#markrutte

Dutch Supreme Court sets very dangerous precedent

No folks, this is not a joke. This is what happens when a judiciary drops impartiality and starts acting as an activist lawmaker instead of a law enforcer. The Dutch parliament is supposed to set legislation. Since when did the judiciary inherit such capabilities by a mandate from the people?

The Dutch Supreme Court has ruled the Dutch government must cut emissions by 25% by 2020 on 1990 levels on the grounds that not doing so is a violation of human rights.

To put that into context, on a per capita basis, Dutch GHG emissions have fallen 11.9% since 1990 to 9.5t per person. However, actual Dutch CO2 output in 1990 was 161,447kt CO2-e vs 162,290kt CO2e in 2017 based on. So a 25% cut vs. 1990 levels would mean the target would be 121,085kt CO2-e.

Let us not forget that the Dutch are responsible for 0.4% of global human-caused emissions. So to cut that by 25% on the latest numbers with growing emissions from China and India will mean the Dutch will be responsible for 0.3% of global emissions. Does the Dutch Supreme Court truly believe the lives of Dutch citizens will be remotely improved by knocking 0.1% off the global total?

Clearly, the Supreme Court didn’t need evidence. Which body did the Supreme Court base its verdict? On UN climate conventions. There is a problem in and of itself.

Never mind that the UN said this about the Netherlands in the past,

The WG2 IPCC climate bible noted, “The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea-level rise and river flooding because 55% of its territory is below sea level”.

This sentence was provided by a Dutch government agency – the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, which published a correction stating that the sentence should have read “55 per cent of the Netherlands is at risk of flooding; 26 per cent of the country is below sea level, and 29 per cent is susceptible to river flooding.”

Never mind that the UN didn’t issue a retraction. Who needs to know correct facts?

It gets worse,

An IPCC report which investigated models showed 98% have overestimated warming.

The Twelfth Session of Working Group I (WGI-12) was held from 23 to 26 September 2013 in Stockholm, Sweden. At the Session, the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (WGI AR5) was approved and the underlying scientific and technical assessment accepted.

Everything in the Working Group II report depends entirely on Working Group I and Working Group I depends solely on the climate data of which 98% have proven wrong.

Chapter Nine “Evaluation of Climate Models” in WGI-12 notes:

Most, though not all, models overestimate the observed warming trend in the tropical troposphere over the last 30 years and tend to underestimate the long-term lower stratospheric cooling trend. {9.4.1, Box 9.2, Figure 9.8}

“…In tropical regions, the models are too dry in the lower troposphere and too moist in the upper troposphere,” (p763)

Most climate model simulations show a larger warming in the tropical troposphere than is found in observational data sets(e.g., McKitrick et al., 2010; Santer et al., 2013).

Does the Dutch Supreme Court believe it knows better than the scientists the UN rely upon who openly admit the data is wrong? So climate change could affect food supply?

We all know the Dutch love chocolate.

Half of the world’s chocolate is currently sourced from just two African countries: Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. According to the IPCC, rising temperatures and a relative reduction in rainfall could make it less suitable for cocoa production in the future.

The research highlighted in the IPCC Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability report indicate that, under a “business as usual” scenario, those countries will experience a 3.8°F (2.1°C) increase in temperature by 2050 which could seriously impact cocoa production.

Claims that changes to the climate are also pushing cocoa-growing regions to higher altitudes in some parts of the world, which can make some crops unsustainable…production has more than doubled in the past 3 decades.

Dutch PM Mark Rutte was absolutely right to say this was a matter for politicians, not courts. What has been proven by this landmark decision is that the court is acting as a lawmaker which is NOT its role.

While some could argue that the Green Left took 9.1% of the vote in the 2017 Dutch election – its best-ever result – the latest polls for 2021 see the party ceding seats. It is hardly a mandate of the people to drastically cut emissions in such a ridiculous space of time.

Has the Dutch Supreme Court understood that c.20% of the economy is driven by industry – electronics, metal production, engineering – and agriculture? Should PM Rutte demand that it all be shut down? Will air traffic controllers at Schipol Airport be arrested and jailed if they let commercial aeroplanes circle for too long in low visibility conditions?

Dutch electricity generation is 75% powered by fossil fuels (natural gas and coal). Does the Supreme Court believe that cutting emissions 25% by 2020 is even remotely achievable without trashing the economy? Will cars be banned from the roads on weekends? Flights suspended on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays? How about Dutch citizens who don’t have a windmill bolted to their home get electricity rationed?

In conclusion, how on earth can the Dutch hit a 25% reduction target inside 12 months? Who will be charged and jailed for failing to meet these obligations in a country where no party has a mandate?

FNF Media sincerely hopes the Dutch government acquiesces the Supreme Court and watches the economy implode as it pushes energy austerity to hit targets that will reduce global emissions by 0.1%, or a 0.00000124% impact to all the CO2 in the atmosphere. All that pain for absolutely no gain.

We need a test case guinea pig to show the world just how ridiculously stupid climate alarmism is. At least the Dutch can self-medicate inside marijuana cafes in Amsterdam.

In all seriousness, the landmark decision of a Supreme Court dictating terms to the very body that sets laws is one that sets a dangerous precedent. Activism is now part and parcel of the Dutch judiciary.

Which part of failed EU don’t the UK politicians get?

Which part of the failed EU project don’t British politicians get? Why would anyone want to remain a member in a club which is so badly failing them? 40m more Europeans under the poverty line since 2007. 118 million in total or 22% of the EU population. Did they forget the Swiss handing back its free pass to enter the EU because they saw no value in joining a club anyone can join. Are the Brits wanting to ditch the pound in favour of a forced euro currency? What merits lie in remaining?

Two more clear examples emerged in the last week to show how more member states are rejecting the elites in Brussels.

League head and Italian Deputy PM Matteo Salvini has seen his party unseat the Democratic Party in Basilicata which had a strong hold on the region for 25 years. At the last election 60% of Italians voted for parties that rejected the EU. This poverty stricken area south of Italy has now endorsed League to take care of its affairs after decades of failure by the pro-EU centre-left incumbent.

Switch to The Netherlands. The anti immigration eurosceptic Forum for Democracy (FvD) Party, established only 2 years ago, took the largest number of seats (13) in the upper house election from zero. The FvD stripped the centre-right of its Senate majority, with PM Rutte’s party losing 7 seats to 31.

Throw on top that, former darling of the left, President Macron, has authorized the army to shoot unarmed yellow vest protesters who are rejecting nose bleed cost pressures for 19 straight weeks. Let’s remain in the EU to endorse such progressive behaviour.

If the board of directors of the EU Club live in denial and fail to listen to the grievances of a growing swell of disgruntled members there can only be one outcome. The club will go out of business. Best that the UK doesn’t renew its membership.

The Katowice Kindergarten

Thunberg.png

While Swedish 15-yo Greta Thunberg deserves absolutely no criticism for presenting in front of a COP24 audience for something she has been made to believe, the deliberate use of children to behave as political pawns is disgraceful, although hardly surprising from a body which has such dreadful ethics. Climate alarmism hit new lows when UN Secretary General Guterres and a collection of hand picked delegates fawned over Thunberg’s catchphrases like she was smarter than all of those there. Honestly if kids are so smart, why bother with pursuing tertiary education? Although the mainstream media might have had a point about the children being more mature than the adults.

Childishness seems to be a recurring theme at the COP24 summit. Whether it is the chanting and laughter brigades deployed to disrupt forums on coal or the “Fossil of the Day Awards” where the host brazenly shames representatives who don’t conform to the realpolitik of the climate alarmists, it is juvenile. There are even fossil fuel derived signs and a T-Rex suited sidekick to add to the childish antics of slagging off the Polish hosts for promoting clean coal.

There was touch of irony when the masked compere in a skeleton tuxedo lambasted Australia for having the hide to use its $100s of millions of carbon credits it earned from the Kyoto Protocol. So flimsy is the framework behind these self-coined “historic” agreements, that countries can get a bashing for adhering to the clauses agreed by the same body hosting the summit. Take that!

When will these stooges work out that shaming those that hold alternative views won’t win over the hearts and minds of those they haven’t convinced?  Why can’t they debate with reasoned arguments, facts and courteous common sense rather than tease those that disagree with them in the sandpit? Surely if the supposedly flaky arguments presented by skeptics are allowed to be heard without interruption, they’ll dig their own grave when asked to back up their own untruths? It is that simple. Ahh but to the cultural Marxists, there are no voices to be heard other than their own. A bit like the marching Maoist Chinese girls in The Last Emperor.

Let us be frank. The UN could not give two hoots for this girl other than what she can do to resurrect the fortunes of a conference that is dying in relevance. Think about it. In Copenhagen, 40,000 climate pilgrims showed up to COP-21. This was the summit where Al Gore mysteriously disappeared when it was shown his hockey stick prophecies were utter tripe. Katowice COP24 has managed 22,000 delegates and 7,331 observers. At least we can say there are far fewer hypocrites at this function shooting to maintain frequent flyer status.

COP summits are little more than a cash grab which is pretty obvious when looking at the delegates present. 42% of those at COP24 are from Africa lining up to receive millions in funding from guilt ridden Western nations. There is a reason why Guinea sent 409 delegates and Australia 30, even though the latter has twice the population of the former.

Although is there another reason why the political class is not listening to the kids? Thunberg is probably unaware many leaders of European nations have no progeny.

France’s Emmanuel Macron – no kids.
Germany’s Angela Merkel – no kids
UK PM Theresa May – no kids.
The Netherlands PM Mark Rutte – no kids.
Former Italian PM Paolo Gentiloni – no kids.
Swedish PM Kjell Stefan Löfven- no biological kids.
Luxembourg PM Xavier Bettel – no kids.
Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz – no kids (although he’s only 32)
Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon – no kids.
EC President Jean-Claude Juncker – no kids.
Incidentally Japan’s PM Abe also has no children.

CM is a fervent supporter of children learning and becoming passionate about certain topics, on the proviso that teaching faculties are prepared to debate both sides of the story in earnest and allow critical evaluation. As evidenced by the 15,000 strong school student led climate strikes across Australia, the Department of Education & Training should be fast tracking spirit levels to schools around the country to ensure there is balance in the classroom.

Alternative for Sweden (AfS) is established

F117A48C-B705-44BE-9F26-2886DA9322A5.jpeg

It seems that several members of the conservative anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats (SD) have splintered to form the Alternative for Sweden (AfS) (video here). The party was founded a few weeks ago by Gustav Kasselstrand, a former member of the SD which saw its support slip to 14.8% in November 2017, compared to 18.4% percent in June, according to the Swedish Statistics Office. Although in March 2018, Sentio poll has the SD at 23% (from 21.9%), a Demoskop poll at 18.6% (15.4% in Feb) and SiFo poll at 15.9%.

The government, comprised of the Social Democrats and Greens, had a 36.4% approval rating, compared with 35.6% in the June poll. The AfS thinks that the SD has become too compromising and see the fall in the polls as reason to break away and follow in the footsteps of the rise and rise of Germany’s AfD.

SD party leader Jimmie Åkesson said in Feb 2018 that the party is its own worst enemy…“Our biggest problem is that we have not been able to build real credibility...”
going on to say it was uncertain whether SD would benefit from “…moving further to the right on immigration issues because parties like the Social Democrats and Moderates have snatched our politics within the area [just like Rutte in The Netherlands adopting policies of Geert Wilder’s Freedom Party at the Dutch election last year]…The next term of office will be crucial for us to establish ourselves as a government alternative…We must compromise and be pragmatic

Even at its current level of support, the Sweden Democrats would still have enough seats to block either the centre-left or centre-right blocs from forming government after the upcoming September 2018 election.

The SD saw surging support several years ago on what they saw was politically correct limp-wristed responses to growing migrant crime. In Malmo, Deputy Police Commissioner Mats Karlsson said in response to multiple explosions that occur in the city on a regular basis, “Our dilemma is that we can never guarantee anything for sure. Evidently there are individuals who have hand grenades and they often resort to violence over things that may seem very banal to you or I – a conflict over an ex-girlfriend or a little brother wanting to outperform his big brother…It’s bad enough when they use guns, because they’ve got such poor aim, but grenades are really worrying. They have a 360-degree reach.”

As CM has made the point for years, whether one likes the direction of right wing politics or not, yet more nationalist parties are feeling the seeds of discontent within their own constituencies and offering a platform to parties that don’t seem to be listening. On Sept 9th, Swedes will get their democratic say. Austria, Germany, Holland, Italy, The Netherlands and France have all seen large shifts toward anti-immigrant/eurosceptic parties in recent elections. It isn’t a coincidence with the EU at the helm.