BBC conflict of interest: Pensions relying on pushing alarmist climate agenda

Posted: November 14, 2012 by Rog Tallbloke in alarmism, Carbon cycle, climate, Legal, media, Politics, propaganda

From the WUWT TwentyEightGate discussion a disturbing revelation of a huge conflict of interest balance of reportage. To see that this has cost taxpayers billions beyond license fees, see this earlier post about a UBS report on the European Carbon Market:

Andrew30 says:

http://www.iigcc.org/index.aspx

“The Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) is a forum for collaboration on climate change for European investors. The group’s objective is to catalyse greater investment in a low carbon economy by bringing investors together to use their collective influence with companies, policymakers and investors. The group currently has over 50 members, including some of the largest pension funds and asset managers in Europe, and represents assets of around €4trillion. A full list of members is available on the membership page”.

Did you catch that: Four trillion Euros!

Remember the phrase “to use their collective influence with companies, policymakers and investors”

http://www.iigcc.org/membership.aspx

Members of the IIGCC include (I trimmed the list a bit):

BBC Pension Trust
Bedfordshire Pension Fund
BT Pension Scheme
Corporation of London Pension Fund
Environment Agency Pension Fund
Greater Manchester Pension Fund
Kent County Council
London Borough of Hounslow Pension Fund
London Borough of Islington Pension Fund
London Borough of Newham Pension Fund
London Pensions Fund Authority
South Yorkshire Pensions Authority
The Church Commissioners for England
The Church in Wales
Universities Superannuation Scheme
West Midlands Metropolitan Authorities Pension Fund
West Yorkshire Pension Fund

To be a bit more specific as to the BBC AGW Bias:

http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/1440290/iigcc-calls-urgent-changes-encourage-institutional-investment


Professional Pensions | 19 May 2009 | 01:00

Categories: Investment

Carbon markets need urgent changes in order to encourage institutional investment and the development of a low-carbon economy, the Institutional Investor Group on Climate Change says.
The group is calling for strong price signals and caps on carbon emissions that will encourage scarcity and demand.

IIGCC chairman and BBC head of pensions investment Peter Dunscombe said: “The credibility of emissions trading schemes would be greatly improved with a robust price signal as well as clear and frequent communication from the regulator on trading data and improved transparency over direct government participation in schemes.”

Catch that: “IIGCC chairman and BBC head of pensions investment Peter Dunscombe…”

The BBC is the Chair of this Carbon Trading driven investment scheme!

Recall: “to use their collective influence with companies, policymakers and investors”

I would say that the BBC has a major non-Scientific reason for their Human Induced Global Warming Bias.

If this Human Induced Global Warming thing does not pan out then perhaps a lot of BBC pensioners will be ‘left out in the cold’.

It is despicable how these charlatans of science are playing with the lives and futures of so many trusting people. These trusting people should pick up the phone, call their MP and get to the bottom of this before their pensions go the way of the dot-com or housing bubble.

It looks like a clear conflict of interest between the BBC and the public that they are supposed to serve.

Comments
  1. kim2ooo says:

    Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings and commented:
    Add your thoughts here… (optional)

  2. Reblogged this on contrary2belief and commented:
    Unsurprised.

  3. Tim Cullen says:

    before their pensions go the way of the dot-com or housing bubble

    Zero Hedge is an interesting news source… unlike Pravda the BBC.

    The UK’s Most Disturbing Number:
    Total Unfunded Pension Obligations = 321% of GDP

    For all our UK readers, who hope some day to collect pension benefits, we have two messages:
    i) our condolences, and
    ii) you won’t.

    Why? The answer comes straight from the ONS:

    The new supplementary table published by ONS in Levy (2012)10 includes the following headline figures for Government pension obligations as at end December 2010:

    Social security pension schemes (i.e. unfunded state pension scheme obligations):
    £3.843 trillion, being 263 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP)
    (£3.497 trillion at end of December 2009)

    Centrally – administered unfunded pension schemes for public sector employees (i.e. unfunded public service pension scheme obligations):
    £852 billion, being 58 per cent of GDP
    (£915 billion at end of December 2009)

    Funded DB pension schemes for which government is responsible:
    £313 billion, being 21 per cent of GDP
    (£332 billion at end of December 2009).

    In summary, the estimates in the new supplementary table indicate a total Government pension obligation, at the end of December 2010, of £5.01 trillion, or 342 per cent of GDP, of which around £4.7 trillion relates to unfunded obligations.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/11/UK%20GDP%20vs%20Obligations_0.jpg

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-12/uks-most-disturbing-number-total-unfunded-pension-obligations-321-gdp

    “Social security pensions” are clearly a ponzi scheme [aka bubble] just waiting to “pop” as their unfunded obligations increase annually.

    Whilst the beloved “public sector employees” pension funds have managed to reduce their unfunded obligations. This is amazing given the very low interest rates [over the last few years] and the deteriorating demographics as “baby boomers” start to retire in significant numbers.

    All pension funds are equal but some pension funds are more equal than others – especially when they have their snouts in the trough.

  4. edmh says:

    Have a look at RENIXX

    http://www.renewable-energy-industry.com/stocks/

    in the last 5 years it has lost 92% of its value.

    But it OK at the BBC because the UK taxpayers underwrites their pension fund so they can go on flogging the CAGW theme with no personal downside.

  5. Tim Cullen says:

    Climate change: another of those interesting networks
    Richard North, 14/11/2012

    Neglecting the other delicious members, and focusing on the BBC, it seems we have a situation where the state broadcaster is a corporate member of the Media Trust which, in turn, is a member of the International Broadcasting Trust, which is paid by the Government (DFID) to lobby the … er … BBC about climate change. And so the circle closes.

    Small wonder it is really that the BBC did not want too much of a spotlight focused on these seminars.

    http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=83332