King Charles III

Darts

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2017
23,042
11,208
113
Anyone want to guess what will happen during the reign of King Charles III?

I) I think the Brits will finally leave Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland will rejoin Ireland.
2) Scotland will secede.

I won't hazard a guess on whether the U.K. will rejoin the EU.
 

bigdickdean

Active member
May 25, 2017
288
139
43
Anyone want to guess what will happen during the reign of King Charles III?

I) I think the Brits will finally leave Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland will rejoin Ireland.
2) Scotland will secede.

I won't hazard a guess on whether the U.K. will rejoin the EU.
I hope Canada becomes a republic and says adios to that colonial relic that is the Commonwealth.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
28,391
6,426
113
We in Canada will CONTINUE to have him as a head of state. PERIOD!!
What he espouses for Climate Change needs to be accelerated. Obviously, the Climate Change Deniers will continue with their ridiculous hypocrisy!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pleasure Hound

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
13,121
1,909
113
Ghawar
We in Canada will CONTINUE to have him as a head of state. PERIOD!!
What he espouses for Climate Change needs to be accelerated. Obviously, the Climate Change Deniers will continue with their ridiculous hypocrisy!!
I think King Charles will be supportive of Climate Change Deniers
who will continue their ridiculous hypocrisy as you said.
What needs to be accelerated is drilling for oil and gas in
North Sea. Just like deep water drilling offshore Newfoundland
also needs to be accelerated under Trudeau.,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM Names Climate Denier as UK Energy Minister, Vows More North Sea Oil and Gas

September 8, 2022

Newly-installed British Prime Minister Liz Truss appointed a reputed climate change denier to head her energy ministry and vowed to increase North Sea oil and gas drilling in the hours after she took office Tuesday.

Truss also said she would introduce price caps today to help Britons cope with soaring home energy bills, aiming to “give people certainty” they can get through the winter with “the energy supplies they need and be able to afford it,” Upstream reports.

Truss was expected to announce £130 billion (US$150 billion) in government-backed loans to fossil energy suppliers, aimed at holding prices at today’s levels over this winter and next, the news story states.

An earlier report that Truss had announced a citizens’ assembly on the climate, energy, and cost of living crises turned out to be fake news circulated by Extinction Rebellion.

“But we can’t just put a sticking plaster on it,” Truss said of the acute cost crunch facing British consumers and businesses. “What we need to do is increase our energy supplies long-term. That is why we will open up more supply in the North Sea… that is why we will build more nuclear power stations.”

Truss rejected calls for a windfall profits tax on fossil companies, beyond the double-sided attempt that the previous Boris Johnson government introduced in May. “I believe it is the wrong thing to be putting companies off investing in the United Kingdom just when we need to be growing the economy,” she said.

In the past, Truss has supported oil and gas fracking and opposed onshore wind and solar farm, the Guardian writes.

To implement her plan, Truss tapped MP Jacob Rees-Mogg as secretary of state for business, energy, and industrial strategy. Rees-Mogg, who represents the southwest England constituency of North East Somerset, has called for more North Sea oil and gas extraction, described fracking as an “interesting opportunity”, and declared himself “very much in favour” of developing small modular nuclear reactors, CNBC reports.

“We need to be thinking about extracting every last cubic inch of gas from the North Sea because we want security of supply,” he said.

“2050 is a long way off,” he added, in response to the UK’s legally binding target net-zero target. “We’re not trying to become net-zero tomorrow, and we are going to need fossil fuels in the interim, and we should use ours, that we have got available.”

The country’s new energy secretary “has claimed that ‘climate alarmism’ is responsible for high energy prices, and that it is unrealistic for scientists to project future changes to the climate because meteorologists struggle to correctly predict the weather,” DeSmog writes, as part of chronology of the new minister’s climate positions. In one March, 2014, interview, “Rees-Mogg said he thought humanity should adapt to, rather than mitigate, climate change, and cast doubt over the effectiveness of humans’ ability to change the climate for future generations,” contrary to the findings of a UN science report at the time.

Dave Timms, head of political affairs at Friends of the Earth, told CNBC that Rees-Mogg’s appointment is “deeply worrying for anyone concerned about the deepening climate emergency, solving the cost of living crisis, and keeping our fuel bills down for good.” Rebecca Newsom, head of politics at Greenpeace UK’s head of politics, agreed that Rees-Mogg is “the last person who should be in charge of the energy brief, at the worst possible moment.”

On Wednesday, a cross-party group of 29 MPs and peers urged Truss “to recommit to net-zero and push forward with measures that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and help to bring down soaring energy bills,” the Guardian writes.

“The decisions your government takes will have a noticeable impact on the lives of people across the country and indeed our entire planet,” they wrote. “We hope that as prime minister you will continue to support measures to reach net-zero by 2050 or sooner in this country, whilst also being a global champion for climate and nature on the international stage.”

Separately, the UK’s influential Climate Change Committee (CCC) called for greater investment in renewables and energy efficiency, warning that increased gas production won’t get the country out of its energy crisis, Upstream says.

“Greater domestic production of fossil fuels may improve energy security, particularly this winter, but our gas reserves—offshore or from shale—are too small to impact meaningfully the prices faced by UK consumers,” the CCC wrote in a letter to the new cabinet. “Energy security and reducing the UK’s exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices requires strong policies that reduce energy waste across the economy and boost domestic production of cheap and secure low carbon energy.”

Former Conservative energy minister Chris Skidmore, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG), told the Guardian he was “not worried” that Truss would backslide on net-zero, adding that Rees-Mogg will be bound by the cabinet’s collective responsibility and Truss’ own policy-making. “The direction is set from the top,” he said. “I’m sure whoever is secretary of state will abide by collective responsibility, and the prime minister sees net-zero as an opportunity to deliver economic growth.”

It appears the UK public will expect nothing less. A survey for the RenewableUK trade group found that 77% of respondents supported greater investment in solar and wind farm to drive down energy costs.

“That includes more than four-fifths (82%) of those planning to vote Conservative in the next election and 84% who voted Tory in 2019, despite opposition to solar farms from the new Prime Minister Liz Truss,” the Evening Standard reports. “The poll also highlighted high levels of support from people across the country for having a renewable project in their area, with 76% of those quizzed saying they would back a green scheme nearby—including 81% of Tory voters.”


 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
28,391
6,426
113
I think King Charles will be supportive of Climate Change Deniers
who will continue their ridiculous hypocrisy as you said.
What needs to be accelerated is drilling for oil and gas in
North Sea. Just like deep water drilling offshore Newfoundland
also needs to be accelerated under Trudeau.,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM Names Climate Denier as UK Energy Minister, Vows More North Sea Oil and Gas

September 8, 2022

Newly-installed British Prime Minister Liz Truss appointed a reputed climate change denier to head her energy ministry and vowed to increase North Sea oil and gas drilling in the hours after she took office Tuesday.

Truss also said she would introduce price caps today to help Britons cope with soaring home energy bills, aiming to “give people certainty” they can get through the winter with “the energy supplies they need and be able to afford it,” Upstream reports.

Truss was expected to announce £130 billion (US$150 billion) in government-backed loans to fossil energy suppliers, aimed at holding prices at today’s levels over this winter and next, the news story states.

An earlier report that Truss had announced a citizens’ assembly on the climate, energy, and cost of living crises turned out to be fake news circulated by Extinction Rebellion.

“But we can’t just put a sticking plaster on it,” Truss said of the acute cost crunch facing British consumers and businesses. “What we need to do is increase our energy supplies long-term. That is why we will open up more supply in the North Sea… that is why we will build more nuclear power stations.”

Truss rejected calls for a windfall profits tax on fossil companies, beyond the double-sided attempt that the previous Boris Johnson government introduced in May. “I believe it is the wrong thing to be putting companies off investing in the United Kingdom just when we need to be growing the economy,” she said.

In the past, Truss has supported oil and gas fracking and opposed onshore wind and solar farm, the Guardian writes.

To implement her plan, Truss tapped MP Jacob Rees-Mogg as secretary of state for business, energy, and industrial strategy. Rees-Mogg, who represents the southwest England constituency of North East Somerset, has called for more North Sea oil and gas extraction, described fracking as an “interesting opportunity”, and declared himself “very much in favour” of developing small modular nuclear reactors, CNBC reports.

“We need to be thinking about extracting every last cubic inch of gas from the North Sea because we want security of supply,” he said.

“2050 is a long way off,” he added, in response to the UK’s legally binding target net-zero target. “We’re not trying to become net-zero tomorrow, and we are going to need fossil fuels in the interim, and we should use ours, that we have got available.”

The country’s new energy secretary “has claimed that ‘climate alarmism’ is responsible for high energy prices, and that it is unrealistic for scientists to project future changes to the climate because meteorologists struggle to correctly predict the weather,” DeSmog writes, as part of chronology of the new minister’s climate positions. In one March, 2014, interview, “Rees-Mogg said he thought humanity should adapt to, rather than mitigate, climate change, and cast doubt over the effectiveness of humans’ ability to change the climate for future generations,” contrary to the findings of a UN science report at the time.

Dave Timms, head of political affairs at Friends of the Earth, told CNBC that Rees-Mogg’s appointment is “deeply worrying for anyone concerned about the deepening climate emergency, solving the cost of living crisis, and keeping our fuel bills down for good.” Rebecca Newsom, head of politics at Greenpeace UK’s head of politics, agreed that Rees-Mogg is “the last person who should be in charge of the energy brief, at the worst possible moment.”

On Wednesday, a cross-party group of 29 MPs and peers urged Truss “to recommit to net-zero and push forward with measures that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and help to bring down soaring energy bills,” the Guardian writes.

“The decisions your government takes will have a noticeable impact on the lives of people across the country and indeed our entire planet,” they wrote. “We hope that as prime minister you will continue to support measures to reach net-zero by 2050 or sooner in this country, whilst also being a global champion for climate and nature on the international stage.”

Separately, the UK’s influential Climate Change Committee (CCC) called for greater investment in renewables and energy efficiency, warning that increased gas production won’t get the country out of its energy crisis, Upstream says.

“Greater domestic production of fossil fuels may improve energy security, particularly this winter, but our gas reserves—offshore or from shale—are too small to impact meaningfully the prices faced by UK consumers,” the CCC wrote in a letter to the new cabinet. “Energy security and reducing the UK’s exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices requires strong policies that reduce energy waste across the economy and boost domestic production of cheap and secure low carbon energy.”

Former Conservative energy minister Chris Skidmore, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG), told the Guardian he was “not worried” that Truss would backslide on net-zero, adding that Rees-Mogg will be bound by the cabinet’s collective responsibility and Truss’ own policy-making. “The direction is set from the top,” he said. “I’m sure whoever is secretary of state will abide by collective responsibility, and the prime minister sees net-zero as an opportunity to deliver economic growth.”

It appears the UK public will expect nothing less. A survey for the RenewableUK trade group found that 77% of respondents supported greater investment in solar and wind farm to drive down energy costs.

“That includes more than four-fifths (82%) of those planning to vote Conservative in the next election and 84% who voted Tory in 2019, despite opposition to solar farms from the new Prime Minister Liz Truss,” the Evening Standard reports. “The poll also highlighted high levels of support from people across the country for having a renewable project in their area, with 76% of those quizzed saying they would back a green scheme nearby—including 81% of Tory voters.”


Once again you and the rest of the Climate Change Deniers take a crisis like that in Ukraine that has caused all this grief to try and use it as fodder to feed the blind cattle.
If we had accelerated the switch globally to renewable energies and electric cars in the 19 nineties, this situation would never have caused such a crisis.
The scrapping of the GM Electric Car EV1 instead of advancing the technology set back to progression to such technology, especially as it was the most advanced one at that time.
All they did was to buy back the leased cars to kill off that technology that came back to bite them around a decade later. Then they get bailed out by the Canadian and American taxpayers!!
Prior to the Ukraine War the steady oil and gas prices meant that the evolution to renewable energies was a very viable option.
But look at the nations that are severely affected by this Climate Change. Yes, several nations around the Globe in all the different continents.
Unprecedented, for 1/3 of a country like Pakistan to be affected by flooding and now causing various disease breakouts. So stop pretending that Climate Change is all about being "alarmist"!!
Well your link proves that the UK residents are in favour of renewable energy. Truss will be a proven disaster just like her predecessor BOJO. They managed to screw up the EU and themselves with that Brexit more like a Brexshit calamity!! Now they have the highest Energy costs by any British Governments of any stripes be it Conservatives or Labour. They are drifting into a steep recession. Are you for once going to blame the Conservatives for it? Scotland set an example where they have advanced the Renewable energies to 97% of their electricity needs. No wonder that they want to be Independent. Cannot blame them. Look at countries like Iceland and Norway that run their electric grids with 100% and 99% of Renewable Energies. Do they give a batshit about Russia's Gas Pipelines? If those nations have accomplished it why are we all lagging behind only to throw our Green Energy Momentum into reverse??
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pleasure Hound

yippie

Member
Aug 28, 2001
174
16
18
I hope Canada becomes a republic and says adios to that colonial relic that is the Commonwealth.
Under the Canadian constitution, ditching the monarchy is all but impossible. It would require the federal parliament and all ten provincial legislatures to agree not just to abolish the monarchy, but also what to replace it with. Would this new position (presumably a president) be elected? If so, how? Or would this person be appointed? If so, by whom? Would the provinces have a say? Would this president be merely a figurehead, like the current Governor General, or would he or she have actual power? If so, what powers? As much as a veto power over legislation? And what replaces the lieutenant governors in each province? The federal parliament and all ten provincial legislatures would have to agree on all these questions. And there’s no way these eleven legislatures would ever even agree on what colour the sky is.

It’s for the same reason that we’re stuck with our unelected senate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: danmand

Pleasure Hound

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2021
3,295
2,297
113
Here's my prediction:

Nothing will happen. King Charles III will simply live his life as he always did. He's much too old to change now. He will do as his great great grandfather (Edward VII) did after Queen Victoria died.....

Don't take this too seriously. It isn't really important.....
 

Pleasure Hound

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2021
3,295
2,297
113
Anyone want to guess what will happen during the reign of King Charles III?

I) I think the Brits will finally leave Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland will rejoin Ireland.
2) Scotland will secede.

I won't hazard a guess on whether the U.K. will rejoin the EU.
The EU will likely not let the UK rejoin if it wanted to.....
 

Pleasure Hound

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2021
3,295
2,297
113
Northern Ireland will never rejoin Ireland. There are still immense religious differences between them.....
 

Pleasure Hound

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2021
3,295
2,297
113
Under the Canadian constitution, ditching the monarchy is all but impossible. It would require the federal parliament and all ten provincial legislatures to agree not just to abolish the monarchy, but also what to replace it with. Would this new position (presumably a president) be elected? If so, how? Or would this person be appointed? If so, by whom? Would the provinces have a say? Would this president be merely a figurehead, like the current Governor General, or would he or she have actual power? If so, what powers? As much as a veto power over legislation? And what replaces the lieutenant governors in each province? The federal parliament and all ten provincial legislatures would have to agree on all these questions. And there’s no way these eleven legislatures would ever even agree on what colour the sky is.

It’s for the same reason that we’re stuck with our unelected senate.
Yes. The bureaucratic soup would be much too thick to get rid of the monarchy these days.....
 

Hippopotamus

Witnessing a modern Era of pandemics & wars
Aug 22, 2019
100
55
28
GTA
We might see this new Head of the State in Canada replacing the image of Queen Elizabeth on the 20$ CA note as early as in 2023 when the next change is said to be due (announced in 2018 to review after 5 years) and we might see him visit Canada more often.
Not much difference this change is gonna make though, for a common human..
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
31,866
58,252
113
Under the Canadian constitution, ditching the monarchy is all but impossible. It would require the federal parliament and all ten provincial legislatures to agree not just to abolish the monarchy, but also what to replace it with. Would this new position (presumably a president) be elected? If so, how? Or would this person be appointed? If so, by whom? Would the provinces have a say? Would this president be merely a figurehead, like the current Governor General, or would he or she have actual power? If so, what powers? As much as a veto power over legislation? And what replaces the lieutenant governors in each province? The federal parliament and all ten provincial legislatures would have to agree on all these questions. And there’s no way these eleven legislatures would ever even agree on what colour the sky is.

It’s for the same reason that we’re stuck with our unelected senate.
I agree that opening it up for amendment would be a big deal and is hugely complicated, but why would they need to replace the king with anything?
Yes, they would have to agree on whatever they come up with, but why would you need anything to replace the role at all?

But yes, the big issue is that opening it up at all puts all the questions on the table and presumably people could push for any kind of crazy new system.
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,964
6,107
113
I think King Charles will be supportive of Climate Change Deniers
who will continue their ridiculous hypocrisy as you said.
What needs to be accelerated is drilling for oil and gas in
North Sea. Just like deep water drilling offshore Newfoundland
also needs to be accelerated under Trudeau.,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM Names Climate Denier as UK Energy Minister, Vows More North Sea Oil and Gas

September 8, 2022

Newly-installed British Prime Minister Liz Truss appointed a reputed climate change denier to head her energy ministry and vowed to increase North Sea oil and gas drilling in the hours after she took office Tuesday.

Truss also said she would introduce price caps today to help Britons cope with soaring home energy bills, aiming to “give people certainty” they can get through the winter with “the energy supplies they need and be able to afford it,” Upstream reports.

Truss was expected to announce £130 billion (US$150 billion) in government-backed loans to fossil energy suppliers, aimed at holding prices at today’s levels over this winter and next, the news story states.

An earlier report that Truss had announced a citizens’ assembly on the climate, energy, and cost of living crises turned out to be fake news circulated by Extinction Rebellion.

“But we can’t just put a sticking plaster on it,” Truss said of the acute cost crunch facing British consumers and businesses. “What we need to do is increase our energy supplies long-term. That is why we will open up more supply in the North Sea… that is why we will build more nuclear power stations.”

Truss rejected calls for a windfall profits tax on fossil companies, beyond the double-sided attempt that the previous Boris Johnson government introduced in May. “I believe it is the wrong thing to be putting companies off investing in the United Kingdom just when we need to be growing the economy,” she said.

In the past, Truss has supported oil and gas fracking and opposed onshore wind and solar farm, the Guardian writes.

To implement her plan, Truss tapped MP Jacob Rees-Mogg as secretary of state for business, energy, and industrial strategy. Rees-Mogg, who represents the southwest England constituency of North East Somerset, has called for more North Sea oil and gas extraction, described fracking as an “interesting opportunity”, and declared himself “very much in favour” of developing small modular nuclear reactors, CNBC reports.

“We need to be thinking about extracting every last cubic inch of gas from the North Sea because we want security of supply,” he said.

“2050 is a long way off,” he added, in response to the UK’s legally binding target net-zero target. “We’re not trying to become net-zero tomorrow, and we are going to need fossil fuels in the interim, and we should use ours, that we have got available.”

The country’s new energy secretary “has claimed that ‘climate alarmism’ is responsible for high energy prices, and that it is unrealistic for scientists to project future changes to the climate because meteorologists struggle to correctly predict the weather,” DeSmog writes, as part of chronology of the new minister’s climate positions. In one March, 2014, interview, “Rees-Mogg said he thought humanity should adapt to, rather than mitigate, climate change, and cast doubt over the effectiveness of humans’ ability to change the climate for future generations,” contrary to the findings of a UN science report at the time.

Dave Timms, head of political affairs at Friends of the Earth, told CNBC that Rees-Mogg’s appointment is “deeply worrying for anyone concerned about the deepening climate emergency, solving the cost of living crisis, and keeping our fuel bills down for good.” Rebecca Newsom, head of politics at Greenpeace UK’s head of politics, agreed that Rees-Mogg is “the last person who should be in charge of the energy brief, at the worst possible moment.”

On Wednesday, a cross-party group of 29 MPs and peers urged Truss “to recommit to net-zero and push forward with measures that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and help to bring down soaring energy bills,” the Guardian writes.

“The decisions your government takes will have a noticeable impact on the lives of people across the country and indeed our entire planet,” they wrote. “We hope that as prime minister you will continue to support measures to reach net-zero by 2050 or sooner in this country, whilst also being a global champion for climate and nature on the international stage.”

Separately, the UK’s influential Climate Change Committee (CCC) called for greater investment in renewables and energy efficiency, warning that increased gas production won’t get the country out of its energy crisis, Upstream says.

“Greater domestic production of fossil fuels may improve energy security, particularly this winter, but our gas reserves—offshore or from shale—are too small to impact meaningfully the prices faced by UK consumers,” the CCC wrote in a letter to the new cabinet. “Energy security and reducing the UK’s exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices requires strong policies that reduce energy waste across the economy and boost domestic production of cheap and secure low carbon energy.”

Former Conservative energy minister Chris Skidmore, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG), told the Guardian he was “not worried” that Truss would backslide on net-zero, adding that Rees-Mogg will be bound by the cabinet’s collective responsibility and Truss’ own policy-making. “The direction is set from the top,” he said. “I’m sure whoever is secretary of state will abide by collective responsibility, and the prime minister sees net-zero as an opportunity to deliver economic growth.”

It appears the UK public will expect nothing less. A survey for the RenewableUK trade group found that 77% of respondents supported greater investment in solar and wind farm to drive down energy costs.

“That includes more than four-fifths (82%) of those planning to vote Conservative in the next election and 84% who voted Tory in 2019, despite opposition to solar farms from the new Prime Minister Liz Truss,” the Evening Standard reports. “The poll also highlighted high levels of support from people across the country for having a renewable project in their area, with 76% of those quizzed saying they would back a green scheme nearby—including 81% of Tory voters.”


What does an appointee of the PM have to do with the King?
 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
13,121
1,909
113
Ghawar
What does an appointee of the PM have to do with the King?
I understand the king is not the one who dictates the PM's
energy policy. My post was just to show what needs to be
accelerated in the UK is North Sea oil drilling. Norway has
also raised its oil and gas output as well. But climate sheeple
would say this is just temporary action. I am sure the sheeple
in the UK want more renewable energy but what energy they will
use is not what they want.
 
Toronto Escorts