The enemy within


Why is it so easy to whip up opposition in this country to almost any economic development?

In Germany (having foolishly decided to close their nuclear fleet) they are busy building or refurbishing some 25 coal-fired power stations — and coal is currently one of the cheapest technologies for generating electricity. That’s despite their green pretensions.   And not just Germany.  In Japan, too, they will rely more on coal. Meantime China and India are building coal capacity as fast as they can. No chance for emissions reduction, if you care about that.

Yet we in Britain seem paralysed on the energy front.  Interminable delays on new nuclear capacity.  Gas-fired power stations being mothballed.  Old coal power plants being closed (because of the EU’s Large Combustion Plant Directive).  And no one dares to mention coal, because the green lobby has such a grip on the public imagination, and around the throats of politicians.

In 2008, a British court ruled, for heaven’s sake, that fear of climate change was a just cause to commit criminal damage, and acquitted six Greenpeace protesters at Kingsnorth. The plan to build Kingsnorth was abandoned, with consequent damage to our energy infrastructure and to local job prospects. Now, as Ofgem has warned, there’s a growing danger of power shortages and blackouts  — which we in UKIP have been predicting for some time.

But coal is just one example.  Then there’s GM crops.  We’ve been eating GM food one way or another for twenty years, with no evidence of harm, yet the press still demonise it as “Frankenstein Food”.  The irony is that we’re all of us, you and me, “Genetically Modified Organisms”, because evolution itself is nothing but genetic modification.  Apparently these Luddites think that if we use the old-fashioned methods of hybridisation, on a rather random trial-and-error basis, that’s better than doing it under controlled conditions in the laboratory.

Activists criticise Monsanto for creating GM seeds which require farmers to buy new seeds each season.  Yet when the EU spends our money in North Korea to create (by conventional hybridisation) new strains that require new seeds every year, we all applaud.  I wrote about this recently.

The world’s population, currently around 7 billion, is likely to reach ten or eleven billion by 2050 (before declining).  To have any hope of feeding these people, we need all the benefits of new technology.  To ignore GM is beyond irresponsible — it is a crime against humanity, and will condemn millions to starvation.

Currently, of course, we are seeing a new front for public resistance, based on false fears and poisonous propaganda.  Fracking has been going on in the States for several decades (and in Germany, as it happens).  Yet very diverse interest groups are mounting a mendacious campaign against it.  On the one hand, green NGOs.  On the other (odd bedfellows) we have Gazprom, terrified of losing a lucrative export market.   We know from experience that this propaganda is simply wrong.  No mineral extraction technology can be totally safe, but fracking is arguably safer than most.  It does not contaminate water supplies. It does not cause earthquakes.  At worst you get minor tremors, as you do with coal mining.  Those areas of England that lost their coal industry should be demanding fracking — it offers all the benefits of mining but with far fewer downsides.

It’s worth reading Allister Heath’s recent piece in the Telegraph, where he sketches the benefits that shale gas has brought to America. It’s expected to create 1.7 million jobs by 2020, adding £450 bn to US GDP.  These are massive numbers which we can’t afford to ignore.  Shale gas has sparked a manufacturing renaissance in the US, with jobs and businesses coming home from China and elsewhere — “On-shoring” as it’s called.  As Heath puts it: “Britain needs to embrace shale gas and stop obsessing with costly renewable energy that is crippling industry”.

Of course we in Britain have a problem in that we have a higher population density than the USA, so we need to drill with great sensitivity, and we need engagement with local communities.  But we have a countervailing advantage: the Bowland Shale, at least, is reportedly substantially thicker than the Marcellus Shale in the USA, which should allow more gas per well, and fewer wells.

But why is it that we in Britain have this huge issue of public engagement, whether with coal, with GM, or with shale gas?  To a large extent it’s the malign influence of green NGOs like Friends of the Earth, who have a wholly disproportionate impact on public debate.  And although their manifestos don’t say so, green NGOs are there to block progress and prosperity.  They hate industry and capitalism and growth.  They’re about embracing poverty.  And — bitter irony — you and I are financing them through our taxes and through the European Commission. We are paying them to damage our future, to deny jobs to our children and grandchildren, to ensure that future generations are poorer than our own, and to allow the West to decline while Asia and South America forge ahead.

Time to recognise these people for what they are.  The enemy within.  The Fifth Column.  The Trojan Horse.  After all, F.O.E. spells “foe”.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to The enemy within

  1. Heino Vockrodt says:

    If we want to create the change that’s so desperately needed, we first must start with the schools. For 2 decades now, our national curriculum has been riddled with green propaganda and socialist’s pipe dreams. Our children have been thoroughly indoctrinated – even if you put facts in front of them, they still believe all the green garbage.
    Most people confuse caring for the environment with man-made climate change – a clever deception, apparently you can’t have one without the other…
    And look what the most malicious minister of the crown ever has signed off now:

    He offers investors that we pay them triple(!) the current price of electricity in return for killing our countryside & birdlife! Traitors Gate in the tower…if I had a choice…

  2. Anne says:

    What put me off Roger, was when I read in the Official Journal of the EC (16.9.97 L 253/13) (as one does) beneath the heading, “The Ability of the GMM to survive in and colonise the human gut” with the passage underneath “The genetic modification might facilitate survival during passage through the intestines and colonization of the human gut. Antagonistic and synergistic effects on the composition of the intestinal flora may occur and have an influence on human health. Therefore experimental data are required on the respective
    properties of the GMO”.

  3. Anne says:

    And also when I read (28.4.97 C 132/30) that a GM maize had been passed in the EU Parliament, even though 13 out of 15 opposed the placing on the market of a maize, which read, “whereas large scale use of the Bt (Bacillus Thuringiensis) toxin raises environmental concerns”. And also, “and the conclusions of the Scientific Committee for Food on the risks of transmission to man of a tracer gene resistant to antibiotics.” I understand there are still concerns even now. Perhaps it may bring an understanding to you, why, not only do I not trust anything that contains GMO’s in
    food now, I most certainly do not trust the people that place these goods on the market for innocent children to eat or drink.

    • Not sure I understand your points Anne. Any new organism — created by natural mutation, by intentional hybridsation or by GM techniques — can be potentially good or bad. But there is no prima facie reason to suppose that a new organism created by GM is any more likely to do harm than one created naturally. I don’t see what is meant by “a gene resistant to antibiotics”. Antibiotics are designed to have an effect on bacteria, not on individual genes.

  4. B Hough says:

    My thoughts exactly Roger, not only a fifth column but traitors to their country as fifth columnists were. I think Greece are realising that Germany makes the rules in the EU then turns them to their advantage, mainly in an industrial way so that they can supply the demand and remain a strong industrial nation whilst the rest of us go down the tubes!
    In 1941 Hitler gave a speech stating his intentions of creating a German Empire in Europe from all the defeated countries, with the British Empire as a trading partner, we caused it to fail, we are now being paid back and run into the ground by a very clever Angela Merkel who is doing it without firing a shot.
    The strength that the British people had to stand up to him at that time has been eroded and diluted by mass immigration.
    None of the points you raised seem to appear in the media, we may still have time to rebuild our country for our grandchildren if we can at least rebuild ourselves financially via fracking / powewr stations as in Germany / stop paying the EU with borrowed money and stop sending borrowed money to other countries in aid, we need it ourselves. Also when will the Greens and climate change zealots start blaming the industrialists for their destruction of `the lungs of the world` the rain forests, why is it always `our fault`?

  5. Anne says:

    Sadly, B Hough, we have no Winston Churchill to save our Country as he once did for us. However, there is one way that can change the situation we are in, for come the General Election in 2015, as we know-without doubt- that all three major Political Parties want to remain in the EU-forever, only vote for those Political Parties or Organisations that want out of the EU, (I hope all UKIPers are standing of course) to repudiate all the EU Treaties so held in the United Nations, repealing the European Communitties Act 1972/3 to prevent any more EU Legislation being forced upon us. Simples!

  6. neilfutureboy says:

    Why is it so easy?

    Because we have government funded Luddite fakecharities, a vast number of people employed (well paid) by the state for being “green” or “social” who get time off for demos or indeed to comment on blogs like this, and because the state owned “balanced” broadcaster censors and lies in the ecofascist cause.

    Imagine a Britain where being an ecofascist was as much grounds for being fired from stae employment as being a BNP supporter is; where no state money is given to Luddites but 10% as much as is currently given to fakecharities (say £3 billion) was given to campaigners for human progress; and where we had a free market rather than a state broadcasting monopoly (with a small number of mandated broadcast formal debates on serious political issues).

    Does anybody doubt we would be far more progressive (in the correct use of the term) and free and wealthy?

  7. Anne says:

    WE, the people, pick and vote for our Governments neilfutureboy, so what is happening now and has done since 1972/3 is our fault. We can blame no one else. So come the General election in 2015, use it as the REFERENDUM we in this Country have been deliberately denied and only vote for those Political Parties or Organisations THAT WANT OUT OF THE EU-for you may never get another chance at all. The people have been promised a referendum before and as I certainly do not believe David Cameron will get in again, even if he did intended to make sure his PROMISED (again) REFERENDUM in 2017 came to be. Plus, exactly how much will be left to this Country’s Constitution to be governed by, especially if the CONSERVATIVES ‘Opt in’ to Justice and Home Affairs and POLICING, in 2014, or if they OPT out in 2014-they can “OPT in” to them at any time after that and the EU will embrace them with “open arms”. Sheer treachery if they opt in to either. I do not say our system of Justice and Home affairs is the best-but it is indeed ours-for now. Our Police (The British “Bobby) swears allegiance to the British Crown, will it be able so to do, if Policing comes under the EU.

    So many in the past fought and died to keep their Country free from foreign rule. They fought off a would be dictator they knew they could never remove. Can any of us remove the EU Commissioner, etc? Stop their Legislation? Only when we are out of the EU can we do that.

  8. B Hough says:

    Hi Anne. I noted that the promised referendum was dated so as to follow the Scottish referendum.
    I think Cameron is hoping for an opt out of the UK thus weakening any possibility of the rest of the UK voting to leave the EU, a leave vote I think would be weakened by the number of immigrant voters which may be included, the EU is a great asset to them.
    An early edict from Brussels was that the UK had to be broken up into four areas, the first could be on its way.

  9. Anne says:

    Since Mr Cameron has been in “Office” B Hough, he has divided the Nation and Country of England into EU REGIONS so that eventually they can be Governed by the EU’s Committee of the REGIONS on behalf of the Commission. (Scotland is already classed as an EU Region) The proposed HS2 is just one part of the EU Trans-European Trasport Network (TEN-T) Policy, which also includes eventually giving sovereignty over our Air space to the EU (The EU’s Single European Sky)-it has already decided what we must have on our land-the HS2, it also wants sovereignty over our seas-all the way down to the Falklands-see Hansard- for the EU’s Motorway in the Sea.

    • I broadly agree with your sentiments, Anne, but as a matter of fact the EU regions were up and running long before Cameron achieved office!

      • Anne says:

        I agree entirely with you Roger. It was however all set in motion by the EU’s Localismn Act other wise known as Mr Camerons “Big Society”. I realised this when I read the contents of a meeting held in the Scottish Parliament (as one does), Which I think was held 21st May 2001. At the meeting in Birmingham that I was attending, I said that, “The Scottish Parliament had been held up as an example of what devolution meant and the workings of it, so it was this example that I quoted from the meeting that took place in the Scottish Parliament on 22nd May this year, when members from the European Union’s Committee of the Regions attended, and that I had the report of that debate in which I chose the words of Mr Dammeyer when he had been speaking to the Scottish Parliament about devolution, that as far as the Scottish people are concerned, Scotland is a “Country”, the Scottish people are “nation”, but Mr Dammeyer explained that from the European point of view Scotland is like a Region of the European Union. I made the point that the Welsh people are also a nation, and Wales is a “Country”, but again, as far as the European Union is concerned Wales is a Region of the European Union. I concluded that the English are a “nation”, and England is a Country, but England as far as the EU is concerned will have to be divided up into regions. (The EU decided that, and the British government obviously agreed) Another gentleman at a later stage also drew attention to the fact that on the official EU map of Great Britain there was no ENGLAND, only regions. As stated previously, it was Mr Cameron that set it all into motion through the Localismn Bill, now Act of Course.

  10. Bill Brown says:

    It amazes me that every time any mention is made of GM, fracking, coal-fired power stations etc. the BBC and most of the press invite a spokeperson from Greenpeace/FoE to deliver an opinion. As we know Greenpeace/FoE are against all methods of power generation including nuclear, coal, gas and big biomass. If these idiots had their way we would have no power except when the wind happens to be blowing sufficiently to 5-6% of summer load.

    The same courtesy is not extended to REF when wind ‘farms’ are discussed.

  11. Mike Spilligan says:

    To answer your first question: It’s easy in this country because we have lazy and thoughtless information media which are alerted to reporting only gloom and doom – it sells more newspapers (still, for the time being) and increases viewing times. It’s as simple as that; though I’ve no idea how that can be combatted. Like the man (I can’t remember who) said: Good news is no news.

  12. Mike Stallard says:

    For several months I have been living with people who really believe in Climate Change, Windmills, anti-Fracking, anti-GM . They rarely mention what they believe. If you question them they attack you personally. They tend to raise their voices rather early in the argument. They sneer rather too easily.
    In other words, they are much more fired up and therefore persuasive. If I had one word to describe them it would be this: threatened.

    But that does not make them right.

    I found the best was way was to think of myself as water rising as the tide comes in, quietly to go (as you do) through each loop-hole, each weakness and occupy that bit of land. So, Roger, keep it up. I was there in the 70s, crouching over a small fire in the dark and stealing food for my family. I don’t want to go there again actually. Now we don’t even have a fireplace.

  13. ken says:

    Can’t comment on the pollution (or not) arguments, but much of the present anti-fracking objections that we are seeing, seem to stem from the visual damage caused by any drilling centres becoming ‘blots’ on the landscape, which indeed I would have some sympathy with, (we in the UK do not have the benefit of many thousands of acres of bland empty countryside to stick hundreds of sites), so my question would be… ‘is there any reasons why these drill head sites have to be exposed at all, ie, why not bury the entire sites during construction, operate them entirely below the surface, cover the entire area over and re-plant trees, hedgerows etc, as if they are simply not there’?, from what has been shown so far, they seem to be relatively low rise and somewhat smallish sites, so the cost, in such a lucrative industry, of such construction may not be a restrictive problem.

  14. Adrian Williams says:

    The trouble with this country is the few make the most noise and the majority don’t care until the lights go out. When the idle ones moved into my area objecting to an opencast development, which is now nearly complete with none of the forecast damage and inconvenience, they were welcomed by the local opposition until they were found out to be the wastrels they are. Unless the government gets its act together power failures are not far away. The rest of the world must laugh their socks off at us. Sitting on massive gas and coal reserves we are guided by vested interests.

  15. Chris says:

    The problem with the UK Roger, is that the population resists everything: new runways at Heathrow, road expansion, rail expansion, nuclear power and fracking. The country seems to be living in a time warp where we’ve had things too good for too long and expect nothing to change. The country has a debt of more than £1.2 trillion and is borrowing £120 billion this year and for the last 2 years.

    Why was Great Britain the most powerful country in the world? Because we had a large manufacturing base. It wasn’t due to bankers, accountants or lawyers. And manufacturing needs stable, reliable and affordable energy.

    Unfortunately, we have the left wing media (BBC, Channel 4, Guardian, Independent) pumping out the same old bulls**t about global warming, ground water contamination, Fukushima explosion etc. It’s time this country grabbed the bull by the horns and did what was right for the UK and not what some eco loons want.

    • Neil Craig says:

      Hardly anybody reads the Guardian or Independent. The problem is the state owned broadcasting monopoly of BBC & C4.

      It has been shown statistically across the world that there is a close correlation between state ownership of the media and authoritarianism, state corruption, nepotism and incompetence even to the extent of public health outcomes. Think how the coverage of the South Staffs 1,200 deaths gets about 1,000th the coverage on the state owned media that a few NOTW journalists daring to get some inside information got.

      I do think this is something UKIP have to campaign on. These totalitarians are our enemy and being polite about them will not placate.

  16. Neil — you’re right. I’ll check internally, but I should think we’re probably on this case. I certainly agree with you. We need Fox News UK.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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