Was someone glancing out the parliamentary windows?
2 Amendment of 2050 target or baseline year
(1) The Secretary of State may by order —(a) amend the percentage specified in section 1(1);
(b) amend section 1 to provide for a different year to be the baseline year.(2) The power in subsection (1)(a) may only be exercised —
(a) if it appears to the Secretary of State that there have been significant developments in —
(i) scientific knowledge about climate change…
I think this is a ‘law’ open to any and all amendments because it is so general and vague.
After all, what does ‘significant knowledge about climate change’ actually mean? And who decides?
Furthermore, the clause doesn’t end with this focus on scientific knowledge. It adds and OR clause, which states, ‘or, European or international law or policy that makes it appropriate to do so’.
Essentially, this means that the basic rule has no weight and can be altered or ignored at will.
Lowest solar winds in 50 years, very little sunspot activity and yet somehow it is still our fault.
While I’ve been a conservationist all my life (take only pictures, leave only footprints), I refuse to do anything because it is labeled as “green” or “eco-friendly”. The whole eco-industry is nothing more than cashing in on the western world’s collective guilt.
Amazing that the item that should be caveat (a) is down the list at (i). I guess that tells the swivel servants that they really don’t have to pay attention to science since developments in that field have low priority.
Off Topic; Citic Pacific Corp., subsidiary of Power Corp. that was set up in Hong Kong with the help of Brian Mulroney issued a cease trading order on Oct. 31st pending some announcement.
This was the outfit that were going to build coal fired power plants in China, as well as invest in infrastructure and aviation manufacturing according to the company website.
Wonder what will be the contents of that announcement?
http://www.citicpacific.com/upload/en/20081031-1e.pdf
http://www.citicpacific.com/