The Head of the IPCC, that highly influential and political climate change propaganda pressure group, has resigned. It’s on the front page of the BBC’s website but way, way down the page in the Environment section.
UN climate head Rajendra Pachauri resigns
The head of the UN climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has resigned amid sexual harassment allegations.
In a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Mr Pachauri said he was unable to provide strong leadership.
Indian police are investigating a complaint from a 29-year-old woman working in his office in Delhi.
Lawyers for the woman say the harassment included unwanted emails as well as text and phone messages. Mr Pachauri has denied the allegations.
Analysis: Roger Harrabin BBC Environment Analyst
Dr Pachauri’s resignation is a shock
So much of a shock that the BBC don’t make it headline news, preferring to stick with Tory Malcolm Rifkind for their big story. Funny how Labour’s Straw has been downplayed, Humphry’s interview yesterday wasn’t exactly a feet to the fire job, whilst the Tory boy is up in lights.
Like Harrabin’s narrative…how ‘Patchy’, after seeing the light, converted from sceptic to believer…
Known to friends as “Patchy”, Dr Pachauri’s tenure has been controversial. He was installed after the US said the previous chair was too alarmist. They thought Dr Pachauri, as an Indian transport economist, would take a pro-development line.
After immersion in scientific research he too became persuaded that climate change is a real threat, deserving more action from political leaders – and he said so in outspoken terms.
As far as I can see Pachauri has always been a believer, an advocate for renewable energy and interested in the social effects of climate change.
Harrabin, just another propagandist. What did he do with that £15,000 the climate change hypers at the Tyndall Centre gave him to promote climate change ‘communication’?
97% of Harrabins brain knows that Patchy is a bigger perv than Harrabins so called journalism lets on
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/02/22/more-women-accuse-pachauri/
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/02/21/chairman-pachauris-messy-messages/
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/02/23/woman-2s-story/
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/02/20/indian-court-rejects-pachauri-publication-ban/
This is supposed to be secret until Thursday, but my unblocked sources have told me, so here is an exclusive for Biased BBC.
In the long-term, the “beset by mistakes” BBC will lose the licence fee with a move first to a levy before considering a move to a subscription service. Presumably moving to a subscription service would be delayed for some years if Labour win the election. But the licence fee will remain in the short-term, but evasion will be decriminalised. The BBC Trust is to be abolished and replaced by a Public Service Broadcasting Commission (PSBC) and the BBC should have a unitary board with a non-executive Chair, who would be known as the BBC Chairman.
John Whittingdale said: “Over the last few years the BBC has suffered from a succession of disasters of its own making” “The BBC Trust has failed to meet expectations and should be abolished” “it is vital that a full and frank debate takes place now on all aspects of the broadcaster. So that this might happen, we are calling on Government to seek cross-party support for setting up an independent review panel now on the 2017 Charter”.
I am told that this set-up could deal with the Green Blob at the BBC, the Arts, Languages and Poetry “best scientific experts” people, who fob of scientists who complain about the BBC’s Censorship policy. Fraser Steel and the BBC Editorial Complaints Unit and those Censorship “Monitors” could finally have their comeuppance. There where 118 written submissions including the one on behalf of Mensa members about the BBC‘s censorship policy for climate science, scientists and scientific debate.
I hope this is correct. The BBC isn’t fit for purpose. This is very exciting and long overdue.
Cripes. Where’s Jack Bauer when Mr. Tracey needs him?
“Anything could happen in the next 30 hours”
I guess we shall just have to wait and see if reality matches prediction.
‘BBC will lose the licence fee with a move first to a levy before considering a move to a subscription service’
Soooo… a levy (no equivocation to that ‘will’)? On ISP service or council tax? Hence moving first to a situation whereby there is no possibility of not paying the BBC, no matter how badly they behave and what re-packaged internal, in-secret old boys and girls’ club decides they got about right.
And this until some unspecified, un-guaranteed point in the vague future when a likely desperate puppet government reneges on a consideration. Or, presumably, not?
That really has worked out well.
I guess the crucial thing is the level of funding that goes to the BBC. I’m assuming the overall level of funding will fall; hopefully dramatically. Much of it should be privatised, a small public service bit should remain.
Otherwise you’re right; it wont make any difference. We’ll find out soon hopefully.
…a move first to a levy before considering a move to a subscription service.
The pie-in-the-sky nature of the move to a subscription service sounds like nothing more than a sweetener to get the levy established. Some quango can then decide ‘We didn’t consider the subscription model to offer the best … blah, blah,…’
They want everyone paying again.
The two messages I got where correct: (1) Short Term: The licence fee will survive. (2) Long Term: The licence fee will not survive. This Committee Compromise leaves the door open to the move from a levy to a subscription, but would also need the Tories with UKIP support, to get rid of Cameron. So vote UKIP even though UKIP policy No 39. Reviewing the BBC licence fee with a view to reducing it: is now rather tame and in the long-term, obsolete, while policy No 40. Taking non-payment of the licence fee out of the criminal sphere: is now Government policy.
Well, I guess we’ll soon find out later today.
If so, you have had a hell of a leak, and scoop, yet not a peep I have seen anywhere else.
Without the unique funding that is the licence fee the BBC grinds to a halt. 20,000 unemployed market rate talents, plus pensions that can only go up as well as up.
Tricky politically, beyond the love for Aunty all have surgically implanted.
Trouble is, there are alternatives now that permit viewing, and legally. Combine that with disgust at BBC accuracy, objectivity and integrity, plus too many abuses and management screw-ups, and folk simply opt out.
This has a wounding effect to cash flow, still necessary with an entity like the BBC, and the death by a thousand cuts accelerates as a bloc such as SNP or UKIP voters withdraw.
So… what to do?
I am just a bit dubious that the first part of the plan WILL be the imposition of an unavoidable tithe no matter what, with the promise of a vague something voluntary not even promised or agreed to by politicians so far clearly addicted to state broadcast media.
I await with interest how this cross-party group make their case, especially the levy.
I, for one, may well go the Emma Thompson route if they impose covering Mark Byford’s pension and Hugs’ salary and JonDon’s expenses on me via a hike on my monthly ISP fee or council tax, on the vague promise it will be all right on the night down the line. Trust, especially associated with the BBC and any machinations via Labour’s Lord Hall or James Purnell, is in short supply.
Others may have reservations, too.
Absolutely. My feeling is that it more firmly entrenches the current state of affairs with the added benefit to the sodding bbc that not only will they continue to be funded by a tax but even people such as me, who don’t watch any live tv will be forced to pay for their socialist dross. But as you say, we’ll have to wait and see which, if any, recommendations are adopted.
Hmm ……you doing an Ed Snowden?
Watch C4 from 11.05pm today (Wednesday) and find out?
Not on the BBC?
No Nick R now letting us know what will be said?
The countdown commences…
Also watch BBC Parliament (Freeview Channel 131) from 9.30am tomorrow (Thursday) morning.
Harrabin doesn’t do ‘journalism’, like Black before him, he’s a political advocate. A climate change advocate. His job is to promote the CAGW meme at every opportunity. In that much at least, if nothing else, he is fairly competent.
Rajendra Pachauri was always on a mission – by his own admission, he saw CAGW as a ‘religion’. So real science really never had a chance.
Good riddance to him. Now, if only the IPCC en masse could be forced to resign, too…
The next Labour shoo-in for Network Rail.
Stephen Byers to return to politics.
What a good day to bury bad news.
All of which is more likely than any serious political party seeing that fat lardy f***er of The Temple as an asset.
Oh…wait…
Meanwhile the sun still has titties on page 3. If you ask me the scoop is the same kind of trap
Talking of resignations…Jack who? Was there another MP involved in the Dispatches ‘scandal’, It’s just that he didn’t rate a mention on any bbc report on Rifkind’s resignation?
It’s just that milipede has totally disappeared off the scene since the scandal broke, just like ‘not me guv’ Straw…it’s all a Tory problem according to the bbc?
The bbc couldn’t even drag a liebour economy spokesperson up to appear on Daily Politics today? They were totally absent, it was to discuss good news though so it’s no surprise liebour didn’t appear seeing as they only do misery.
The IPCC vacancy provides a great opportunity for a true scientist to take a grip of the whole sorry eco-political mess and strip it down to the bare essentials i.e. the science and nothing but the science, presented with impartiality and honesty, based on evidence and totally immune from the interference of politicans and environmentalists.
The corruption of science by eco-zealots and politicians is now so deep and wide the chances of reform are a big fat zilch.
Sea levels along the northeast coast of the US rose by record levels during 2009-2010, a study has found.
Sea levels north of New York City rose by 128mm in two years, according to a report in the journal, Nature Communications.
So starts this BBC article. Terrifying, or what?
There then follows the usual climate-change guff. Only if you’re keen enough to read well into the piece do you discover that they just had a high-tide during a storm:
“This study identifies a record breaking high sea level event that occurred along part of the US east coast in 2009-10.
They try sooo hard!
While the story of this thread has been minimised by the BBC, for obvious reasons, two other stories, one concerning a former Lib Dem party President, and another a Labour councillor has been ‘overlooked’ completely by them.
Can’t imagine if would have been a Tory, never mind a UKIP rep, that the BBC wouldn’t have made it top of their headlines.
LABOUR COUNCILLOR CLAIMS PUTIN CONTROLLED BY ALIENS
ALLEGATIONS OF ‘CASH FOR PLANNING PERMISSION’ IN TIM FARRON’S CONSTITUENCY
Thanks Richard, I doubt very much in the short term anything will change at all as it has more money than it needs at every level. Every ‘value-for-money’ employee for example seems entitled to a taxi to work and back (reported this week has not changed since 2008 (£28 miilion), now £34 Million was spent on taxi firms alone ( Mail ). But a new board will tighten up the lavish media fest they have had for so long. Subscription IS the end of the BBC. It will have to undergo torture to convert to a British Telecom style enterprise and all it’s scheming UN (IPCC) and pro left agendas will have to be binned and subject to scrutiny by OfCom and an independent board. It will (of course) never happen under Labour and it would require a determined push by Conservative (sans Cameron) and UKip in a pact to ensure that the BBC never has that monopoly over us ever again. They are casualties of their own war against the English.
Another Beeboid political chum also found out:-
“Green policies are mad – no wonder Natalie Bennett dried up, blasts LEO MCKINSTRY”
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/560431/Leo-McKinstry-on-Green-policies-Natalie-Bennett-mad