party are such morons, I didn’t vote at all.
Are the various European Green parties so batty?
You're not specific about what you dislike, but the British Greens are unusual in that they politically very close to Corbyn's agenda but culturally very different from Labour - their conference is distinctly counter-culture, which Corbyn and McDonnell really are not. Caroline Lucas is good at what she does, though, and punches well above her weight.
German Greens are close to power and have become strikingly centrist, to the point that coalition with the Christian Democrats is not an outlandish idea - they are anti-nuclear but then so are the CDU. French Greens have two choices, one left-wing and one centrist.
Nonsense like the 6pm man curfew.
A curfew like that could find a lot of self-identifying women around after 6PM.
I could easily see us getting a strongly Woke take on this in the aftermath of this terrible tragedy, with a WLM or FLM equivalent movement off the back of it with months and months of narcisstic self-absorbed virtue-signalling by the usual fanatics, whilst pompously preaching the trendiest language to use and behaviour to exhibit at everyone else.
Ugh. Companies, banks, corporations and HR departments will all get in on the act, and your Facebook and LinkedIn will be full of it, and you'll be encouraged to join in, and it will be extremely irritating.
I'm not even sure I'm joking. These are the times we live in.
Been on the sauce early again?
I really detest the use of woke by the likes of you. Today's "politically correct" - so tiring and lazy
Nope. Stone cold sober.
Woke has a very specific meaning, as I've explored on here many a time before. Much of the population is only too happy to listen and learn from tragedies and other people's experiences, but they hate being pompously (and incessantly) lectured at by needy preening narcissists, and they get infuriated when they're almost inevitably called reactionary or bigotted for telling them to button it.
If the likes of you can't see that then maybe that's because you're also.. a needy preening narcissist.
Think about it.
Yes it does. And not the meaning for which you've attributed and then stolen the word.
Here's the definition: "alert to injustice in society, especially racism."
I am proudly woke thank you, as I would hope most are. If I see racism I call it out
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Every religion has its equivalent of Matthew's Pharisees, obsessed with the external forms but unable to open their hearts to the true message.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
Eh? Have you just gone all weirdly pious on us - or is this a joke?
No, I have been a Christian for more than two decades. I was brought up Atheist.
So do you believe there will be a Judgement Day where people who sing hymns but don’t believe in god will be told to do something beastly forever more?
Being told I lecture when every CasinoRoyale post is lecturing somebody about how they are wrong is peak PB to be honest, there is nobody more condescending here than CR. It's a shame as they can post good stuff, it's just undone almost completely by the utter nonsensical rubbish they post at other times.
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
When and how did you get the instructions? I’ve had nothing yet.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Every religion has its equivalent of Matthew's Pharisees, obsessed with the external forms but unable to open their hearts to the true message.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
Eh? Have you just gone all weirdly pious on us - or is this a joke?
No, I have been a Christian for more than two decades. I was brought up Atheist.
So do you believe there will be a Judgement Day where people who sing hymns but don’t believe in god will be told to do something beastly forever more?
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
Well, I agree with you but according to the stats upthread we'd seem to be in the minority!
Really? I can’t read the earlier pages because of the fabled iPhone loading errors. Can you summarise?
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
Well, I agree with you but according to the stats upthread we'd seem to be in the minority!
Really? I can’t read the earlier pages because of the fabled iPhone loading errors. Can you summarise?
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
When and how did you get the instructions? I’ve had nothing yet.
You’re not supposed to do it until the 21st!
Fake news.
You can submit it online as soon as you get the letter.
It does ask you to predict whether there will be any visitors at your house on Sunday - the likes of Sandy Rentool and Gideon Wise would be calling for the boys in blue if you answered yes.
< I'd say British was at least as popular a self-description as English amongst the English prior to 1997. (The two were probably used interchangeably, and if you were from Essex, say, those parts of Britain which were not England were so far away that the need to distinguish between the two rarely arose).
English has become a much more popular self-definition over the past 20-odd years. I put that partly down to devolution. It's instructive to look at old pictures of England football matches (80s and before). Very few St. George's Crosses in the crowd; lots of Union Flags.
The forthcoming Census may be informative - there are a growing number of people who see themselves only as British - not English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh.
That's a brave assertion.
At this point I would go back to the 2001 and 2011 results to see what's been happening in that regard so far this century, but I need to go and make dinner or else husband will waste away...
Husband has now been fed.
I went to look at the census data. 2001 had no identity question in England (which apparently caused ructions at the time since it was included in the rest of the country,) but by 2011 this had been rectified.
So, ten years ago, 60% of the English population responded as English only, 20% British only, 9% as English and British, and the remainder various other things. In Wales it's a remarkably similar split: 58% Welsh only, 17% British only and 7% as Welsh and British.
In Scotland, 62% said Scottish only, 18% Scottish and British and just 8% as British only, which concurs with the general opinion on which part of the UK is liable to fall off first.
If anything has happened since then other than the British figures nosediving everywhere then I'll be astonished.
I'll be filling out English and British this year.
Did the census tonight!
All three in my house filled out English and British. I must admit I didn’t think too much about it. What else were we supposed to put?
Well, I agree with you but according to the stats upthread we'd seem to be in the minority!
Really? I can’t read the earlier pages because of the fabled iPhone loading errors. Can you summarise?
How do you fix those?
No way that I know of. Bullshit software - Vanilla. I have no such issue on any other site.
I've filled out 3/4 of the census for my household. My other half will probably ask me to fill out her individual part. Put "No religion" down, would probably have checked both christian and no religion if it was possible tbh.
it ought to be possible. Lots of not very religious people are very Christian, and lots of very religious people don't seem very Christian.
Every religion has its equivalent of Matthew's Pharisees, obsessed with the external forms but unable to open their hearts to the true message.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
Eh? Have you just gone all weirdly pious on us - or is this a joke?
No, I have been a Christian for more than two decades. I was brought up Atheist.
So do you believe there will be a Judgement Day where people who sing hymns but don’t believe in god will be told to do something beastly forever more?
I believe it to be more subtle than that, to Quote Matthew 25:KJV
" 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels"
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
And furthermore, it must be said that Robert Jenrick has the most punchable face this side of Jared Kushner.
It may have taken 14,000 posts, but I knew I would eventually agree with you on something.
Assuming you omitted Gove as we are limiting it to humans.
Catholics from Poland and Eastern Europe, evangelicals from Africa and Hindus and Sikhs and Muslims from South Asia would soon push the numbers back up again
Leaving aside my suspicion that the more recent Polish immigrants to the UK would be a lot less religious than their grandmothers back home, who are these other "Catholics from... Eastern Europe" exactly?
Beware, Wiki census figures might not be your friend in trying to answer this.
To my mind, the only justification for building that mine is if the coal is of the quality required for steel making. If it's good for steel then it should be built. If it's not then the coal should be left in the ground.
In the latter case the Government should probably find an agency that needs urgently to be relocated out of London to compensate.
It's coking coal for steel production. There aren't too many things that I feel strongly about, but preventing this mine from opening is utterly stupid.
According to the Sun (yes, I know)," it was revealed last month that due to the high sulphur content of the coal itself, it might be able to be used at all - either in Britain or sold to other markets". If true, that does seem rather a snag, irrespective of climate impact.
That's not really relevant for planning purposes. If it's got too high a sulphur content to be any good, no one will pay to dig it up. Personally I think it's very unlikely that they would have got this far without having a good idea what's down there.
How does "climate alarmists" go with the Government supposedly being all in on the green agenda?
This Government wants it both ways, some day these two ideas are going to smash into each other. Fundamentally this Tory Government is holding together two coalitions, perhaps they will last. Perhaps they won't
The number of climate alarmists who vote Tory now are miniscule, if climate change is already your main concern you will already be voting Labour or Tory.
The working class voters in the North who won the Tories their majority however will not be happy if the government abandons this proposed new mine
Why do the Tories go on about climate change all the time then? Explain that one.
Climate change is the main concern, it's the future of our planet for goodness sake
Because many Tory politicians are variously:
a) Morons who don't understand their voting coalition b) Wet liberals who are way to the left of their voters.
They can currently get away with this because they are only really opposed from the left, who want to do all the same stupid stuff, just faster and with extra subsidies.
Who do you vote for if you think that banning the mining of coal is moronic all the while its use it increasing elsewhere in the world? Especially when it's for steel production anyway?
Who do you vote for if you want the option to buy an IC engine vehicle for as long as you need one?
Who do you vote for if you don't want to see the entire country's heavy industry exported to China by green taxes, and expensive renewable energy?
Who do you vote for if you think that given the ever rising level of 3rd world emissions, we should move to climate change mitigation rather than uselessly trashing our economy in an excersise of tokenism?
Who do you vote for who would end lockdown right now, given we have data we have which shows fairly clearly that we could without overwhelming the health service?
The above may all be very unpopular with the London Liberal types who have a iron grip on both parties, but probably a good 1/3rd of the country currently feels disenfranchised along these lines (the Europe issue was similar in the 90s/00s).
This mine must be allowed. It is the worst type of tokenism that this should be mired in delay whilst we import coal, and people could be earning money.
Labour's comments on this are particularly shameful and reprehensible.
I have to say that the news on the coal mine is some of the best news I have heard for ages.
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
I'd disagree. Looking at the numbers we can well handle the C02 emissions within our targets...
For the next four decades ? Seems unlikely.
Missed this before.
The new coal mine would comprise I think 0.3% of the UK's C02 emissions, and the Planning Permission terminates before 2050.
Comments
We have to stop digging carbon up and putting it in the atmosphere. We will only get really serious about finding alternatives when we make the status quo more difficult.
No new mine, concentrate on the technology to make steel without coking coal.
Is that reasonable?
And they aren't tripping over themselves all pretending to be working class, even if they aren't any more (let's not get into vanguardism and the lumpen-proletariat).
It's quite a funny problem Laurie Penny used to have whilst trying to become the megaphone for the far-left during the street-demo period around 2010. It never quite washed with them; they all believed she really wanted to become a writer for the Guardian.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1369925156383117312?s=20
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1370135902362632196
Popcorn hour
However I expect 'no religion' to top the poll in the 2021 census. The figures have shifted dramatically in various surveys since 2021.
Woke has a very specific meaning, as I've explored on here many a time before. Much of the population is only too happy to listen and learn from tragedies and other people's experiences, but they hate being pompously (and incessantly) lectured at by needy preening narcissists, and they get infuriated when they're almost inevitably called reactionary or bigotted for telling them to button it.
If the likes of you can't see that then maybe that's because you're also..
a needy preening narcissist.
Think about it.
While probably increasing net emissions overall because we're then shipping in dirtier coke from abroad?
Catholics from Poland and Eastern Europe, evangelicals from Africa and Hindus and Sikhs and Muslims from South Asia would soon push the numbers back up again
Nothing good ever comes from being dogmatic about anything.
There is no Test act on the Census form. You can self identify as a Christian if you like, but it's only on Judgement Day that you find out the truth.
Are you aware of any cross-fertilisation going on from UK to help EU countries ramp up their vaccine rollouts or in related areas?
Thinking about eg advice / support from the VTF.
Cheers.
Personally I feel that we’re at a point where the SNP (which is a coalition just like other parties) has reached a deciding point on how it defines itself for the foreseeable future. A new Gammons for Indy party might be a necessary development though it has to be said that the current contenders seem like a bunch of fecking amateurs. I’m still standing by my prediction that the ISP and what ever other TLAs are floating about won’t win a single list seat in May unless Salmond throws his weight behind them, and he’s leaving it a bit late to do even that.
I’m amazed you are even troubled by this Pulpstar. Even Professor Richard Dawkins describes himself as a cultural Christian!
Beyond that I have not really looked into the details of the mine.
Especially if the alternative is to import dirtier coal from elsewhere.
People confuse coal for electricity and coal for steel, they're not the same thing. If coal makes steel which makes wind turbines which replaces carbon generating fuels then the environment is better off not worse off. But hey, lets just moan about any development at all. 🙄
Seems unlikely.
Others reasonably differ, and have likewise explained that to you at some length.
“The likes of you... incessantly lectured..” LOL
Here's the definition: "alert to injustice in society, especially racism."
I am proudly woke thank you, as I would hope most are. If I see racism I call it out
You can submit it online as soon as you get the letter.
It does ask you to predict whether there will be any visitors at your house on Sunday - the likes of Sandy Rentool and Gideon Wise would be calling for the boys in blue if you answered yes.
"
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels"
Assuming you omitted Gove as we are limiting it to humans.
Beware, Wiki census figures might not be your friend in trying to answer this.
a) Morons who don't understand their voting coalition
b) Wet liberals who are way to the left of their voters.
They can currently get away with this because they are only really opposed from the left, who want to do all the same stupid stuff, just faster and with extra subsidies.
Who do you vote for if you think that banning the mining of coal is moronic all the while its use it increasing elsewhere in the world? Especially when it's for steel production anyway?
Who do you vote for if you want the option to buy an IC engine vehicle for as long as you need one?
Who do you vote for if you don't want to see the entire country's heavy industry exported to China by green taxes, and expensive renewable energy?
Who do you vote for if you think that given the ever rising level of 3rd world emissions, we should move to climate change mitigation rather than uselessly trashing our economy in an excersise of tokenism?
Who do you vote for who would end lockdown right now, given we have data we have which shows fairly clearly that we could without overwhelming the health service?
The above may all be very unpopular with the London Liberal types who have a iron grip on both parties, but probably a good 1/3rd of the country currently feels disenfranchised along these lines (the Europe issue was similar in the 90s/00s).
The new coal mine would comprise I think 0.3% of the UK's C02 emissions, and the Planning Permission terminates before 2050.