Desire for net zero referendum growing among public, poll finds

Posted: November 27, 2022 by oldbrew in democracy, Emissions, net zero, Politics
Tags: ,


Policies based on pseudo-official UN climate theories are now so politically significant, the public want a say, according to this poll. Voters never agreed to the draconian contents of the Climate Change Act (2008). Open debate has been marginalised for years now.
– – –
More people than ever want a referendum on the Government’s net zero policy, a survey has found.

A poll by YouGov found that 44 per cent of adults in Britain supported “holding a national referendum to decide whether or not the UK pursues a net zero carbon policy”, with 27 per cent opposed, while 29 per cent said they did not know, reports The Telegraph.

When the “don’t knows” were excluded, 62 per cent wanted a referendum. A poll on the same question a year ago found that 58 per cent wanted a ballot on the issue.

Excluding “don’t knows”, 66 per cent of 2019 Labour voters backed a poll, compared with 60 per cent of Liberal Democrat voters and 56 per cent of Conservative voters.

Lib Dem voters were the most decisive group, with only 15 per cent “don’t knows”, compared with 25 per cent for Labour and 24 per cent for the Tories. Both Remainers and Leavers supported a referendum, at 58 per cent and 61 per cent of those expressing an opinion, respectively.

The survey was commissioned by Car26, which is campaigning for a referendum on net zero and a pause in carbon-related regulations until such a ballot is held.

However, speaking to The Telegraph, the Conservative MP carrying out a review of net zero delivery for the Government, Chris Skidmore, said there could be no delay to measures such as banning petrol cars because it would damage public trust.

Full report here.

Comments
  1. Phoenix44 says:

    So banning something most of us have chosen to buy and value and being forced to instead buy something more expensive and worse won’t “damage public trust”?

    These people are nothing more than authoritarians, sure they are right and sure they know how to run a complex, non-lihear economy. When they don’t.

  2. liardetg says:

    Is the idiot Skidmore planning to decarbonise the thousands upon thousands of diesel powered 12 wheel artics in Europe? If not, then s few EVs bought by rich virtue signalers won’t shift global temperature’s much. But that’s not the objective which is to mess up the lives of all of us. Oh, and aviation? Here we have six share ploughs, plough by battery? Hoots of incredible laughter.

  3. cognog2 says:

    Doesn’t Chris Skidmore know that ‘Public Trust’ is at an all time low these days?

    The only way to start restoring it would be to completely Reform or dispense with the Climate Change Act 2008, which was passed by a (temporary?) brain dead bunch of Westminster Politicians with a dictator like 99.4% majority.
    In conjunction, the resulting ‘NZE’ —:Net Zero Emissions policy should be dumped ASAP preferably without scaring the Financial Markets.

    We really must put a stop to these grossly COERCIVE policies masquerading as for the social well-being of the planet.

  4. oldbrew says:

    cognog2 says:
    Doesn’t Chris Skidmore know that ‘Public Trust’ is at an all time low these days?
    – – –
    Yes…
    Mr Skidmore – who reveals in the Telegraph that he is standing down at the next election – said…

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/11/26/chris-skidmore-net-zero-tsar-stand-mp-tory-exodus-continues/

    He’s 41.

  5. Gamecock says:

    Nothing improves public trust like starving them.

    8 million people in London. No petrol = no food. If no power doesn’t get ’em, no food surely will.

  6. Gamecock says:

    A referendum may not give you the answer you want. You will be shocked by how many vote for starving and freezing.

  7. One group wants to do net zero rapidly, no matter if people do not have reliable energy. Another group wants to move more slowly.

    Is there no group who wants to study and discuss and debate what used to cause climate change back when it was natural? There were warmer times in history when it was all natural.

    Going from 300 to 400 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere added one molecule of CO2 to ten thousand molecules of atmosphere.

    This whole debate is about almost nothing.

    It is way past time to study history and data and understand and base actions on facts.

  8. oldbrew says:

    Re. the forthcoming assorted energy bans in the UK, the Irish aren’t enjoying their peat ban.

    Protests Erupt After Irish Govt Bans Peat, A Natural, Abundant Fuel
    NOV 23, 2022
    https://climatechangedispatch.com/protests-erupt-after-irish-govt-bans-peat-a-natural-abundant-fuel/

  9. History shows that climate warms as ice retreats, History shows that climate cools as ice advances. “so called science” tells us warming causes ice to retreat and cooling causes ice to advance, but they say, “no one know why” it must be “chaos”.

    Common sense tells us the advancing ice causes colder and the retreating ice causes warmer.

    Greenland ice core records show ice accumulation the most in the warmest times when the Arctic is thawed. Data shows cooling after that.

    Greenland ice core records show ice accumulation the least in the coldest times when the Arctic is frozen. Data shows warming after that.

    Recent data and news told us of over six feet of snow in Buffalo New York from one Lake Effect Snowfall because the Great Lakes were warmer and thawed.

    The warmer it gets the faster Arctic Ocean Effect Snowfall will limit the upper limits of warming and then, after a few hundred years, based on history and ice core records, the ice will advance and cause another colder period.

    CO2 does not change the temperature that sea ice is removed, any warming from CO2 will just bring the more snowfall sooner.

    Climate Change is Normal, Natural, Necessary, Self-Correcting and it is controlled by Water, in all of its abundance and changing states.

    Tropical Storms in the Tropics limit temperature, the warmer days will have more cooling storms.

    Snowfall in Polar Regions is regulated by sea ice and the thermostat setting is the temperature that sea ice freezes and thaws.

    Ocean currents carry energy in warm currents to power the polar ice machines. Ocean currents carry cold water back to the tropics and the cold water is chilled by ice being pushed into the turbulent salt water currents. Ice with salt can freeze ice cream in the turbulence of and ice cream maker. The salt exclusion zone that forms under the sea ice allows the sea ice to grow underneath during times much ice is pushed into the polar regions from deep and heavy sequestered ice, chilling it to below freezing.

    The net zero people, do not study, do not understand, do not want anyone to understand, natural causes of climate change. Their Peer Reviewed Consensus is a Political Weapon, not any kind of Science.

    Natural Alternating, Warm then Cold then Warm then Cold, forever, is the way natural climate has always worked and how it will always work.

    Climate people use a static energy balance theory and model that in their computer models and try to forecast a Dynamic Climate System. They do not include abundant water, in all of its states, as a factor in dynamic cycles.

    The Static Climate Theory of alarmist have a Static System that is “out of balance” when warm energy is stored in the oceans for transport to the polar regions and is out of balance when cold water chilled by thawing ice is transported back the the tropics, yet the dynamic cycles are what showed up in history and data as normal.

  10. […] Desire for net zero referendum growing among public, poll finds — Tallbloke’s Talkshop […]

  11. catweazle666 says:

    So the Green shill Skidmark doesn’t believe that public trust has already been pretty much obliterated?

    Makes sense…

  12. tallbloke says:

    “Chris Skidmore, said there could be no delay to measures such as banning petrol cars”

    #SackThemAll

  13. tallbloke says:

    Meanwhile, a veteran German politician is critical of the continuation of climate policy, and the US foreign policy it provides a figleaf for, by other means…

    “Germany has found itself reaping the consequences of the crisis in Ukraine, facing skyrocketing energy and food costs, recession and the danger of permanent deindustrialization as Washington and Brussels continue to call for more and more sanctions against Russian energy to try to “punish” Moscow for its military operation in Ukraine.

    The United States and its allies have spent the entire period since 2014 preparing for a confrontation with Russia in Ukraine, Oskar Lafontaine, a veteran German statesman with over forty years of political experience under his belt, has said.

    “Of course, I also mean the conflict in Ukraine, which began with the Maidan putsch in Kiev in 2014. Since then, the US and its Western vassals have been arming Ukraine and systematically preparing it for confrontation with Russia. Ukraine thus became a de facto, if not de jure, member of NATO. This backstory has been studiously ignored by Western politicians and the mainstream media,” Lafontaine told Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten in an interview published Sunday.

    “For more than 100 years, it has been the declared aim of US policy to prevent German business and technology from merging with Russian raw materials at all cost. It is perfectly clear that, if you take this history into account, we are dealing with a US proxy war against Russia which has been prepared for a long time,” Lafontaine said.

    Lafontaine, who has worked under Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, Helmut Kohl and Gerhard Schroder, and served as president of the Bundesrat, minister president of Saarland, minister of finance, and leader of Die Linke and the SPD, blasted the current crop of German and European leaders for going along with policies which have brought Berlin to the brink of disaster.

    “It is unforgivable that the SPD in particular betrayed the legacy of Willy Brandt and his policy of détente, and did not even seriously insist on compliance with the Minsk Agreements,” the politician said, referring to the 2015 peace agreements meant to restore peace to the Donbass.

    Lafontaine slammed the German government over its limp-wristed response to the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines, which he characterized as a “declaration of war on Germany.” It was “pathetic and cowardly” of the federal government to try to “sweep incident under the carpet,” despite evidence that “the USA either carried out the attack directly or greenlit it,” the politician said.”

  14. oldbrew says:

    Net zero is itself a deindustrialization policy.

  15. catweazle666 says:

    Exactly so, oldbrew.
    That is the point of the whole AGW hoax.

  16. oldbrew says:

    Dramatic Recovery in Global Sea Ice Confounds the Net Zero Catastrophists
    BY CHRIS MORRISON 28 NOVEMBER 2022

    https://dailysceptic.org/2022/11/28/dramatic-recovery-in-global-sea-ice-confounds-the-net-zero-catastrophists/

  17. catweazle666 says:

    The Greenland ice cap seems to be doing OK too, oldbrew.

  18. oldbrew says:

    UK confirms the first state backing of a nuclear project in over 30 years
    29 November

    The government will become a 50% shareholder in Sizewell C’s development
    . . .
    Ministers have also confirmed a plan to set up Great British Nuclear, a body aiming to develop the framework for a pipeline of new builds.

    https://www.energylivenews.com/2022/11/29/uk-confirms-the-first-state-backing-of-a-nuclear-project-in-over-30-years/

  19. Gamecock says:

    “The government will become a 50% shareholder in Sizewell C’s development”

    I find this impossible to believe. Given governments’ capricious cancellation of nuclear projects WITHOUT CAUSE, it makes no sense for a private investor to get into nuclear without 100% government backing.

    If they can kill it, they have to put up ALL the money. Who would risk their own money?

  20. oldbrew says:

    Below is an extract from the first letter…

    Letters: How can Britain be weaned off gas with no reliable alternatives in place?
    By
    Letters to the Editor
    30 November 2022

    ‘Given that there is no economically viable gigawatt-scale solution to electricity storage even on the horizon, would somebody in the Government please explain how, if the country is to wean itself off fossil fuels for electricity generation, it intends to keep the lights on without massive investment in nuclear power?’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2022/11/30/letters-how-can-britain-weaned-gas-no-reliable-alternatives/
    – – –
    The Government has a simple ‘plan’: dump the problem on another government in n years’ time. Net zero may have been overtaken by some other nonsense by then.

  21. Gamecock says:

    “Given that there is no economically viable gigawatt-scale solution to electricity storage”

    Could have stopped there. “Storage” will always be finite; outages are not so constrained.

    “Storage” is a non-starter, pushed for its psychological/propaganda value.

  22. oldbrew says:

    Lack Of Battery Storage Makes Green-Energy Grid A Pipe Dream
    DEC 1, 2022.

    GWPF Director, Dr. Benny Peiser said:

    “The skyrocketing prices in UK electricity markets in recent days are a warning. Without economic forms of electricity storage, a drive for renewables is going to end very badly for consumers.”

    https://climatechangedispatch.com/lack-of-battery-storage-makes-green-energy-grid-a-pipe-dream/

    Desperation for electricity will become a regular thing. Already happening.

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 )

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