Cancun Climate Conference: Cancelled for lack of interest?

Dec 6th, Monday, around 2:00 p.m. The accreditation hall at Cancun, without the vast crowds expected

This morning was my first effective day at the Cancun Climate Conference. The formal programme started in the afternoon, but for the morning they had arranged an educational visit for us to the local Botanical Gardens, where a small piece of rain forest (suitably sanitised) has been preserved.

I still remember the old lefty protest song “Pave Paradise, put up a Parking Lot … Took all the trees, put them in a tree museum. And charged all the people, a dollar and a half just to see ‘em”. This was the Mexican tree museum.
We were there to study pilot programmes for the UN’s REDD project. No, I didn´t know what it meant either, but apparently it’s “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degredation”. So there.

They seem to be doing some excellent work — involving local communities (Mayan, in this case) in valuing the forest, and in sustainable management. Nevertheless I dread to think what will happen in corrupt countries where the illegal loggers are in control of the hinterland.

Then off to the Cancun Messe (unfortunate associations there!) for accreditation. The accreditation hall was about the size of an aicraft hangar, with a couple of dozen desks, after you’d negotiated the maze of airport-style tensor-tapes to herd the crowds.

Except there weren’t any crowds. There were about six people when I was there. I have a photograph of the vast empty space (unfortunately I can’t download it till I get home). It tells its own story of the Cancun Climate Conference.
Next was an open area with a cheerful bandstand, with seats for an audience of two hundred or so. But the audience was smaller than the band, who played vigorously to hide their chagrin.

Inside were stands of a zillion (mostly unheard of) NGOs and small states, with no one paying much attention, and the staff looking bored, as well they might. There were numerous food stalls, doing little trade.
It was all too reminiscent of the Marie Celeste, and I wondered whether they would decide to cancel the conference for lack of interest.

Then we were briefed — extensively. As I predicted, they expect a glorious success on REDD. But no sniff yet of their Holy Grail — the legally binding emissions agreement. Mind you, we didn’t observe the last legally binding agreement (Kyoto), and even if they got one, it probably wouldn’t stick. But they keep encouraging themselves and whistling in the wind with talk of “preparatory work for success in 2011 in South Africa”. We’ll see.

A little bird tells me that the Guardian (it’s a newspaper, apparently) proposes to run a piece on my current climate campaign. But as you would expect, they plan to play the man rather than the ball. Unconcerned at the Pounds (no Pound sign in Mexico!) 700 billion plus we plan to spend in the UK on climate mitigation, they intend instead to attack the few thousand that I’m spending on warning people about it.

I shall see what they say and deliver a considered response. But there is a great irony here. One of the comments I hear most frequently from constituents on the doorstep is “You politicians never tell us enough about the EU” (although admittedly when I ask “OK, have you got half an hour?” they speedily remember some other priority — often Coronation Street).

But when I go out of my way to warn constituents about the huge costs of renewable energy imposed on them by Brussels diktat, I get vilified by the left-wing press. I must be doing something right.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Cancun Climate Conference: Cancelled for lack of interest?

  1. In the States there is growing realization that loss of constitutional government is the price for “going green”!

    That is a price that many of us are unwilling to pay, and the politicians who promote such foolishness will soon find themselves unemployed.

    This video of Eisenhower’s farewell address:

    These two best selling books address different aspects of the tyranny that is hiding behind the “green movement.”

    http://www.booksbyoliver.com/

    http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo

  2. Paul says:

    Seems like you’ve stirred the tofu munchers from their stoner daydreams into action. First thing they do when the wake up late or get home from their job working for local government is to trawl sites like the Guardianist climate daily and use two fingers like slugs on speed in order to leave inane comments and sanctify their souls – souls bereft of any semblance of reason.
    Gotta feel sorry for them Roger.
    Keep up the good work.
    Oh by the way, I wonder how Chris Huhne will manage to pay back the planet for his climate crime of flying to Cancun, flying back to vote tonight and then fly back to Cancun.
    My suggestion to him is that he forgoes the last leg of this ecobash and stay there.

  3. Is there any news on ”new institutional measures” such as we saw at Copenhagen?

    The (failed) proposal then was for ”38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, ”

    and

    ”…. the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries.”

    (from AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON LONG-TERM COOPERATIVE ACTION UNDER THE CONVENTION Seventh session, Bangkok, 28 September to 9 October 2009, and Barcelona, 2–6 November 2009[24] FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/INF.2 15 September 2009, Page 18/19.)

  4. Quite so, Roger! Vilification by socialist supporting media is usually a good indication that you are doing what is right. Usually, if ignoring an influential political figure or organisation does not work – they resort to personal attacks or a greater degree of misrepresentation of the truth. In some ways, we really are living in an Orwellean society – right now. Thank you Roger Helmer – for standing up to the evil of socialism. Your supporters know that you will never shy away from the truth. The sheer apathy at this latest climate conference, simply goes to show that even world leaders have no belief in their own convictions any more.

  5. neutral says:

    Helmer,

    I’ve just read about your anti climate change poster campaign.

    How dare you waste taxpayers money in this ridiculous self promoting activity. You don’t represent your party, you don’t represent your electorate, clearly you only represent yourself. And now you have the nerve to gallivant off to Mexico simply to peddle more of your usual blend of sarcasm and misinformation.

    How much did your flight cost? Which hotel are you in? What is the daily rate? What are you other expenses?

    I think we should be told.

  6. Paula McCabe says:

    Neutral… you say Mr Helmer doesnt represent the party. Are you a member? You say he doesn’t represent his electorate… do you live in the East Midlands? As you say, “I think we should be told”.

    I think you will find MEPs publish their expenses so your questions are pretty pointless don’t you think?

  7. neutral says:

    Helmer doesn’t represent his party on environment issues and if you read the Guardian piece, you will see that no one is backing him. Indeed, he doesn’t even speak for the ECR on environmental issues (he sits on the employment committee) so the question is what is he doing in Mexico?

    In terms of his expenses, I don’t see anything on his website. And strangely, his declaration of interests is completely blank.

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members/expert/alphaOrder/view.do?language=EN&id=4516

    We do know that he employs his wife however, with taxpayers money. How very convenient.

  8. Paula McCabe says:

    Oh neutral, are you purposefully being a little thick or does it come naturally?

    The Guardian certainly doesn’t speak for Tory members, and do you know what, sometimes I would suggest party HQ doesn’t either.

    Again I ask you are you a member of the party, or a constituent resident in the East Midlands given you claim Mr Helmer does not represent them? You say no one is backing him. I believe he was voted in yet again by the electorate in the East Midlands. Sounds like a mandate to me. Who is backing you?

  9. neutral says:

    Paula – What on earth are you on about? The Guardian doesn’t speak for Tory members, but the Guardian did speak TO the Tory party, who distanced themselves from Helmer’s so-called work.

    Why is Helmer in Mexico when he sits on the Employment Committee?
    How much is his trip costing us the taxpayer?
    Why did he use EU funds to promote himself on a series of billboards in the East Midlands?
    Why did he use the ECR logo on those billboards when he does not speak for the Group on these matters?

    Are you beginning to see a pattern emerging?

  10. I guess that “Neutral” is neutral in much the same way that The Independent is independent. Seems to me, old lad, as if you have an agenda.

    The reason I’m in Mexico is because climate change has been a main focus of my work for at least four years. I have published books and DVDs on the issue, organised conferences in the European parliament, attended conferences around the world, worked with prominent scientists in the field, and at least among UK politicians become a reasonably well-known commenator. I also sat on the European parliament’s Temporary Committee on Climate Change. I did indeed sit on the Environment Committee for five long years, but there’s only so much you can stand of their hot-house greenery, and after a while it gets boring to bang your head against a wall.

    I am at the COP16 Cancun Conference, formally accredited on behalf of the EU, as are thirty or so other MEPs. We are staying at the Now Sapphire beach hotel, with extensive facilities ranging from a Spa Treatment Centre to Hobie Cats and Diving Classes. But apart from bars, restaurants and the Business Centre, I haven’t used any of those facilities. I haven’t set foot on the beach or in the pool.

    That’s because we are working all the hours God sends. Indeed because some colleagues in Brussels don’t seem to understand the time difference, I’ve been doing radio interviews, texts and phone calls in the middle of the night, after a twelve-hour day. If “Neutral” thinks that’s a jolly, I invite him to try it sometime.

    I used billboards in my region to alert my constituents to the huge damage that our climate policies are doing. I was using funds provided to all MEPs to enable them to communicate with their voters. It is an entirely proper and appropriate use of those funds. And if I failed to use them, the money would not go back to the hard-pressed taxpayer — it would just get used elsewhere in the parliament.

    I used the ECR logo on the billboards because that is a requirement of the rules of the parliament with regard to Information Funds. And while climate scepticism is not the policy of the group, it has the support of a number of members. I met the Deputy Environment Minister of the Czech Republic yesterday, who is with one of our group parties, and he made it clear that both he and his government agree with my position (as, accordinng to opinion polls, do most of the British people).

  11. BlueRock says:

    > But when I go out of my way to warn constituents about the huge costs of renewable energy imposed on them by Brussels diktat, I get vilified by the left-wing press. I must be doing something right.

    Or it could be simply that you are completely wrong and determinedly ignorant – in the exact same way you are re. climate science, homophobia and whatever else you hold forth on.

    “STRAIGHT TALKING” – isn’t that how Dubya and Caribou Barbie refer to themselves? It appears to be a term used as self-congratulation by those who don’t need evidence, science and reality to reach conclusions.

    • Thank you BlueRock. You might like to visit http://is.gd/iBaKV for a list of 1000 scientists who oppose climate alarmism. But in the end, science is not about numbers or opinion polls. It’s about falsifying hypotheses, and as I explain in my piece on my web-site, key predictions of the alarmist hypothesis have indeed been falsified.

      • BlueRock says:

        > You might like to visit…

        A further demonstration that you cannot separate science from propaganda and lies, served up by a notorious liar. Also, a demonstration that you will accept any rubbish without question provided it confirms what you *want* to be true.

        http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/new-improved-climate-skeptic-list-fraud/

        Every national science academy of every industrialised country on the planet confirms and accepts the conclusions laid out by IPCC AR4 WG1. So do ~98% of published climate scientists.

        The reason for this near-total consensus is because the scientific evidence is so compelling.

        > …as I explain in my piece on my web-site, key predictions of the alarmist hypothesis have indeed been falsified.

        No, you’ve simply broadcast your ignorance, arrogance and incompetence. You are afflicted, as are most deniers, with a severe case of ‘Dunning-Kruger effect’ – a condition in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the ability to realize their mistakes.

        Mr Helmer, you are the modern-day equivalent of a flat earther and become more a subject of ridicule and contempt with each passing day.

        P.S. Did you know there are also lists of scientists who “oppose” evolution? Do you also think that makes evolution false?

  12. Peter Mauley says:

    Well done Roger, keep up the good work. When do you think you will be able to persuade your Tory colleagues? Especially David Cameron, who seems fully signed up to AGW imbecility?

  13. Tufty says:

    I live in the East Midlands and Mr Helmer certainly represents me. I am also a professional environmental scientist and I couldn’t have put the case against climate astrology any better myself. Keep up the good work.

  14. BlueRock says:

    Tufty:

    > I am also a professional environmental scientist and I couldn’t have put the case against climate astrology any better myself.

    “Climate astrology”?

    Climate is the long-term patterns of weather on a planet.

    Astrology is the woo-woo study of how alignment of planets supposedly effect our everyday lives.

    Tufty is a prime example of the idiot / liar who crawls around the internet, spouting nonsense.

  15. BlueRock says:

    Peter Mauley:

    > When do you think you will be able to persuade your Tory colleagues? Especially David Cameron, who seems fully signed up to AGW imbecility?

    And then he can move on to the planet’s climate scientists. I’m sure they’ll be swayed by his £9,000-worth of posters.

  16. neutral says:

    Dear Mr Helmer,

    Thank you for your reply and clarifications.

    Best regards,

    Neutral

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s