Also In The News - part 3

[Daggers]

Retired Narbs Rd chippy owner being booted out by normal government on normal island. 
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-67654360

Edited 8 December 2023 by Daggers

[Daggers]

4 minutes ago, SecretPro said:

Are we really going to pretend that the reasons the Tories want to stop the boats is to preserve human life?

 

Of Course the small boat crossings are a bad thing - the answer is to open legal routes so that people don't have to risk life and limb to get here - which is the bit the Tories aren't interested, because they don't value human life, they just value votes.

And if they employed sufficient staff at the Home Office in the first place then asylum applications could be processed fast enough not to warrant lengthy, expensive stays in hotels, processing centres or prison ships. 
 

80% of applications are eventually granted - the problem is the broken system. 

[jgtuk]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 No i understand that this is their stated desire. I . And i have a lot of sympathy with their concerns.  However, i just cant align myself with the idea that its ok if someone produces oil just as long as it isn't us, which is pretty much what they are wanting by protesting against the issuing of new permits. I actually think it would be so much better for us AND the environment if we are the ones producing oil rather than having it shipped in from thousands of miles away..  The cost of oil would be so much cheaper and therefore the cost of pretty much everything else would be so much cheaper and therefore the cost of living in general , Whilst we continue to make the transition to more renewable energy sources where possible.  I have just accepted thats going to happen at a slightly more manageable pace than some have. I feel we are making good progress and are one of the nations leading the way and this should be recognised.

I assume you think JSO are only present in the UK from your comments?

 

Who is saying this?? Your'e having a laugh if you think it's better for us and the environment if we continue to give out NEW licences and therefore prolonging the use of fossil fuels.

 

The cost of oil will never be cheaper (renewables are the cheapest form of energy)

 

The transition will take much, much longer (do we have that luxury?)

 

 

That pace will mean the deaths of thousands (tens? hundreds?)

 

 

https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-why-banning-new-north-sea-oil-and-gas-is-not-a-just-stop-oil-plan/

 

 

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, Dunge said:

They’re definitely going to try to drive this into being the number one issue over coming months. The Liz Truss saga has massively damaged the Conservatives on the economy, to the point where people are laughing at them. So they’ll go with two lines of attack: Migration numbers (legal or otherwise) and social policy, particularly trans and cancel culture. They’ll threaten that if Labour get into power then the Old English culture that the older population know will be taken from them forever, and by a man who tried to put Jeremy Corbyn into Number 10. (Missing out the part where he later kicked Corbyn out of the same party.)

 

But immigration will be the main line because it’s somewhere that the Tories can speak strong words while Starmer will likely squirm.

Labour’s immigration policy is currently fine, no need for Starmer to squirm on it. They can still be hard on reducing net migration, which I think we all know needs to happen, while not introducing inhumane policy.

 

At the end of the day the Tories can say whatever they like on migration, we have 13 years of evidence that they simply cannot back up their words. 

[MPH]

14 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

I assume you think JSO are only present in the UK from your comments?

 

Who is saying this?? Your'e having a laugh if you think it's better for us and the environment if we continue to give out NEW licences and therefore prolonging the use of fossil fuels.

 

The cost of oil will never be cheaper (renewables are the cheapest form of energy)

 

The transition will take much, much longer (do we have that luxury?)

 

 

That pace will mean the deaths of thousands (tens? hundreds?)

 

 

https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-why-banning-new-north-sea-oil-and-gas-is-not-a-just-stop-oil-plan/

 

 

i couldn't have made it clearer that this is with the intention of continuing to make the transition to more renewable sources. with each new license, less oil will need to be inported.

 

Do we have that luxury? The problem is the length of time it took to take this issue seriously. Its going to be a long process. Period.  The problem is not the UK.. we are 3rd on the list of  nations taking action and making the transitions.  the attention should be aimed at other nations speeding up THEIR process. we are a tiny small nation, us speeding up the process of 10-15 years will have the most minute of impacts whilst much larger nations speeding up their process by even 5 years will have a far greater impact..

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, SecretPro said:

Are we really going to pretend that the reasons the Tories want to stop the boats is to preserve human life?

 

Of Course the small boat crossings are a bad thing - the answer is to open legal routes so that people don't have to risk life and limb to get here - which is the bit the Tories aren't interested, because they don't value human life, they just value votes.

I don't think opening legal routes would help unless they were open to all.  The reason Joe Soap from foreign parts is willing to part with a small fortune and risk his life crossing the Channel, is because Joe Soap wants to live in the UK.  If the legal immigration was raised from 1 million to 2 million or 5 million or 10 million, but Joe Soap wasn't on the enlarged list, then he would still pay his money.  The only way to stop him is to let him in by another route, or to make it not worth his while.

[Robo61]

18 hours ago, MPH said:

 

i Think some elements of Just stop oil are hoping for exactly that. Otherwise, why protest?

 

it would be very short sighted of them to not see the progress the UK is making. We are literally miles ahead of so many other nations in that respect.

 

 

the UK is literally 3rd on the list of nations leading the way in renewable energy.

 

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/11-countries-leading-the-charge-on-renewable-energy/

They are protesting only because this Government changed its policy on the granting licences to extract oil nothing more nothing less.

 

Whilst up to the last couple of years the UK have been doing very well and Governments pre Truss do deserve some praise for that. However if we keep on the current tractectory we will soon fall behind the rest of the world. Given that we are in the top half a dozen in terms of historical emissions and we have an obligation to show an example to the rest of the world.

 

The link shows nothing of the sort, it is merely a list of countries, in no particular order, that have made progress and is by no means inclusive.

[jgtuk]

22 minutes ago, MPH said:

i couldn't have made it clearer that this is with the intention of continuing to make the transition to more renewable sources. with each new license, less oil will need to be inported.

 

Do we have that luxury? The problem is the length of time it took to take this issue seriously. Its going to be a long process. Period.  The problem is not the UK.. we are 3rd on the list of  nations taking action and making the transitions.  the attention should be aimed at other nations speeding up THEIR process. we are a tiny small nation, us speeding up the process of 10-15 years will have the most minute of impacts whilst much larger nations speeding up their process by even 5 years will have a far greater impact..

Not true... 

 

"The private companies that own the fields are under no obligation to sell the oil and gas to UK energy suppliers. So even if we extract more fossil fuels in the UK, there’s no reason to think it would end up being used in British homes and on British roads at a price that’s any lower than the amount companies pay on global commodities markets — it’s a free market where the fossil fuels go to the highest bidder."

 

Other nations are also under pressure to speed up their transition to renewables. As one of the richest countries in the world we should be leading not following and that in itself would put even more pressure on the nations falling behind.

Oil will not disapear overnight and nor will our need for it's many uses but it's possible to force a transition more quickly by pushing green policies, subsidising renewables (as is happening with fossil fuels, a figure in the billions) and stop licencing new oil and gas fields.

 

 

[Dunge]

47 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Labour’s immigration policy is currently fine, no need for Starmer to squirm on it. They can still be hard on reducing net migration, which I think we all know needs to happen, while not introducing inhumane policy.

 

At the end of the day the Tories can say whatever they like on migration, we have 13 years of evidence that they simply cannot back up their words. 

I agree. But Starmer’s going to have to be ready for the attack and be able to give his answer clearly, because the right wing press will go on the attack against him with it and try to make it the defining issue of the election.

[Robo61]

4 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

I don't think opening legal routes would help unless they were open to all.  The reason Joe Soap from foreign parts is willing to part with a small fortune and risk his life crossing the Channel, is because Joe Soap wants to live in the UK.  If the legal immigration was raised from 1 million to 2 million or 5 million or 10 million, but Joe Soap wasn't on the enlarged list, then he would still pay his money.  The only way to stop him is to let him in by another route, or to make it not worth his while.

Legal routes are not the be all and end all, but these so called boat people have already ensured very difficult journeys to get to France,if they could apply in France then without doubt but there would be fewer left to cross by dinghy. That would help in deterring the people traffickers in France as there would no longer be a critical mass of people to make their illegal activity worthwhile. The problem is this government have put all their eggs in the basket that was always doomed to failure and will remain so.

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

Labour’s immigration policy is currently fine, no need for Starmer to squirm on it. They can still be hard on reducing net migration, which I think we all know needs to happen, while not introducing inhumane policy.

 

At the end of the day the Tories can say whatever they like on migration, we have 13 years of evidence that they simply cannot back up their words. 

It unequivocally doesn’t.

 

The country has chronic staffing shortages in multiple critical areas and an ageing population that needs its pensions paid. This only gets solved by increasing the working population level through migration.

[MPH]

39 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

Not true... 

 

"The private companies that own the fields are under no obligation to sell the oil and gas to UK energy suppliers. So even if we extract more fossil fuels in the UK, there’s no reason to think it would end up being used in British homes and on British roads at a price that’s any lower than the amount companies pay on global commodities markets — it’s a free market where the fossil fuels go to the highest bidder."

 

Other nations are also under pressure to speed up their transition to renewables. As one of the richest countries in the world we should be leading not following and that in itself would put even more pressure on the nations falling behind.

Oil will not disapear overnight and nor will our need for it's many uses but it's possible to force a transition more quickly by pushing green policies, subsidising renewables (as is happening with fossil fuels, a figure in the billions) and stop licencing new oil and gas fields.

 

 

 

 

 This is for the existing permits and licenses.

 

Under no obligation  doesn't mean they will refuse to. Besides, they want more licenses  as part of the contract  can make it that they have to sell at least part of it to the British market

[MPH]

44 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

They are protesting only because this Government changed its policy on the granting licences to extract oil nothing more nothing less.

 

Whilst up to the last couple of years the UK have been doing very well and Governments pre Truss do deserve some praise for that. However if we keep on the current tractectory we will soon fall behind the rest of the world. Given that we are in the top half a dozen in terms of historical emissions and we have an obligation to show an example to the rest of the world.

 

The link shows nothing of the sort, it is merely a list of countries, in no particular order, that have made progress and is by no means inclusive.

 

 

i'd like to see some evidence for that claim

[jgtuk]

7 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

 This is for the existing permits and licenses.

 

Under no obligation  doesn't mean they will refuse to. Besides, they want more licenses  as part of the contract  can make it that they have to sell at least part of it to the British market

Do you think they’ll sell it to us cheaply because it’s kind. 
It’s an open market, they want cash. 
 

edit: it’s also the wrong type of oil, we can’t use it…

Edited 8 December 2023 by jgtuk

[FoxesDeb]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

i couldn't have made it clearer that this is with the intention of continuing to make the transition to more renewable sources. with each new license, less oil will need to be inported.

 

Do we have that luxury? The problem is the length of time it took to take this issue seriously. Its going to be a long process. Period.  The problem is not the UK.. we are 3rd on the list of  nations taking action and making the transitions.  the attention should be aimed at other nations speeding up THEIR process. we are a tiny small nation, us speeding up the process of 10-15 years will have the most minute of impacts whilst much larger nations speeding up their process by even 5 years will have a far greater impact..

I looked at the link earlier and it looked to me more like the UK was mentioned third in a list, not that the UK is three from top of the list of nations with the highest production of renewable energy. I'd happily be shown otherwise, it just would surprise me if it were true, that's all.

[MPH]

5 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

Do you think they’ll sell it to us cheaply because it’s kind. 
It’s an open market, they want cash. 
 

edit: it’s also the wrong type of oil, we can’t use it…

 

 

they want the license, we issue it on our terms.

[jgtuk]

7 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

they want the license, we issue it on our terms.

But where is your evidence that it will happen, not just an idea you had?

You’re also missing the bit about us not being able to use that oil…

Edited 8 December 2023 by jgtuk

[Wymsey]

4 hours ago, Greg2607 said:

if you are angry about that... wait until you find out they are spending £1.6bn overs two years on the Bibby Stockholm........  

That seems like a disaster from the word go.., but what are the, legal, best possible practical alternatives to deal with the migrant influx?

 

This is one good example of how poor the government is in dealing with sensitive and quite urgent issues.

Edited 8 December 2023 by Wymsey

[MPH]

6 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

But where is your evidence that it will happen, not just an idea you had?

You’re also missing the bit about us not being able to use that oil…

well, thats kind of how contracts work - you negotiate to make sure both sides get what they want.

 

 

and to your second point, just because we currently have the wrong type of refinery for the oil we produce does not mean that can not be changed or adapted.

[Lionator]

35 minutes ago, Daggers said:

It unequivocally doesn’t.

 

The country has chronic staffing shortages in multiple critical areas and an ageing population that needs its pensions paid. This only gets solved by increasing the working population level through migration.

I agree, but surely the net migration is unsustainably high in terms of housing/facility? You can’t go on at 700k+ for more than a couple of years? 

[CosbehFox]

I heard a radio 4 report today of a border crisis from Mexico to the US currently. It absolutely blew my mind that one of the migrants was from Afghanistan who been smuggled into Central America and spent 50 days get thru it to Mexico and then finally the US. 
 

 

[FoxesDeb]

7 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I agree, but surely the net migration is unsustainably high in terms of housing/facility? You can’t go on at 700k+ for more than a couple of years? 

Governments worldwide need to get better at accepting and dealing with immigrants, the situation is only going to deepen the further we get into the climate crisis

[jgtuk]

7 minutes ago, MPH said:

well, thats kind of how contracts work - you negotiate to make sure both sides get what they want.

 

 

and to your second point, just because we currently have the wrong type of refinery for the oil we produce does not mean that can not be changed or adapted.

But it’s never happened before… do you really believe that will happen. We’ve been screwed over for years as consumers. 
We can’t change or adapt the refineries, cost prohibitive apparently, we’d have to build new ones which kind of defeats the purpose of cutting down on oil. 

[MPH]

1 minute ago, jgtuk said:

But it’s never happened before… do you really believe that will happen. We’ve been screwed over for years as consumers. 
We can’t change or adapt the refineries, cost prohibitive apparently, we’d have to build new ones which kind of defeats the purpose of cutting down on oil. 

  If you're talking about the reduction in oil prices... I Hate to say this because i despise the guy, but one think i have to give trump credit for is overseeing a marked drop in fuel prices n the United states. He openly and brazenly repeated  that he was doing a deal with the oil companies for basically throwing licenses around like confetti.  Now i should point  out is was likely for different reasons than what we are talking about it, my point being the issuing country can have some sway when issuing licenses... I also would suggest that something being ' cost prohibitve' is an excuse and can be interpreted as saying it will eat into the oil companies profits.

[Robo61]

46 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

i'd like to see some evidence for that claim

40 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/58160547

Well we are certainly not on track to meet our own targets.