Non-job of the Week

January 13, 2011 5:14 PM

An unusual non-job this week. It isn't a vacancy, rather a job that already exists inside the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). I wonder how many people know about, or have read the blogs of John Pearson?  He is the Head of South East Asia Climate Change, based at the British High Commission in Singapore.

The next question is why the FCO needs to have such a function, and there are people doing a similar job around the world. On the FCO website they say:
"Building Britain's prosperity by increasing exports and investment, opening markets, ensuring access to resources, and promoting sustainable global growth... Climate change is a global problem and therefore requires a global solution. The FCO, with its network of posts across the globe, work on securing an international climate agreement."

Taxpayers want their money spent on frontline services.  Or, in the case of the FCO, sticking up for British taxpayers’ interests, not lecturing other countries trying to convince them to make the same mistakes our politicians have and impose a massive burden on their consumers by putting in place regulations that increase energy costs.  There is more on the subject in a TPA report here. It's advice that they aren’t going to heed so it’s a waste of money anyway.  Look at the farce in Copenhagen or Cancun, where the talks only avoided a collapse by avoiding all the key issues.

Countries around the world want cheap energy, not higher prices. They want low taxes, not additional green taxes. It is bad enough we have gone down the wrong road, but it's indefensible for taxpayers' to have to pay for someone to lecture other countries and encourage them to do the same.An unusual non-job this week. It isn't a vacancy, rather a job that already exists inside the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). I wonder how many people know about, or have read the blogs of John Pearson?  He is the Head of South East Asia Climate Change, based at the British High Commission in Singapore.

The next question is why the FCO needs to have such a function, and there are people doing a similar job around the world. On the FCO website they say:
"Building Britain's prosperity by increasing exports and investment, opening markets, ensuring access to resources, and promoting sustainable global growth... Climate change is a global problem and therefore requires a global solution. The FCO, with its network of posts across the globe, work on securing an international climate agreement."

Taxpayers want their money spent on frontline services.  Or, in the case of the FCO, sticking up for British taxpayers’ interests, not lecturing other countries trying to convince them to make the same mistakes our politicians have and impose a massive burden on their consumers by putting in place regulations that increase energy costs.  There is more on the subject in a TPA report here. It's advice that they aren’t going to heed so it’s a waste of money anyway.  Look at the farce in Copenhagen or Cancun, where the talks only avoided a collapse by avoiding all the key issues.

Countries around the world want cheap energy, not higher prices. They want low taxes, not additional green taxes. It is bad enough we have gone down the wrong road, but it's indefensible for taxpayers' to have to pay for someone to lecture other countries and encourage them to do the same.

Latest Blogs: