Did you see the BBC shilling for Brown again this morning? It asks, and I quote, “Gordon Brown is due to launch a masterplan to save the world’s rainforests by paying developing countries for not chopping them down. Environment analyst Roger Harrabin reports on whether this new plan will be successful.” A masterplan, eh? Paying people for doing nothing? Think welfarism but this time with trees.

Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to DEAD WOOD.

  1. Martin says:

    Gordon doing what Gordon does best. Give away our tax money to 3rd world losers.


  2. Rob says:

    Yes, I did hear that, but what struck me most about the Today programme this morning, on the day that the government nationalises one of the country’s largest banks, was that despite allowing Chancellor Darling a long and unchallenged defence of the government’s action, the official opposition was given no chance to offer their thoughts on the matter. I heard a bit from a Lib-Dem Lord about local government neglect of ratepayers money, but nothing from the Conservative Party.


  3. David Vance says:

    The Conservatives do not exist. As Labour sovietises our economy there must be no oppositio. It’s about not being able to see the wood for the subsidised trees, to return to topic!


  4. Martin says:

    Radio 5 were spouting out the usual crap that this is all the fault of Thatcher again.

    Funny that the banking system managed quite well up until 1997 in the UK. What changed then I wonder?

    A certain Scottish one eyed snot gobbler I think.


  5. Peter says:

    Conceding that all our Dear Leader does is, in the eyes of the BBC, ‘a masterplan/stroke of epic proportions’, I have some empathy for initiatives of this sort.

    And they are not exactly new, either.

    Whether one is on board with the whole climate change roller-coaster or not, I also choose to hope that it is a bit more than ‘paying people for doing nothing’. At least in the great foreign aid scheme of cunning plans.

    Other than preserving what some would argue to be much more cost-effective passive, present, mitigators of our carbon emissions than most future, active, enviROI negative hare-brained schemes I get subjected to daily, the benefits of short-term forest clearance to even the locals in theory ‘gaining’ seems negligible.

    So I’d like to see ‘it’ done. But done well, and for the right reasons.

    Which kinda rules out Mr. Brown and his media camp following cheerleaders in the vanguard.


  6. David says:

    George Osborne has written an excellent article in the Standard about Brown’s many economic failings. But the BBC only creates a story for Gordon’s newspaper articles, so don’t expect Osborne’s to get a mention anywhere.


  7. Cassandra says:

    Its a cunning redistributive plan that milks the rich west to give free money to the poor south, aid in a different package BUT the TOADIES somehow forgot to mention biofuels,illegal logging,political corruption,slash’N’burn poor farmers,Eastern demand for hardwood which means that logging will continue apace even if the west threw its entire GDP at the countries involved!
    For every pound/euro/dollar put in to the scheme the bent/crooked business men and polititians will cream off more than two thirds, plus lots of nonjobs for the boys!
    But hey, its only money right? it falls from the sky like little snowflakes!


  8. Billyquiz says:

    Old snot gobbler is a bit slow off the mark I’m afraid.

    Here in Norway the government began doing this a year ago to the tune of 3 Billion Kroner a year (£300 million).


  9. emil says:

    Cue third world timber merchants, backed by corrupt local officials, trousering plenty of OUR hard earned cash and then cutting down the rainforests anyway.


  10. Martin says:

    I think I’ve seen it all now. On the news they just a clip of the green terrorists trying to break into the Houses of Parliament.

    One of the banners read “Trees have Rights too”

    You couldn’t make it up!


  11. GBS says:


    The application of rights,as a concept, to inanimate objects, plants and animals is what is known as a “Stolen Concept”.

    A useful explanation of this philsophically valauble identification is here:


  12. Jon says:

    After decades of bailing out corrupt incompetent governments – Browns masterplan is more of the same. In fact its a “greenie” con.

    Why is Brazil, Venezuala etc. third world countries? They don’t only have trees. The arogant lefties in the west who keep the people in poverty through always giving massive amounts of aid.

    Foreign aid helps only the corrupt. If aid really did work – why are some African countries still in absolute poverty? It can’t all be down to bad harvests every year.


  13. Martin says:

    GBS: Thanks for that. So can we now start campaigning for the rights of vegetables? If a tree has rights so must a Tomato, Potato or Sprout.

    So why should veggie’s not be brought to book over their inhuman acts of eating spuds?


  14. GBS says:

    Martin, yep, but I guess they are too stupide to to exert intellectually consistency in the application of what they preach.

    Maybe they know it would reveal their own stupidity to themselves; it’s why they have to ignore the full implementation of what they preach in how they live their own lives! How many wood products do they use?

    As you *should* know us humans should not use any of these natural resources! We are a disease to be eliminated to save the planet – for whose appreciative benefit they do not say! Perhaps they are all working for some alien culture who wants to invade the planet? I smell conspiracy! 😉


  15. Peter says:

    FWIW, a lead to some more info:

    Eliasch Review on International deforestation published

    The international community should enable rainforest countries to halve deforestation by 2020 and make the global forest sector ‘carbon
    neutral’ by 2030. This is the recommendation of an independent report to the Prime Minister published today.

    The Eliasch Review, ‘Climate Change: Financing Global Forests’, is an independent report commissioned by the Prime Minister and led by
    Johan Eliasch, Special Representative on Deforestation. It provides a comprehensive analysis of the financing and mechanisms needed to support sustainable management of forests and reduce emissions associated with deforestation.

    The full report can be seen online at

    The full PR is pretty long, so I just popped in the first segment. If you want it all I am sure it is linked somewhere.

    Mind you, I couldn’t actually find much from the link provided either.

    Mr. Eliasch was once involved with the Conservatives but moved, I believe, because of this issue (those in power can do stuff- fair enough) rather than any political ideology.

    He also founded Cool Earth, a mitigation scheme. Hopefully altruistic as any moves to put money in such schemes’ pockets via such as the above might cause a problem, when the review finds that…

    – The international community should aim to support forest nations to halve deforestation by 2020 and make the global forest sector ‘carbon
    neutral’ by 2030 – i.e. with emissions from forest loss balanced by new forest growth.

    – Reducing emissions from deforestation should be fully included in any post-2012 global climate deal at Copenhagen.

    – National Governments should develop their own strategies to combat deforestation in forest countries, including establishing baselines,
    targets and effective governance and distribution of finances.

    – In the long term, the forest sector should be included in global carbon markets.

    – Public and private sector funding will be needed in the short to medium term as carbon markets grow.

    – The international community should provide support for capacity building where necessary. Total capacity building costs are estimated
    at up to $4 billion over 5 years for 40 forest nations.

    Newsnight championed his efforts a few years ago for one night, and then dropped it when the next thing came along, as do most BBC news or science programmes. If they actually stuck with things, good or bad, up or down, and continued a sensible narrative throughout, I respect their commitment to the cause of better environmental practices, but they will set fire to their Granny if it will boost a rating on one day.

    So… expect no objective analysis on this issue either, I fear.

    More like: “Gordon Brown throws his body in front of trees to save them from Sarah Palin!!!’.


  16. Original Robin says:

    This plan can easily be paid for with Carbon Credits– if China and India join !