MP still avoids tough questions on global warming

It’s now been almost six months since Greg Knight MP published a newsletter containing a thoroughly misleading article about global warming . Given the continuing debate over renewable energy in East Yorkshire I wrote to him immediately to point out the errors in the article and ask for a correction.

Weeks passed without reply and a follow up email to his office eventually prompted a letter from his researcher, Matthew Thomas, in July. This response completely ignored the refutation by the source the newsletter itself used. I replied to that letter on the 23rd July demanding a correction, with a follow up email on the 6th Sept, and still there has been no word from his office.

I also note that I’ve been removed from the mailing list for the constituency newsletter, as was another person who pulled up Greg Knight on this issue.

Why is Greg Knight so happy to spread lies about climate change and ignore the people he works for when they hold him to account?

Why is Greg Knight happy to employ a Parliamentary researcher who completely fails to understand and engage counter arguments?

 

The truth about Greg Knight…

“It could well be that the truth has finally caught up with them.”

That was a barb from Greg Knight this week after two newspapers corrected their reporting on the sitting hours of MPs.

It’s a shame the truth about climate change hasn’t caught up with Mr Knight, who is yet to apologise for publishing misleading ‘analysis’ of a Met Office report in his April newsletter.

Greg Knight’s premium rate phone number

Our MP, Greg Knight, not one for answering emails promptly, if at all, appears not to appreciate phone calls from his constituents, if his use of a premium rate phone number is anything to go by.

After hearing nothing in three months from our most honourable representative I thought I’d give his office a ring. According to his website though, the telephone number to contact him on as a constituent is an o845 number. While such numbers are free to call from a BT landline, they charge a premium rate from mobiles.

Figures from Ofcom in the last quarter of 2011 show that 13% of people in the UK live in a home that has a mobile phone but no landline phone. I have a landline at home but during the day am at work, where I can’t use the office phone for such matters.

Should I, or anyone else, really have to fork out for the ‘privilege’ of contacting my representative in Parliament? It hardly seems consistent with the vague concept of democracy parliament supposedly entails.

Bridlington misses out on Portas Pilots money

The twelve towns to receive the first money in the Portas Pilots scheme have been announced to much fanfare, little critique and disappointment for Bridlington, which missed out. Market Rasen in Lincolnshire was the nearest to receive funding while Goole also failed to nab a £100,000 cash injection and a chance to appear on the telly box.

The grants follow a report from Mary Portas, of Mary Queen of Shops’ fame, into the state of our high streets, in which she recommended: “affordable town-centre parking, disincentives for landlords that left shops empty, and “town teams” made up of consumers, landlords, shops and councillors who would be in put in charge of improving the main shopping areas.”

Now, with the money and a camera crew in tow, Portas will try to turn around the towns’ flagging fortunes through various measures that generally revolve around attracting more shoppers. This is being welcomed with open arms in the winning towns but I struggle to see what real effect this may have in a recession.

Look North this week reported from Grimsby, another unsuccessful bidder. Those interviewed were expressing their disappointment, reminding us that business is poor, while the journalist mentioned that the town is one of the most deprived in the country. Surely it doesn’t take a genius to work out that unemployed people are going to be low spenders? If a town is on its knees employment wise then of course its shops are going to suffer.

Similarly a report in this week’s Bridlington Free Press merely expresses disappointment from traders and describes no presumed benefits from the programme nor ideas, apart from a focus on the King Street Market, the last open street market on Yorkshire’s coast, and a push to rally support from more businesses for another round of bidding.

Liz Philpott, the Renaissane Programme Manager for Bridlington, told the Free Press: “We have a had a look at some of the winners and we still feel that we put quite a good big togher compared to those announced as winners.

“There’s another bid round that’s open until the end of June and we are going to be having another look at our original submission, and incorporate some of the things that have been going on at the moment.”

A video posted on YouTube – included above – in support of the bid is also short on ideas and it’s unclear what evidence general statements, such as “Encourage pop-up traders and get people into the town…  reinvigorating the town centre people of all ages will come together and fall in love with Bridlington” are based upon.

Bridlington’s [mis]fortunes are complex and linked into various factors including a dependence on seasonal visitors, low wages, an elderly population and many more, something the Area Action Plan at least is trying to consider, even if it now looks in doubt. The video in fact references the vision from the Area Action Plan at the end: “A great place to live by the sea… visitors welcome!”

Retail is no firm basis for a stronger economy. If anything it’s back to front – shops are where money ends up, not where it’s created. Yet there appears to be some national collective delusion that this approach will benefit deprived towns in the long run, if only we have places to buy all the pretty things.

The Portas Pilots especially seem like little more than a glitzy sticking plaster. There’s no doubt that many town centres need reinvigorating, something that could be helped along if the likes of Tesco and Asda stopped sucking them dry, but if their inhabitants don’t have money to spend in the first place what real difference will it make?

Bridlington resident warned by police over Olympics joke

One Bridlington resident has felt the full force of the Olympic security crackdown after receiving a warning from Humberside Police following a joke she made on Facebook.

Helen Perry wrote on the Bridlington Free Press’ page that she was going to squirt the torch with a water pistol in protest at the lack of local torch bearers.

A few days later she received a phone call from Humberside Police advising her that such behaviour would see her arrested.

The authorities and the organising committee have been making a mockery out of many of our supposed rights in their efforts to protect the ‘sanctity’ of the Games.

Last week, protest group the Space Hijackers were suspended from Twitter after using Olympic trademarks as part of their satirical attacks on the Games.

And in Cornwall, shortly after the flame arrived in the UK, a Cornish flag was snatched from the torch bearer by outrunners as it was not part of the official uniform. 

Interestingly, the latest torchbearer to be confirmed for the Bridlington relay is Saudi Arabian doctor and fitness instructor, Dr Badr Alshibani. Dr Alshibani is male, which is possibly rather fortunate as his female compatriots have been banned from competing in the Games, in clear convention of the Olympic Charter.

Greg Knight misleads on global warming

The latest e-newsletter from Greg Knight has claimed the planet is no longer warming and may even be heading for a mini-ice age in what is a shameful abuse of climate science and statistics.

The newsletter, sent by his senior parliamentary researcher, Matthew Thomas, contains the following story:

The supposed consensus on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing that our planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures even suggest that we could be heading for a mini iceage to rival the 70 year temperature drop that saw ‘frost fairs’ held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week, rather quietly, and without fanfare by the Met Office.  It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

Having previously dismissed the role that our sun plays in climate changes, some scientists are now having second thoughts, but it will probably take ten or more years from now before we will be able to determine for certain whether the warming that took place late in the 20th Century was caused by manmade CO² emissions or merely by natural variability.

This story has been lifted near verbatim from an article written by the Daily Mail’s David Rose who, in January, claimed that the Met Office’s latest data showed there had been no warming for 15 years. The Met Office responded:

This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.

They go on to include the full response they provided Mr Rose. One key part, which he ignored, said:

[...] what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850.

As the Skeptical Science website shows, David Rose was selective in his use of data as well as quotes from the Met Office, a common tactic among people who claim global warming is not caused by humankind.

Similarly, the second claim, that we are heading towards an ice age, is also false. The Mail article suggests this will be caused by weakening solar activity but as the Met Office said:

This research shows that the most likely change in the Sun’s output will not have a big impact on global temperatures or do much to slow the warming we expect from greenhouse gases.

The suggestion that global warming is caused by the sun rather than human industrial activity, is one that holds no water. As Skeptical Science – a really handy website – points out, the trend for solar activity over the 20th century has been a slight cooling.

Note also that Mr Knight makes no explicit references or links to the data or the “some scientists [who] are now having second thoughts”. A person with the power to participate in lawmaking should at the very least provide evidence for such bold claims as those contained in his newsletter*.

This also links to his use of “supposed consensus”; actually a David Rose line. Climate skeptics like to talk down the consensus among scientists studying climate change and global warming. In actual fact, “around 95% of active climate researchers actively publishing climate papers endorse the consensus position.” (source: includes an explanation of how consensus emerges)

Furthermore, the claim that it will take ten years or more to know for certain what caused (like it’s stopped) global warming  sits nicely with Greg Knight’s apparent views on renewable technologies. The MP has been vocal in his opposition to proposed wind turbines in East Yorkshire; if he can undermine, in the eyes of his constituents, the science that supports our need for them then his opposition appears expedient.

And finally, for a bonus laugh, there is the use of this Time magazine cover to illustrate the story. This cover is from… 1977. As if thirty five subsequent years of science don’t matter.

I have written to Mr Knight to ask for an apology and correction in his next newsletter and, further, that he engage in the grave issue of climate change with the scientific rigour it sorely needs.
*Not that it’s a problem in this case as Mr Knight (or whichever of his staff wrote the newsletter) was lax enough to simply copy text from the Mail article, making it easy to source the information.

Greg Knight forcing through NHS privatisation

Greg Knight last week voted with his Coalition bosses against releasing the risk assessment for the controversial Health and Social Care Bill

The proposed changes will essentially open up the NHS to full-blooded privatisation and put at risk the principle of free health care.

Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has so far refused to publish the risk assessment in open defiance of two freedom of information requests and despite regional risk registers flagging up serious concerns, including the likely failure to deliver statutory objectives.

Wednesday’s vote is typical of the government’s arrogant and unmandated approach to forcing through changes to the National Health Service.

The bill is opposed by the majority of doctors and nurses and has prompted an e-petition of over 150,000 signatures.

While Mr Knight toes the line in Westminster he is much more eager to please crowds at home by showing his support for Bridlington Hospital, which has suffered cuts to services over the past decade.

A year ago Andrew Lansley visited the hospital at Mr Knight’s invitation and told staff and patients it had a future. If this bill gets through Parliament the same can’t be said for the wider NHS.

Lest we forget, you simply can’t trust the Tories on the National Health Service.

Greg Knight wants to cut benefits for cancer patients

Our Right Honourable MP, Greg Knight, earlier this month voted to bind cancer patients to the time limit for employment support allowance.

This means that people with cancer who have been out of work for twelve months will now be means tested for this particular benefit irrespective of whether they are fit to work. Even if their partner earns as little as £150 per week, the ESA will be removed.

MacMillan Cancer Support estimate that “thousands of cancer patients – still recovering from their illness and therefore too sick to work – will see their income drop by up to £94 a week from April.”

Mr Knight’s cruel decision came in a day of votes to overturn Lords’ amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill, in which the government also enacted ‘financial privilege’ to prevent the Lords from responding to the defeat.

The government also defeated Lords’ amendments to allow young disabled children who have never worked to continue claiming contributory benefits and not charging single parents to use the Child Support Agency.

Turbine opponents acting like spoiled BRATs

Opponents to new wind turbines on Flamborough Head have stooped to a new low by lobbying the Heritage Lottery Fund to freeze funding for the Bempton RSPB centre, as reported in the Guardian.

It’s quite apparent that Bempton Residents Against Turbines care little for the health of local bird populations and more for their selfish campaign to prevent any turbines being built.

If they did care for wildlife then why would they try to strangle funding for a charity who are doing just that – protecting the birds?

These wind farm opponents are behaving like the BRATs of their acronym simply because the RSPB won’t kowtow to their demands. It’s time the NIMBYs grew up.

Child poverty in Bridlington – is Greg Knight helping?

Earlier this month the End Child Poverty group revealed the extent of child poverty across the country in 2011. In Bridlington the numbers are dire.

Children are defined as living in poverty “if they live in families in receipt of out of work benefits or in receipt of in-work tax credits where their reported income is less than 60% of median income.”

In Bridlington South, the number of children living in poverty is estimated at 31%. In Bridlington Central and Old Town it’s 29% and, in Bridlington North, 12%. In comparison, the figure for the whole of England is 20.9%.

These alarming figures beg the question: how can our MP, Greg Knight, be working in the interests of his constituents when he continues to support the savage economic and social policies of his Tory colleagues?

Since the current government took office, Mr Knight has:

• Voted to increase VAT, a tax move which hits people with low incomes the hardest.
• Voted for cuts which are causing huge job losses in the public sector.
• Voted to remove financial help for the poorest school students.
• Voted against small taxes on the big banks responsible for our financial hardship.
• Voted against taxing bonuses to fund youth jobs at a time of high youth unemployment.

The Coalition pledged to end child poverty, but according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Joseph Rowntree Foundation, their policies are forecast to throw an extra 200,000 children into relative poverty by 2015.

Furthermore, the above figures examine poverty before housing costs are included. A cap on housing benefit coincides with social rents for new tenants rising to 80% of market rates while private rents are soaring. This places further strain on poor families’ financial resources.

One way out of poverty is employment, but jobs simply don’t exist. The private sector hasn’t filled the gap caused by cuts to the public sector and attacks on the welfare safety net are worsening the situation. Austerity is not working.

Mr Knight is a staunch Conservative who rarely rebels against his party, a party who are making ordinary people suffer to pay for the bankers’ folly. Therefore, why exactly do we support his presence in Parliament?