Ade #BIN SPYING 💙💛

In light of the renewal of the debate around energy extraction, particularly Britain’s oil & gas industry, it seems appropriate to highlight several of the arguments by proponents of the Net Zero agenda against oil & gas, broken down by claim.   1) “Prices are set on international markets, so UK extraction doesn’t help” • While there are international benchmark prices, this is misleading • Commodity trading firms make vast sums of money trading the dislocation between regional prices, seen most clearly in 2022 • UK now imports ~50% of its gas   • Domestic production: o reduces reliance on LNG spot markets, the most volatile segment o lowers exposure to geopolitical shocks • Energy imports cost the UK tens of billions per yearduring crises • Domestic supply improves balance of payments and currency stability 2) “Private companies mean profits don’t benefit the public” • North Sea producers face ~75% headline tax rate • Generated ~£9–10bn in tax revenue in 2022–23 (HM Treasury / OBR) • £350bn+ total tax receipts since the 1970s • Supports ~200,000 UK jobs (Offshore Energies UK) • Government retains control via: o licensing o taxation o regulatory approval 3) “We shouldn’t expand fossil fuels during a climate transition” • UK still relies heavily on gas: o ~80% of homes heated by gas • Cutting domestic supply does not get rid of the demand • Imports replace production: o LNG often has higher lifecycle emissions than domestic gas • Gas remains essential for: o power system backup o heating o fertiliser and industrial processes 4) “New extraction won’t lower consumer bills” • It’s true that it does not directly set prices, but: o reduces price spikes and volatility o lowers reliance on high-cost LNG spot purchases o reduces system risk premiums • 2022 crisis driven by regional supply constraints, not absence of global supply 5) “Renewables and nuclear will replace gas by the time new fields come online” • Most projections show gas still in the mix into the 2030s+ (CCC / IEA) • Nuclear build timelines: 10–15+ years (we want these shortened, but we work with what we have) • Renewables require: o backup generation (currently gas) o major grid/storage expansion • Gas still needed for non-power uses (e.g. fertiliser) • Other countries will likely still need to buy oil & gas. We should be able to supply it to them.   6) “We’re running out of reserves anyway” This is entirely false. • UK Continental Shelf estimated to hold ~5–15 billion barrels of oil equivalent remaining(NSTA) , with 2.9 billion barrels of oil equivalent proven & probable reserves. • Falling production reflects: o policy o investment o licensing constraints Rather than any lack of resources   7) “Why more gas storage?” • UK storage capacity: o ~2% of annual demand o vs 15–25% in many European countries • Low storage → higher exposure to: o price spikes o supply shocks • Reduced flexibility since closure of Rough storage facility Gas storage serves to smooth out price volatility and contributes to security of supply.   Ultimately, it comes down to this: the Norwegians, Saudis, and Russians do not mind so much when oil & gas prices go up. They are selling the oil and gas. We could be too – and the profits would flow to British companies, British shareholders, British workers, and the British state. Why not have that instead of paying to import it our energy? We cannot let the myths overtake the narrative: let’s get rich.

Larry Fink: “Every currency and financial asset will be digitized into digital wallets. This will roll out globally, fast. It rewires the plumbing of finance.” The infrastructure for The Great Taking is being announced. When all assets sit in custodial digital wallets on centralized ledgers, legal title and control shift to whoever runs the plumbing. That’s not innovation, it’s the end of direct ownership. Digitization = centralization of control. The “plumbing” they’re changing is who gets to turn the valves on your money, stocks, and property claims. Watch the code. Exit the system. Build your safety zone. Freedom first. CAF.

This one will require a stiff drink. In the early 1990s, the government came up with a clever idea. Instead of borrowing money cheaply to build hospitals, schools, and roads, it would get the private sector to build them and then pay the private sector back over 25 to 30 years. The Private Finance Initiative. PFI. The attraction was obvious. You got a shiny new hospital today. The bill didn't show up on the government's books. The cost was deferred into the future. Politicians got ribbon-cutting ceremonies without the awkward conversation about borrowing. It was, in effect, the nation's credit card. Buy now, pay later. Except the interest rate was extraordinary. The total capital value of everything built under PFI was around £50 billion. As of March 2024, there were 665 PFI contracts still running across the UK, with roughly £136 billion in remaining payments stretching out to the early 2050s. These are payments public bodies are contractually locked into. Hospitals, schools, councils, government departments. Paying for buildings that in many cases were constructed twenty or thirty years ago. And the terms are extraordinary. PFI contracts were structured so the private sector would not just build the facility but manage its services. Cleaning. Maintenance. Catering. Portering. These services are bundled into long-term contracts with built-in inflation increases that the public sector cannot renegotiate, cannot exit without paying massive penalties, and often cannot even fully scrutinise because of commercial confidentiality clauses. In one case raised in Parliament, a hospital was charged £333 to change a lightbulb. That isn't an urban myth. It was cited in Hansard. The NHS has been hit hardest. According to parliamentary analysis, the capital cost of NHS PFI projects was around £13 billion. The total repayments are estimated at around £80 billion. And the peak of NHS PFI annual repayments isn't even here yet. It arrives in 2029. The bills are still going up. In 2020-21, NHS trusts paid £457 million purely in interest charges on PFI contracts. Not services. Not maintenance. Interest. In the last five years, NHS trusts have handed over more than £1.8 billion in PFI interest alone. We Own It calculates that money would have covered the starting salaries of over 50,000 new doctors. One NHS trust, Essex Partnership, has reportedly paid back 27 times what was originally borrowed. Some hospitals are spending more on PFI repayments than on medicines for patients. And remember, these repayments come out of the same NHS budget that's supposed to fund patient care, staff, and equipment. Scotland got it just as badly. Audit Scotland reported that Scottish taxpayers will pay a cumulative £40 billion for PFI assets worth just £9 billion. North Ayrshire Council will have paid £440 million by 2038 for four schools that cost £83 million to build. Now here's what makes this worse. Many of these contracts are starting to expire. The buildings are being handed back to the public sector. And the NAO has warned of significant risks around the handback process, including cases where public bodies were dissatisfied with the condition of assets being returned to them. Decades of payments. And some of these buildings may come back needing significant further investment. So what actually happened? The government could have borrowed money at significantly lower rates to build these hospitals and schools itself. Sovereign borrowing has always been cheaper than private finance. Instead, it paid the private sector to borrow at a premium and passed the inflated cost on to the taxpayer. The private sector took the profit. The taxpayer took the risk. The buildings are now ageing. The debts are still being paid. And the services that were supposed to benefit are being squeezed partly because so much of their budget is locked into contractual obligations they cannot escape. PFI wasn't investment. It was an accounting trick. A way for governments to build things without the borrowing showing up in the national debt figures. It made politicians look fiscally responsible while loading future generations with obligations they had no say in and no ability to renegotiate. Both parties did this. The Conservatives created PFI in 1992. Labour massively expanded it after 1997. More than 700 projects were signed. The coalition eventually wound it down. The current government scrapped the latest version. But the contracts remain. The payments continue. And the damage is already done. This is what it looks like when a country chooses to buy its infrastructure on hire purchase instead of investing properly. You lock in above-market rates for decades. You lose control of the assets. You tie the hands of future governments. And when the bill keeps coming due, you're told there's no money for doctors, teachers, or social care. There was always money. It just went somewhere else.

Absolutely unbelievable. Humberside Police have now closed their investigation into the grooming gangs in Hull, claiming they’ve “explored every possible line of enquiry”. No charges. No justice. Another grooming gang probe quietly shut down. Young girls up and down this country are being consistently failed and abandoned by the authorities. British girls deserve better.