The tired old Foreign Office and Lib Dem line is we have to go along with what the EU wants for the trade.... We constantly hear the refrain that we have to pay the subscription to be in the trade club, you have to take some rough with the smooth, we have 3.5 million jobs dependent on EU trade.
It means we have to repeat the counter sound bites time and again.
The EU sells a lot more to us than we sell to them. They would not wish to risk that.
Whatever we do on renegotiation and membership, Germany will want to sell us her BMWs and France her wine.
If the rest of the EU did get protectionist with us, we could take them to the WTO and demand international action. Or we could propose a supertax on imported wine and imported cars here in the UK in retaliation....
The advocates of staying in on current terms have to answer this increasingly difficult question – isn’t the single market becoming a means of lumbering us with uncompetitive costs and rules which Chinese or US or other non EU companies do not face when selling into the EU market?
Second
Tom Wigley’s 1998 estimate [was] that even if Kyoto were to be 100% successful in meeting its targets, it would only have reduced temperatures by an estimated 0.05 degrees Celsius by 2050. Kyoto has been a crazy waste of money, Kyoto nations have spent billions and billions of dollars on the off-chance of cooling the earth by an amount too small to be measured....
The Kyoto Protocol, which was confidently forecast by its supporters to make an unmeasurably small difference in reducing temperature if it succeeded in reducing emissions, was also a failure at reducing emissions.... China by itself wiped out all the gains of the EU27, and all the gains of the US, and turned them all into a net increase. And that’s just China, doesn’t include Brazil and India and all the rest of the developing world....
The answer to “What didn’t Kyoto do?” is “It didn’t do anything but cost money”, but that will never stop its supporters.
0 comments:
Post a Comment