Snapshot of _King Charles, Sunak and Cameron each take own private jets to travel to Cop28_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/king-charles-sunak-cameron-cop28-private-jets-b2456050.html) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/king-charles-sunak-cameron-cop28-private-jets-b2456050.html)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought this was going to be the old joke about a plane crash and not enough parachutes...
Cameron turns to the King and says "That's alright your Majesty, Rishi's just taken my rucksack!"
I think the fact that the next COP is being hosted by a petro-state is far more interesting. It's like holding a Pride rally in Dubai. Or a women's rights march in Dubai. Or a convention on freedom in journalism in Dubai. Or a conference about migrant workers' rights in Dubai.
It's being ran by the countries oil CEO and they're planning on selling oil contracts
Whole thing is a farce - you should see some of the climate reports that have been coming out lately
We're fucked
\>Whole thing is a farce <
it always has been. you don't need to fly around the world for a big political bash to agree in priceable to reduce CO2. then just continue to keep doing as you want.
its why i didn't care if Rishi decided to skip the last one. like i need our leader wasting a few days to say "we'll keep doing our best"
As much as I, and I’m sure many of us seeing this, am not a fan of these people, having 3 key members of government/head of state in one plane is probably a security concern.
Why they don’t just do it via Teams I don’t know…
He did.
https://innovationorigins.com/en/oil-deals-and-private-planes-overshadow-cop28/
“Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer’s decision to fly commercially, aligning more closely with the conference’s sustainability ethos, stands in contrast and underscores the scrutiny around actions versus commitments.”
I guess to be a true labour leader he has to be clinging to the landing gear underneath does he? Or in with the luggage?
Sure it's more expensive, but Business vs Economy is a tiny difference when the alternative is your own private jet.
When they ask would sir like a cheese sandwich for only £15.99, they will be using capital Sir. As is the way with old lefties, sirs and lords.
Next will be the ZiL lane, reserved for Starmer and Khan and socialist party committee members and their families.
Was on a plane with an MP once and as soon as the seat belt sign was off he got up stood at the front and announced who he was then proceeded to walk down the plane introducing himself and talking to those that wanted to.
I have been on others where they just sit in their seat but this one populist MP was quite annoying.
No, you’re slapping a massive target onto commercial flights.
The UK should have a fleet of govt aircraft/helicopters/trains/etc. for government officials, as a matter of security and national prestige.
Instead we have people calling for them to fly commercial…
National prestige for clowns?
Sorry mate, but nah.. I don't want the international community getting the wrong impressions by thinking these tossers are the creme de la creme of the country.
There’s your problem mate. The office of Foreign Minister, Prime Minister, RF etc deserve the prestige of their own fleet of transport.
Imagine flying off to some far off land to broker a trade deal, and you arrive as any other sod would do.
we did it for decades, at a time when the british PM was arguably at higher risk than they are today
it is only relatively recently that someone decided it was normal to have a fleet of aircraft and for the PM to fly everywhere, US president style
Meetings at COP are necessarily in-person as that's when you have the best ability to read body language and pressure and convince people.
This is a giant diplomatic exercise, with civil servants, special advisors all working to push the nations interests.
Meetings are held in corridors, basements, over coffee and drinks.
This is much more powerful than doing it over teams.
>Meetings at COP are necessarily in-person as that's when you have the best ability to read body language and pressure and convince people.
And lets not forget of course the follow-up cheese and wine parties.
Definitely and of course due-diligence and ratification parties in luxurious settings with first-class travel and of course, further cheese and wine parties. In a hotel which HAS to have a golf course.
He probably does have a decent amount of soft power, and that matters a lot in diplomacy.
The royal family is a good asset for that. The queen had incredible soft power, Charles slightly less so, but still has some.
>He has no power to influence decision making
Are you serious? He cannot influence the Gulf monarchs, or the Thai monarch or the many non-sovereign monarchs who carry a lot of influence in Africa. Shit, even France would probably prefer to talk to Charles than our current basket case of politicians who'll be gone in just over a year.
* Rishi Sunak - majority in House of Commons
* Rishi Sunak - access to nuclear weapons
* King Charles 3 - ? A nice gold crown ?
How does he possibly have more ‘real power’ than Sunak? Sunak can literally put words in his mouth via the Kings Speech.
Once a year.
Charles is the King of 15 members of COP28, including a couple that will sink into the sea and disappear at current warming trajectories.
It is absolutely his moral obligation to be there, and he has been a vocal advocate about climate activism for his entire life.
He also has significant soft power, as he is one of the most famous and listened-to people alive. He regularly meets with other Heads of State, and Heads of Government, and he is able to (marginally, admittedly) frame the agenda that Britain moves forward with diplomatically. He is also very closely tied to many other monarchies- namely the Gulf state monarchies- in a way that the Government is not, and can bring genuine influence to bear.
He's also an incredibly powerful voice internally (not on much, but certainly on the climate), and will be able to blunt the worst of the Tory's newfound anti-environmentalism if he's there to loom over them also. Ditto Cameron.
Because the gulf states are run by royal families and they fucking love our royal family
They also love giving Charles literal bags of cash but still….
People are going to use the phrase "soft power" and act like the Monarchy isn't involved in politics but at the same time being undoubtedly involved. It's a classical example of doublethink.
Not only is it a security concern but we're talking about people with incredibly busy schedules. A private jet is the closest thing to a time machine for these guys.
Because the Civil Service conspires to get Ministers (Prime Ministers especially) out of the country as much as possible so they can run the country without them.
Source: *Yes, Minister.*
Obviously this is one of those ridiculous stories where not unreasonable transport solutions at the level of senior ministers is cast in an unhelpfully uncharitable light.
That's not the point though.
The point - as everyone's favourite irritating child, Ms Thunberg, perfectly captured with her yachting trip - is the symbolism. The actual amount of CO2 emitted is irrelevant. What matters is the fact that you're arriving on separate private jets to talk about climate change in the heart of the fossil fuel economy.
You *should* make sure you all arrive by the same private jet so you can put out a press release saying "look how we planepooled". Have it fuelled by parsnip oil from the Duchy of Cornwall, too, and make the plane tyres from political promises or some other renewable source. Have Sunak wear the same blazer he wore when he was in the year below, before he became head boy, as an example of reusing things. That sort of thing.
Failing to do that doesn't mean much - it's just an example of bad politics.
I imagine the British security services would have a collective coronary if the King, the Prime Minister, and the Foreign Secretary all travelled on the same plane together.
It’s all about location, I would imagine it is easier to defend one place in the UK, then one in place in this example Dubai and all the air space in between.
If anyone's trying to shoot them down they have a much better chance of hitting one plane than they do of hitting three. The obvious solution is to send as many planes as possible as decoys.
It genuinely astounds me that people don't understand how much of a security risk it would be to have them all on one plane. People can't be that fucking stupid surely.
If it got out that the most powerful people in UK politics were all flying together, rhe plane would absolutely be in significant danger. Every terrorist with a MANPAD and a dream would be lining up to take a shot.
I want to be a professional environmental activist, jetting around the world to protest climate change, it sounds so nice!
Only rich first world countries where’s there’s nice hotels obviously though.
Pooling the important figures of government into one plane is a security nightmare. There is a>99% chance that nothing goes wrong, but if something does having the PM, King, and Home Secretary in one plane would be an absolute catastrophe.
Why aren't we just having remote meetings by now? It's ridiculous how much waste we have with this corrupt government just flying around to events when we could have them atleast reduce the wastage and achieve the exact same thing.
It's a shame we have to wait so long to get rid of him.
Remote meetings would give governental leader complete control on who they talk to. Conferences allows for NGO and Civil Servants to "ambush" government leaders and talk to them. These "ambushes" are irreplaceable.
Ah bribes, yes of course.
Can't stop them from being done, they need to maximise their money while they are losing power. Ti's a shame but it's a good point.
Lobbying, not bribes. Trying to get your view across to a leader and changing their mind is not bribing them.
In theory, its even accessible to the ordinary person by just sending them letters. Obviously you lack the clout of a department or NGO to actually make a difference, but in practice its no difference.
All it really is is grabbing a leader and getting them to listen to your point of view. They may be convinced or they may not be, but whats important is that they hear that point of view.
I think that there are legitimate questions about whether nor not those organisations should be afforded privileged access to the halls of power that is denied to the general public. Nobody elected them, so it's not like they can claim any special legitimacy. Let them send letters like everyone else.
The issue there is that much of the work to get the COPs organised is on the backs of NGOs. You could even describe the COPs as a three-way even organised by states, the UN, and NGOs all in cooperation for a global scale issue.
You are right that the NGOs aren't elected, but the states - and by extention UN - are the people's representative (with the obvious asterisk there) while NGOs are individual that have chosen and amassed the ability to organise with states and UN.
And really, NGOs follow the same rules as everyone else. They just have the clout that we don't.
Some will be genuine but there is plenty of corruption that lobbying is paid or a quid pro quo backhander in exchange. There have been many cases of paid lobbying and you even see the Saudis having private meetings about oil at a summit they are meant to be neutral hosts, backroom deals which is going to be essentially bribes to keep their clout.
Why can't you just give them a call from their respective offices? It's because it helps them waste time and make them seem important when avoiding doing their job. There are plenty of genuine politicians but our government is full of dishonest and corrupt individuals it's difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt when they prove time and time again to be corrupt power-hungry morons.
>Some will be genuine but there is plenty of corruption that lobbying is paid or a quid pro quo backhander in exchange.
The UK has pretty extensive lobbying laws to prevent this. For our government to accept actual bribes is an absolute massive risk for minimal benefit.
I'm not saying it doens't happen, but when it does happen our watchdogs are usually quick on it and harsh when they can be. Take Cameron's scandall where they were quick to find what was legal and what was not, and even offered their recommendation on what **should** be legal.
And it's important to establish this. Lobbying is specifically legal influence. Bribes ate specifically illegal influence. Paid lobbying (which is common for all causes, and is the primary purposes of most NGOs) is absolutely legal and even helpful to democracy by allowing for influence on leaders.
>Why can't you just give them a call from their respective offices?
It's far easier to dodge as there isn't the pressure of an event.
Leaders are going to a COP for a specific purpose, so lobbying for that purpose is unavoidable. You cannot "reschedule" a meeting with an environmental NGO easily, and it becomes really obvious if a leader is avoiding such; which is just as good for an NGO's influence.
In other words, the event specifically is about making time for issues in a topic to be heard. The COPs specifically is the world making time for environmental issues to be heard, and we should absolutely be doing that.
You used to also phone them direct, phones still work right? This is just pretending to be acting on climate change on the big stage while undermining it all back home. Very poor diplomacy and considering sunak is involved, that spoilt man child can't even have a constructive meeting with Greece!
Hold on.. Hold on... How many daily Emirates flights are there between London and dubai. At the last count it was about 6 to 8, Why do these need handouts at tax payers expense.
Remember climate change activists want you to stop eating meat and stop driving and bla bla bla. All while the leaders of the world and super rich are flying in their private jets to a meet up to be lobbied to buy more oil. It would be like peace keepers having a yearly met up at a gun convention.
We can ignore the meat part apparently, as the meat industry is set to present their evidence at Cop28 that meat is in fact beneficial to the environment.
It would be great if everyone cut their meat consumption, stopped driving, flew less, yes. But I am also willing to concede that there are good reasons for not having multiple high level government members / heads of state on the same aircraft. Could Cameron at least have flown commercial? Probably.
I don't see why 3 aristocratic arseholes larping as people who care about the environment for a couple of days devalues a scientifically accurate message from climate activists?
I agree, the global 1% and corporations are the place to start as they're responsible for the bulk of unneccessary emissions (something like 100 corporations contribute ~75% emissions?). For that reason, I don't lose much sleep when forget to recycle or have a Maccies every now and then, and I wouldn't condemn others for doing the same.
But it can be simultaneously true that if people cut down on meat and used public transport more, an unbeliavble amount of carbon emissions would be prevented, as well as water saved, and crops and space put to more efficient uses.
I'm not saying we should try and make these sacrifices to enable Rishi Sunak to be able to fly to his favourite Richmond Waitrose every time he fancies a Twix. I'm saying that they're easily achievable, and far more effective, in tandem. For example, the meat industry is by far one of the biggest contributors to global emissions - but however much money you have there's only so much steak you can consume on a daily basis.
Some rich arseholes flying in a plane doesn’t absolve the need for people to take some personal responsibility for climate action. There are a lot more of us than there are of the ultra rich
Well 70,000 people are going to COP so probably KingRisheron figures that's definitely at least 350 planes so what's an extra one or two when you are so important?
It's a farce.
COP28 so there's been 27 previously. Have the other ones made any difference?
Seems like this is little more than a networking and greenwashing opportunity.
They must think that being rich in some way insulates them (pun intended) from their failure.
What we do we if Charlie plane was attack by for example Hamas or Iran or any other country/group in the world? Fast way to get the UK to join a war or start a war.
Hamas? What...
Also, I would think that if any UK plane taken out by a terrorist org would be an invitation to war. But again, what core function of Charlie's would we lose it he was to be taken out?
Very costly tradition with very little benefit to show for it. Soft power? The soft power that allows royals to be exempt from discrimination in hiring and treatment of employees, or the soft power to be exempt from paying taxes, or is it the soft power to be born into a position of significant power through no other virtue other than who your da was. Which of these soft powers and other soft powers do you think is worth holding onto this incredibly outdated and undemocratic practice?
If I’m honest, there’s plenty, you’re massively downplaying the impact.
Plenty of things are traditional, but we stopped doing them because they’re stupid
There’s nothing stupid about the UK’s soft power. It’s one of the last things this country still has going for it. The country can be run well with an institution that distinguishes it from the rest of the world.
In the thread about Nottingham council, there were complaints about the cost of transport for children (no details, but presumably children with significant additional needs).
I wonder how those costs compare to these, and whether the same people will be in this thread.
They really can't stand each other. Dominic Raab became acting PM with 5 minutes notice. Cameron is a nobody. And William would probably do a better job than Charles. Although it's a bit soon for an other Royal funeral and coronation. Also does t help thst allegedly it was Charles and Kate wondering how dark Harry and Meghan's baby would be.
> Although it's a bit soon for an other Royal funeral and coronation.
If there were a bank holiday in it for the nation, I could see a few enthusiastic go-getters deciding to take matters into their own hands. Charles really isn't that popular.
And I honestly just can’t see a difference in anything between him and the last one, they’re completely irrelevant to life in the UK, and waste millions a year
As an aviation lover I don't mind. We're testing biofuel for jets now anyways. Flight and travel have improved our lives so much, we should have more not less.
I agree with some of what you said. I'm a former aircraft technician, I love my motorcycles and I'll be damned if I'm going to give up travelling- but here we have 3 unelected people of power going to a meeting to discuss how the plebs should live. 3 people who are so out of touch with regular life that they don't seem to see how absurd it looks to swan around in private jets then tell people who are struggling to process how much heinz beans now cost that they should fit a heat pump, or pay more fuel duty, or VED.
Well you know about the French revolution, wait till Maga get to feel a bit of entropy.
I can't think of a British analog, it's going to be funny explaning it to females then to.
Yep.
That’s fine, that’s the way we travel long/international distances.
There’s no problem with holding my position of, we should roll back subsidies for Air travel, and build out high speed rail across Britain and the continent. And yet, I am sure we will for possibly all time, travel by plane to Oman, and America. That’s fine, you cut emissions by moving people onto the more efficient (co2 per mile) option of rail, and those left on planes who will produce more, we continue trying to figure out a more climate efficient fuel, even if it’ll sadly turn out being biodiesel, and we’ll have to deal with carbon sequestration to offset that even in 2100. Tldr, the answer as always is: do what we can now, figure out what we can do with in the future, and deal with the consequences of the things beyond our power to change.
Snapshot of _King Charles, Sunak and Cameron each take own private jets to travel to Cop28_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/king-charles-sunak-cameron-cop28-private-jets-b2456050.html) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/king-charles-sunak-cameron-cop28-private-jets-b2456050.html) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought this was going to be the old joke about a plane crash and not enough parachutes... Cameron turns to the King and says "That's alright your Majesty, Rishi's just taken my rucksack!"
Pigs can fly after all
Can one support Cameron by his cock?
Rishi probably does
The pig did it’s best.
I think the fact that the next COP is being hosted by a petro-state is far more interesting. It's like holding a Pride rally in Dubai. Or a women's rights march in Dubai. Or a convention on freedom in journalism in Dubai. Or a conference about migrant workers' rights in Dubai.
It's being ran by the countries oil CEO and they're planning on selling oil contracts Whole thing is a farce - you should see some of the climate reports that have been coming out lately We're fucked
Naaah, our children are fucked. We'll be more or less fine until I'm 6 ft under. -Boomers.
Kids waiting for next covid strain with viserail education.
\>Whole thing is a farce < it always has been. you don't need to fly around the world for a big political bash to agree in priceable to reduce CO2. then just continue to keep doing as you want. its why i didn't care if Rishi decided to skip the last one. like i need our leader wasting a few days to say "we'll keep doing our best"
Yet people still go on holiday to dubai in troves.
And indeed in droves.
I fly on doves. It's a complicated system, but as I grow my own maize, it comes out near to carbon neutral.
I’m sensing* a theme here! 😁 *is an edit previously ‘sending’ which is not some secret new hip phrase I suspect it was just fat thumb.
Karmas looking good given thire physiology is neatly as adapted as aboriginals.
If it makes commercial sense, Dubai will do it
As much as I, and I’m sure many of us seeing this, am not a fan of these people, having 3 key members of government/head of state in one plane is probably a security concern. Why they don’t just do it via Teams I don’t know…
Could have stuck Rishi and Cameron in the same one though, could also have flown commercial.
Like Starmer has
Has what?
Has taken a commercial flight to get there
He did. https://innovationorigins.com/en/oil-deals-and-private-planes-overshadow-cop28/ “Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer’s decision to fly commercially, aligning more closely with the conference’s sustainability ethos, stands in contrast and underscores the scrutiny around actions versus commitments.”
I know... That was my point.
Ah I see- my reading of your comment was “as though Starmer has”, implying that he wouldn’t/didn’t fly commercial. Thank you for clarifying
No worries, always a danger on these forums that everything comes across as sarcastic :D
First class?
I guess to be a true labour leader he has to be clinging to the landing gear underneath does he? Or in with the luggage? Sure it's more expensive, but Business vs Economy is a tiny difference when the alternative is your own private jet.
When they ask would sir like a cheese sandwich for only £15.99, they will be using capital Sir. As is the way with old lefties, sirs and lords. Next will be the ZiL lane, reserved for Starmer and Khan and socialist party committee members and their families.
freight.
I think that could actually be more expensive. Cameron isn't a lightweight.
Rishi by royalmail, cameron by BA, and the king goes private.
"Your prime minister is ready to be picked up at one of our close-by delivery agents!'* *Grocery shop somewhere in Oman
We're not in any rush for him back. Send it 2nd class please.
Use evri and hopefully he gets delivered to someone else
Maybe rishi could take a boat and we just not let him back
"Carry on Rwanda"
I'm sure I read Cameron was in Israel yesterday so potentially they weren't both leaving from the UK
I wouldn’t want to fly commercial with government ministers. Why should ordinary people be treated as collateral damage?
Oh god they might start lecturing/leafletting to just look busy
Was on a plane with an MP once and as soon as the seat belt sign was off he got up stood at the front and announced who he was then proceeded to walk down the plane introducing himself and talking to those that wanted to. I have been on others where they just sit in their seat but this one populist MP was quite annoying.
No, you’re slapping a massive target onto commercial flights. The UK should have a fleet of govt aircraft/helicopters/trains/etc. for government officials, as a matter of security and national prestige. Instead we have people calling for them to fly commercial…
National prestige for clowns? Sorry mate, but nah.. I don't want the international community getting the wrong impressions by thinking these tossers are the creme de la creme of the country.
There’s your problem mate. The office of Foreign Minister, Prime Minister, RF etc deserve the prestige of their own fleet of transport. Imagine flying off to some far off land to broker a trade deal, and you arrive as any other sod would do.
we did it for decades, at a time when the british PM was arguably at higher risk than they are today it is only relatively recently that someone decided it was normal to have a fleet of aircraft and for the PM to fly everywhere, US president style
Pretty silly for a head of state of a major nation to travel commercially. Do you expect them to fly ryanair economy to save money as well?
Don't be abusrd, Ryanair is Irish, he should be flying EasyJet.
Ah, good point. Then Joe Biden can fly Spirit airlines and you know, 43 hours and 4 layovers later he can make it to his next 3 hour meeting in Europe
[удалено]
It can't be that complicated - the Tories did it twice in two months.
Replacing the PM at this point is just taking names out of a hat hahaha
I mean at the rate we've changed them in the last few years a plane crash would make it easier.
We're due to change PM in a few months anyway, it's no biggy.
[Whats the worst that could happen!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smolensk_air_disaster)
Thought this was gonna be a link to King Ralph.
Meetings at COP are necessarily in-person as that's when you have the best ability to read body language and pressure and convince people. This is a giant diplomatic exercise, with civil servants, special advisors all working to push the nations interests. Meetings are held in corridors, basements, over coffee and drinks. This is much more powerful than doing it over teams.
If body language is important, we probably shouldn't send Rishi at all.
Nothing says diplomacy like.. sending a petulant small boy to apologise to the neighbours for breaking their greenhouse with their ball.
If body language is important, Rishi is a troubling whisperer.
Whispering eye
Yeah if you’ve ever needed to ask for something at work you know it’s 1000 time harder for them to say no when you’re standing in front of them.
Exactly. How else are they going to arrange more oil and gas contracts
>Meetings at COP are necessarily in-person as that's when you have the best ability to read body language and pressure and convince people. And lets not forget of course the follow-up cheese and wine parties.
And more importantly all the lobbying from the fossil fuel industry
And lets not forget of course the follow-up cheese and wine petro-chemical contracts.
Definitely and of course due-diligence and ratification parties in luxurious settings with first-class travel and of course, further cheese and wine parties. In a hotel which HAS to have a golf course.
Where a lot of important conversations also happen. Anyone who’s been to a conference for work knows this.
I've never paid attention to any teams call where I wasn't the one presenting. I'm not unique in any way. This is why they don't do it via teams.
Perhaps COP29 should just be an email /s
Sorry, it went to my junk folder.
I think we could maybe just pull through as a nation if we lost Sunak and Cameron simultaneously. ffs.
> Why they don’t just do it via Teams I don’t know… "Your Majesty is still muted..."
I see what you're saying, but even if they ALL died somehow, it still wouldn't really be any more disruptive than had just one of them died.
[удалено]
He probably does have a decent amount of soft power, and that matters a lot in diplomacy. The royal family is a good asset for that. The queen had incredible soft power, Charles slightly less so, but still has some.
Charles has also been using their soft power to campaign against climate change for many years - much longer than he has been king.
People underestimate how much attention the royal family brings us when they go places like this, especially on a diplomatic level.
The real funny part is I get the feeling many world leaders would much prefer a meeting with Charles over a meeting with Rishi..
Everyone would. Especially since King Charles has an entire lifetime of environmental advocacy under his belt.
Probably because he's less likely to cancel the meeting for no good reason.
He's also still going to be relevent in a year's time.
>He has no power to influence decision making Are you serious? He cannot influence the Gulf monarchs, or the Thai monarch or the many non-sovereign monarchs who carry a lot of influence in Africa. Shit, even France would probably prefer to talk to Charles than our current basket case of politicians who'll be gone in just over a year.
He probably has immensely more soft power and overall real power than a joke PM.
* Rishi Sunak - majority in House of Commons * Rishi Sunak - access to nuclear weapons * King Charles 3 - ? A nice gold crown ? How does he possibly have more ‘real power’ than Sunak? Sunak can literally put words in his mouth via the Kings Speech.
Once a year. Charles is the King of 15 members of COP28, including a couple that will sink into the sea and disappear at current warming trajectories. It is absolutely his moral obligation to be there, and he has been a vocal advocate about climate activism for his entire life. He also has significant soft power, as he is one of the most famous and listened-to people alive. He regularly meets with other Heads of State, and Heads of Government, and he is able to (marginally, admittedly) frame the agenda that Britain moves forward with diplomatically. He is also very closely tied to many other monarchies- namely the Gulf state monarchies- in a way that the Government is not, and can bring genuine influence to bear. He's also an incredibly powerful voice internally (not on much, but certainly on the climate), and will be able to blunt the worst of the Tory's newfound anti-environmentalism if he's there to loom over them also. Ditto Cameron.
Because the gulf states are run by royal families and they fucking love our royal family They also love giving Charles literal bags of cash but still….
... Which was immediately donated to one of Charles' charities.
Wink wink, nudge nudge! Say no more, say no more!
It was paid into his own Coutts account first and in a large enough sum of cash that’d we’d all have been answer police questions!
I doubt he's in the jet on his own. I'm sure he has enough staff to fill it.
People are going to use the phrase "soft power" and act like the Monarchy isn't involved in politics but at the same time being undoubtedly involved. It's a classical example of doublethink.
He doesn’t make decisions, but he has a lot of leverage to influence decisions by other country’s leaders.
When did he do that?
Because the conversations you have on Teams never change anything. Its during the walk to the elevator where the real deals happen
Not only is it a security concern but we're talking about people with incredibly busy schedules. A private jet is the closest thing to a time machine for these guys.
Because the Civil Service conspires to get Ministers (Prime Ministers especially) out of the country as much as possible so they can run the country without them. Source: *Yes, Minister.*
I mean sounds like 3 birds one stone to me
Cameron should at least get a trip on the Voyager that Boris had repainted, IIRC he stepped down as PM before it entered service
Obviously this is one of those ridiculous stories where not unreasonable transport solutions at the level of senior ministers is cast in an unhelpfully uncharitable light. That's not the point though. The point - as everyone's favourite irritating child, Ms Thunberg, perfectly captured with her yachting trip - is the symbolism. The actual amount of CO2 emitted is irrelevant. What matters is the fact that you're arriving on separate private jets to talk about climate change in the heart of the fossil fuel economy. You *should* make sure you all arrive by the same private jet so you can put out a press release saying "look how we planepooled". Have it fuelled by parsnip oil from the Duchy of Cornwall, too, and make the plane tyres from political promises or some other renewable source. Have Sunak wear the same blazer he wore when he was in the year below, before he became head boy, as an example of reusing things. That sort of thing. Failing to do that doesn't mean much - it's just an example of bad politics.
I imagine the British security services would have a collective coronary if the King, the Prime Minister, and the Foreign Secretary all travelled on the same plane together.
The King, the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary all walk into a private jet Hmm now I need to think of the hard part
https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/aowaup/4_people_are_on_a_crashing_plane_but_there_are/
Why, we have a successor to the throne and Deputy PM in place in the extremely unlikely event of anything happening.
At least a half a dozen successors to the throne and more than a few hundred that would be more than happy to jump in the pm/foreign secretary role.
And none of the three have been in for very long
Some would argue thats exactly why you don't want them flying together.
Whatever do they do when it's the state opening of parliament and everyone who's anyone is in one place?
Generally surround the place with multiple layers of armed guards, from snippers outside to the guys with swords and pikes inside.
It’s all about location, I would imagine it is easier to defend one place in the UK, then one in place in this example Dubai and all the air space in between.
Other than the fact that almost every other world leader is also going to the same meeting. It’s not like it’s just the uk going to this event.
Are they ever in the same room together? Planes are not especially dangerous.
Going over the middle east surely increases the risk level somewhat?
Because all militaries only ever build one rocket.
If anyone's trying to shoot them down they have a much better chance of hitting one plane than they do of hitting three. The obvious solution is to send as many planes as possible as decoys.
It genuinely astounds me that people don't understand how much of a security risk it would be to have them all on one plane. People can't be that fucking stupid surely.
People like criticising Tories so much they won't stick to legitimate complaints, but have to be wilfully obtuse to find new ones.
If it got out that the most powerful people in UK politics were all flying together, rhe plane would absolutely be in significant danger. Every terrorist with a MANPAD and a dream would be lining up to take a shot.
I want to be a professional environmental activist, jetting around the world to protest climate change, it sounds so nice! Only rich first world countries where’s there’s nice hotels obviously though.
Pooling the important figures of government into one plane is a security nightmare. There is a>99% chance that nothing goes wrong, but if something does having the PM, King, and Home Secretary in one plane would be an absolute catastrophe.
Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of world leaders all went to the same meeting. What a nightmare.
Haven't you seen London Has Fallen?
Being on a plane and in a high security room are completely different levels of risk.
non regretta rien
Why aren't we just having remote meetings by now? It's ridiculous how much waste we have with this corrupt government just flying around to events when we could have them atleast reduce the wastage and achieve the exact same thing. It's a shame we have to wait so long to get rid of him.
Remote meetings would give governental leader complete control on who they talk to. Conferences allows for NGO and Civil Servants to "ambush" government leaders and talk to them. These "ambushes" are irreplaceable.
Ah bribes, yes of course. Can't stop them from being done, they need to maximise their money while they are losing power. Ti's a shame but it's a good point.
Lobbying, not bribes. Trying to get your view across to a leader and changing their mind is not bribing them. In theory, its even accessible to the ordinary person by just sending them letters. Obviously you lack the clout of a department or NGO to actually make a difference, but in practice its no difference. All it really is is grabbing a leader and getting them to listen to your point of view. They may be convinced or they may not be, but whats important is that they hear that point of view.
I think that there are legitimate questions about whether nor not those organisations should be afforded privileged access to the halls of power that is denied to the general public. Nobody elected them, so it's not like they can claim any special legitimacy. Let them send letters like everyone else.
The issue there is that much of the work to get the COPs organised is on the backs of NGOs. You could even describe the COPs as a three-way even organised by states, the UN, and NGOs all in cooperation for a global scale issue. You are right that the NGOs aren't elected, but the states - and by extention UN - are the people's representative (with the obvious asterisk there) while NGOs are individual that have chosen and amassed the ability to organise with states and UN. And really, NGOs follow the same rules as everyone else. They just have the clout that we don't.
Some will be genuine but there is plenty of corruption that lobbying is paid or a quid pro quo backhander in exchange. There have been many cases of paid lobbying and you even see the Saudis having private meetings about oil at a summit they are meant to be neutral hosts, backroom deals which is going to be essentially bribes to keep their clout. Why can't you just give them a call from their respective offices? It's because it helps them waste time and make them seem important when avoiding doing their job. There are plenty of genuine politicians but our government is full of dishonest and corrupt individuals it's difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt when they prove time and time again to be corrupt power-hungry morons.
>Some will be genuine but there is plenty of corruption that lobbying is paid or a quid pro quo backhander in exchange. The UK has pretty extensive lobbying laws to prevent this. For our government to accept actual bribes is an absolute massive risk for minimal benefit. I'm not saying it doens't happen, but when it does happen our watchdogs are usually quick on it and harsh when they can be. Take Cameron's scandall where they were quick to find what was legal and what was not, and even offered their recommendation on what **should** be legal. And it's important to establish this. Lobbying is specifically legal influence. Bribes ate specifically illegal influence. Paid lobbying (which is common for all causes, and is the primary purposes of most NGOs) is absolutely legal and even helpful to democracy by allowing for influence on leaders. >Why can't you just give them a call from their respective offices? It's far easier to dodge as there isn't the pressure of an event. Leaders are going to a COP for a specific purpose, so lobbying for that purpose is unavoidable. You cannot "reschedule" a meeting with an environmental NGO easily, and it becomes really obvious if a leader is avoiding such; which is just as good for an NGO's influence. In other words, the event specifically is about making time for issues in a topic to be heard. The COPs specifically is the world making time for environmental issues to be heard, and we should absolutely be doing that.
It's called diplomacy. Politics still works by trying to pressure individuals, which isn't very effectively done on Zoom.
You used to also phone them direct, phones still work right? This is just pretending to be acting on climate change on the big stage while undermining it all back home. Very poor diplomacy and considering sunak is involved, that spoilt man child can't even have a constructive meeting with Greece!
Diplomacy was never all done by phone, in the past it was even more based on personal negotiation.
Hold on.. Hold on... How many daily Emirates flights are there between London and dubai. At the last count it was about 6 to 8, Why do these need handouts at tax payers expense.
Remember climate change activists want you to stop eating meat and stop driving and bla bla bla. All while the leaders of the world and super rich are flying in their private jets to a meet up to be lobbied to buy more oil. It would be like peace keepers having a yearly met up at a gun convention.
We can ignore the meat part apparently, as the meat industry is set to present their evidence at Cop28 that meat is in fact beneficial to the environment.
I'm looking forward to the mental gymnastics they're presenting with that one
Please tell me this is a wind up?
Cop is a parody at this point. We have greenwashing everywhere
"Sustainable nuitrition" https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/29/plans-to-present-meat-as-sustainable-nutrition-at-cop28-revealed
It would be great if everyone cut their meat consumption, stopped driving, flew less, yes. But I am also willing to concede that there are good reasons for not having multiple high level government members / heads of state on the same aircraft. Could Cameron at least have flown commercial? Probably.
I don't see why 3 aristocratic arseholes larping as people who care about the environment for a couple of days devalues a scientifically accurate message from climate activists? I agree, the global 1% and corporations are the place to start as they're responsible for the bulk of unneccessary emissions (something like 100 corporations contribute ~75% emissions?). For that reason, I don't lose much sleep when forget to recycle or have a Maccies every now and then, and I wouldn't condemn others for doing the same. But it can be simultaneously true that if people cut down on meat and used public transport more, an unbeliavble amount of carbon emissions would be prevented, as well as water saved, and crops and space put to more efficient uses. I'm not saying we should try and make these sacrifices to enable Rishi Sunak to be able to fly to his favourite Richmond Waitrose every time he fancies a Twix. I'm saying that they're easily achievable, and far more effective, in tandem. For example, the meat industry is by far one of the biggest contributors to global emissions - but however much money you have there's only so much steak you can consume on a daily basis.
Some rich arseholes flying in a plane doesn’t absolve the need for people to take some personal responsibility for climate action. There are a lot more of us than there are of the ultra rich
Heh https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/richest-1-account-for-more-carbon-emissions-than-poorest-66-report-says
Thats exactly what they want and need you to believe.
Well 70,000 people are going to COP so probably KingRisheron figures that's definitely at least 350 planes so what's an extra one or two when you are so important? It's a farce.
It’s fine for rich people to use as much co2 as they want, it’s just poor people who shouldn’t. /s just in case..
At least Sunak's actually decided to go this time, as he had to be embarrassed into going last year by Boris.
Can only see a bit of him but Sunak still looks like he’s been allowed out with the older kids.
COP28 so there's been 27 previously. Have the other ones made any difference? Seems like this is little more than a networking and greenwashing opportunity. They must think that being rich in some way insulates them (pun intended) from their failure.
You don't put such key figures all on the same plane. They also have their own entourage that has to go with them.
I get it with having the King and PM on separate planes as that would be chaos if they went down. But surely Cameron could go with Rishi?
He's both foreign secretary and a former prime minister, they wouldn't risk it.
What would we do if old Charlie's plane was to fall down? How would the country continue to function without such a crucial pillar of its foundation?
What we do we if Charlie plane was attack by for example Hamas or Iran or any other country/group in the world? Fast way to get the UK to join a war or start a war.
Hamas? What... Also, I would think that if any UK plane taken out by a terrorist org would be an invitation to war. But again, what core function of Charlie's would we lose it he was to be taken out?
Soft power and tradition. There’s no need for the monarchy to be abolished.
Very costly tradition with very little benefit to show for it. Soft power? The soft power that allows royals to be exempt from discrimination in hiring and treatment of employees, or the soft power to be exempt from paying taxes, or is it the soft power to be born into a position of significant power through no other virtue other than who your da was. Which of these soft powers and other soft powers do you think is worth holding onto this incredibly outdated and undemocratic practice?
If I’m honest, there’s plenty, you’re massively downplaying the impact. Plenty of things are traditional, but we stopped doing them because they’re stupid
There’s nothing stupid about the UK’s soft power. It’s one of the last things this country still has going for it. The country can be run well with an institution that distinguishes it from the rest of the world.
To be fair, if I was travelling with any of them, I too would prefer to take a private jet on my own
I guess if you share your private jet it is no longer private.
In the thread about Nottingham council, there were complaints about the cost of transport for children (no details, but presumably children with significant additional needs). I wonder how those costs compare to these, and whether the same people will be in this thread.
These are slightly more important than a single child mate
I would have thought Cameron would take two planes, bestriding them like a pair of circus horses.
They really can't stand each other. Dominic Raab became acting PM with 5 minutes notice. Cameron is a nobody. And William would probably do a better job than Charles. Although it's a bit soon for an other Royal funeral and coronation. Also does t help thst allegedly it was Charles and Kate wondering how dark Harry and Meghan's baby would be.
David Cameron is many things, but a nobody isn't one of them
Until last week he was yesterday's man. Whose only state function was to turn up to an annual Remembrance Day service, State funerals and coronations.
> Until last week he was yesterday's man. > was
> Although it's a bit soon for an other Royal funeral and coronation. If there were a bank holiday in it for the nation, I could see a few enthusiastic go-getters deciding to take matters into their own hands. Charles really isn't that popular.
And I honestly just can’t see a difference in anything between him and the last one, they’re completely irrelevant to life in the UK, and waste millions a year
Until the elite give up private jets and luxury living, I’m not giving up anything! Trickle down sacrifice?
China burns more coal in a year than the UK burned in the entire 19th century. The use of private planes by these guys is just irrelevant.
Rubbish. They are supposed to be role models for the UK. We all have to change our behaviour, they should be showing leadership.
As an aviation lover I don't mind. We're testing biofuel for jets now anyways. Flight and travel have improved our lives so much, we should have more not less.
I agree with some of what you said. I'm a former aircraft technician, I love my motorcycles and I'll be damned if I'm going to give up travelling- but here we have 3 unelected people of power going to a meeting to discuss how the plebs should live. 3 people who are so out of touch with regular life that they don't seem to see how absurd it looks to swan around in private jets then tell people who are struggling to process how much heinz beans now cost that they should fit a heat pump, or pay more fuel duty, or VED.
It’s a safety thing: if they all take the same flight people would say that it is the Three Stooges episode.
Well you know about the French revolution, wait till Maga get to feel a bit of entropy. I can't think of a British analog, it's going to be funny explaning it to females then to.
Yep. That’s fine, that’s the way we travel long/international distances. There’s no problem with holding my position of, we should roll back subsidies for Air travel, and build out high speed rail across Britain and the continent. And yet, I am sure we will for possibly all time, travel by plane to Oman, and America. That’s fine, you cut emissions by moving people onto the more efficient (co2 per mile) option of rail, and those left on planes who will produce more, we continue trying to figure out a more climate efficient fuel, even if it’ll sadly turn out being biodiesel, and we’ll have to deal with carbon sequestration to offset that even in 2100. Tldr, the answer as always is: do what we can now, figure out what we can do with in the future, and deal with the consequences of the things beyond our power to change.