Jump to content
We are aware of the intermittent site speed issues at the moment. Please be patient and don't repeatedly click things as that compounds the issue.

Proceedings of the Castle Aching Parish Council, 1905


Recommended Posts

Absolutely!

It will continue to do so, for many years to come.

 

However, I shall be happy to limit its usage once people stop flying around. Or China agrees to stop burning coal?

 

But then, at over 70 years old, I guess my car's 'carbon footprint' has long since been consigned to history?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Malcolm 0-6-0 said:

We've just come out of a lockdown that's lasted since August and people just want to be out having fun and these far right b$stards are trying to ruin that just to protest about getting vaccinated

 

Blame Sky News. The same Sky News that back when the right wing John Howard and then Tony Abbott governments were unrolling ""vital" national security laws to battle"" Middle Eastern Terrorism""  that was going to hit us like a tidal wave and ruin the Australian  Way Of Life they were the cheer squad for getting our rights trampled on.

 

Arrested on suspicion  without even knowing or being told  the charge? Arrested on suspicion and unable to contact anyone for 14 days? Arrested on suspicion  and then having the 14 days endlessly extended, again without the ability to contact anyone to let them know where you had vanished to?  Arrested on suspicion and then charged  if upon release you told anyone where you'd been? Government logging all metadata of everyones emails and texts?  Laws making it an offense for journalists to withhold their sources from the government? Laws making it illegal for workers or visiting medical personnel to reveal  any details about the conditions in our offshore detention camps where refugees are kept indefinitely? 

 

These and worse were all passed or proposed by the Howard and Abbott governments and the Sky News d!ckheads were right on board  "Ïf you've done nothing wrong  youvé got nothing to fear!" was their mindless endless  response to any questioning of the laws. In fact if you questioned the laws you must be a muslim terrorist sympathiser. Now these same  d!cks are all indignantly shouting "FREEDOM!"  cos of laws that say you have to wear a mask when shopping and get vaccinated to prevent you dying in an awful way grasping for each breath like a fish out of water?

 

The stupidity and hypocrisy is so breathtaking that it too makes it hard to breathe sometimes when you think about it. I've found that if I think hard enough about it by accident  when I'm standing up I go faint from all the breath it took and I keel over. 

 

Meanwhile, Ted Cruz and other assorted RWNJ in America have also jumped aboard and are hammering Australias covid response.

 

Oh the unbeleeevable  irony of people who continue to support a president who tried and is still trying to overthrow a democratically decided  election result, is manipulating electoral rules to prevent minorities voting, labels journalism that is critical in any way "Fake News!""  that should be banned  and is a supporter of right wing extremists who march through towns with burning tiki torches  chanting "You Will Not Replace Us!" labelling our government  "Nazis"!

 

Dóh, Ive just fallen over again.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/22/rightwing-pundit-candace-owens-suggests-us-invade-australia-to-free-an-oppressed-people

 

 

 

 

Edited by monkeysarefun
  • Round of applause 5
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@monkeysarefun, I've just been watching your PM at the COP here spouting forth on all the things Australia is going to do on climate change, but he made no suggestion, that I heard, that they are going to in any way limit the amount of coal they export to China!  But maybe what China does with the coal is China's problem!

 

Jim

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caley Jim said:

@monkeysarefun, I've just been watching your PM at the COP here spouting forth on all the things Australia is going to do on climate change, but he made no suggestion, that I heard, that they are going to in any way limit the amount of coal they export to China!  But maybe what China does with the coal is China's problem!

 

Jim

What??!?! Scott Morrison is currently in Scotland spruiking his governments inaction on climate change? Thats terrible, cos it means that back here this guy is running the place!

 

image.png.34b865d2f19fe24bc8b9f2a0736aaf35.png

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caley Jim said:

@monkeysarefun, I've just been watching your PM at the COP here spouting forth on all the things Australia is going to do on climate change, but he made no suggestion, that I heard, that they are going to in any way limit the amount of coal they export to China!  But maybe what China does with the coal is China's problem!

 

Jim

 

Our silly PM Scott Morrison is the leader of the Liberal Party. However the Liberal party's big problem is that they are in a coalition with the much smaller National Party (used to be the country party). Without the Nats as partners the Liberal party would be in the minority and thus couldn't form government.

 

The Nationals went from representing the rural sector, mainly farmers, to being the representatives of the, guess what? coal miners. This is because the coal mining in Australia is in Queensland and northern NSW both areas of National Party seats. So the reality is that Scomo can't lower our emissions because if he does the obvious and attacks the problem at the source the Nats will use their numbers to destroy the Coalition Government. 

 

So in reality Australia is led not by the Liberal National Party Coalition (LNP) but by the minority Nationals. The Nats are profoundly anti-everything that has a whiff of science in it especially doing anything about climate change. Scomo claimed to have a plan to meet the 2050 target he'd present at the Glasgow meeting - the truth is that the plan is nothing but a complete surrender to the interests of the Nationals which puts us back where we have always been - pretending climate change isn't happening.    

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

Candace Owens is what is generally referred to as what is rather rudely, but absolutely correct, a "coconut". Makes a big deal of how she's an unoppressed black woman and refuses to be a victim yet supports 100% the far right white supremacist policies of the Trump MAGA crowd.  Used to be one of the leaders of the Turning Point USA organization - the student wing of the MAGA movement.

 

That American attack on Australian COVID responses came about because we have a couple of very far right podcaster "journalists" in Australia, based in Melbourne. The first is a a self professed Nazi named Avi Yemeni (of all things Jewish) who is a stringer for the Canadian far right alternate news source Rebel News. The second is a wedding photographer and son of a Sri Lankan refugee family called Rukshan Fernando who set himself up as another far right conservative. both have been happily feeding footage of the anti-vax demonstrations to Fox News in the US, which has resulted in it being picked up by the MAGA far right supporters in the US media like Candace Owens as well as politicians like Ted Cruz.

 

The end result has been to give these anti-vaxxers far more importance than they enjoy here and also to give the Murdoch controlled media a stick to beat up our Labor government in Victoria. The response here to the anti-vaxxers has been largely to treat them as a bloody nuisance, but the Murdoch media which is strongly conservative has given them far more prominence than they really have.      

  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Malcolm 0-6-0 said:

 

 

 

we have a couple of very far right podcaster "journalists" in Australia, based in Melbourne.   

Tradition dictates that when a Victorian brings up something about their state, a New South Welshman is duty bound to bring up examples that prove that NSW is better yet again but in this case I'll let it pass.

 

Plus, I dont think we have any notable anti vaxxers except this guy.

image.png.cc98c156e724352997175fa90b5ac9a7.png

 

 

 

Oh damn., Forgot about Craig Kelly...

 

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, monkeysarefun said:

What??!?! Scott Morrison is currently in Scotland spruiking his governments inaction on climate change? Thats terrible, cos it means that back here this guy is running the place!

 

image.png.34b865d2f19fe24bc8b9f2a0736aaf35.png

 

It could be worse.

 

You could be being run by the human idiot who has your 4 legged leader in his hands.:)

  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, monkeysarefun said:

Tradition dictates that when a Victorian brings up something about their state, a New South Welshman is duty bound to bring up examples that prove that NSW is better yet again but in this case I'll let it pass.

 

Plus, I dont think we have any notable anti vaxxers except this guy.

image.png.cc98c156e724352997175fa90b5ac9a7.png

 

 

 

Oh damn., Forgot about Craig Kelly...

 

 

 

Yep there's Craig Kelly (the Ivermectin Kid) and Clive Palmer's coal mine representative in the Federal parliament. But you left out the "circle of love" girl ex-Premier Gladys Berejiklian who not only unleashed the Ruby Princess passengers but also helped her then boyfriend MP Daryl Maguire's aspiration to make a couple of millions dollars at the taxpayer's expense.

 

But at the moment there's not much to choose between the NSW Libs and the Victoria Libs. Our lot just recently reinstated Matthew Guy as leader despite him having convincingly lost the last election and still having to shake off his lobster lunch with the Capo of the local Mafia, and his Shadow Atty General (no law degree) Tim Smith has just had to resign that post because he blew .113 in a breathalyser on Saturday after hitting another car then crashing into a fence and house. Word is that he may be set to resign from Parliament.

 

If our respective Liberals were a comedy act they be a sell out every night.    :D

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Malcolm 0-6-0 said:

 

Our silly PM Scott Morrison is the leader of the Liberal Party. However the Liberal party's big problem is that they are in a coalition with the much smaller National Party (used to be the country party). Without the Nats as partners the Liberal party would be in the minority and thus couldn't form government.

 

The Nationals went from representing the rural sector, mainly farmers, to being the representatives of the, guess what? coal miners. This is because the coal mining in Australia is in Queensland and northern NSW both areas of National Party seats. So the reality is that Scomo can't lower our emissions because if he does the obvious and attacks the problem at the source the Nats will use their numbers to destroy the Coalition Government. 

 

So in reality Australia is led not by the Liberal National Party Coalition (LNP) but by the minority Nationals. The Nats are profoundly anti-everything that has a whiff of science in it especially doing anything about climate change. Scomo claimed to have a plan to meet the 2050 target he'd present at the Glasgow meeting - the truth is that the plan is nothing but a complete surrender to the interests of the Nationals which puts us back where we have always been - pretending climate change isn't happening.    

 

As a result of which, Australia is shaping up in the world public consciousness as one of the Bad Boys of climate change.  For a developed liberal democracy not hampered by being an authoritarian regime run by a ruthless dictator (China, Russia) or a semi-developing country (India), that's going to be a bit of an image problem. Now even Bolsonaroes-for-Brains has promised to stop cutting down the Amazon rain forest, Oz is heading towards being a real outlier on climate.

 

It made me review my lifestyle.  Could I justify buying so many new and shiny RTR locos (I realise, with horror, that I have 7 on pre-order as well as a bunch of Hattons coaches), rather than cut down on such rampant consumerism.  And these will all come from China, made, no doubt, in factories powered by coal-fired power stations.   

 

Then I suddenly realised that, if Australia insisted on being one of the top-five most recalcitrant polluters, for consistency's sake, I'd have to stop buying Australian wine!  So, please, please, revisit your carbon reduction strategy before I run out of booze!  

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Then I suddenly realised that, if Australia insisted on being one of the top-five most recalcitrant polluters, for consistency's sake, I'd have to stop buying Australian wine!  So, please, please, revisit your carbon reduction strategy before I run out of booze!  

 

Perhaps the thing to do to save your conscience here would be a state-by-state analysis. Do the wine-producing states have the least climate-friendly politicians or not? Failing that, an intensive state-by-state analysis of the wines themselves may lead either to greater clarity, or potentially greater indifference...

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
13 hours ago, Malcolm 0-6-0 said:

Candace Owens is what is generally referred to as what is rather rudely, but absolutely correct, a "coconut".

Rather a dodgy term, especially when used by a white person, but divisive rather than inclusive nonetheless.

Why not remove skin colour from the issue and simply call her out for what she is: a right-wing extremist?

  • Agree 3
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
15 hours ago, Caley Jim said:

But maybe what China does with the coal is China's problem

What else would they do with it?

 

When “we in the west” shifted mass production to economies with cheaper labour costs, we also happily outsourced production to countries with poor or non-existent concerns over the climate. Now, we are telling them to cut down their emissions.

 

Simplest solution (and it isn’t that simple, just simpler) is to work out the true carbon cost of production and distribution and levy that as a tax. But only if that tax is hypothecated into long term investment in true carbon neutral energy production and research. That would seriously dent China’s balance of payments, and lead to massive shortages of most consumer goods as China won’t relinquish the production capability to other nations. It would take years to re-establish production, even if we had the desire to do it, and the capital to re-invest after decades of asset-stripping and moving the proceeds to offshore tax havens.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
20 hours ago, alastairq said:

Besides, as far as the UK is concerned, the economic [financial] cost of taxing our beef, far outweighs the financial cost of any saving of the environment.

In other words,  the results  would be negligible.

That’s not the aim.

The aim is to change the eating habits by nudging people away from meat.

 

I forget the precise numbers, but roughly speaking 1 ton of people will consume 10 tons of food in their life. The same is true for, say, cows.

So, to provide meat for 1 ton of people requires 10 tons of cows, which requires 100 tons of vegetation.

Or that 100 tons of vegetables could feed 10 tons of people.

As I said, the factor of 10 may not be correct, but the exponential relationship is.

And to feed those cows, we need grassland, which is usually created by cutting dow the forests that provide us with our carbon sinks.

On top if that, the multiple-stomach digestive system of ruminants leads to more production of greenhouse gases.

 

The results would be very far from negligible.

 

There are three things we can all do towards reducing our carbon footprint:

1) Eat less meat (not advocating abstinence, just 2-3 times a week);

2) Cycle/walk/use public transport instead of driving;

3) Don’t fly, or at least cut back substantially.

 

The only other thing we can do on top of this is vote for representatives that put this issue front and foremost, ignoring all other issues that affect us. In the UK, I think that means Green Party: the others simply say more than they do.

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

But the whole beef thing is complicated by the balance with the other things we use cattle for. If we stop eating beef but continue to drink milk, eat cheese, and buy leather goods, what do we do with the male half of the cattle population, other than the small fraction retained for reproduction? If you argue that we should cease to drink milk, eat cheese, and put our cash in leather wallets too, how do we recompense hill farmers who rely on the steady income provided by their small dairy herds, the income from sheep being seasonal at best and currently miniscule? (Unlike lowland dairy farmers, their land is not suitable for arable farming.)

 

This argument probably only really applies to the British and Irish cattle population; I'm all in favour of avoiding South American beef, production of which has been responsible for destruction of rainforest, as I understand.

Edited by Compound2632
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The two words that we in the privileged 15% of the world population probably need to learn more than any others: less; and, enough. And, the further up the 15% we individually are (and you might get a surprise if you check your own standing), the more we need to learn them.

 

I was listening to Arnold Schwarzenegger talking about the topic the other day, and he made a huge amount of sense to me, except on this ‘less/enough’ point. He was totally clear that advancing technology would allow us to continue to ‘have’ (he used the example of the power output of his electric Hummer being greater than it was when petrol!), and I just don’t buy that narrative.

 

I’m definitely no saint in this score, but I’m far more conscious of it than before, and am seriously factoring environmental impact into “do we need it; can we afford it” thinking, in a way that I’m sure I didn’t even as recently as five years ago.

 

What I do notice is that children need a lot of help to “get it”. Modern children are so steeped in consumerist thinking, and bombarded with it at every turn, that they are blind to “embedded CO2 pollution” in goods and services. They “get” plastic bottles, and obvious recycling, but other things are not on their radar, and it’s no surprise given that they learn most by example, and adults are currently setting such a woeful example!

 

In short: the biggest ‘developed world’ enemy of our environment is consumerism.

 

 

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the news ....

 

Post B----T, one country is strictly following the letter of the agreement.  The other country is finding that in practice this is not working well for them and causing domestic political issues. So ... this other country stops playing ball, says, 'never mind the rules we agreed to, we want our own way'.  The first country threatens to take them to court to enforce the rules they both agreed.

 

What am I talking about? HMG bitching and whining about the Northern Ireland Protocol. trying to slide out from rules they agreed? Or Macron wanting permits for fishing boats that have not shown they qualify for permits according to rules they agreed?

 

Well, the answer is, of course, "both"

 

My irony meter is going off the scale!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

In the news ....

 

Post B----T, one country is strictly following the letter of the agreement.  The other country is finding that in practice this is not working well for them and causing domestic political issues. So ... this other country stops playing ball, says, 'never mind the rules we agreed to, we want our own way'.  The first country threatens to take them to court to enforce the rules they both agreed.

 

What am I talking about? HMG bitching and whining about the Northern Ireland Protocol. trying to slide out from rules they agreed? Or Macron wanting permits for fishing boats that have not shown they qualify for permits according to rules they agreed?

 

Well, the answer is, of course, "both"

 

My irony meter is going off the scale!!!!

 

Ah well, it was all about "taking back control"...

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Perhaps the thing to do to save your conscience here would be a state-by-state analysis. Do the wine-producing states have the least climate-friendly politicians or not? Failing that, an intensive state-by-state analysis of the wines themselves may lead either to greater clarity, or potentially greater indifference...

 

For convenience in the Hunter Valley a bit north of Sydney you can enjoy a cheeky white wine  in one of our premier wine producing regions  and then go  view some kickar5e open cut mine work just across the road .

 

Kind of a Winery and Minery tour. 

 

https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/Hunter+Region,+NSW/@-32.4407333,150.8178666,47086m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x6b0cce1839e1c6df:0x562ff793f7b67efd!8m2!3d-32.1932173!4d151.700565?hl=en

 

 

 

 

Edited by monkeysarefun
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 4
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

In the news ....

 

Post B----T, one country is strictly following the letter of the agreement.  The other country is finding that in practice this is not working well for them and causing domestic political issues. So ... this other country stops playing ball, says, 'never mind the rules we agreed to, we want our own way'.  The first country threatens to take them to court to enforce the rules they both agreed.

 

What am I talking about? HMG bitching and whining about the Northern Ireland Protocol. trying to slide out from rules they agreed? Or Macron wanting permits for fishing boats that have not shown they qualify for permits according to rules they agreed?

 

Well, the answer is, of course, "both"

 

My irony meter is going off the scale!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree about both sides being at fault but in the case of the fishing dispute, I think this has come about as a result of the rushed agreement (6 days between first publication and putting into operation) and the inability to check details.  Providing proof of fishing in an area is easy if you have a large trawler that swallows up all in its extensive path.  These boats have tracking devices and that tracking provides the proof.  That is not the case for small day boats which don't carry such tracking gear.  

 

Now if you were really interested in protecting UK fishing waters (or more accurately the fishing waters of a Crown Dependency) would you rather have those "take-all" big boats or smaller day boats taking more sustainable catches.

 

My irony meter is also off scale.

 

I don't think NI comes under quite the same scope of a rushed solution since anyone with business experience could have told the government that there would be a problem with an open land border to the EU that had to be policed if the UK stayed outside of the customs union.  Indeed many tried but were labelled the experts with whom Gove had had enough.

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

I agree about both sides being at fault but in the case of the fishing dispute, I think this has come about as a result of the rushed agreement (6 days between first publication and putting into operation) and the inability to check details.  Providing proof of fishing in an area is easy if you have a large trawler that swallows up all in its extensive path.  These boats have tracking devices and that tracking provides the proof.  That is not the case for small day boats which don't carry such tracking gear.  

 

Now if you were really interested in protecting UK fishing waters (or more accurately the fishing waters of a Crown Dependency) would you rather have those "take-all" big boats or smaller day boats taking more sustainable catches.

 

My irony meter is also off scale.

 

I don't think NI comes under quite the same scope of a rushed solution since anyone with business experience could have told the government that there would be a problem with an open land border to the EU that had to be policed if the UK stayed outside of the customs union.  Indeed many tried but were labelled the experts with whom Gove had had enough.

 

Yes, but you see, the French government has, essentially thrown its Teddy Bear out of the 'pram because the UK and Jersey have said, "Yep, you can go into our waters and fish, provided that you provide some evidence that you've already being doing it, as we agreed".

 

Now if fishing is anything like farming, which, given all the permissions and quotas, I suspect it must be, there is a lot of paperwork before one can cast a net or suck on a Fisherman's Friend. 

 

So, I'm struggling to see why requiring the agreed degree of verification is unreasonable here.

 

It is entirely possible to imagine das boot on the other foot; imagine trying to move a sausage from one part of the UK to another when you don't have all the Byzantine forms in triplicate that you agreed with the EU you'd provide in order to cross the Irish Sea!

 

I do conclude, however, that an aggravating factor in the case of NI is that this was agonised over in detail for months, though there is the sense that HMG was reckless to some extent as to whether it was a fudge that would later come unstuck, because at that point it was pretty much throwing everything out of the window, including constitutional conventions and its own MPs, to "Get B-word done".  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...