Saturday, September 17, 2005
Basically at Clinton's jamboree where the "great & good" of the world schmooz Tony Blair has said that his "thinking has changed" & Kyoto is a waste of space.
"My thinking has changed in the past three or four years." So what does he think now? "No country," he declared, "is going to cut its growth." That is, no country is going to allow the Kyoto treaty, or any other such global-warming treaty, to crimp -- some say cripple -- its economy.
Looking ahead to future climate-change negotiations, Blair said of such fast-growing countries as India and China, "They're not going to start negotiating another treaty like Kyoto." India and China, of course, weren't covered by Kyoto in the first place, which was one of the fatal flaws in the treaty. But now Blair is acknowledging the obvious: that after the current Kyoto treaty -- which the US never acceded to -- expires in 2012, there's not going to be another worldwide deal like it.
So what will happen instead? Blair answered: "What countries will do is work together to develop the science and technology….There is no way that we are going to tackle this problem unless we develop the science and technology to do it."
Hey just what sensible people who have, for years, been dumped on as "in the pay of the oil companies" & "opposing the concensous" have been saying.
This must be the biggest turnaround since Oceania noticed they were at war with Eurasia rather than Eastasia. Clearly anything like that would bring headlines worldwide, or at the very least UKwide. So checking Google news for Clinton global initiative - thats right - lot of stuff about who is there & how much it costs & even about his Toniness saying the BBC aren't nice enough to Bush but not a squeak about this. Big Brother would approve (anyone under 19 won't get the allusion).
But if Blair thinks he can just walk away from a treaty when he likes - rather than the head of state, What of the other treaties we have entered into?
You know, those treaties we are told mean 'ever closer union'.
Can we just walk away from those too?
In any case he & others can & do ignore any treaty or international law they wishe. I have commented before on how the Helsinki Treaty obliges us to "take no action against the territorial integrity or unity" of other signatories, one of which is Yugoslavia.
I don't think the most trusting could suggest that anybody in our government over the last 15 years can be accused of adherence to that treaty. I regard the destruction of the rule of law in international affairs as a much more serious threat to our overall safety than anything bin Laden can do.
In any case our media will censor,
spin, paper over & generally dismiss any Kyoto breach (which leaves me in a quandry since I think Kyoto worthless but disapprove of ignoring treaties)