|
||||||
|
By  David Craig, on October 31st, 2022Monday/Tuesday blog Euphoria at the BBC this morning as Brazilians vote to turn their country into a version of socialist paradise/hell-hole Venezuela. I wonder how long it will be before we see millions of Brazilians flooding over the USA’s southern (lack of) borders in order to escape their collapsing train-wreck of a country? I was going to write a blog today, but Neil Oliver once again says what needs to be said much more eloquently than I ever could:
By David Craig, on October 28th, 2022Friday/weekend blog Fondly remembering Cop 26Hopefully readers are aware that our rulers are getting ready for their next climate hot air bletherathon – Cop 27 – in Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt. Was it really only last year that the last one of these farces was held when the UK wasted hundreds of millions staging Cop 26 in Glasgow for over 40,000 climate gravy-train-riders? As far as I remember, the only ‘achievement’ of the Glasgow Cop 26 was when Sri Lanka’s (IMHO) utterly corrupt and incompetent president or PM or looter-in-chief or whatever announced that his country would lead the world in tackling the supposed ‘nitrogen crisis’ by banning all nitrogen-based fertiliser. Rapturous applause greeted this bold initiative at the conference and on the mainstream media like BBC. Though perhaps people in Sri Lanka weren’t too enthusiastic when a lack of fertiliser led to agricultural production collapsing, the economy imploding and the country going bankrupt. Though spiteful rumours suggest that the ruling elites made off with about $20bn so, unlike ordinary Sri Lankans, they won’t be going hungry any time soon. Get ready for the great climate sheikhdownAnyway, as our rulers prepare for Cop27 in Sharm El Sheikh, we’re being prepared for what will probably be the greatest sheikhdown in human history. The world’s most corrupt, backwards, basket-case countries will try to use the Cop 27 meeting to extract supposed ‘climate reparations’ of around $100bn a year. One of the countries whose rulers will slavering over the thought of getting their blood-soaked hands on some of this loot is the hell-hole – Somalia. Somalia is one of the four most corrupt countries in the world according to Transparency International. The other three are Venezuela, Syria and South Sudan. We’re already being softened up by the West-hating media about how we’re supposedly responsible for hell-hole Somalia’s problems:
The truth the media never mentionLet’s do a little reality check to see whether supposed catastrophic man-made climate change is really responsible for Somalia’s regular supposed ‘droughts’ and ‘famines’. I’ll only show two simple charts. Though these are the kind of charts our climate-catastrophist media will never mention. Here’s a chart of rainfall in Somalia by year from 1901 to 2021:
You can see that there was probably less rain in the scorching hot 1930s and 1940s and possibly a bit more rain during the global cooling of the 1960s and 1970s. But there doesn’t seem to be any clear trend of reducing rainfall. In fact, the rain levels seem to be slightly higher and more consistent since the 1980s. So, claims of increasing drought in Somalia due to supposed catastrophic man-made climate change are clearly nonsense. So, what else could be responsible for the desertification of that hell-hole Somalia and the starvation of its people? Given that my small band of readers are much more intelligent and better informed than the majority of the population, you’ll already have guessed the real problem facing excrement-covered, poverty-stricken, basket-case Somalia:
In 1950 the population of Somalia was just 2,263,971. By the year 2000 it had quadrupled to reach 8,872,143. It’s now about 16 million and, if it continues to grow at its current trajectory doubling every 20 or so years, will reach over 70 million by the end of this century. More people mean more people to feed, more deforestation, more destruction of natural resources, more wars as ever more people fight over ever fewer resources per person and more floods of migration of violent, uneducated, unemployable Third-world parasites to the rich successful West. So, as we’re bombarded with mainstream-media nonsense about how the CO2-emitting West is supposedly responsible for changing our climate and harming the world’s most vulnerable (actually most corrupt) countries, just remember Somalia and at least another 50 countries just like Somalia whose venal rulers will be hungrily demanding hundreds of billions in supposed ‘climate reparations’. No doubt our useless, West-loathing, virtue-signalling, white-guilt-obsessed, gullible rulers will probably give in to the greatest financial sheikhdown in human history. Never in the history of human affairs will so much be stolen from so many by so few. Meanwhile, while we shower utterly venal Third-world kleptocrats with money we don’t have and so have to borrow, the Chinese will be gleefully taking over country after country using debt-colonialism in order to grab their natural resources. No wonder this guy is always laughing:
By David Craig, on October 26th, 2022Wednesday/ Thursday blog As our latest PM puts together yet another ‘government of all the talents’, I thought it worth mentioning a scam probably few readers know about Yes Ministers? One of the many ways for MPs to increase their remuneration is by becoming government ministers. In the Westminster Parliament we have around 95 MPs who are also paid ministers. This means that more than one in four of the 360 Conservative MPs (at the time of writing) are also government ministers of some sort. In addition there are around 14 salaried government ministers from the House of Lords bringing the total of Westminster government ministers to 109. This high number of government ministers at Westminster was something that even our parliamentarians were beginning to question. In 2010 the Public Administration Select Committee examined this issue. In its inquiry Too Many Ministers? the Committee found that the UK Government was an international outlier when it came to ministerial numbers; employing more ministers than India, Canada and South Africa. In 2011, the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee wrote a report entitled Smaller Government: What Do Ministers Do? In this report, the Committee noted that Britain had many more paid ministers than most other European countries. With just under 15 per cent of British MPs, being paid ministerial salaries, British citizens benefit from considerably more government ministers than countries like Germany, Italy and France which also have around 600 members of their lower houses but where they had, in some cases (Germany and France), around half or even fewer than half the percentage of MPs being ministers compared to Britain: Percentage of MPs being paid ministerial salaries in the larger European countries
The House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee was concerned about the effects on our democracy from having so many ministers: “Having too many ministers is bad not just for the quality of government, but also for the independence of the legislature. The Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975 limits the total number of ministers at 109 but this is regularly exceeded by appointing unpaid ministers. In addition, the existence of Parliamentary Private Secretaries (PPSs) who, while not ministers, are expected to support the Government in all divisions in the House, further increases the size of the payroll vote. Currently 141 Members— approximately 22% of the House of Commons—hold some position in the Government. This is deeply corrosive to the House of Commons primary role of acting as a check on the Executive as all government ministers are expected to vote with the Government.” As one former political adviser explained to the Commons Public Administration Committee, ‘if the Prime Minister has his way, he would appoint every single backbencher in his party to a ministerial job to ensure their vote’. Appointing MPs to ministerial positions is also a good way for prime ministers to reward loyalty. So perhaps we’re very lucky that the Ministerial and Other Salaries Act (1975) limits the number of paid ministers to 109, though governments often exceed this number by appointing unpaid ministers in addition to the lucky 109 who are fully paid. The Commons Public Administration Committee found three main problems with there being so many ministers in Westminster. Firstly, they were hugely expensive ‘placing a burden on the public purse’. The amounts we pay our 95 MPs who are also government ministers could seem quite generous to ordinary British taxpayers whose average salary is in the region of £24,600: Cost of MPs who are also paid government ministers
Secondly, the Committee felt that having so many ministers reduced the ability of the House of Commons to hold the Government to account. As all ministers were expected to support the Government in the Commons, by making so many MPs into ministers, the Government ensured their support by creating what was called a ‘payroll vote’ – anyone either getting or hoping to get the benefits of a nice ministerial salary and other perks of office would be unlikely to jeopardise this by ever voting against the Government. As the Committee warned, ‘the temptation to create more and more “jobs for the boys” (and girls) is not conducive either to better government or better scrutiny of legislation’. Moreover, one could imagine that there were many other MPs who were more than tempted by the perks of becoming a government minister – important ego-boosting meetings with important people discussing important issues, chauffeur-driven cars, flocks of civil servant flunkies grovelling to you, private companies eager to pay for your services – who would do whatever the Government told them in the hope that they too might one enjoy the ministerial life of Riley. And thirdly, the Committee was concerned about the poor managerial qualities of many ministers. As one contributor to the Committee explained, ‘very few ministers have ever run anything. There is no way you are going to convert them into good managers’. Former ministers and civil servants appearing before the Committee also expressed concerns about having such a large number of ministers when there really wasn’t enough work for them all. A former minister remarked, ‘I think there has probably been an increase in pointless activity’. And a senior civil servant seemed to be suggesting that the large number of ministers was more linked to the Prime Minister’s desire to hand out well-paid favours and ensure support rather than the number being driven by the real quantity of work to be done. T A civil servant explained how officials spent far too much time trying to find things for the hordes of junior ministers to do: “The more junior ministers you have – and we have more junior ministers than ever – the more work you have to find for them. One of the biggest single frustrations of the political process within the civil service is just the number of junior ministers you have and the work projects that have to be designed and engineered at a political level.” The Committee also concluded that: ‘The ever-upward trend in the size of government over the last hundred years or more is striking and hard to justify objectively in the context of the end of Empire, privatisation, and, most recently, devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland’. Given that there are another 28 ministers in the Scottish Parliament, 14 in the Welsh Assembly and 10 in the Northern Ireland executive, people from outside of politics might have imagined that this flourishing in ministerial numbers in the regional assemblies might have reduced the need for so many ministers in Westminster. The Government’s response to the Committee’s recommendation to cut the number of ministers was the usual bureaucratic ‘get lost’ that we should have become used to when any part of the public sector is faced with even the mildest suggestion as to how it might improve its performance and/or reduce its costs to the taxpayer. The Government thanked the Committee for its work: “The Government welcomes the Committee’s interest in the role and appointment of Ministers, continuing that of their predecessor Committee whose report ‘Too Many Ministers’ (Ninth Report of Session 2009-10 HC 457) gave this Government considerable food for thought when making appointments in May 2010. The Government currently has 121 Ministers, including 95 in the Commons, and is keen that they perform their roles effectively and flexibly, rising to the challenges of the day particularly in the light of the necessary impetus to reduce the deficit.“ But the Government rejected any suggestion that the number of government ministers could be reduced towards the level of comparable legislatures in other countries in order to save British taxpayers money: “The Government is grateful for the Committee’s views on these issues. As the Committee knows, the Government has been clear that it wants to strengthen Parliament, and to look at the issue of the size of Government and the balance between the two Houses in the round. It would not for example be appropriate to only consider the limits in the Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975. To this end, the Government will keep the number of Ministers under review particularly in the light of its proposals on House of Lords reform and changes to the number of Parliamentary constituencies. However, the Government believes that a reduction to 80 ministers shared between the Commons and the Lords over the course of this Parliament as suggested by the Committee is unlikely to be a realistic aspiration.” Since then, all ideas of reducing the number of government ministers have been quietly shelved and the ministerial gravy train can keep trundling happily along, possibly more for the benefit of Westminster’s many ministers than for British taxpayers. Moreover, this apparent superfluity of government ministers is definitely not in the interests of a functioning democracy in which Parliament is supposed to hold the government to account. By David Craig, on October 24th, 2022Monday blog Firstly I think most people must have breathed a sigh of relief that recidivist liar Bunter Johnson has pulled out of the Tory leadership race. I expect the £ and the FTSE 100 to shoot up at the news that semi-adults will now be taking over our government. Though maybe it doesn’t matter who takes over if our politicians continue their desperate efforts to de-industrialise Britain in order to take us back to the wonders of life before electricity was discovered. Help your government reach Net ZeroThanks to a reader for alerting me to this latest piece of madness from our crazed rulers. It’s a consultation on how best our leaders can achieve their self-imposed goal of achieving ‘Net Zero’: The lunacy of committing economic suicide can perhaps best be summed up in this sentence from the consultation: “The BEIS Secretary of State has commissioned an independent review of the government’s approach to delivering its net zero target, to ensure we are delivering net zero in a way that is pro-business and pro-growth”. Our rulers don’t seem to grasp the fact that economic growth and ‘Net Zero’ and mutually exclusive. If you don’t have cheap reliable energy, you can’t have economic growth. Just last week, the maker of Minis decided to move production of 40,000 cars a year from their Oxford factory with its high energy costs to China with its low energy costs:
Other industries like aluminium, steel-making, chemicals and many more moved from Britain years ago. Most moved to China with its cheap, reliable energy precisely because of the UK’s ludicrous ‘Net Zero’ policies:
This public consultation will apparently “consider a range of evidence and views from across society. This will include a range of themed roundtables with businesses, industry, communities, local government and non-governmental groups to collect a broad range of views on the transition to net zero. We will also engage on an individual level with a variety of leaders in the net zero space, including but not limited to academics, business leaders and politicians.” However, the only issue which the consultation will not consider is whether the whole catastrophic, man-made climate change is a load of nonsense with absolutely no scientific basis and that ‘Net Zero’ is about as justified as deciding to mine cheese on the moon:
No doubt, the consultation will conclude that there is massive public backing for ‘Net Zero’ given that nobody questioning the economically-suicidal lunacy of the policy will be allowed to contribute. As another reader commented – compared to the madness of the climate catastrophist cult, the policy of burning witches will appear relatively sane. By David Craig, on October 22nd, 2022weekend blog In my weekend blog of 7 October, I featured an article on Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum website describing how our rulers intended to impose ‘personal carbon allowances ‘ on each of us in order to supposedly ‘save the planet’.
I believe that none of our ‘trusted’ mainstream media felt the story was worth mentioning. Australia shows us the future?Well, it seems Klaus Schwab’s project for controlling everything we buy or do is moving on at quite a pace. One of Australia’s leading banks – the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CommBank) – has just introduced a feature that links purchases to a customer’s carbon footprint and warns them when they are going over the average. “By combining our rich customer data and CoGo’s industry-leading capability in measuring carbon outputs, we will be able to provide greater transparency for customers so that they can take actionable steps to reduce their environmental footprint,” CommBank Group executive Angus Sullivan said in a statement. Here’s the story: Mastercard is helping ‘save the planet’Moreover, last year Mastercard in collaboration with Swedish fintech Doconomy, developed the Mastercard Carbon Calculator. Now integrated across Mastercard’s global network, this feature is easy for banks to adopt and customize for eco-conscious consumers who are looking for more ways to be informed about their spending. It provides access to insights and data about carbon impact and enables people to easily contribute to preserving the environment. “Companies, consumers and communities must work together to make the significant changes needed to effectively address climate change,” said Jorn Lambert, Chief Digital Officer, Mastercard. “The Mastercard Carbon Calculator informs consumers about the carbon footprint of their purchases, so that they can make more mindful spending decisions.” https://www.mastercard.com/news/press/2021/april/mastercard-unveils-new-carbon-calculator-tool/ Back to pre-industrial times?I wonder how long it will be before these voluntary personal carbon allowances become mandatory? This would allow our rulers to limit every aspect of our increasingly impoverished lives. Oh, I’ve just noticed this article in the Independent newspaper: “Should everyone have their own personal carbon quota? Calls grow for emissions allowances. Advocates propose every person in UK be given a monthly carbon budget to balance between heating, travel, energy and food.” It’s remarkable how quickly yesterday’s crazy ‘conspiracy theories’ become today’s reality. And here’s Mastercard’s brilliant new card which will limit your consumption: By David Craig, on October 19th, 2022Wednesday/ Thursday blog Another manufacturer forced out of BritainHopefully you’ll all have seen the wonderful news. BMW’s joint venture with Chinese automaker Great Wall Motor, manufacturers of the Mini, have decided to move all production of electric mini cars from their Oxford factory to Germany and China with most production being (I believe) in China. This is great as the Oxford plant will make many fewer cars in future and so will end up using a lot less energy thus helping Britain reach its net zero targets. Why would the BMW/Chinese joint venture want to manufacture in China rather than the UK? Obviously labour costs in China are much lower than in the UK. Moreover, Chinese workers don’t ever go on strike. Not if they want to avoid 20 to 30 years in a Chinese labour camp. But there’s a third element – energy costs in China are vastly lower than in the UK. When I wrote THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS, UK energy costs were at least four times those in China:
Now I suspect that UK energy prices with all or expensive, unreliable supposed renewables are about ten times higher than those in China with all its wonderful cheap coal:
Though one oddity about the BMW decision is moving some production to Germany with its high labour costs and eye-wateringly high energy costs. But BMW is a German company and is probably under a lot of political pressure to base some electric car production in the Vaterland. We don’t want no dirty factoriesHelped by the (IMHO) utterly, worthless, parasitic, self-serving Ed Miliband’s economically-suicidal Climate Change Act, the UK is doing a wonderful job of reducing its CO2 emissions by exporting manufacturing jobs to countries with much lower energy costs: Here’s a chart showing the UK’s share of global manufacturing since 1990 – almost halving from over 16% to around 8.7% in just 30 years: And here’s one showing the decline in the UK’s manufacturing workforce from over 6 million in 1978 to just over 2 million now: Hooray! Less manufacturing means lower CO2 emissions. And if we can completely wreck what pathetically little is left of UK manufacturing in the next few years, that will help us to achieve what we all want – net zero CO2 emissions. Of course, there is just one small niggling downside to Britain’s self-inflicted, economically-suicidal de-industrialisation – a country which makes nothing and sells nothing can’t afford to pay for all the free goodies that the Brits now expect from their government. But nobody seems to understand that. I guess they don’t teach economics in schools and universities anymore. Certainly, none of our pointless, over-paid, over-pensioned, self-serving, expenses-fiddling, intellectually-challenged politicians nor the climate-catastrophist mainstream media seem to have a clue about the economic and social disaster they are imposing on us with their net-zero idiocies. It will be interesting to see how people react when they finally come to realise this unfortunate fact of economics. By David Craig, on October 17th, 2022Monday/ Tuesday blog Killed by the diversity industry?In my Thursday/ Friday blog, I pointed out that the only ethnic group under-represented in our ‘world-beating’ NHS were white ethnic Brits. White ethnic Brits make up 85.6% of the working-age population and 86% of the total population. Yet they only account for 77.9% of the NHS’s 1.3 million employees. The under-representation of whites is even worse when you look at the ethnicities of NHS doctors. Whites account for only 56.2% of senior doctors, 59.9% of consultants and an embarrassingly small 37.4% of specialty doctors. Using these figures, I gave some examples of current job vacancies for Diversity, Inclusion and Equality managers and I questioned why the NHS was still hiring ever more of these wastes of skin. At the time, I didn’t know that the Taxpayers Alliance had just released some research on the numbers and cost of Diversity, Inclusion and Equality managers in the NHS. The Taxpayers Alliance estimates that there are around 812 diversity managers in the NHS costing us £40.7m. But I believe the figures from the Taxpayers Alliance only include the direct employment costs – salary, social costs and possibly pension contributions – of these useless, utterly superfluous people. What the Taxpayers Alliance doesn’t take into account are the additional costs of this army of woke garbage – office costs, administrative support and so on. But the greatest additional cost will be the amount of real employees’ time these fools take up with pointless training sessions in Critical Race Theory and Gender Recognition Sensitivity Training and whatever other garbage they dream up to justify their pointless, parasitic existences. A simple rule of thumb would suggest that the real cost of each of the purveyors of this diversity nonsense is probably around twice their salaries. So they are actually costing the NHS over £80m a year – a cost that is increasing as ever more are hired in spite of the NHS claiming (as usual) that it’s in crisis. Oh, and in case you weren’t aware, the UK has a far higher number (more than twice as many in most cases) of these worthless people per 10,000 employees than any other developed country: This is complete madness and needs to stop. So, when you hear the professional bed-wetters and shroud-wavers howling and moaning that millions will die if any cuts are made to the sacred NHS budget, remember that firing these 800+ pointless diversity nincompoops could save the NHS more than £80m a year and probably result in freeing up more time for frontline medical staff to look after patients rather than being stuck in woke propaganda indoctrination sessions. Oh, and while our leaders are thinking about firing all these diversity idiots, how about stopping all NHS translation services? If people can’t be bothered to learn English, why should they get free treatment at taxpayers’ expense? That would save another £66m a year. And then there’s the £57m spent by NHS organisations last year on communications – including 1,000 communications officers – a 13% rise from £50.4m the previous year. NHS hospitals have increased their spending on spin doctors despite waiting lists hitting record highs. So, there’s another pile of nonsense that should be axed. Short of money? No, the NHS is drowning in our money, but chooses to waste massive amounts on irrelevant rubbish. Hey, I’ve just woken up and have already found £200m in annual savings the NHS could start making immediately. That could help cut some waiting lists or save a few more heart attack victims. I could probably find a couple of hundred million more in savings by lunchtime. Radiators and drains?There’s a simplistic theory that there are two main types of employee in public-sector organisations. Let’s call them ‘radiators’ and ‘drains’. The ‘radiators’ try to fulfil the purpose of the organisation – looking after patients (NHS), reducing crime (police), defending the country (armed forces), providing public services (local councils) etc. They can be called ‘radiators’ because they contribute something. The ‘drains’, on the other hand, see the organisation as just a mechanism for their own self-advancement, self-enrichment and accumulation of power and status. The ‘drains’ drain the organisation’s resources as they use them to advance themselves rather than meet the organisation’s goals. While the radiators are mostly focused outwards on the organisation’s goals, the drains focus inwards on internal politics and their own personal advancement. And so in every organisation, the drains will always eventually rise to the top levels, seize power and use the organisation for their own personal ambitions or political ends. Hopefully the three above examples of massive waste – more diversity nonsense, unjustifiable translation services to prove how ‘inclusive’ we are and rising communication costs – all of which have nothing to do with efficiently supplying a health service show that the drains are now running and ruining the NHS for their own benefit. So, if you’re one of the seven million or so people waiting for NHS treatment, you are hopefully coming to realise that the wonderfully diverse, inclusive and equality-obsessed, woke NHS now exists mostly for the benefit of its drains and really doesn’t give a damn about you. It just wants your money to fuel its leaders’ careers, self-importance and financial well-being as well as maybe netting them a few gongs and possibly even a well-padded seat in the Lords. By David Craig, on October 12th, 2022Thursday/Friday blog Yet again, the NHS is in crisis. Or at least that what the usual limp-wristed, eternally-bleating handwringers are claiming yet again. So, if the NHS is in crisis, one could assume that our beloved NHS, which (as we all know) is a national treasure and the envy of the world, wouldn’t be wasting millions hiring totally useless people for completely unnecessary non-jobs. At the end of this blog, I’ll list just a few of the many NHS job vacancies for pointless Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (DIE) managers. But before I do that, let’s do something no mainstream media would ever dare do. Let’s look at how diverse the NHS currently is. Too many ethnic minorities in the NHS?Of the NHS’s 1.3 million employees, 77.9% are white compared to 85.6% of the working-age population and 86% of the total population; 10.7% are Asian compared to 7.2% of the working-age population and 7.5% of the total population; and 6.5% are Black compared to only 3.4% of the working-age population and 3.3% of the total population Conclusion 1: The NHS actually has a greater percentage of employees from ethnic minorities than in the working-age population and than in the general population. So, if the NHS is going to reflect the communities it serves (as the lefty libtards and the BBC and C4 News are always demanding) then the NHS should employ more White people and fewer Asians and Blacks. Not enough white doctors?But, you say, aren’t most of the NHS ethnic minorities doing the more menial jobs while evil, ghastly white supremacists take all the top, best-paid jobs? Well, here are the figures: Among senior doctors, only 56.2% are White compared to 77.9% of NHS employees being White. A huge 31.4% are Asian compared to only 10.7% of NHS employees being Asian. Among consultants 59.9% are White compared to 77.9% of NHS employees being White. A huge 29.1% are Asian compared to only 10.7% of NHS employees being Asian. And 2.9% are Black compared to 6.5% of NHS employees being Black. So, Asians are over-represented at this level while Blacks are under-represented. And among specialty doctors, only 37.4% are White; a massive 42.9% are Asian and 7.4% are Black. So, Asians are hugely over-represented at this level and Blacks are slightly over-represented In summary, among medical staff, Whites are under-represented, Asians over -represented and Blacks don’t do well at the top levels but are at just above the right level among specialist medical staff. Conclusion 2: If NHS medical staff are to represent the communities they serve, then the NHS should stop employing so many Asians and focus on employing more Whites. So, please help me understand why the NHS is employing loads more Diversity, Inclusion and Equality managers? Given that ethnic minorities are over-represented both in the NHS in general and among medical staff, the last thing the NHS needs is more Diversity, Inclusion and Equality managers. Yet, if you look at current NHS vacancies, there are plenty for Diversity, Inclusion and Equality managers. If the NHS really is in crisis, why the hell is the NHS wasting millions of our money on these useless creatures?????? Want a well-paid useless non-job? Here are a fewMoorfields Research and Development: requires a Equality Diversity Inclusion (EDI) Research Associate to join the Study Delivery Team Dudley NHS Trust: An exciting opportunity has arisen at Dudley Group for a passionate and driven experienced midwife, to become the first Equality, Diversity and inclusion lead midwife at the trust. The overarching aim and purpose of the role of Equality Diversity, and Inclusion Lead Midwife is to support The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust to achieve equity of health outcomes for all social groups accessing our Maternity Service; targeting support and interventions to the most disadvantaged groups to improve service quality and address inequalities of access, service provision and healthcare outcomes Royal Free London: Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Engagement Manager: The EDI&E Manager will monitor and report progress against the objectives as part of the Trusts Annual Report and corporate into the Annual Equality Information Report, developing actions plans to ensure delivery. This role will also monitor compliance with the Assessable Information Standard and help services improve recording of patients and service user equality information to support inclusive service delivery. The EDI&E Manager will also support the Equality Analysis (EA) process across the organisation, completion of the Equality Delivery System (EDS) and be the key contact for the team St George’s University Hospitals: An exciting opportunity has arisen to join our Education, Culture and OD Team as our Diversity and Inclusion Workforce Officer. This new role will report to our D&I Workforce Lead and support the implementation of a number of key projects that support the trusts on-going commitment to improving inclusion Berkshire Healthcare NHS Trust: We have a newly created senior-level opportunity for an inspirational and experienced Organisational Design and Development (OD&D) professional, ideally with a clinical background, who can accelerate our progress by introducing fresh impetus and best practice to our efforts. The role is responsible for our Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) programme: staff safety and violence reduction as well as our leadership and talent agenda and you will need to deliver a step change in the culture of the Trust and the experience of our patients, services users and staff Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust: This role enables the post holder to make a great contribution to the progression of our Diversity and Inclusion strategy objectives St John Ambulance: Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Manager: Do you want to make a difference and be part of a vibrant and inclusive organisation that has been helping save lives for more than a century? As one of the country’s best-loved charities, St John Ambulance played a pivotal role in responding to the pandemic as well as ‘everyday’ health emergencies, training, supporting communities, and improving young people’s lives NHS South Central and West Commissioning Support Unit is now hiring Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Wellbeing Project Manager in Lawrence Hill BS1. View job listing details and apply now. The EDI & wellbeing team deliver a mix of projects and programmes relating to improving equity for people of all backgrounds and characteristics, championing inclusion and improving diversity within the workforce. By David Craig, on October 12th, 2022Wednesday blog I’m not smart enough to have a story today. So instead, here’s the brilliant Neil Oliver. Personally I think this 19-minute video is slightly longer than it needs to be as (IMHO) he rambles a bit. But as usual he says what nobody else (apart perhaps from Mark Steyn) dares to say: By David Craig, on October 10th, 2022Monday/ Tuesday blog In my weekend blog I featured an article from Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum website from 14 September 2022 describing a future in which we’ll all have individual ‘carbon allowances’ which will restrict the maximum amount of CO2 we will be permitted to use. Whether our rulers will succeed in imposing these ‘carbon allowances’ on us without people rebelling is questionable. Though our rulers have seen how quickly and easily we submitted to their draconian restrictions on our freedoms during the US/Chinese lab-leaked plague. So our rulers are probably fairly optimistic we’ll cave in to their carbon restrictions too. In this blog, I’d like to propose the various stages our rulers will use to nudge/coerce us into accepting carbon restrictions on our lives. For clarity, I have expressed this process as a series of stages. But they won’t necessarily be sequential as they will overlap. One reason I thought of describing this process is so that, when it happens and everyone is surprised, I’ll at least have the dubious pleasure of being able to say “I told you so”. Stage 1: Carbon scoring All our food now has all kinds of information about its nutritional value which nobody ever looks at and even fewer people understand. In the same way, food manufacturers and retailers will be pressured into giving a ‘carbon score’ to all our food. So obviously a kilo of avocadoes flown in from Peru or wherever will have a much higher ‘carbon score’ than a kilo of potatoes grown in Britain. Following the supposed ‘success’ of carbon-scoring our food, our rulers will extend carbon-scoring to other items that we buy – clothes, white goods* (washing machines, fridges, freezers etc), fuel, travel, flights, holidays and so on and so forth. *(Apologies for using the term ‘white goods’ as I realise this will now be considered racist, colonialist, white supremacist etc etc. Moreover, no doubt some woke archaeologists will one day discover ‘proof’ that thousands of years ago people in subequatorial Africa had washing machines, tumble dryers and fridge/freezers while we worthless white Europeans were still living in caves) Stage 2: Self-monitoring Various apps will be developed so that every time we buy anything, we just need to scan the QR code with our mobile phones and these will then inform us how much carbon we are using every day, week, month and year. This will also show whether our carbon use is above or below recommended levels. This will all no doubt be called something friendly and unthreatening like the ‘MyCarbon Project’ Stage 3: MyCarbon propaganda This third stage will probably start in schools. Children will be given projects in which they measure how much carbon they and their families are using and will be tasked with finding ways of reducing their own and their families’ carbon usage. Then there will be numerous mainstream-media newspaper, magazine, TV features and blogs on “20 tips for saving carbon” and “How to be low carbon leaders” and “Low carbon life hacks” and suchlike. Any blogs suggesting the whole thing is a load of nonsense will, of course, be censored by the Big Tech companies. And food writers will extol the exciting recipes we can make using only UK-produced food. Then there will be stories of happy families (mixed race, of course, and never white) telling us how they managed to cut their carbon footprints and how much better their lives are now they only eat UK-grown cabbages, turnips and potatoes, adore munching insects and jellyfish crisps, avoid meat, never travel anywhere, make all their own furniture and toys etc and never take holidays. All this will be designed to ‘nudge’ us into cutting our own carbon usage just like these wonderful mixed-race families. No doubt we’ll also be lectured on how much healthier our new low-carbon lifestyles are and thus they are helping ‘save the NHS’ which is ‘the envy of the world’. Stage 4: Carbon justice taxes At some point, our rulers will move beyond ‘nudge’ into something more resembling ‘coercion’. Part of this could include carbon taxes whereby a small amount is added in tax to everything we buy or use. The level of tax will depend on the product or service’s carbon score. To hide the fact that these are actually Pigouvian taxes designed to change our behaviours by making certain things close to unaffordable for ordinary people, these taxes might be called something like ‘carbon justice contributions’ on the basis that the money will supposedly be used to compensate the world’s poorest (most corrupt) countries for the supposed ‘damage’ being caused to their countries by supposed ‘climate change’ supposedly due to the high level of CO2 emissions from advanced (less corrupt) countries. Hundreds of billions will be raised from us in the West by these ‘carbon justice’ taxes and most of these billions will be stolen by the kleptocrat, venal, incompetent, gangster rulers of the world’s 100+ hell-holes which will forever remain poverty-stricken hell-holes while their rulers become multi-billionaires at our expense. Stage 5: Will carbon allowances ever be imposed? While I feel reasonably confident that stages 1 – 4 will happen in some form or other, there’s more doubt about whether our rulers will go as far as imposing Stage 5 – individual and family carbon allowances which will restrict how much we can eat, buy and travel. As I explained in my weekend blog, if these carbon allowances are introduced, they will be backed up by carbon-trading schemes whereby we dirty, unwashed, ignorant, planet-destroying plebs will be allowed to sell some of our dismally-small carbon allowances which can then be bought by the political, media and business elites so that they can continue to live lives of unlimited luxury while we huddle in our tiny, barely-heated, minimally-furnished homes eating cheap almost inedible garbage. It will be interesting to see if things go this far before the whole man-made climate change nonsense is exposed for the scam which it is. ConclusionAs American baseball player Yogi Berra said: So, you can believe my predictions or reject them. Up to you. But it’s still probably worth trying to predict how our rulers will push us into the world they are planning for us as foreseen is forewarned. |
|
|||||
| Copyright © 2026 Snouts in the Trough - All Rights Reserved | ||||||
