New EU president says climate change is a myth

brianthebard

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5430362.ece

The European Union's new figurehead believes that climate change is a dangerous myth and has compared the union to a Communist state.

The views of President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic, 67, have left the government of Mirek Topolanek, his bitter opponent, determined to keep him as far away as possible from the EU presidency, which it took over from France yesterday.

The Czech president, who caused a diplomatic incident by dining with opponents of the EU’s Lisbon treaty on a recent visit to Ireland, has a largely ceremonial role.

Which side of the debate does this help or hinder? I guess any neutral greens or environmentalists may be scared away from the no vote after this. Will he be a boon to the no side here though, an example of a fellow european who is opposed to the lisbon treaty and therefore an example of why we should vote no in support of those in the EU who have not been given the vote?

K-9

Jaysus, I thought Sarkozy was bad!

brianthebard

He is.

K-9

brianthebard wrote: »

He is.

Still, how dare that jumped up Czech tell us Climate Change is a myth. I'm sick with the EU interfering in Ireland...........................etc. etc.

brianthebard

Its an interesting situation though, clearly a lot of it has to do with infighting in Czech politics. But the Czech republic has yet to ratify the Lisbon treaty and I think its fair to say that for the next six months the No side in Ireland bizarrely has the EU president on their side. Certainly interesting.

molloyjh

Given that I can't see a direct quote from Klaus on the matter in the article quoted above it is somewhat difficult to comment on what he said. If he said climate change was a myth the obvious response is that it is not. Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has occured constantly through-out our planets history. If on the other hand he was talking about anthropogenic (sp?) global warming, i.e. man-made global warming, then he is claiming to know something for a fact that he cannot possibly know. Noone knows for definite that we are or are not causing global warming.

The fact that the presidency has moved onto the Czech Republic where their President is so blantantly hostile to the EU (while their Parliament are the complete opposite) raises serious questions about the manner in which the title is passed around, and serious questions about the Czech position on the matter. Who better represents their views on the EU?

CDfm

Well I dont see why we must take on a whole set of expensive measures for unproven theories using pseudo science plunging Western Economies into recession.

Why should we all go green when the Chinese dont.

K-9

molloyjh wrote: »

The fact that the presidency has moved onto the Czech Republic where their President is so blantantly hostile to the EU (while their Parliament are the complete opposite) raises serious questions about the manner in which the title is passed around, and serious questions about the Czech position on the matter. Who better represents their views on the EU?

That is for the Czechs to decide, NOT the EU.

If it was the same scenario in Ireland, there'd be uproar if the EU changed the methods of the Presidency to silence our President. Many Yes and No side voters would be united on that one.

It really is another case of the EU not winning no matter what they do or don't do!

evercloserunion

As far as I know the PM and not the President is the EU president.

CantGetNoSleep

evercloserunion wrote: »

As far as I know the PM and not the President is the EU president.

Does this depend on the country?

I.E. Sarkozy not Fillon would be EU President from France, Cowen not McAleese would be President from Ireland. Probably in national constitutions

evercloserunion

CantGetNoSleep wrote: »

Does this depend on the country?

I.E. Sarkozy not Fillon would be EU President from France, Cowen not McAleese would be President from Ireland. Probably in national constitutions

Yeah, I'm not sure exactly how the president is chosen but the point is to avoid having people in ceremonial roles at national level acting as EU president. I think it's probably the same "head of state" position that represents each nation in the IGCs.

EDIT: As usual, Wikipedia has the answers. There is no single president but rather the task is undertaken by an entire national government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_the_Council_of_the_European_Union

So while a national government holds the presidency, the "President" as we know it would be the head of government.

Dob74

Don't see a direct quote from Kluas about climate change. Considering China is opening a coal power station every week. There is very little the west can do about climate change.

evercloserunion

Dob74 wrote: »

Don't see a direct quote from Kluas about climate change. Considering China is opening a coal power station every week. There is very little the west can do about climate change.

Except cut back on their own CO2 emissions?

Scofflaw

Dob74 wrote: »

Don't see a direct quote from Kluas about climate change. Considering China is opening a coal power station every week. There is very little the west can do about climate change.

The US contributes 22.2% of world greenhouse emissions, China plus Taiwan 18.4% (and Taiwan is part of the "West" in most senses), the EU 14.7%. The US and the EU between them therefore account for about 37%, and if you include the rest of the countries over which the "West" has influence, you're pretty much covering at least 75% of the world's emissions.

There is, therefore, a lot the West can do. One thing it cannot do is opt out on the spurious basis that it's someone else's problem, because it isn't. Even if China chose to double its emissions while the rest of the world halved theirs, we'd still be better off - and the Chinese are not immune to sanctions, particularly since the majority of their emissions come from producing Western goods in Chinese factories. A carbon tariff at the borders of the EU would rapidly make the Western companies manufacturing in China cut "Chinese" emissions.

accurately,
Scofflaw

K-9

CantGetNoSleep wrote: »

Does this depend on the country?

I.E. Sarkozy not Fillon would be EU President from France, Cowen not McAleese would be President from Ireland. Probably in national constitutions

evercloserunion wrote: »

Yeah, I'm not sure exactly how the president is chosen but the point is to avoid having people in ceremonial roles at national level acting as EU president. I think it's probably the same "head of state" position that represents each nation in the IGCs.

EDIT: As usual, Wikipedia has the answers. There is no single president but rather the task is undertaken by an entire national government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_the_Council_of_the_European_Union

So while a national government holds the presidency, the "President" as we know it would be the head of government.

Wasn't 100% on it myself but going on previous Irish Presidencies, Bertie, Bruton and Charlie basically ran the show.

Would be interesting if say McAleese had a major difference of opinion with the Govt. on something like this. I remember FF being annoyed with Robinson overstepping her seemingly restrictive terms of office.

Still, we'd probably want to sort it out ourselves, not the EU!

Scofflaw

Seanies32 wrote: »

Wasn't 100% on it myself but going on previous Irish Presidencies, Bertie, Bruton and Charlie basically ran the show.

Would be interesting if say McAleese had a major difference of opinion with the Govt. on something like this. I remember FF being annoyed with Robinson overstepping her seemingly restrictive terms of office.

Still, we'd probably want to sort it out ourselves, not the EU!

Funnily enough, it's the government of the member state that holds the Presidency. There isn't, strictly speaking, an "EU President", but a "Presidency" - not a single office but rather a rotating 'department'.

The post of "President of the Council of the European Union" is held by whichever of the country's Ministers is sitting at a particular session of the Council, so at a meeting of Finance Ministers during the Irish Presidency, Charlie McCreevy was President. There is no point at which Klaus gets to be President of anything EU - because Mirek Topolanek the Czech Prime Minister is the Czech representative on the European Council (the council of heads of state), so he will be President of that during his tenure.

You couldn't make this stuff up - unless of course you allowed 27 countries to choose a mutually acceptable permanent intergovernmental framework.

cordially,
Scofflaw

CDfm

Scofflaw wrote: »

The US contributes 22.2% of world greenhouse emissions, China plus Taiwan 18.4% (and Taiwan is part of the "West" in most senses), the EU 14.7%. The US and the EU between them therefore account for about 37%, and if you include the rest of the countries over which the "West" has influence, you're pretty much covering at least 75% of the world's emissions.



accurately,
Scofflaw

I think you are overestimating the influence and can you give a source for your figures.

If it really so cool and easy why are the tarriffs not in place now to protect our economies.

It should be no policy implementation without tariiffs.

So even if the science is a crock at least our economies and jobs are protected.

If it cant be done this way it shouldnt be done at all.

TheBigLebowski

The man is clearly delusional. Of course climate change is not a myth as it is fact. What he means to say is man made climate change is a myth which is true.

Scofflaw

CDfm wrote: »

I think you are overestimating the influence and can you give a source for your figures.

Back-issue of New Scientist, most recently. 2006 figures are slightly different - see here for example. It has the US at 19.8% and China at 17.7%, doesn't give a figure for the EU.

As to influence, the Kyoto Protocol now covers every country except the US, Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, Taiwan, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Western Sahara, Chad, and a handful of micro-states (Vatican, Andorra, San Marino, Brunei, the Palestinian Authority...).

CDfm wrote: »

If it really so cool and easy why are the tarriffs not in place now to protect our economies.

It should be no policy implementation without tariiffs.

So even if the science is a crock at least our economies and jobs are protected.

If it cant be done this way it shouldnt be done at all.

That would require WTO agreement, I suspect - which in turn requires US agreement. You need to bear in mind that governments have, by and large, only been persuaded of the reality of the situation in the last decade.

Nor is it simply a choice between the economy and addressing climate change - reducing fossil fuel use is a sensible strategy at this point because we're at peak oil as well, plus the Middle East is hardly stable, and Russia is not really a supplier I'm happy with. For all the whinging about how hard it would be to reduce emissions, there's an awful lot of wasted energy - and there are really very few jobs in Ireland dependent on the oil industry. We are in a prime position to cut fossil fuel use.

cordially,
Scofflaw

brianthebard

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

The man is clearly delusional. Of course climate change is not a myth as it is fact. What he means to say is man made climate change is a myth which is true.

Of course we know this is true, but this could easily be the times mistake and not his, since it would have been translated. Besides at this stage we know that when politicians talk about teh climate change they aren't talking about how it was wet yesterday and now its sunny.

FloorBoard

Man made climate change is not a myth, it is a massive scam, and our new EU man is not the only one stepping out of line.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/environment/environment-minister-sammy-wilson-i-still-think-manmade-climate-change-is-a-con-14123972.html

espinolman

CDfm wrote: »

Well I dont see why we must take on a whole set of expensive measures for unproven theories using pseudo science plunging Western Economies into recession.

Why should we all go green when the Chinese dont.

Absolutely , i agree with you , where is the proof co2 causes climate change !

Scofflaw

espinolman wrote: »

Absolutely , i agree with you , where is the proof co2 causes climate change !

All over the scientific journals.

off-handedly,
Scofflaw

FloorBoard

Scofflaw wrote: »

All over the scientific journals.

off-handedly,
Scofflaw

Oh, the scientists said so. That makes it true?

espinolman

Scofflaw wrote: »

All over the scientific journals.

off-handedly,
Scofflaw

The scientific journals will say whatever they are funded to say , and the environmental movement is politically driven .

sink

espinolman wrote: »

The scientific journals will say whatever they are funded to say , and the environmental movement is politically driven .

You obviously haven't got a clue what the scientific process is specifically what peer review is and what role scientific journals play with that process. For if you did you would realise how ridiculous that sentence is.

oscarBravo

This is the EU forum, not the Green Issues forum. If you want to discuss the reality or otherwise of Climate Change, do it over there. If you want to discuss the ramblings of EU heads of state, you can do it here.

brianthebard

So back on topic, and in relation to the lisbon issue, what side of the debate does the Czech presidency benefit? The infighting and disunity on the EU/Lisbon issue will have implications here, but for who? I see it as a boon for the No side.

ionix5891

this is what you get when right wing nutters get in power (or just look at the US for last 8 years) we have our own variety here called Sein Fein

aint he the same guy who met Liberats Declan Hanley recently or am I mixing up with some other Czech ?

FloorBoard wrote: »

Oh, the scientists said so. That makes it true?

just shows your ignorance, science doesnt deal in black and white "truths" but in percentages derived from studies and experiments dealing with theories, today the prevailing body of knowledge point to man made global warming, if better evidence is found this will change

.

sink

ionix5891 wrote: »

this is what you get when right wing nutters get in power (or just look at the US for last 8 years) we have our own variety here called Sein Fein

Sinn Fein are left wing nutters.

ionix5891

sink wrote: »

Sinn Fein are left wing nutters.

my bad you right, i need my politics license revoked

anyways they are there among the edges with other nutcases