Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News Podcast 17th April 2024

Transcript

UK Column News Podcast 17th April 2024 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Good afternoon. It's Wednesday, the seventeenth of April, just after one o'clock.
0:12
Welcome to UK Colin News. I'm your host Mike Robinson joining me in
0:15
the studio today Charles Mallard. Welcome to the program. Charles, siks Mike,
0:18
and by videolink, we've got Mark Anderson from Texas. So we're going
0:22
to get started off with food production and Charles Farmers has been finding it pretty
0:27
difficult, as we all know, with the amount of rein at the moment.
0:30
But of course if it's clay, soil becomes a big problem. It
0:35
absolutely does. And I think now the situation is such that with any soil
0:38
really it's a problem. And this is something that's been happening for months now.
0:42
October really was the beginning of very wet whether which the government should have
0:46
seen coming. So the question that presents itself is is the government, and
0:50
in particular defra leading us towards food shortages. We have news that a fund,
0:56
sorry, just we'll go back to the first slide reported by the end,
1:00
you hear that a farming recovery fund def limits the sorry lifts the one
1:03
hundred and fifty meters eligibility rule. That's their typo, not ours. Now
1:07
what this means is that in an attempt to support farmers who have been affected
1:14
by flooding, DEFRA produced a scheme quite extraordinary in its premise in that if
1:19
you were further away than one hundred and fifty meters from a watercourse, you
1:23
were ineligible, despite the fact that you might still be flooded in exactly the
1:26
same way. So the question is should they have seen this coming or not.
1:30
We have here from the Department for leveling up the illustration of how much
1:37
land is in agriculture that green bar at the top sixty three percent of the
1:41
overall land mass in England, that is, and further they go on to
1:46
talk about flooding and exactly how much of the UK's farmland is subject to flooding,
1:53
being in National flood Zone three seventy one percent or thereabouts. So it
1:59
seems perfectly extraordinary that DEFRA would not have had a plan in place. Now
2:02
we've talked a lot about the environmental land management schemes going back to January of
2:07
this year, the announcement and then the recent counter announcement that actually it was
2:10
not going to be possible to fund what was set out originally. So we'll
2:15
just have a quick look at what is available in the SFI, which is
2:20
one that's been scaled back to only twenty five percent of a holding, and
2:25
to highlight the extraordinary efforts the government are going to to pressure farmers into taking
2:34
land out of food production. I've just pulled up an example here of hedgerows,
2:38
which are of course critical for wildlife all sorts, and the funding here
2:45
is up to three pounds per one hundred meters or ten pounds per one hundred
2:50
meters to manage those hedgerows. And that's set against taking arable and horticultural land
2:55
out of production, which has for flower mixes and food up to seven hundred
3:01
and thirty two pounds per hectors. There's an extraordinary disparity when, of course
3:07
hedgerows, according to the sort of the push for nature recovery, would be
3:12
an ideal target. And yet that's something that the government have missed. So
3:17
the next thing to look at is the sort of apparent sap by the government
3:21
to put forward a statutory instrument about hedgerow regulations. Now this might not be
3:27
something that you considered to be particularly important, but the reason I draw your
3:30
attention to it is because they're trying to make it look like they're producing tough
3:36
regulations to ensure that nature is indeed protected. But of course they say that
3:40
these things may not happen except in the circumstances described. And of course we
3:46
then see as usual in case or rather to enable the treatment of serious cause
3:52
of harm to plant health or a serious infestation of any pest or weed,
3:57
while considering the biosecurity moment at the moment, it's not so hard to see
4:00
how that might come to pass. And also the catch all here we've got
4:06
for the purposes of enhancing the environment or improving public or agricultural access. So
4:14
really the idea that hedgerows are to be improved and to become a sort of
4:18
constituent part of the landscape seems to be based on thin air. And of
4:24
course we've got this theme again of access to the public and this idea of
4:29
natural capital and indeed that possibly becoming a chargeable item. So what I'll do
4:34
is just close up now with a look at where we are on the latest
4:40
from the Agricultural and Horticultural Development Board, who have an updated report on wheat
4:49
in particular talking about the wheat crop looking poor and indeed the imports having gone
4:58
up, so that this is on the prices from the European Commission forecasting that
5:02
the prices will go up, the productions fallen and planting continues to be disrupted
5:09
by heavy rain in top producing regions. But I think the important bit there,
5:13
the highlighted text at the bottom, is that sizeable Russian wheat supplies continue
5:18
to limit gains in wheat future. So I return to my original question,
5:24
which is the government and DEFRA setting us up for food shortages because of course,
5:29
the only reason that we are unable to access the wheat that might be
5:33
produced by Russia, or indeed that that will have a knock on effect on
5:36
our ability to secure crops that we're unable to grow here at the moment,
5:42
is of course because of the government's refusal to sue for peace in Ukraine and
5:46
indeed to impose sanctions. So they've put themselves into an almighty muddle, and
5:51
of course the taxpayer you are footing the bill to try and dig back out
5:57
of this hole, as well as faced with the respective enormous increases in price
6:01
and indeed discussive food in the not too distant future. So that's really the
6:05
update on what the government are calling food security at the moment. But I
6:11
don't think we can ignore Charles. In the meantime, while they're not bringing
6:15
in Russian weight, all this weight is coming in from Ukraine and it's extremely
6:19
low quality, or it's corrupted, or it's poisoned in some way. And
6:23
of course this is the reason why Polish farmers in particular, but in fact
6:28
farmers right across the sort of former Russian eastern countries of the Poland and north
6:33
of Poland campaigning against this, and so you know, we're being we're having
6:41
this poor quality we dumped on the market in the meantime. Absolutely, Yeah,
6:44
that's another critical part of it. And then and then, of course
6:46
the other thing which I haven't discussed, but is there ever present, is
6:50
the increase in input costs on the fertilizer side and the energy side, again
6:57
you know, aligned with all of this, which which again the government are
7:01
very much driving rather than it being a consequence of what would be natural market
7:05
forces. Yeah, okay, thank you. Well, let's move on to
7:09
the issue of censorship. And I'm going to say thanks to Debbie for sending
7:13
this over to me last night. This is the House of Commons Culture,
7:15
Media and Sport Committee, sixth Report of Session for twenty twenty three twenty twenty
7:20
four, and it's called Trusted Voices. Now, of course, the issue
7:25
of trust with respect and narratives is something that we've talked about quite a lot
7:29
over the coming over the past period, because this is something which is absolutely
7:32
at the forefront of the minds of those who are trying to keep control of
7:36
a narrative that they have increasingly not got control of. But if we put
7:40
that back on screen for a second, then let's just have a look and
7:43
see what they say in this report. They say the pandemic has brought home
7:47
just how vital it is to be able to access authoritative information. We highlighted
7:51
in our twenty twenty report on Misinformation how online hoaxes and conspiracies had been allowed
7:57
to spread across social media. Neever, the problem is not confined to COVID
8:01
nineteen and this is great because what they then go on to do is tell
8:05
us what the range of issues is, so climate change, five G,
8:09
water fluoridation, elections and those claiming UK terror attacks have been staged. So
8:15
everybody's doing very well. These people are extremely nervous about people campaigning on these
8:20
issues, and so I would just say keep going, because it's getting them
8:24
more and more rattled anyway they go on. And the report to say this
8:26
makes it all the more important that there are prominent trustworthy actors, or as
8:31
they call them, trusted voices, who can provide evidence, to accurate information
8:37
and communicate in an accessible way. So I wonder who they might have in
8:41
mind. Let's have a look and see. Given the government's role as a
8:45
trusted voice during the pandemic, did you find the government to be a trusted
8:48
voice during the pand I should have prefaced this by the way of saying that
8:50
this particular segment is going to be a comedy segment, so keep this in
8:54
mind. But do you view the government as a trusted voice during the pandemic?
8:58
Charles, That springs to mind immediately. But I suppose trusted to be
9:03
making it up from start to finish. Yes, okay, so we put
9:07
that back. So as a trusted voice during the pandemic, we were concerned
9:11
to hear about the shortcomings of its communications, with limitations with both the information
9:16
transmitted and the methods by which it was done. We believe that the government
9:20
could do more to utilize the vast number of experts and employees, building on
9:24
the critical role played by the Chief Medical Officer and the Chief Scientific Officer during
9:30
the pandemic, to engage public issues of national concern. So, as I
9:35
say, this is a comedy show, and of course the chuckle brothers there,
9:37
the Chief Medical Officer and the Chief Scientific Officer lost the trust, shall
9:43
we say, of the public, very quickly because of their sheer and competence.
9:46
But anyway, we move on. During our inquiry we received fifty three
9:50
pieces of written evidence. We held six oral evidence sessions where we heard from
9:54
the founder of Money Saving expert Martin Lewis, the BBC's disinformation social media correspondent
10:00
Marianna Spring, academics, fact checkers from Full Fact and Channel four News.
10:05
Now, of course, Channel four News is the organization that ran the pro
10:09
white helmets campaign in the UK. At least they took the lead on it,
10:13
so I'm not sure I would consider them a trusted voice. Then others
10:18
included the national newspapers, Sense about Science, the Science Media Center, the
10:22
National Academies. Come on to that. In the second, civil servants and
10:26
the Parliamentary Undersecretary of State at the Department of Science, Invasion and Technology,
10:31
Paul Scully MPN, will come on to him in a second as well.
10:35
Trust is fundamental, they say, to a well functioning society. The extent
10:37
which people trust a person or an institution influences their opinions and their behavior,
10:43
and this is key. And they said that Alison Phillips, editor of The
10:48
Daily Myrt, told them that she thought the trustworthiness of the established news organizations
10:52
Comedy Continues had increased hugely compared to the mid nineteen eties, with content being
10:58
far more informative, responsible and well thought through. And what we're going to
11:01
say about this is right the way through this a complete lack of self awareness,
11:05
a complete lack of understanding of what people actually thought about the way that
11:11
the pandemic was was promoted in the mainstream press about the fact that the game
11:18
was up. As soon as the spy Bee documentation went out, and people
11:24
began to understand that the mainstream press had been used in order to push a
11:28
narrative which would increase fear in the general public, to encourage behavior change,
11:33
to get people to do what the trusted government wanted them to do. It's
11:39
quite incredible that they had the goal to publish this and the way that they
11:41
have. But let's go on with it. We heard from both independent and
11:46
media organization fact checkers during our inquiry and so to understand how they can achieve
11:50
and maintain a reputation as a trusted voice. Rebecca Skippage, Disinformation Editor,
11:56
the editor of the disinformation that BBC puts out, I would argue, but
11:58
anyway at the BBC told us it's fact checking was underpinned by the BBC's twin
12:03
pillars of impartiality and accuracy. Just that it never ends. It's brilliant.
12:09
The Government's Counter Disinformation Unit leads the operational response to disinformation for the UK government
12:15
and works with a range of partners including other government departments, social media platforms,
12:20
civil society groups and academia. So just think about that they are working
12:24
with social media platforms. If anybody's not understanding why they get shadow band or
12:31
they get material brought down, this offers the explanation the kind of disinformation unit
12:35
is working hand in glove with the social media platforms. Paul Scully MP we
12:41
mentioned have already said that the kind of Disinformation Unit was not some big shitty
12:46
intelligence unit. That's a lie. It's trying to find trends that it can
12:52
say this is happening. What do you want to do about it? I
12:54
mean, there's so much documentation that demonstrates that that is simply false. But
12:58
anyway, we are concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability of the kind
13:03
of disinformation and the appropriateness of its reach. We recommend that the government commission
13:07
and lay before Parliament an independent review of the activities and strategy of kind of
13:13
disinformation within the next twelve months, so we will see whether that happens.
13:16
I won't be holding my breath because I don't think the government has any intention
13:20
or likely to do that at all. And of course, in the meantime,
13:22
within the next twelve months there probably will be a new government, so
13:26
that isn't going to happen there either. Anyway, recommendations, we recommended the
13:31
Government publishes advice for government departments and their public bodies on communication intended for young
13:35
people, including guidance on the use of new apps and platforms, including TikTok.
13:41
And it was a theme through this document that young people were extremely important
13:45
and the idea of capturing young minds was absolutely key. The Government Communication Services
13:52
should conduct and publish and evaluation of the effectiveness of government communications during the pandemic
13:58
by the end of twenty twenty four, ensuring that this takes into kind of
14:01
the views of the public and frontline organizations such as those working with patients and
14:05
carerors. And the government should ali and encourage its scientists to respond directly to
14:11
the media to kind of misinformation. Okay. As part of the renewed focus
14:16
on assessing the national academies, the government should review what role the national academies
14:20
should play in the public information landscape and work with them to publish objectives and
14:26
benchmarks to deliver on that role. And of course what are we talking about
14:31
here. We're talking about the Academy of Medical Sciences, the British Academy,
14:33
the Royal Academy of Engineering, and the Royal Society. Those are the main
14:37
four. Those are the four national academies. There are also academies for Scotland
14:41
and Wales, but those are the four national ones. But in the meantime
14:45
then, of course, yesterday in Brussels, the Nazi conference was taking place.
14:52
National Conservative conference and Soler Braverman heading that up and well it was centered
14:58
or wasn't centered, but they certainly making lots of noise about it being centered
15:01
because the Belgians and the Belgian authorities, at the auspices of the Mayor of
15:05
Brussels, decided to basically throw up a cordon and on the basis of public
15:11
safety and so on. But this was the list of speakers, so Bram
15:16
and leading at Nigel Faraj, Matteus Moravietsky. I mean, yes, I
15:22
don't think we need to say very much. Victor Orban was supposed to be
15:24
speaking as well, and all of the other names that you'd see on screen.
15:28
And as you say, the police decided that they would put up a
15:31
cordon outside the place. But I just wanted to end this segment with a
15:35
little bit of video from Soel Bravram and sorry, and well we'll have a
15:41
laugh about this at the end discuss. I'm here with like minded democrats,
15:48
elected democratically elected politicians, leaders and experts in their fields, and we are
15:54
here talking about the issues that matter to the British people, but also many
15:58
sit around the Europe securing our borders, making our community safe for and how
16:06
to protect our countries. And it's a real shame that the thought police,
16:12
instructed by the Mayor of Brussels a sore fit to try and undermine and denigrate
16:18
what is free speech and free debate. I remember the words of missus Thatcher,
16:23
and I'm going to misquote her. But the more ridiculous and far fetched
16:27
and extremists their attempts are to silence us, the more cheered on I am,
16:33
because it's just shows that they've lost, they've lost the political arguments.
16:38
I mean, the hypocrisy of this woman is off the charge. So this
16:41
is the woman who has Home Secretary drove much of the censorship agenda in this
16:48
country, and now she's on the receiving end of it herself, and she's
16:51
busy making comments like that. I just find it absolutely incredible. Thoughts.
16:56
Yeah, it's pretty remarkable. I mean, more recently, of course,
17:00
her treatment of the sort of demonstrations and gatherings in the name of freedom and
17:07
peace in from October last year perfectly extraordinary. But yes, she does seem
17:12
to encapsulate entirely what certainly a large percentage of the viewing audience of UK column
17:18
will be thinking. But just not quite meaning the same thing by it.
17:21
Indeed, yes, okay, let's welcome Mark to the program and well World
17:26
Health Day. Yes on April nine, Good day, gentlemen. I covered
17:33
virtually in real time the Chicago Council and Global Affairs program, World Health Day,
17:38
Migration, climate change and global health. And most of the photos you're
17:42
seeing pretty much all our original snapshots or screen shots from the program. And
17:49
it was very interesting in that the approach seemed to be and here's the speakers,
17:55
Ibraham Abu bakar If I'm saying that right, the pro Provost of the
18:00
University College London, and the moderator was Maya Prabu, and she's a clinical
18:07
associate professor a law a Yale Law School. It was an interesting, if
18:11
not kind of surreal discussion, and it seemed to be weighted toward making climate
18:17
change more personal, talking about things regarding climate change that would make us care
18:22
more about the theory of anthropogenic climate change, that being the kind of climate
18:27
change that's purely caused by mankind's industrial and leisure activities, nothing to do with
18:33
the sun and solar cycles and things like that. And there were many things
18:40
discussed. I had to be really selective on what to present here. On
18:42
this next slide. One of the many things that was rolled out was Middle
18:48
East Respiratory syndrome or MERS, a species of coronavirus. This was cited during
18:52
the program and it showed for instance, Time magazine, which is a notorious
19:00
for having extremely fear ridden covers for its cover stories. There was one I
19:07
talked about years ago where it showed the Earth on fire. This one just
19:11
says, warning, we are not ready for the next pandemic. That's in
19:14
twenty seventeen. Get the date on that Time cover there, twenty seventeen warning
19:19
we are not ready for the next pandemic. And other studies were cited twenty
19:25
nineteen, a World at Risk, and something going all the way back to
19:27
twenty fifteen and moving on from there. Just to sort of delineate what they
19:33
rolled out at this program, we had climate migrants. So now the migration
19:38
program, the border insecurity program, particularly at the southern borth in the United
19:44
States, that's being more strongly attributed to climate change, not that weather couldn't
19:48
have anything to do with it. Of course, crops do fail and people
19:52
migrate, but you have to look at it in context. This slide projected
19:56
internal climate migrants by twenty fifth. The World Banks ground Swell Report projects that
20:02
climate change could lead could lead up to two hundred and sixteen million people across
20:07
six world regions to move within their countries, not internationally so much, but
20:12
within their countries by twenty fifty if we don't act, and let's move on
20:18
from there, we can talk a little bit about ground swell. What is
20:21
it? Well, here's some of the pages from a Groundswell report that is
20:26
about three hundred and sixty two pages in length. So I had to struggle
20:30
to figure out what include here, but it shows different regions around the world.
20:34
The two hundred and sixteen million people. People can look at this in
20:38
more detail, forty million in South Asia, and so on and so forth.
20:42
Going on from there, the slides, well, of course we'll be
20:45
in the show notes the next one taking action on internal climate migration, the
20:52
number of people forced to move because the climate change could be reduced by as
20:56
much as eighty percent if we act now to cut global greenhouse gases and integrate
21:03
climate migration. Again, the thrust of the program was to make climate change
21:08
more more of a personal issue. Why should you care about it. Otherwise,
21:12
it's just an abstraction. It's just computer models. So mark of course
21:18
they amount of migration fall by eighty percent, If they're eighty percent fewer people
21:22
on the planet, that'd be another way of looking at Yeah, that's that's
21:27
interesting. Moving on from there, I won't spend a lot of time on
21:33
each particular slide. Again, I took all these with the screenshots as they
21:37
did their program. If you've ever tried to take pictures of overhead presentations right
21:42
at a live program, it never works out. This was much easier doing
21:45
it virtually anyway. It says most migration is labor driven. There's some truth
21:51
to that. A lot of migration is South South thirty seven percent, mostly
21:56
students and some refugees. It says here also that international migrations or excuse me,
22:03
international migrants, they're saying, are highly heterog heterogenous, heterogeneous, heterogeneous,
22:10
most very healthy. Now that is highly disputable. At the southern border
22:15
here in Texas, there are a lot of reports of TB and other communicable
22:21
diseases coming through with the international migrants which are coming over, of course,
22:25
across the border between ports of entry in record numbers. So that's a very
22:30
debatable claim during this program April nine in Chicago and moving on from there again
22:37
tugging at the heartstrings to get us more interested in climate change. UNICEF children
22:41
are being displaced by climate change. Millions of children are being driven from their
22:47
homes by weather related events exacerbated by climate change. So, in other words,
22:52
there are weather related events that aren't necessarily tied to the climate change that
22:57
they're talking about. So there's a lot of a lot of nuance there that
23:00
you have to keep in mind. And then this next slide, the growing
23:06
health toll of a changing climate, and this goes to the heart of heat
23:11
related labor capacity loss in other words, as anthropogenic so called man caused climate
23:18
change. As that increases, there's going to be a loss of potential labor.
23:23
For hereat exposure led to the loss of forty two percent more hours of
23:29
potential labor potential labor in twenty twenty two compared to nineteen ninety one through two
23:33
thousand. The associated global potential loss of income reached eight hundred and sixty three
23:40
billion in twenty twenty two, So that ties climate change into labor loss and
23:47
unrealized income. Things like that, and people can look at these slides in
23:52
more detail if they want to understand them to the end degree. And here
23:56
we have climate suitability for infectious disease transmits. The main speaker walked everybody through
24:04
this. Climate change is altering the environmental distribution of food, water, air,
24:11
and vector born infectious diseases, of many of which threatened nutrient utilization.
24:15
In twenty twenty two, a record ten percent of the global coastline showed conditions
24:21
suitable for vibrio transmission. That's a type of bacteria often found in undercooked or
24:27
uncooked seafood and putting one point four billion people at risk and leading to our
24:33
record six hundred and ten thousand estimated ribriosis cases. And this again is just
24:42
kind of what they walked everyone through. And then they got into their solutions.
24:48
Decreased the carbon footprint, of course, and going on from there,
24:53
accelerate mitigation and adaptation, prioritizing energy, health and food system in ventions that
25:00
can offer health cod benefits. And I think we're getting near the end of
25:04
the slides, and I can comment a little bit on them. Local solutions
25:08
in Sahel, which is just below the Sahara Desert before you get into the
25:12
tropical regions of Africa that sort of in between zone rising temperatures and decreasing rainfall,
25:19
growing population policymakers, academic partnership, so on and so forth, and
25:26
thrugal locally developed adaptatient health system action, income diversification, water harnessing, farming,
25:33
innovation, planning, tree soil conservation, and some of that might do
25:37
some good. It's not to say that all those actions are bad, but
25:41
just looking at the context of this. And I'll note Mike that I did
25:45
manage to get one of my questions answered. I've been raising my hand many
25:48
times at who WHO programs I've been covering virtually, and they never call on
25:52
me. This time they did address one of my questions, and that was
25:57
does the speaker subscribe to the one health view that animals, plants, and
26:03
humans are to be all judged on the same level and giving the same value.
26:07
And he said, that's easy to answer. The answer is absolutely yes.
26:12
So that's how the main speaker summarized his comments, Mike. But the
26:18
whole program, again, to kind of wind it up, was to give
26:22
climate change a more human face and a more personable connection so people would care
26:26
more. And the speaker completely dismissed any idea that anything other than anthro progenic
26:33
climate change was the cause of so called climate change, and of course they
26:37
trust the computer models completely. It's all a matter of faith really with this
26:41
issue. So there you go, thanks Mark, And I've been making two
26:45
points about that. First, the idea that heat exposure is causing a massive
26:49
loss of libor, well, how do we compare that? What happens when
26:52
we compare that to the amount of libor that's been lost as a result of
26:56
the vaccination policy and the number of people that are ready and long term sick,
27:00
particularly in Western nations at the moment. And the other question about the
27:04
distribution of food, bearing in mind what Charles kicked the program off with today,
27:10
that's just laughable as well. Okay, let's move on. If you
27:14
like what the UK Column does, you'd like to support us. We have
27:15
a page you can go to to find out how you can support us at
27:18
support dot UK column dot org and all the options are there if you can
27:22
possibly help us out. We do need your support and it is only your
27:26
support that keeps us going. So that's much a precident if you can UK
27:32
Column dot org and UK Column extracts are the main places to go, but
27:36
you could share anything that you find on all the various platforms, and please
27:40
do have a look at the items that are available on the UK Column Shop
27:44
now. Brian has another episode of Walking the Dog happening on Sunday eleven am
27:49
on his YouTube channel. The link to that will be in the show notes
27:52
on the UK Column website, so do listen to that if you possibly can.
27:57
Tomorrow we have an interview with Nikola Lund who was a school teacher and
28:04
well during lockdown and COVID and so on, ended up becoming moving careers into
28:10
journalism and so she's talking about that transition if you'd like to join us at
28:14
one pm for that tomorrow. Another reminder that on Monday next week, Playing
28:19
God, the documentary from Jackie Devoi, will be premiering on the UK Column
28:25
website at two pm on Monday immediately following the UK Column News, so join
28:30
us for that if you possibly can. And then yesterday's interview with doctor Charles
28:37
Hoffer is the on demand version of that will be on the website shortly after
28:41
the news today, so if you haven't seen that already, please have a
28:45
look, share it and if you can possibly help Charles Hoffer's crowdfunder for his
28:52
legal expenses, that would be great. As well. A reminder of the
28:55
Science Beautiful Festival taking place in Wimborne and Dorset June twenty seventh, thirtieth.
29:00
We had the guys on from that on extra last Wednesday. If you haven't
29:06
seen that, have a look, but hopefully you can make it there.
29:07
There is a promo code for ten percent off and Darren from the Light will
29:12
be joining us an extra the day to talk about the Standing the Light Festival
29:17
taking place in May twenty fourth to twenty seventh. Various UK home people will
29:21
be at both these events, so if you can possibly come along and say
29:25
hello, that would be fantastic. Okay, where does that take us?
29:29
Then? That takes us to well geo engineering Charles. Yes, indeed,
29:36
oh no, sorry, before that I should sorry for Nehie. Sorry to
29:38
apologize. We have to mention this for Nephie. How survivor's petition is going
29:44
to be heard in Hollywood and that's happening today, I believe, and so
29:49
have a look at this Glasgow Times article for a bit more information on that.
29:53
But mainly the point here is to say a massive thank you to everybody
29:57
that helped with their crowdfunder, because on Monday's program that was setting at around
30:03
two or three hundred pints. It's my two and a half thousand pints and
30:06
I'm just going to say that is a fantastic response and thank you very much
30:08
to everybody for that. So finally to move on to the geo engineering.
30:15
This follows the increasing steps that this subject is taking into the public domain.
30:22
I reported on this back in November after the COP twenty eight meeting whether the
30:29
wider topic of geo engineering was discussed, and before we go into the specific
30:33
detail, I'd like you to consider the precautionary principle, which when applied to
30:38
scientific study, is really the basis by which an activity does or does not
30:45
go ahead, in that if there's a perceived risk then and an unknown then
30:51
the activity does not go ahead. So with that in mind, we will
30:53
have a look at the University of Washington's marine cloud brightening program. You may
31:00
have heard of this, which would not be their intent, because the news
31:04
surrounding it has been that they have done this very quietly, but of course
31:10
it has actually attracted a significant amount of attention So what we'll do now is
31:12
we just have a look at an American news video reporting on exactly what's happening
31:18
and why, and then we'll come back into the studio for comment and analysis.
31:27
That roar is not coming from a snow machine. Instead, the plume
31:32
you see are tiny aerosol particles. It's the first technology in the country to
31:36
test ways to brighten clouds in an effort to cool the glow. This system,
31:41
it's composed of three main components. In these tanks, Jessica Madrado and
31:45
a group of scientists from the University of Washington's Marine Cloud Brightening Program are mixing
31:52
salt and water and using a compression system to test if this machine can distribute
31:57
the right size particles. They say Alameda provides the perfect cloud conditions over the
32:02
Bay. If you make the particles that are too small, they are not
32:08
going to create the effect that you want in this marine cloud. If you
32:14
make them too big, they will actually create or induce rainy cloud. The
32:20
goal to mimic the effects of pollution in a cleaner way, using salt water
32:24
to brighten clouds, which they hope will then reflect more sunlight back into space
32:30
to help cool the Earth still in the early phases. Program director Sarah Doherty
32:35
says, right now they need to figure out if it's even possible and how
32:38
much impact it could have to understand so with something like marine cloud brightening,
32:43
you're not going to just reverse global warming, so it's really important. How
32:47
it plays out in the climate system will depend on where you can brighten clouds
32:52
and how much. Calcate Est Bay Professor Elena Giveenttel is excited about the research,
32:57
but cautions that as Earth continues to heat up, the various ideas for
33:00
cooling the world are not without controversy. While there are certain benefits from trying
33:07
to cool the environment, we we're not quite sure what kind of negative effects.
33:14
Doherty believes reducing emissions is the most important tool, but says that alone
33:19
won't be enough. But we are kind of locked in at this point,
33:22
committed to significant climate disruption. So the question is are there other things we
33:27
can do to help reduce suffering and impacts, and this might be one of
33:30
them. The group of researchers planned to be here throughout the summer. They
33:34
also hope that they can make this an educational experience for those who visit the
33:37
Museum in Alameda. Felina Jones, NBC Bay Area News. What does she
33:45
mean by committed to significant climate disruption? Well, exactly one of a number
33:50
of questions that falls out of that, And I would defy anybody to watch
33:53
it and consider that what they're doing seems in any way sensible. But this
33:58
follows Mark's segment neat in that this is predicated on the belief that the vast
34:04
majority of people will view such a thing as entirely necessary because of the supposition
34:12
that anthropogenic climate change is actually a thing. And so we're going to look
34:19
rather than go back and analyze the specific video or the I would encourage you
34:22
to watch it again and share it widely because of the number of questions that
34:27
it leaves begging. But we're going to look at what the University of Washington
34:30
says about what it is doing and why. So they're calling this marine cloud
34:36
brightening, And as you heard, it has the intentional sorry, it produces
34:42
climate warming by intentionally increasing the reflection of sunlight from marine cloud. So this
34:46
is the theory. So in effect to mimic pollution, which sounds completely extraordinary
34:52
and is completely extraordinary. An overarching goal of the research is to provide open,
34:55
objective scientific information to address near term climate risk. So we're setting the
35:01
seeds of panic. But it's the open and objective claim that we want to
35:07
come back to. But obviously the critical part of this slide here is the
35:13
fact that they are not certain. So I refer back to the precautionary principle.
35:16
They have absolutely no idea what the effect will actually be in and you
35:21
can see there the enormous spread of talking about as little as point to of
35:25
a degree celsius or as much as one degree. Well they are there's an
35:30
enormous disparity between those two figures in relative terms. So just highlights that despite
35:37
the inconsistencies, they're still going to go ahead with it. And they talk
35:42
about the stakeholder engagement efforts. And again what I particularly want to talk about
35:46
or look at is the engagement sort of further down engagement with the Global South
35:51
and indigenous peoples on field science. So in effect, the suggestion that the
35:55
Global South has no idea about the sort of thing. And this is potentially
36:00
an area in which, let's say in doctrination perhaps can be pursued. Relevant
36:07
to the United Kingdom audience, the program here in the team is led by
36:15
Robert Wood and Sarah doctor At at the University of Washington, but it goes
36:20
on to say the program also collaborates with researchers at a range of other institutions,
36:24
including the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom. I got in touch
36:29
with the University of Exeter to ask them a range of questions about the involvement
36:32
of the particular scientists and what other weather modification programs they might be involved in,
36:39
and their response was brief. They said, no, University of Exeter
36:44
scientists are part of or funded by the University of Washington's marine cloud Brightening program.
36:50
Exeter researchers collaborate with the University of Washington researchers providing expertise in climate modeling.
36:55
Well, that seems a slightly disingenuous reply, because the statement from Washington
37:01
suggests that they are in fact a part of it, even if it is
37:06
in a collaborative context. So there was a little bit of hairsplitting going on
37:10
there. But the point of it is that they are providing modeling. Now,
37:15
which way is modeling going to go? And is this research actually open
37:20
and objective? They spoke about being funded by an organization called silver Lining,
37:25
and so let's have a look at silver Lining ensuring a Safe Climate. And
37:29
within their policy document they say that the international community currently lacks the critical scientific
37:35
information needed to make informed decisions. So you could interact with that as saying
37:39
that that's why such research needs to go ahead in order to find out this
37:45
information, or more realistically, perhaps you could suggest that that means that this
37:50
research should not be going ahead, and again with reference back to the precautionary
37:54
principle. Again, another reference to the Global South, suggesting that the lack
38:01
of access to research and funding means that they need to be brought into this
38:08
for the purpose of equity. Of course, now this is a topic that
38:13
has has sort of infused organizations across the board. University of Cambridge is looking
38:17
back to last year when they went to COP twenty eight and they, you
38:24
know, expressly state that these are just ideas. There are various ideas for
38:29
refreezing the Arctic, including marine cloud brightening, stratospheric aerosol injection, and even
38:35
pumping of seawater onto the top of sea ice. So we'll come back to
38:38
that because that is absolutely relevant to what's going on now. The Royal Society
38:43
have been talking about this since two thousand and nine, that they had a
38:45
bilateral workshop with Norway last year, and in that they talked about the research,
38:54
the sort of status of research at the moment, and they really just
38:59
give good idea of that the enormous numbers of bodies that are researching exactly this.
39:05
So again we've got the marine cloud brightening and stratosphoric aerosol injection. But
39:09
the important thing is that a common argument against this is that research itself will
39:15
increase the likelihood of implementation, but in fact research will often rather reveal new
39:21
undesirable side effects associated with implementation of solar radiation management and thus could equally well
39:27
provide discouragement for it. So the same could be said to apply to marine
39:30
cloud brightening. And again they go on with the reference to the international law
39:36
and they talk about the potential to reduce the rate of warming and all this
39:40
sort of thing. But there are therefore concerns that solar geoengineering could produce regional
39:46
shifts in hydrological conditions that would be greater or more harmful than those expected under
39:52
climate change. So with all this in mind, how on Earth has it
39:55
been permitted to have gone ahead, apparently without any consent or consultation of the
40:02
residents around the Alamed Bay area where the USS Hornet is at anchor. So,
40:08
finally, just to highlight the sort of absurdity of the situation, I
40:13
just want to look at the British Antarctic Survey from September twenty twenty three where
40:19
they state the clouds formed with sea salt contribute to Arctic warming. Now I'm
40:24
not comparing light for light here because obviously we're in a much colder area,
40:30
but nonetheless the fact that in the Britge Antarctic Survey have been doing more or
40:34
less the same thing, and they say the high concentration of sea salt aerosols
40:37
has been shown to increase cloud droplet concentration and the amount of sailar radiation reflected
40:44
back towards the Earth. So, in effect, the Bridge Antarctic Survey here
40:49
concluding that what they're doing in United States MINT has had the exact opposite effect.
40:54
Okay, let's move on to warfare. And well, you toxed about
41:00
dragonfire some weeks ago, Charles, you introduced into our audience, and of
41:04
course this is the missile defense system, which is basically a directed energy weapon.
41:09
Dragon Fire, they have announced is now going to be installed on multiple
41:15
Royal Navy Web warships from twenty twenty seven. Now. They're very excited about
41:19
this because they're saying this is as the result of a reform procurement system,
41:24
which means that they could get it onto these warships a lot faster than otherwise.
41:30
So we have a little bit of video which features the wonderful Grant Shops.
41:35
So let's just have a look at that. That roar is not that's
41:42
the wrong one, Stephanie Grant shapes. Yeah, that's it. This is
41:46
Dragonfire, the UK's first laser weapon able to shoot down drones and missiles with
41:52
incredible accuracy. It could revolutionize how we fight wars. And this isn't an
41:58
idea decades away. We're building it right now to fit onto our warships in
42:02
just three years time. Rapid delivery of this incredible feat of British innovation is
42:08
only possible because the government has this weak reformed way with procure for our military,
42:15
so we'll be faster and getting our weapons into the hands of our soldiers,
42:20
sailors and aviators years ahead of schedule, and through these reforms will build
42:25
more lethal British armed forces to defend the United Kingdom from threats at home and
42:30
abroad. Did that inspire you, Probably not the way that you would have
42:37
intended. No, So basically the reforming things by sort of removing the hurdles
42:45
to just getting on and doing it. So we'll have more on this soon.
42:49
But in the meantime, of course Britain continues to be committed to European
42:54
security. They should be committed, but I'm not sure to any form of
42:59
European security. But anyway, this of course, this is a meeting that
43:01
was taking place this week in Sofia, and of course a more effort to
43:07
get stuff over to Ukraine and uk very happy to have reminded everybody this week
43:14
because these two mind sweepers, which used to be part of the Royal Navy,
43:16
I mean, the Royal Navy doesn't really have any ships left, but
43:19
we're now giving them away to Ukraine. Well why because the Ukraine is a
43:22
dumping ground for everything. So it doesn't matter whether it's a car that can
43:25
no longer be driven in London because of Ulez or a mind sweeper that we
43:30
is probably too expensive to scrap, so we just send it off to them
43:34
instead. It's a great deal. But in the meantime, the BBC is
43:38
very keen to tell us that Russia has now had fifty thousand people killed in
43:44
the course of the conflict. This is confirmed as far as the BBC is
43:49
concerned. What amuses me about this, I'm just going to I mean,
43:52
it's not amusing that anybody has died, but I'm talking about the BBC's coverage
43:57
of this whole situation. They refuse use to confirm any kind of statistics on
44:02
Ukrainian dead, because there might be an extra zero on the end of that
44:06
number in that case. But the BBC totally silent on the issue of Ukrainian
44:12
dead, and well, you know, they're probably to publish graphs and stuff
44:15
like this to try to tell us how bad Russia is doing, but no
44:20
comment on Ukraine. So what is the latest on Ukraine? Well, indeed,
44:23
although I'm minded of accuracy and impartiality when looking at those graphs, which
44:29
of course is disturbing, but yes, the latest is that Ukraine having been
44:32
somewhat relegated to the backseat now that Iran has come into the four. Zelensky
44:40
nonetheless is still banging the banging the drum for engagement with other countries, the
44:46
United Kingdom in particular, but also others, and he's announced on his website
44:53
President of Ukraine that he's requesting a meeting of Ukraine NATO Council and he's making
45:00
an address. So this of course relates back to the speech that David Cameron
45:04
made that we reported on last week. But in particular, what I would
45:08
like to draw your attention to is Zelenski talking about discussing protection of the sky's
45:14
supply of anti aircraft warfare systems and missiles, but also a first global peace
45:20
summit in June. So we'll be interested to see how exactly that turns out
45:25
and what indeed the United Kingdom and the United States will have to say about
45:30
it. But with David Cameron in mind and what he was saying about China
45:36
last week and the week before, it's interesting how the waters can be muddied,
45:43
particularly with regard to Ukraine, because of course he's talking about the German
45:46
Chancellor, but also he refers to the signals they've heard from Beijing Beijing and
45:51
says China can really help us restore the just peace for Ukraine and the stability
45:55
in international relations. So how will that be regarded by the UK Will it
46:02
effectively queer the pitch? But he brings in the topic of restoring the just
46:09
peace and on the theme of restoration and all the rest of it. I
46:14
want to look at the Attorney General who's come out as the sort of latest
46:19
cheerleader for Ukraine. She's pledged to support Ukraine in their efforts, having just
46:25
spoken well, not just but a week or so ago at the Hague,
46:30
and also that we look further back there. She is with Zelenski in February
46:35
marking the two year anniversary of the Ukraine conflict. Also, she's come out
46:39
and spoken back in September last year talking about the case against Russia at the
46:46
International Court of Justice, which was essentially about the suggestion of genocide by Ukraine.
46:52
And she said in the hearing today, the UK made submissions regarding the
46:55
scope of the Court's jurisdiction under the Genocide Convention, including concerning the requirement of
47:00
good faith and the fact that the Genocide Convention does not, in any circumstances
47:06
authorized states to commit aggression war crimes or crimes against humanity. Of course there's
47:10
a deafening silence where Israel and Gaza are concerned from the Attorney General, so
47:16
really just an identification of the hypocrisy but also the partisan chip there when it
47:22
concerns Ukraine. But on the theme of restoration and reconstruction, it's now becoming
47:28
a sort of hotter topic. It started up last year. But here we've
47:30
got the European Commission talking about co hosting an international conference, which is the
47:36
one I've just referred to that Victoria Apprentice spoke at. And then we've got
47:39
the Council of Europe talking about the Register of Damage for Ukraine. And of
47:45
course this is the important part because this is where we begin to look at
47:47
all the enormous amounts of money which are swilling around outside of the defense contributions.
47:53
And here from the Department of Business and Trade, updated a few weeks
47:59
ago in March, incentives or initiatives to support UK businesses who are helping to
48:05
rebuild critical infrastructure in Ukraine or possibly what one might refer to as profiteering.
48:10
Figures published by the World Bank outline reconstruction costs are expected to amount to four
48:15
hundred and eighty six billion dollars over the next decade, and the Department of
48:21
Business and Trade is encouraging innovative UK businesses to contribute their experience and expertise in
48:25
rebuilding Ukraine's damaged infrastructure. So what sort of shape is this likely to take?
48:31
And although outside of the United Kingdoms sphere of influence, I think it's
48:36
relevant to look at one of the one of the contracts that's already in motion,
48:42
which is by VON, the communications company VON and Kievstar set in motion.
48:47
There's six hundred million US dollar investment plan, and there's Mike Pompeio joining
48:52
the delegation, So again plenty of external influence. And of course, just
48:58
to get a flavor of what VON are all about, we look back to
49:00
twenty twenty one where they're rolling out the new industry standard for digital identity validation,
49:06
in which they say that they're all rather the chief executive talking about it
49:09
being one of the great challenges of our time and that the world has struggled
49:13
with the competing forces of want to make the consumer experience more seamless while decreasing
49:19
the risk of online fraud. So the point really is that this sort of
49:24
apparent desire to build back better, of course, will have very very serious
49:31
consequences for the people of Ukraine, for whom the future will be utterly completely
49:37
different due to this reconstruction effort. Yes, okay, Mark, we've just
49:43
done a little bit of editing of the order here and let's have a look
49:46
at the livist update on the World Health Organization and the Pandemic Treaty. Okay,
49:52
that's fine. Yeah. Very recently in the Federal Register that compilation of
49:58
Regulations and public comment Periods in the euro Government, the Office of Global Affairs
50:04
I'm showing here of the Department of Health and Human Services is putting a notice
50:08
of public listening session out again a request for comments. This is another opportunity
50:14
for people not just in the US, according to the noted WHO watchdog James
50:19
Rguski, but also people in the UK and throughout the world can comment and
50:23
the listening session will be held Thursday May second, twenty twenty four, from
50:29
ten am to twelve pm Eastern daylight time US. This session is open to
50:35
the public but requires an RSVP to that website that excuse me email I've given
50:40
before oga dot RSVP. Well, this has the number one at at Oga
50:45
dot RSVP one at HHS dot gov. Listeners can see this in the show
50:52
notes and do that by Friday, April twenty sixth, RSVP by that time
50:57
April twenty sixth in order to take part in that May second listening session.
51:01
Very important. The session will be held virtually online and dial in information will
51:06
be shared with those who register. The purpose of it. The US Department
51:10
of Health and Human Services leads the US delegation to the seventy seventh World Health
51:15
Assembly and will convene this informal stakeholder listening session. The session is designed to
51:22
seek input from stakeholders. I love that word. Don't use stakeholders, what
51:24
about citizens and subject matter experts? Experts in subject matter to help the HHS
51:31
Office of Global Affairs inform and prepare for the US government engagement at the World
51:37
Health Assembly. Of course that's coming up May twenty seventh through June first,
51:40
when they anticipate they're going to finalize the World Pandemic Treaty, something to be
51:45
very concerned about in its outcomes. Moving on from there, the matters to
51:51
be discussed at the seventy seventh World the Health Assembly. There's a link there
51:55
that viewers and listeners can click on gives some highlights. Pillar number one,
52:01
one billion more people benefiting from universal health coverage, acceleration toward the UN sustainable
52:08
development goals regarding maternal health and child mortality. In particular, child mortality is
52:15
very interesting for the WHO since it also supports abortion on demand and the entire
52:22
abortion industry through what's called reproductive healthcare without hesitation. The UN and the WHO
52:29
as a branch of the UN, supports the abortion industry, So child mortality
52:34
very interesting there and time microbial resistance accelerating national and global responses going on from
52:40
there. Pillar number two in the next slide just some highlights the implementation of
52:47
the International Health Regulations that stem back to zero five and ultimately to nineteen sixty
52:52
nine. The Working Group on a memis to the International Health REGs that's involved
52:58
in pillar number two under Governmental Negotiating Body to draft and negotiate the WHO Convention
53:06
Agreement or other international instrument on pandemic Preparedness and Prevention and response. Again,
53:12
they hesitate to call it a treaty, even though they sometimes do, because
53:15
that's what it is. And I believe we have Pillar number three just a
53:19
couple matters well being in health promotion. But notice the last one climate change
53:24
and health. So there that concept comes up once again. So this is
53:30
how people can get involved. This is the new timeframe. I believe I
53:34
have another slide or two. This is some information I carried over from my
53:37
last report. I won't recite much of it except to say that viewers and
53:42
listeners can access this through the show notes, and you can access the EU
53:46
Parliament. It has a liaison office in London at thirty two Smith Square.
53:52
The EU parliament Liaison office in Dublin, Ireland is at twelve Dash fourteen Lower
53:58
Mount Street. And I give the phone numbers and emails for those that want
54:02
to contact their members of the European Parliament. Of course, Parliament dot UK
54:07
you can easily scroll down and contact House of Commons and House of Lords members.
54:12
And in the US, it's important to note that the Senate Bill four
54:15
four four by Senator Round Johnson of Wisconsin guys that piece of legislation which has
54:22
been dormant for over a year. And I called Johnson's office yesterday to find
54:27
out why, and I still not have gotten a response back. I'm still
54:30
waiting for a response, but that legislation SB four four four defines the WHO
54:35
packed as a treaty to force the US Senate to treat it as such and
54:38
give their constitutionally required advice and consent on that. So a lot of moving
54:44
parts here, but this is a critical time and today is the last day
54:49
of the current day holder session where you can still contact the Office of Global
54:55
Affairs of HHS, and the one I talked about just a minute ago,
55:00
the next upcoming one. So this is the tail end of the current one,
55:04
and now we're going into the upcoming public input session. So a lot
55:08
to unravel, but very important and timely information. Guys. Yeah, and
55:12
Mark, what is going to happen by the end of May then, well,
55:17
they expect to consummate the treaty May twenty seventh through June first at the
55:24
World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. I was hoping to get Scott tips
55:29
there. I'm still kind of working on that. Maybe he could be a
55:31
liaison for US, but it's hard to say exactly. If you look at
55:37
James Riguski's research at James Reguski dot substack dot com, there's been a lot,
55:43
a lot of delays and they've broke they've broken some of their own rules
55:46
on giving the Member States, Mike, giving the Member States enough time to
55:52
review the regulation amendments, the amendments to the International Health RAGS and the elements
55:57
of the Pandemic Treaty. So we're not giving the Member nations enough time to
56:02
review it. So it is possible. Raguski believes that they'll botch this and
56:07
they'll have to delay the finalization of the treaty to another time. But they
56:10
really want it. They're salivating at this, so they're going to try.
56:15
Yeah, okay, I mean, what kind of uh pressure are congressmen and
56:21
women coming under about it? Well, actually, it seems like it's too
56:27
quiet, Like they're not they're not looking at SB four four four. Why
56:30
is that Bill ben dormant for over a year. When initially shot Ron Johnson
56:35
brought it out, he was very enthusiastic. This is a treaty. The
56:37
Senate's got a big job here. There's a lot going on, and now
56:40
it's just been quite silent, actually, Mike, as far as I can
56:44
tell so far. Yeah, I think I think that's the feeling I get
56:47
in the UK as well. I think i'd like to see a lot more
56:52
pressure coming on the MPs at this point. Okay, let's let's move on
56:55
then, and uh, police and the question of police discipline. So this
57:00
is all about sacking rogue officers, and so the government has decided that they
57:06
through secondary legislation, so the statute instrument laid before Parliament to make it easier
57:13
for chief constables to sack rogue officers during misconduct hearings, is what they're saying.
57:17
So, in other words, chief constables are going to be given their
57:20
responsibility for sharing the hearings which will decide on the removal of officers found guilty
57:24
of police misconduct. Police leaders in inverted commons will be held increasingly accountable for
57:30
their own officers. And so what this also means is that police and crime
57:36
commissioners, as we all know, we're democratically elected, so that's okay,
57:40
then are going to have to take a larger role in this process and providing
57:45
oversight for the decisions that the Chief Constable makes. So the government statement,
57:51
however, said this The Home Office has also committed to providing funding to develop
57:55
an automated and continuous integrity screening system of the police workforce to ensure that officers
58:01
are continuously vetted throughout their careers. I don't know, Charles, what do
58:07
you think about this for police officer yourself? Do you think what do you
58:12
think about the disciplinary procedure for police and putting that in the hands of chief
58:17
constables, Because it seems to me that if the police have been receiving a
58:22
lot of bad press in the last couple of years because of sexual offenses and
58:25
so on from police officers and the police being perceived as not having dealt with
58:31
it, then putting a chief constable in charge of the board that makes these
58:36
decisions gives the police much more scope for cover up, yeah, would seem
58:39
to And I think that's exactly the point, you know, particularly referring to
58:44
leadership as a fault, clearly identified fault up and down the chain, which
58:49
his his Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary has identified in multiple reports, so have others,
58:57
and to suggest that removing one possible check and balance would help is absolutely
59:05
ridiculous, as is the suggestion that chief constables until now have in effect had
59:09
their hands tied behind their backs. They absolutely haven't, and so this,
59:15
yeah, I mean, it is an absolutely mechanism by which an awful lot
59:22
more could be hidden. But also then in terms of the continual vetting,
59:27
I mean that's that again, is a bad, bad precedent. I would
59:31
say, well, I would say it's going to end up being attached to
59:35
AI at the end of the day. And yes, yes, okay,
59:38
Well that's it for today. We'll have to leave it there for a night.
59:42
So I'm going to say thank you very much to everybody that's been that's
59:45
joined us today, and we've brought back in a few minutes for some UK
59:49
column News extra and Mark and Charles will be there and also Darren from the
59:52
Light, so do join us for that in a few minutes off your UK
59:55
column member. Otherwise we'll see on Friday one pm as usual. Don't forget
1:00:00
the interview at one pm tomorrow. See you Friday, M M M