Mrs Marr stops just at the point where it gets really interesting - why would anyone else want to lead Labour to a big defeat?
If she can't even ask this question, her analysis of Labour's leadership conundrum is worthless.
Re: food prices.
A programme on Radio 4 yesterday Our Food, Our Future, while it had some silly stuff about global warming from Mr Gummer and others, seemed to come down on low buffer stocks as the reason for dramatic food price rises.
I think I've come across this argument before on a Food Programme that focused on the price of rice.
Re: emissions trading.
There was a Radio 4 doccy on the UN/World Bank scheme, which showed it to be a complete beanfeast for companies in India/China. Carbon grants for projects that would have gone ahead anyway, in one case for a dam that had already been built before they even applied for the carbon trading grant.
Re: UN emissions trading above
The doccy I was thinking of is Carbon Trading, which is available as an MP3 from The Changing World which seems to be associated with the BBC world service.
More consumption than production = reducing buffer stocks. Bleedin obvious, innit?
Biofuels is a load of old bullocks and always has been. But it gave the left-whingers chance to hot-air their opinions, so we should be grateful.
Spot the two deliberate errors:
"oh... no... slight miscalculation... we actually need to stop bio-fuel production immediately because it's actually increasing carbon emissions through the entirely unforeseen impact of increased grain production, which we never imagined would happen... sorry about that."
Yes, you've got it ... eco-wonks admitting an error and then apologising, unheard of.
Good of you to keep us on our toes Mr Tyler.
Commenting by HaloScan
