• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,067
Location
Redcar
I think this is something significant, a lot of the focus of the job centre is just that, getting a job as quick as possible - any job. In other countries the focus is more on finding a career for people that will work for them long term, giving access to training courses and the like.
Yes I think people who have never had much contact with the Jobcentre get a real culture shock when they rock up having been made unemployed and found out that what it actually does is verify you're ticking the right boxes so that you payment can go ahead this month or if you need to be referred for a sanction.

There might be a little bit of a chat about finding jobs and your CV but if you need actual support finding a job (and as you say forget about finding a career, that's for the birds) then you'll be sent onto outsourced (there's more money leaking out to the private sector at great expense again) training programmes of little provable value or, even worse, put on something like Restart which hasn't been wholly unsuccessful but seems to be very very lumpy (some areas it works well, other it doesn't) again provided by private contractors (like Serco).

If you wanted to really try and target reducing the number of people who are capable of at least some work but are stuck on Universal Credit you'd redesign the Jobcentre from the ground-up. But that's difficult so instead punishment beatings will continue until nothing changes because the punishment beatings have been ongoing for at least a decade and a half now and nothing has improved.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,380
Location
Taunton or Kent
Yes I think people who have never had much contact with the Jobcentre get a real culture shock when they rock up having been made unemployed and found out that what it actually does is verify you're ticking the right boxes so that you payment can go ahead this month or if you need to be referred for a sanction.

There might be a little bit of a chat about finding jobs and your CV but if you need actual support finding a job (and as you say forget about finding a career, that's for the birds) then you'll be sent onto outsourced (there's more money leaking out to the private sector at great expense again) training programmes of little provable value or, even worse, put on something like Restart which hasn't been wholly unsuccessful but seems to be very very lumpy (some areas it works well, other it doesn't) again provided by private contractors (like Serco).

If you wanted to really try and target reducing the number of people who are capable of at least some work but are stuck on Universal Credit you'd redesign the Jobcentre from the ground-up. But that's difficult so instead punishment beatings will continue until nothing changes because the punishment beatings have been ongoing for at least a decade and a half now and nothing has improved.
Performative cruelty is the go-to tactic for politicians trying to appeal to key voters when they are incapable of making those voters' lives better. As long as they can show someone is having it worse than you, the voters needed will turn out. It's the same with asylum seekers; far better to show them detained and deported than have a preventative approach and collaborate with other countries. Of course this just means the country as a whole sinks further into the gutter, as this approach doesn't improve anybody's lives except the richest 1%.
 

johntea

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2010
Messages
3,025
My experience 10 years ago was a little bit of a culture shock at first having worked in a senior role at a place for 8 years straight - I quit without having another job lined up despite interviewing for several in the months leading up but there had been some management changes and the like and I could feel it was starting to affect me mentally

In the end it was pleasant enough - the 'job coach' visit every 2 weeks was pretty much a 5 minute exercise so they could tick some boxes on their computer so I got my payment as they must have 20-30 people to fit in a day each and could see I was 'serious' enough about looking for work

After around 6 months I applied for a random job online one afternoon (public sector so not even a CV, an application form!), got an interview, got the job, been there ever since and now on a salary over double where I was at so everything worked itself out pretty well! (amsusingly I had about a 3 month wait for paperwork and checks etc. before I could start my new job but my old job rang offering me some part time work as they were short staffed so I took that on and managed to leave JSA at that point...never burn your bridges is the takeaway there!)

If anything it opened my eyes to how boring life without the routine of a job actually is once the novelty wears off!
 

Broucek

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2020
Messages
920
Location
UK
There's a pretty funny sitcom about a job centre which captures some of the absurdity. It has an entertaining mix of characters from those who are trying hard to help to bolshie “work to rule” types.

 
Last edited:

martin butler

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2018
Messages
847
I think Starmer will cling on as long as possible, he appears to believe himself to bet he only thing between Britain and disaster.

I think the time for him to be allowed a "dignified exit" is long past - he is clearly not going to go unless he is dragged out of number ten.

He is reportedly talking to McSweeney again, who prides himself in being "the hammer of the left"

A lot depends on what the cabinet decide, if as expected Burnham wins, and returns to Parliament, then he will have backers in the cabinet, who will want Stamer to go and not stand, leaving Burnham with a clear route to No 10, as ever its numbers,

I f Starmer is talking to McSweeny again, that's going to create more rifts, give more ministers a reason to oust Starmer, they might not like Burnham, but you can bet they will hate McSweeny more. I think that Starmer will be told resign as leader, save your face, agree to carry on as stand in PM, until the new leader is elected.
 

Broucek

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2020
Messages
920
Location
UK
All this puts me in mind of one of the "Poems on the Underground" from years back

I wanna be the leader
I wanna be the leader
Can I be the leader?
Can I?
I can?
Promise?
Promise?
Yippee, I'm the leader
I'm the leader
OK what shall we do?
(Roger McGough)
 

The Ham

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
12,021
Yes I think people who have never had much contact with the Jobcentre get a real culture shock when they rock up having been made unemployed and found out that what it actually does is verify you're ticking the right boxes so that you payment can go ahead this month or if you need to be referred for a sanction.

There might be a little bit of a chat about finding jobs and your CV but if you need actual support finding a job (and as you say forget about finding a career, that's for the birds) then you'll be sent onto outsourced (there's more money leaking out to the private sector at great expense again) training programmes of little provable value or, even worse, put on something like Restart which hasn't been wholly unsuccessful but seems to be very very lumpy (some areas it works well, other it doesn't) again provided by private contractors (like Serco).

If you wanted to really try and target reducing the number of people who are capable of at least some work but are stuck on Universal Credit you'd redesign the Jobcentre from the ground-up. But that's difficult so instead punishment beatings will continue until nothing changes because the punishment beatings have been ongoing for at least a decade and a half now and nothing has improved.

The experience of someone I know was that they were interviewed by someone, who told them not to be too hopeful for anything beyond minimum wage but then needed help with their IT from the individual they were taking to (which unsurprisingly irked them given how they'd just been told that they shouldn't expect too much).

The individual then was told that they couldn't claim very much as their spouse was earning above the threshold, to the extent that it wasn't worth the travel let alone the inconvenience.

Anyway, needless to say, the individual got a job above minimum wage as they had a reasonable science degree from a good university and never darkened the door of the job centre again.

That's not to say that there aren't good staff at job centres, it's just that was their experience.

Whilst I can understand that with no experience an individual may need to do some work to get a better job, they'd been working through university (cleaning a couple of days a week term time and some seasonal work during the summer holidays) so weren't entirely without work experience.

Likewise, it's not unheard of people with a degree working for minimum wage, I suspect that the framing of the message wasn't as good as it could have been. For example, "let's try for applying to a range of jobs to get you into work quickly, so some which are entry level to get some additional work experience as well as a few more aligned with your expectations".

Same, you may be working minimum wage to start with potentially but not closing off the fact they could apply for a role which is the start of a career.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,067
Location
Redcar
In the end it was pleasant enough - the 'job coach' visit every 2 weeks was pretty much a 5 minute exercise so they could tick some boxes on their computer so I got my payment as they must have 20-30 people to fit in a day each and could see I was 'serious' enough about looking for work
Yeah that was basically my experience when I was signing on back in 2012/13ish. Saw my work coach once every two weeks, ticked the boxes, off I went. He was a nice guy and we had a pleasant chat whilst doing the bits and bobs. He even got me out of a sanction actually (I'd muddled up an appointment so failed to turn up completely by accident, he had to refer it to be looked at for a sanction but whatever he wrote did the trick as I never got one!).

But I reckon that's also part of the problem. When you've got to get through a few dozen people you can't exactly spend much time with each one looking at what support they need. Hence the fobbing off to third-party contractors of dubious value!
If anything it opened my eyes to how boring life without the routine of a job actually is once the novelty wears off!
Ha, absolutely! I was unemployed again around 2015/16ish and after about a month I contacted my old employer and asked if they'd have me back as a volunteer (as they were a voluntary agency with some paid staff) as I was increasingly bored out of my tree. Worked out well in the end as I was first in line for a job when some more funding came through! :lol:
The experience of someone I know was that they were interviewed by someone, who told them not to be too hopeful for anything beyond minimum wage but then needed help with their IT from the individual they were taking to (which unsurprisingly irked them given how they'd just been told that they shouldn't expect too much).

The individual then was told that they couldn't claim very much as their spouse was earning above the threshold, to the extent that it wasn't worth the travel let alone the inconvenience.

Anyway, needless to say, the individual got a job above minimum wage as they had a reasonable science degree from a good university and never darkened the door of the job centre again.

That's not to say that there aren't good staff at job centres, it's just that was their experience.

Whilst I can understand that with no experience an individual may need to do some work to get a better job, they'd been working through university (cleaning a couple of days a week term time and some seasonal work during the summer holidays) so weren't entirely without work experience.

Likewise, it's not unheard of people with a degree working for minimum wage, I suspect that the framing of the message wasn't as good as it could have been. For example, "let's try for applying to a range of jobs to get you into work quickly, so some which are entry level to get some additional work experience as well as a few more aligned with your expectations".

Same, you may be working minimum wage to start with potentially but not closing off the fact they could apply for a role which is the start of a career.

Yeah I think this is a big issue to be honest with the Jobcentre set up. If you're fairly self-motivated, have some reasonable qualifications/skills, there's really very little that they can offer you. When I signed on in 2012/13 as a fresh graduate with a 2:1 in History I got sent on a course to check my English, Maths and Computer Skills. Having completed the assessments within an hour or two on day one I spent most of the rest of the two days helping various other people who needed assistance in setting up emails and other bits and pieces.

But that was a box that had to be ticked so ticked it was! But what value did I gain from that? Nowt other than getting out of the house!

Then at the other end of the spectrum when you've got people who have low motivation (usually due to health or other circumstances), low skills/qualifications, and potentially other barriers to work the best they can offer is a training course with a private contractor of dubious utility...
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,267
My cynical view is that most of the Job Centre apparatus could be dispensed with, but remains primarily as ritual humiliation for those who need out of work support.

There have been enough scandals (for example sending out letters for appointments after they've already been missed for an excuse to sanction someone to meet targets) that I am skeptical the organisation is fit for purpose.
 

martin butler

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2018
Messages
847
My experience with the job centre was one of frustration, but as you say, i was wise enough to play the game, I ticked the boxes, did courses, all of which were really of no practical help in getting a job, i did get back into work, but it was due to my own efforts, not that of any job coach, plus mine seemed to change every month,

The first one , was actually very good, she did try to help, she listened to what i was saying, she got promoted,

next was only interested in sign here, show me your job search, then that's it, I was out the door,

3rd was nasty, accused me of not applying for enough jobs, even though i was doing as much as I could, he was very aggressive, threatening, demanding I apply for jobs, I had no chance of getting, because I didn't have any of the skills,

then I got my original one back, he I think might have been sacked, or moved on, I saw a course, I thought would be helpful, asked can you fund it she had to ask further up, but i did get the funding, and through that, i was given a contact, by one of the teachers, where her husband worked, told they are after a decent administrator, you should apply, and I got the job,

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Now that Andy Burnham has been duly ellected an MP, Will Starmer still be leader by the conference, As i've posted before, I think many cabinet members now realise that Starmer is a liability and will loose them the next election, if nothing is done

It won't be this week, but I'm half expecting Burnham to be having meetings with senior labour figures who will force Starmer's hand, and get him to agree to stand down, there will be a leadership campaign that Burnham will win, and Labour will go into the conference season with a new leader, and purpose,

I hope the first thing Burnham as leader announces is the full implementation of media reform and an enquiry into foreign money in British politics with new laws that effectively means party have to publish where their funding comes from, and from that people should be able to discover the extent of the web of deceit that covers much of the right-wing parties.
 
Last edited:

martin butler

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2018
Messages
847
I've yet to see much evidence of a purpose.... Hope I'm wrong!
I would hope the conference, if things pan out as I hope, could see an announcement that leaverson will be fully implemented, that an enquiry will be set in motion into funding of political parties, this would hopefully be a start, then a bill to nationalise failing water companies,
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
7,210
Location
UK

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Now that Andy Burnham has been duly ellected an MP, Will Starmer still be leader by the conference, As i've posted before, I think many cabinet members now realise that Starmer is a liability and will loose them the next election, if nothing is done
It's interesting, as before the most recent revelations about Mandelson, it felt like there was a bit of an upswing in Starmers popularity, particularly with standing up to Don and not getting involved in Iran.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

I hope the first thing Burnham as leader announces is the full implementation of media reform and an enquiry into foreign money in British politics with new laws that effectively means party have to publish where their funding comes from, and from that people should be able to discover the extent of the web of deceit that covers much of the right-wing parties.
That would certainly be welcome, but it also wouldn't be the first time a leadership candidate has stood on a radical platform, and once in power decided to ditch it for reheated Blairisim.
 

martin butler

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2018
Messages
847
It's interesting, as before the most recent revelations about Mandelson, it felt like there was a bit of an upswing in Starmers popularity, particularly with standing up to Don and not getting involved in Iran.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


That would certainly be welcome, but it also wouldn't be the first time a leadership candidate has stood on a radical platform, and once in power decided to ditch it for reheated Blairisim.
I think Labour will have no choice but to, the biggest threat to this country is not from the various communities that often have lived without problem for generations amongst us, but from the unregulated impact of social media, where people post known lies, and misinformation that create unrest and disquiet My hope is that Burnham, if he were to become PM, could navigate a path that seeks to address the issues, such as the high cost of living, the lack of proper medical intervention, that might help to stop the type of murders we have seen of late, and to do something to address the imbalance between the very richest, and the other 90 % but whilst showing fairness.
 

Markdvdman

Member
Joined
14 Aug 2011
Messages
491
Location
Merthyr Tydfil / Gorslas
Burnham is very pro net zero, and the cost to this country is alarming! Address that and cost of living will come down it is a simple policy - like decarbonisation and without carbon there can not be life! It is insane!
 

JamieL

Member
Joined
6 Aug 2022
Messages
906
Location
UK
We have to get out of this doom-loop of Prime Ministers. Assuming the leadership challenge goes ahead and Starmer falls, the new PM will be just as unpopular within 18 months as the structural issues surrounding the economy will not be fixed.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
7,210
Location
UK
Burnham is very pro net zero, and the cost to this country is alarming!
I'm not certain that's true, renewables are often cheaper than gas, and create jobs here in the UK, rather than in despotic middle eastern regimes with questionable labour practices.
Address that and cost of living will come down it is a simple policy
Simple policies are often simple as they are derived from an overly simplistic analysis, given the volatility we have seen in hydrocarbon prices in the last few years, we must remember that oil and gas are not cheap and reliable, they are dependent on international trade routes, foreign governments and international actions outside our control.
- like decarbonisation and without carbon there can not be life! It is insane!
What do you think decarbonisation is, is you're suggesting we cannot live without fossil fuels, then you are obviously wrong. Or areyou are suggesting some bizarre scheme to remove all the carbon atoms from the planet earth?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

We have to get out of this doom-loop of Prime Ministers. Assuming the leadership challenge goes ahead and Starmer falls, the new PM will be just as unpopular within 18 months as the structural issues surrounding the economy will not be fixed.
Unfortunately, politicians that don't back neoliberalism don't get the support of the papers and the wealthiest who benefit from the status, and thus don't get elected.
 

JamieL

Member
Joined
6 Aug 2022
Messages
906
Location
UK
Unfortunately, politicians that don't back neoliberalism don't get the support of the papers and the wealthiest who benefit from the status, and thus don't get elected.
Not sure I entirely agree with that. A key strand of neoliberalism is individual responsibility which, if applied in a pure form at a state level, would mean no payment of benefits be that for unemployment, state pension etc as people would make their own arrangements. Yet that is not what the electorate nor the politicians advocate!
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
7,210
Location
UK
A key strand of neoliberalism is individual responsibility
That certainly seems to be creeping in, especially with rise of American libertarianism, but I would say that it has historically referred to an emphasis on the free market, small government type policies. For example, it's Wikipedia article states:
Neoliberalism is often associated with a set of economic liberalization policies, including lower taxes, privatization, deregulation, depoliticisation, consumer choice, labor market flexibilization, economic globalization, free trade, monetarism, austerity, and reductions in government spending. These policies are designed to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society.

Which doesn't include the ideas of individual responsibility as key criteria.
which, if applied in a pure form at a state level, would mean no payment of benefits be that for unemployment, state pension etc as people would make their own arrangements. Yet that is not what the electorate nor the politicians advocate!
Indeed, the politicians know that even if they want such policies, they won't get away with them. Though we do see a few glimpses of it from time to time when Farrage lets his guard down.
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Associate Staff
International Transport
Railtours & Preservation
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
4,575
What do you think decarbonisation is, is you're suggesting we cannot live without fossil fuels, then you are obviously wrong. Or areyou are suggesting some bizarre scheme to remove all the carbon atoms from the planet earth?
We don't just extract oil to burn it, where will we get plastics, certain pharmaceuticals? Also where will all our electric cars run with no tarmac? There's a lot of development needed before net zero with no dependence on oil. Currently it's pie in the sky.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
7,210
Location
UK
We don't just extract oil to burn it, where will we get plastics, certain pharmaceuticals? Also where will all our electric cars run with no tarmac? There's a lot of development needed before net zero with no dependence on oil. Currently it's pie in the sky.
I never stated that we did?
 

125Spotter

Member
Joined
7 Aug 2022
Messages
113
Location
South West
the cost to this country is alarming! Address that and cost of living will come down it is a simple policy
Which costs precisely are you referring to? Please be specific, because "costs" are not all the same – they could be losses attributable to the public purse, to individual householders/citizens, to trade, or some other cost entirely?

Large gross investment costs can appear substantial but pale into insignificance when looked at in terms of GDP impact and general national expenditure over long timeframes. Public costs arising from certain losses of revenues don't tell us anything about whether the economic position of private individuals improves or not. The public purse doesn't run like a personal bank account and a fall in tax revenue, for example, doesn't imply a fall in national wealth.

The long term "costs" in the broadest possible sense – our ability to maintain safe, secure, prosperous lives in our corner of Europe – that arise out of inaction, in return for some perceived short-term economic relief, will be far more catastrophic not just on this country, but on the ability for the global economy and status quo to exist in its present form at all.

Simple policies are often simple as they are derived from an overly simplistic analysis, given the volatility we have seen in hydrocarbon prices in the last few years, we must remember that oil and gas are not cheap and reliable, they are dependent on international trade routes, foreign governments and international actions outside our control.
I quite agree. Offering a one-line solution to a problem of that complexity should make us more sceptical, not less, regardless of which party is doing the offering
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
7,984
Location
Surrey
We have to get out of this doom-loop of Prime Ministers. Assuming the leadership challenge goes ahead and Starmer falls, the new PM will be just as unpopular within 18 months as the structural issues surrounding the economy will not be fixed.
Labour MPs are just like Tory ones despite all the rhetoric about being different. Majority are only interested in getting reelected and will vote Burnham in the vein hope he can delievr them back at next General Election.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,267
We have to get out of this doom-loop of Prime Ministers. Assuming the leadership challenge goes ahead and Starmer falls, the new PM will be just as unpopular within 18 months as the structural issues surrounding the economy will not be fixed.
Ultimately Starmer has had two years and has made no meaningful progress on the majority of those structural issues.

I invite you to check the list of acts of parliaments [this specific page is 1997, we would now be in mid April 1999] passed by this point in the 1997-2001 term for comparison.
Even the "signature" renters rights and planning reform bills are tepid in terms of dealing with the challenges we face.

See the strategic defence review which said very little and the never produced defence infrastructure plan as an example for the sorts of wheel spinning this government has produced.

He is either totally unwilling to make real changes (I suspect he is absolutely fine with the post 1979 status quo) or has so squandred the goodwill of his party that he can't persuade them to vote for his plans despite the enormous powers of patronage available to the PM.

In either case his position is untenable and he must resign. Three more years of paralysis is unacceptable.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,180
Location
LBK
He is either totally unwilling to make real changes (I suspect he is absolutely fine with the post 1979 status quo) or has so squandred the goodwill of his party that he can't persuade them to vote for his plans despite the enormous powers of patronage available to the PM.
A bit of both. He and Burnham are both of the same ilk though - they had a particular political opinion on a protected minority which turned on a sixpence the moment the Supreme Court clarified the law. Both forget that the point of coming to power is that you can *change the law*. Prime Ministers don't have to change their personal opinions because some old solicitors clarified a law.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,830
We don't just extract oil to burn it, where will we get plastics, certain pharmaceuticals? Also where will all our electric cars run with no tarmac? There's a lot of development needed before net zero with no dependence on oil. Currently it's pie in the sky.
You appear to have misunderstood the term net zero. It refers to carbon emissions and does not mean absolute zero use of oil and gas.

There will always be some uses of oil and gas which are hard or impossible to replace with alternatives. Net zero means that essential consumption is balanced by carbon sinks elsewhere, not that consumption is eliminated entirely.

And of course it's burning hydrocarbons thus releasing CO2 into the atmosphere which is the problem, not turning it into durable goods. So a lot of the processes and end uses you're talking about just aren't a concern for net zero.

It always needs to be borne in mind however that the vast majority of oil and gas is used as fuel for transport or heating, for which practical alternatives exist and are now being rapidly adopted all over the world.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Labour MPs are just like Tory ones despite all the rhetoric about being different. Majority are only interested in getting reelected and will vote Burnham in the vein hope he can delievr them back at next General Election.
I'm not sure that 'MPs want to keep doing their jobs and not become unemployed' is a particular sign of nefariousness. In that respect MPs are no different to literally everyone else who has a job.
 
Last edited:

Richard Scott

Established Member
Associate Staff
International Transport
Railtours & Preservation
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
4,575
You appear to have misunderstood the term net zero. It refers to carbon emissions and does not mean absolute zero use of oil and gas.
No, I'm fully aware of what net zero means, I was referring to the zero use of oil, which as was pointed out, I'd unfortunately misread the person's post.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,180
Location
LBK
Several sources including BBC and the Telegraph indicating Starmer is ready to resign.

BBC News - Talk of Starmer staying on to fight is fading fast - BBC News

"We promised people we weren't going to do this."

There is exasperation in the voice of a long time Labour adviser. But as every hour passes, it is more likely the UK will soon have its seventh prime minister in 10 years.

Talk of Sir Keir Starmer fighting is fading, his exit seems more likely as the weekend goes on. The prime minister is at his country retreat, Chequers, spending time with his wife.

The man coming for his job, Andy Burnham, is spending the weekend with his family, away from home too.
 

Railwaycat

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2023
Messages
277
Location
Derbyshire
No, I'm fully aware of what net zero means, I was referring to the zero use of oil, which as was pointed out, I'd unfortunately misread the person's post.

I think the problem is that too many people, even some with more than half a brain, believe the likes of reform, the right wing press and vested interests that net zero means no more use of oil full stop.
 

Top