Why ‘track climate change’? We all know ‘tracking’ means using climate models to conjure up attribution numbers that can’t be questioned, except possibly by other climate models. How useful is that?
– – –
The Met Office will be reduced to its smallest size since the Second World War (says London Economic) if it is hit by a 20 per cent Civil Service staff cut, new figures have revealed.
Ministers have ordered every government department and agency to draw up plans to reduce their plans by at least one fifth, it has emerged.
According to the i newspaper, officials must also explain how they could cut staff numbers by up to 40 per cent if required.
Met backlash
The Met Office is expected to lobby ministers to preserve its current workforce, arguing that its role has never been more vital because of the need to forecast climate change.
It will also claim that its work pays for itself – because it is able to sell its services to commercial clients.
If the Met Office’s current workforce of just under 2,000 is slashed by 20 per cent, it will go below 1,600.
Full article here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Is this another case of ‘Boris not believing his own s**t’??
‘Met backlash’
“If you cut us, we’ll give you worse weather, dammit!”
[…] Tories to slash Met Office staff – ‘despite need to track climate change’ […]
I’m in tears, here! Dylin’s maybe involved.
There’s plenty of work for solid citizens at airports 😀
The plan calls for reducing ALL departmental civil service rolls by 20% — not just the MET. They certsinly are nt being targetted.
But, they want an exemption because “Climate Change”
““The Government has invested in the Met Office recognising the vital work we do helping to protect us all from severe weather and our changing climate.”
The Met does nothing to protect people from severe weather or climate change — it does perform a vital role in weather prediction and storm warnings — which I doubt it will curtail because of a staffing cut. What they need to cut is all the climate change forecasting nonsense.
If anyone actually needs to be terrified of the future weather, the UN IPCC has loads of nonsense to serve up which needs no staff to deliver it — it is already on the Internet.
I’m concerned as to how this may affect the shipping forecast. Despite being inland, it’s been a stabilising force in my life for so long..
Amazing that over the decades the actual work has been taken over by computers and automated weather stations yet the Met Office has never cut its staff.
Had this been a business, IT should have halved the workforce.
Met orifice is not fit for purpose since it was Slingoed.
Arctic sea ice extent at 30-year highs
Cap Allon
Electroverse.net
Wed, 01 Jun 2022
EUMETSAT, as the organization is known, was created through an international convention signed by 30 European nations.
What their data reveals is contrary to the official AGW narrative (I’m surprised the agency hasn’t been branded ‘misinformation’ and immediately scraped from the internet): currently, Arctic Sea Ice Extent is ‘taking out’ the levels logged during the 2020s, 2010s and 2000s, and is into the averages last observed during the 1990s and even the 1980s, with no signs of it slowing-up:
https://electroverse.net/arctic-sea-ice-extent-at-30-year-highs/
“its role has never been more vital because of the need to forecast climate change.” Another load of bull droppings. None of these CAGW mobs has EVER been successful at predicting the planetary temperature at a fixed point in the future… AND THEY NEVER WILL.
If they were honest about it and started paying attention to cosmic ray/cloud cover, and Nikolov and Zeller’s seminal works, orbital influences, and other non “satanic gases” likely influences, we might actually get some decent science out of it. Yeah. Sure. That’s likely /s
‘The Met Office is expected to lobby ministers to preserve its current workforce, arguing that its role has never been more vital because of the need to forecast climate change.
It will also claim that its work pays for itself – because it is able to sell its services to commercial clients.’
There is a business of selling weather forecasts. They might have some accuracy a few days out. Why would anyone pay for ‘forecast climate change.’ Their climate predictions have double-ought zero value.
They are a weather service, wanting to be something else. The something else can be shed.
They should shut it down and let some private operators run the services under contract. Australia has a number of companies that provide weather service to TV channels and even to BOM. Similarly in USA. I am sure there must be organisations in UK that could do a better job. If a private concern forgets about climate models and forecast based on past experiences of weather patterns not only will they be more accurate for short term (two weeks) the cost will be far lower. Is there not a saying that the public sector will always give a poorer service at twice the cost?
For mid-long range forecasts; Piers Corbyn? (Haven’t heard much from WeatherAction recently).