The weekend is in sight. This means that the Westminster MSM have to scrabble around for another nice, page-filling scandal to keep us diverted from what’s going on. we’re in for another weekend of blatant, shameless deflection.

For today, the Sunak attempts at cutting back on some Net Zero policies may serve. Only for the record and in passing am I mentioning the collection of today’s front pages (link) about ‘end to interest rate rise’ and the fate of the ‘Murdoch empire’.

Now let’s enjoy  today’s rich harvest of examples for blatant and shameless projection. Firstly, there’s Labour’s criticism  which has got to be seen (or read …) to be believed (emphases are always mine):

“Simon Case has been accused of allowing Rishi Sunak to use Downing Street as “PR for the Conservative Party” over a net-zero announcement branded with the Tory conference slogan. The cabinet secretary has been warned by Labour that he risks the impartiality of the civil service after the prime minister unveiled a series of changes to climate policy while standing behind his party’s conference strapline.” (link, paywalled)

Does this mean that the PM has no power and is just a puppet of the Whitehall mandarins, that he has to obey his Cabinet Secretary in all things? We’ll have to see if Whitehall mandarins will support one of their own should Labour get into No 10 or if yon mandarins want to get rid of Simon Case by all and any means possible.

Note that there’s no factual criticism by Labour of Sunak’s decision. Perhaps we’ll get to see over the weekend Labour explaining to us that Net Zero is good for us. Perhaps they’ve taken note of Matt Goodwin’s poll on this issue, published yesterday in his paywalled substack site where he points out that the majority of the electorate – the 16-24 age cohort exempted – is in the majority against Net Zero, observing that the Net Zero policies are regarded :

“[…] as an imposition on people by an “increasingly out-of-touch, London-based, financially secure and morally righteous elite who are losing sight of how their policies are affecting the rest of the country, and, on the other side, a much larger number of financially precarious if not impoverished voters who are increasingly having to upend their lives and finances to meet the demands of this new elite.” (link, paywalled)

Pointing out that the ongoing physical destruction of Khan’s ULEZ cameras is a sign that the electorate isn’t going to reward this policy with their votes, Goodwin concludes that ditching the worst of the green crappery makes electoral sense:

“Which is why, whatever your personal view of Net Zero, wherever you sit on this issue, the blunt reality for Rishi Sunak is that zooming in on this divide is good politics and good for his chances at the rapidly approaching general election. Rishi Sunak, it appears then, is very much up for fighting the next election. The only question is whether his party’s disillusioned voters will now rally behind him.” (link, paywalled)

While this is for the future, I found it quite remarkable that the usual ‘experts’ in Westminster only managed to come up with this criticism:

“In his speech on environmental policy, Rishi Sunak promised that when it came to meat and flying taxes, as well as a “government diktat” to force households to use seven bins, “I’ve scrapped it”. There was only one issue: according to his critics, as well as his own civil servants, no one was seriously proposing any of those policies. There was nothing to scrap.” (link, paywalled)

So were they alright with the other Net Zero excrescences Sunak scrapped? Interesting … It’s as if the ‘model experiments’ by local councils in England and Wales, of forcing people to have seven bins – or boxes – never happened. Models, after all, aren’t meant to be implemented – if you believe those ‘experts’. ‘Veganism’ also has been ‘imposed’ by acres of newsprint adn shelves full of crap, even a whole month being educated to it: nah, never happened, go away!

There’s also an opinion piece in The Times, by Paul Goodman, editor of that Tory ‘ConHome’ newsletter. The headline is sufficient: “This is the green case the Tories should have made ten years ago” (link, paywalled): another lovely deflection from asking why the Tories never did so. Answer: look no further than Ms May and Johnson plus wifey! Any Tory wanting to keep his job would never ever dare to stand up against those former PMs.

That’s all I have for today. As exercise in blatant deflection the ‘criticism’ of Sunak’s Net Zero policies truly takes some beating. Have a good day.