Guest Blog: Green Peter Cranie on why he won't be sitting next to Nick Griffin
On Thursday I picked up a message from the North West Politics showÃÂ asking if I'd be available to come in and speak about the UN Climate Conference on Copenhagen on Sunday. This was not unexpected - Climate Change is a central Green issue.
ÃÂ
I rang back on my lunch hour. It turned out that there would be a bit of a catch - they were also inviting Nick Griffin. They wanted to debate the Conference and they asked me to come into the studio with him. So why won't I be sitting down with Nick Griffin to discuss Climate Change?
During the Euros, we had a no-platform policy with the BNP, and we ran a strongly anti-racist campaign. We said to voters that if the Greens beat the BNP we would stop Nick Griffin getting elected. All the pre-election YouGov polls putting Greens and BNP neck and neck in "the North" turned out to be right. The vast majority of voters in Merseyside voted against racism. Unfortunately the BNP got 4,961 more votes than the Greens across the North West region (electorate 5,206,809), meaning that Nick Griffin got the last Euro seat.
ÃÂ
I've turned down the invite from the Politics Show. It isn't because last time we were invited on, the Greens were covered in the same programme as the BNP (not a pattern we want to repeat). It isn't simply because of the Euro Election campaign of "no platform". Nor is it the fact that at the NW Green Party Office and at home (we moved house after the election), we received lots of abusive stuff from BNP supporters. There is a bigger issue at stake.
ÃÂ
By inviting Nick Griffin on to discuss the issue of Climate Change, the BBC is making a crucial mistake. You don't invite a spokesperson from the Flat Earth Society to debate satellite launches, so why invite a denier to discuss the future impact of Climate Change and the need to tackle it?
ÃÂ
Nick Griffin adds nothing substantive to this story. His presence adds nothing to the debate. I accept the BBC NW Politics team has been tasked to cover both the Greens and the BNP, weighted according to our support and elected representatives, but theÃÂ Copenhagen Conference isn't the time to give the BNP regional TV coverage.
ÃÂ
The impact of Climate Change is already being disproportionally felt by the poorer populations around the globe. From the flood plains of Bangladesh to the melting glaciers and the millions of people dependent on them for fresh water - Climate Change is a reality.
ÃÂ
If national governments had applied the precautionary principle to financial services, making sure effective regulation and oversight was in place, we wouldn't now as taxpayers be holding a huge bill for the excesses of greedy, self interested bankers. We can't repeat the same mistake with the Climate.
ÃÂ
On the issue of the environment, Nick Griffin lines up with the self interested big business oil companies, the Saudi Arabian delegation and a whole host of conspiracy nuts. The Green Party stands for practical local action, cutting heating bills and putting money back into people's pockets. If we hold the balance of power in Liverpool after the local elections, expect to see us push for practical measures at a local level.
ÃÂ
My son celebrates is first birthday today. All our children deserve a future that isn't a losing battle against a runaway climate catastrophe, and that is the risk we face if average global temperatures rise by more than 2 degrees. The precautionary principle needs to apply. The BBC debate on Copenhagen needs to be serious and not wasted on denialists.
Peter Cranie, is a leading member of the Green Party in the North West, he blogs HERE.
17 Comments
Leave a comment
Dale Street Associates
David Bartlett
City editor of the Post and Echo covering politics, regeneration, and urban affairs.
Read My Posts »
I'd like to know what Peter thinks about the views of JMU academic, Benny Peiser. This bloke has just been appointed Director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, a right-wing lobby group funded by vested interests in climate change denial. Peiser believes in global cooling, and describes himself as a 'social anthropologist' in sports science. Peiser also thinks we're going to be hit by a giant asteroid before long. I know what I think about him. But what does Peter Cranie think?
I'm not a Green, but this is a good article from Peter. His party should be applauded for their position over the BNP as well.
What a pity you didn't join in Peter, it seems Griffin wiped the floor with the Lib dem bloke. well worth a view on the BBCi player. i am sure you could have done much better!
I think Peter Cranie is wrong, having to argue with idiots is sadly the lot of politicians, if he wants academically stimulating stuff, he should join a debating society.
Mr Cranie was wrong to turn down the slot, the BBC would have gone ahead anyway. Thank goodness the Liberal Democrats challenged nasty Nick; otherwise heâÂÂd had the slot all to himself and spurted out the usual nonsense about the cowardice of other parties not wishing to debate with him because he was right.
Sorry Mr Cranie your argument sounds like an excuse dressed up in intellectual prose.
And yours, Bex, is a justification for allowing a fascist, racist, homophobic and occasionally violent party a platform as a respectable political party.
Try again.
Wavertree Scamp, the BBC would have gone ahead with just Nazi Nick. So you would have a fascist, racist, homophobic party able to pretend to be a respectable political party, without challenge.
Is that not a contraditction in terms? A political party so respectable that no-one else will share a platform with them? Your argument is flawed.
The BBC would be left looking daft, and in future would think twice about giving a platform to a racist political party, since it would be aware that every other political party would boycott it.
Sadly, the Liberal Democrats failed to appreciate the political sense on this occasion.
We are about to enter the next Little Ice Age. Despite his distateful racist politics, Griffin is right to hold the view that the "science" of global warming is a computer generated fraud. Government and media brainwashing are leading the population into stupidly blaming CO2 for climate change, which is a perfectly natural occurence. The consequences of not preparing for global COOLING will be devastating to humanity.
BigEnd but small brain, it would seem. Before Governments were to prepare for global cooling, they'd need some evidence of it. For the evidence, they would turn to the world's scientific experts. Those experts would currently tell Governments what exactly? They'd tell them what they have been telling them for several years now - CO2 emissions are raising global temperature dangerously high. But to take action over global cooling, Governments could reject the near-unanimity of world scientific opinion, and base their policies for the future on the judgement of Nick Griffin & some bloke from JMU's sport science department. Sound reasonable?
Ronnie, you have been brainwashed like the rest of them. There are very many eminent scientists who dispute the AGW theory (and yes, it is just that - a theory). Man made CO2 is not causing climate change, it is due to the vagaries of nature, sunspots, earth's orbit, cloud cover and many other less well understood factors (even climatologists don't understand why the last 10 years have been cooler than they predicted). Some hard facts can be found by listening to Piers Corbyn who does this for a living. He gets it consistently RIGHT about climate. Strange by the way how "global warming" became "climate change", such a convenient political phrase. 140 qualified scientist have just written to Ban Ki Moon at Copenhagen to express their expert views, though politically he won't want to accept that there IS an alternative view which should be debated before the UN spend trillions on a useless course of action. Read the full leaked detais (not just the email content) from the CRU at East Anglia University to find the computer code used in their climate projections is worthless.
p.s. Ronnie, I may have a small brain (who knows ?) but these guys don't -
http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org/
Thanks for the debate !
Is that the best you can do? That link is just another blog by just another crank. And it's no good you 'deniers' scrapping around to find some retired academic or two who's willing to put his name to a 'denial' petition. You've got to address the hundreds of academics who contributed to the IPCC reports. They are not dealing with piddling variations in global temperature - 0.5c for example - that might be explained by long-term trends. They are claiming the evidence indicates we have broken out of the conventional range of variation, and now face rises in excess of 2c. Once that trend is established, it may not be reversible. IPCC report, or a crank's blog? Your call.
Oh, BigEnd, you do us more than a favour by enlisting Piers Corbyn to your case. I advise readers here to rush to Wikipedia and make up their own mind on Piers Corbyn. Two points in addition: Corbyn is a self-appointed weather forecaster. Weather is not climate. And far from getting things right, he's forever getting things wrong - and then conveniently air-brushing his nonsense from the record. The best to be said of Piers Corbyn is that he is a maverick. But another word comes to mind - the one that comes to mind whenever my car won't start.
Ronnie, A cranks blog? Retired academic or two? You sound a bit heated about this - maybe you would like to check the names and qualifications of the 140 signatories on the letter to Ban Ki Moon. This is an honest debate, climate science is NOT settled but still being formulated. The measures proposed to "control" the earth's temperature are not only futile but also misguided. The IPCC have taken the most extreme projection from a faulty computer programme. Check the facts behind Michael Mann's infamous and flawed "hockey stick" graph. It was just plain wrong but was used to influence countless politicians. Who was the crank then? Many scientists who initially advised the IPCC are now in disagreement with their extreme analysis of the situation. As I mentioned above, trends for long term climate strongly suggest (no more, no less) that we are entering another Maunder minimum (little ice age). Mitigation measures against this are far more important than worrying unduly about a slight warming phase. As for Piers Corbyn, yes he is a weather forecaster and a very good one. This is his living. If anyone is airbrushing their mistakes it is the CRU at East Anglia University. They have thrown away the original temperature data from weather stations on which they based their flawed projections - now nobody can go back and check their faked results. Trust trillions of pounds to these charlatans? - you must be joking.
Ay, Peter Cranie is a GREAT LEADER and shall rule the world 1 day, and will finally prove that Global Warming is a Myth !!!!!!!
I love this man, he is hilarious he thinks that Global Warming is happening right now lol. He shall beat Nick 'smick' Griffin one day and shall turn the world GREEN.
I love the YMCA!