Eco-friendly? It just makes us eco-angry
THERE’S yet more evidence that climate change protesters clearly believe there is nothing they can do nor protest they can stage that cannot be justified by the validity of their cause. We’ve already seen cities and towns brought to a standstill, pink yachts being dumped at junctions and on roads and bridges to cause maximum inconvenience, people being denied the opportunity to go to work and offices being sprayed with paint or people gluing their hands to doors.
Incredibly, and totally unjustifiably, public transport has been halted by demonstrators climbing on the roofs of trains and even ambulances have been told they have to re-route to avoid demos.
Just last month the immaculate lawns at Trinity College, Cambridge, were dug up and the turf and soil dumped in the nearby branch of a bank they’d decided to target. Police just watched, reportedly aware of not wanting to be seen to be denying the human rights of the protesters! They should have been nicked for wanton damage and fly-tipping.
Last week that same bank, Barclays, was back in their sights as environmental campaigners were able to force 97 branches to close. It was a nationwide protest, from London to Edinburgh, Cardiff to Belfast, due to their claim that the bank funds fossil fuel companies. But what gives these people the right to stop bank staff getting to work and people being able to access their money?
In just the same way as they feel no compunction in denying passengers the right to go on holidays or business people to make crucial trips when they force the closure of airports, their justification is to save the planet.
What arrant, uncaring, smug nonsense from these self-styled eco-warriors. Of course for the Tarquins and Olivias who come down from the shires to cause this mayhem, this is all just a jolly lark and their trust funds will ensure they don’t lose a day’s pay, and the banks to which they belong aren’t to be found on any high street. They’re private banks where you have to be invited to join.
The fact that businesses desperately needed cash that day, or that meetings to help save people’s homes or businesses could not take place, means nothing. They just trot out the tired and ludicrous mantra that “we don’t have a choice, we’re sorry for any inconvenience but we have to get our message out”.
This Government has already pledged to drag us out of our petrol, diesel or hybrid cars and vans within a few years and has brought forward the target by
■
PERHAPS we’ve not had “enough of experts” after all? It was only a few years back that Michael Gove, then Lord Chancellor, sought to dismiss the ceaseless supply of negative stories about the impact of Brexit by saying “people in this country have had enough of experts”.
It certainly didn’t seem that way at Number 10 when Prime Minister Boris Johnson addressed the nation flanked by England’s Chief Medical Officer Professor Chriswitty and the government’s Chief Scientificadviser Sir Patrickvallance.
Indeed, as it is those very same experts and many more like them who will determine how the Government responds to the coronavirus epidemic, in truth we probably can’t get enough of ’em! which we will be carbon neutral. So why don’t they go and protest in China, India or Brazil, where the message seems to go largely unheeded?
It was also shown that these campaigners are, quite literally, giving children nightmares. Though campaigner Greta Thunberg has undoubtedly energised thousands of youngsters into environmental awareness, a survey by BBC Newsround – the news show for younger viewers – found that 17 per cent of its audience has had bad dreams or anxiety and trouble sleeping as a result of fears over climate change.
One little girl said she was convinced her parents and family would die, as would all the animals, the world would dry up and she would be left as the last person on the planet.
Oh the irony! The BBC show that always has a negative climate change story to lead on, or one that is very close to the top of every bulletin, discovers its own content is frightening the children – and then reports it without any balancing, positive angle that scientists and others are working flat out to find solutions.
Again, these scare stories are justified by campaigners as being important to get the message over to younger people.
Just what don’t they get? Of course they have the right to demonstrate, but they don’t have a “monopoly” on protests.and the Eco cause is not a get-outof-jail-free card.
■
IFYOU, like me, have been or are currently a supporter of the Savethe Children charity, you might wish to reconsider where you send your cash.
It has just been found “guilty” by the Charity Commission watchdog of “serious failures” in its handling of a sexual harassment scandal.
They include a string of mistakes by chief executive Kevin Watkins.
Allegations had been made against former senior executives Justin Forsyth and Brendan Cox – widower of murdered MP Jo Cox – but the charity initially hid details of the allegations then sought to deal with the matter internally. It spent £100,000 trying to keep the story from the press.
Politicians and campaigners insist Watkins should go. Surely they are right.