How to Discredit a Report, Minister

(7 mins) "Yes, Minister" is well and truly the principal reference for our government at the moment, and thanks to extracts from episode "The Greasy Pole", intercut with some recent sound bites we can see all too clearly how the techniques of Sir Humphrey are alive and kicking in what Tony Abbott and his ministers are doing.
We hope you'll love this - I know it's long, but it sure doesn't feel like 7 minutes when you watch it. You'll be well rewarded.
See the recommended techniques for how to discredit an unwelcome report. They're all too frequently being used even as we speak.
Stage One: Refuse to publish in the public interest saying
1. There are security considerations.
2. The findings could be misinterpreted.
3. You are waiting for the results of a wider and more detailed report which is still in preparation. (If there isn't one, commission it; this gives you even more time).
Stage Two: Discredit the evidence you are not publishing, saying
1. It leaves important questions unanswered.
2. Much of the evidence is inconclusive.
3. The figures are open to other interpretations.
4. Certain findings are contradictory.
5. Some of the main conclusions have been questioned. (If they haven't, question them yourself; then they have).
Stage Three: Undermine the recommendations. Suggested phrases:
1. 'Not really a basis for long term decisions'.
2. 'Not sufficient information on which to base a valid assessment'.
3. 'No reason for any fundamental rethink of existing policy'.
4. 'Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice'.
Stage Four: Discredit the person who produced the report. Explain (off the record) that
1. He is harbouring a grudge against the Department.
2. He is a publicity seeker.
3. He is trying to get a Knighthood/Chair/Vice Chancellorship.
4. He used to be a consultant to a multinational.
5. He wants to be a consultant to a multinational."
"It is only totalitarian governments that suppress facts. In this country we simply take a democratic decision not to publish them."
Source: / 1termtony

[@edwardsadler7515]

I recall a radio interview with actor Paul Eddington (aka Jim Hacker) a few years ago. He said that the show had been a hit in Denmark, which led to an invitation to the cast to visit the country. They had even laid a red carpet from the aircraft on arrival! Inside the terminal, one of their hosts asked "How did you know?" "Know what?" he replied. "That it was like this in Denmark?"

[@haiqal5333]

I see the show is universal.

[@jakobole]

My late father loved the show when it was on - I was a bit too young, but it's a bit frightening how little has changed :)

[@dromankass8655]

It's been re-made very well in India, as they inherited the same civil service from the British Empire, and have the same issues of entrenched officials carrying on the same way no matter who is elected.

[@whitescar2]

@@dromankass8655 I'd say that is one of the best things about our societies. Look at the craziness that happened in the US over the last four years. Imagine if every excess and daft policy tweet would have made it into practice without a moderating force of bureaucrats in between? And then the swing back this year, when the majority of those policies were revoked. It's fine to course-correct the tanker that is the nation between elections, whether we need to steer left or right for a bit. But doing about-turns because the other party got elected would lead us going in circles! It's a good thing that big change takes time, and we cannot revoke and implement massive, sweeping changes every four years as the political winds happen to change. How would you ever plan your future in such a society?

[@jediknight1294]

@@dromankass8655 the civil service NEEDS to be impartial or at best not be heavily behind one party. This is why Blair led the gutting of the civil service, it allowed for party loyalty to matter and stacking things so that people tasked with enforcing a change or implementing it to ensure it doesn't work.

[@AlpenSkyWatcher]

Stage 1) Give your reasons and terms in place of public interests Stage 1.2) Hint at security considerations. Stage 1.3) Point out that report can be used against government and public interest. Stage 1.4) Suggest another report or study. Stage 2) Discredit evidence of earlier reports. Claim certain findings are contradictory. Stage 2.1) Undermine recommendations. Due to above discreditations. Stage 3) There is no need for fundamental rethink of current policies. Broadly speak that things endorse current policies Stage 4) Discredit person who made the report. Accuse of greed for financial gain, publicity, or higher station.

[@jasonitaliano8631]

I understand that the show is a comedy, but seeing it in action is chilling

[@spongebobsquaretits]

why on earth would you type all that out.

[@channelfogg6629]

I suppose you know we're quite capable of watching and understanding the clip ourselves.

[@Aiwendill]

@@spongebobsquaretits Because he is a politician

[@tobywearnes269]

Thanks for the framework

[@jdd109]

So before anyone in the world comes into power, they watch yes PM and take notes? Lol

[@hans2406]

Of course not! There are always public servants who will guide and instruct politicians en route, so to say.

[@ookland81]

In fact, before the first line was put down, seeking ideas to use in this series but not wishing to step on the toes of current days MP, the writers arranged to visit a major newspaper. There in the archives they read what was happening in the political arena 20 years previous. (I guess then it was newspapers for 1960 that they reviewed. ) They were astounded to read that what was happening today (the 80s, their time) was happening 20 years previously. Yet the truly amazing twist is, as you have pointed out, this show is now some 40 years old and yet what was written about in 1980s based on what was happening in the 60s is still how the men in power play the game today. Its not so much they take note as this is just how it works.

[@666Tomato666]

@@ookland81 people that don't follow the book don't get to govern, it's that simple

[@esbenandersen5706]

My old Public Administration professor at university wanted to put it on the reading list (Or watching list, as it may be) so we could know how to become good bureaucrats.

[@tessjuel]

@@ookland81 They also had insiders from the government as consultants. Several of the episodes in the series were actually based on real events.

[@draconianTL]

I used to use this methodology to veto things I didn’t want to happen in my old university department. It’s quite flexible and applicable to any organisation with distributed leadership.

[@MrKeeft1]

That is the point of course...its applicable to...........almost anything...is it the psychologists at eork yuet agasin, they sre controling the world it seems..hoew comr no one reslises..e3r whose plan...uk stands no chance now..well plsanned... i knew it i1m 72 and susoprected from warku asge ewiorld power..now i usually keep quiet..

[@hans2406]

Yes minister, yes prime minister is simply the ultimate guide for politicians, for any government in any country.

[@invictus7736]

But they're both about the civil service more than ministers

[@MEGALEHANE]

Well not really when you have a government that can pass any legislation unanimously through congress. Such as China.

[@eleethtahgra7182]

No...except china...or russia...or NK...or cuba. Well, any country with totalitarian rule. If one does not produce good result...demotion is the least of one's worry.

[@weiskl887]

@@eleethtahgra7182 LOL your belief in Democracy is ISIS level. The British Empire came to be in a feudal era. In fact All of Western empire rose from Authoritarian Govt structure for centuries. French Revolution was the first actual Attempt to break from Totalitarian West. Germany developed extremely Well during Bismark's period also Totalitarian Govt with a King to boot and he instituted Social Welfare. It amazes me that how the current generation isn't able to think critically. Also its extremely free even though its Totalitarian. Sure you can't criticized the King its called Sedition. But other than that Mozart, beethoven all are under Totalitarian Govt. Successful forms of Govt is about Merit and performance.

[@eleethtahgra7182]

@@weiskl887 indeed. Democracy, totalitarian, dictatorship, etc, would perform well if its purely merit based. I..think, all govt should be like the army structure. An officer would have to climb the rank from 1st leutenant all the way to general. Most govt officials are also like that. They climb ranks, theyve got to. Through the ranks, they gain experience, skill n connections. Alas, politicians arent required to do that. Thus, I think, the weakness of most of current democratic govts.

[@chrisgibson5267]

"Do you know all of their tricks? " "No, only a couple of hundred ".

[@mahmudgadauji2827]

ï enjoyed being in Government" ïf i knew, we wouldnt have lost the election"

[@233kosta]

This show was always a documentary, even if it were intended as a parody!

[@And-ur6ol]

The show was intended as educational on the UK goverment system, concealed as comedy. That is why it is so precise. It creators were smart and knew exactly what they were doing. Much of the material came from government insiders.

[@darthkek1953]

@@And-ur6ol Civil service insiders, technically.

[@And-ur6ol]

@@darthkek1953 yes, civil service.

[@camf7522]

233kosta ... yes and text book for the Australian Liberal Party!

[@233kosta]

@@camf7522 In fairness, the electorate is just as complicit. Make it clear that none of you will vote for imbeciles who get taken for a ride like this and watch some qualified candidates step up!

[@alicewinters4302]

Im english and its you're duty to the free world to make more of these

[@jenniferschmitzer299]

I hope your intent was, saying, as a Person from the British Isles, it is Ones Duty. I would hate to think, as an Antipodean type. These sorts of things would be slacking. Since we are all freshly out of irons and so forth.

[@paddybpaddyb9940]

I'm not "Im," English not "english" it's, not "its" , your not "you're" + a full stop. Please don't let the side down.

[@dunruden9720]

A very wise man once said, "It doesn't matter who you vote for. You always end up with a politician!"

[@Fetguf]

That must have been wayyy before trump..

[@petersenior5432]

@@Fetguf not to mention the first few presidents (less politicians than philosophers), and that one who had to sell his peanut farm because that would be a conflict of interests.

[@Fetguf]

@@petersenior5432 Philosophy is not a bad education for a politician, it teaches about moral and ethics, and makes you think ;-)

[@davidhunt240]

@@Fetguf perhaps Ronald Reagan, who was a TV cowboy?

[@eleSDSU]

That is asinine because you either always get a politician because the person elected is now a politician by office or you are talking about "politician" as in a colloquial shorthand for "classical crony politician" trope in which case it is evidently not true since as some have already pointed out Trump and Reagan but then you have countries like Argentina where most presidents have been medics, not politicians, or the greatest ever of the "non-politician" to ever hold office, Jose "Pepe" Mujica, ex-president of Uruguay, a farmer and the best president in the history of not only Uruguay, but South America. (I don't feel comfortable saying America since I don't know that much about Central American history).

[@neiljohnson3068]

I always wondered if Yes Minster was a training film. This proves it

[@mscott3918]

I started my career in the Foreign Office in the seventies. Yes Minister could have been a training course.

[@saltspringrailway3683]

I believe it is used in training sessions.

[@commanderbastard1993]

The best insight into how the British government works. I often wonder which is the comedy and which is reality?

[@piotrd.4850]

Yes, Minister.

[@Andvare]

One is a tragedy, the other a comedy.

[@JustinShaedo]

If it aids your interpretation: the stories are based off actual events and the laughter is from a live audience.

[@SightForMemories]

Depends on which reality gets the most laughs. I always say, fiction can never beat reality... so it must be true in this case too.

[@Willaev]

It’s all reality, and that’s the comedy.

[@rutger5000]

When it girst came out people thought it was a comedy. Soon tyey realized it was a documentary. Now it is used as a "how-to" manual.

[@talbenavraham1385]

This program was considered a comedy but it's actually a documentary.

[@daviniarobbins9298]

There is always some truth in fiction. It is amazing what you can get away with when you disguise it as a work of fiction.

[@tessjuel]

I wish there was a way to give a video a thousand thumbs up. This one is beyond brilliant.

[@janesmith9024]

Very clever juxtapositions between then and now. The Yes Minister series was brilliant in its day and is brilliant now. I wish it could be brought back in 2020 in the UK. It would be very successful.

[@talbenavraham1385]

It would be banned.

[@MMLVMOTO]

They tried it. It tanked.

[@TheRip72]

@John Doe It was indeed poor. Many different scenarios were included in the original series & they explain government actions today just as well as they did back then. There was no need to re-make it.

[@DAMORBEL]

@John Doe That would be one way of drawing the teeth of the original, would it not?

[@DAMORBEL]

@John Doe Government people, politicians and particularly civil servants do not like being shown up in their true colours, i.e. cynical manipulators. Thus they will do their level best to discredit it by whatever means available. For me that is sufficient reason for the stage version to tank. There are very very many ways in the theatrical world to 'fix' this.

[@helenheeney2284]

Ah a fantastic programme forgot how truly brilliant this was love them

[@garrghhh]

This is absolutely brilliant! Can't believe I didn't come across this video ("mashup") before.* While I can always see nonstop reflections of the lessons the Minister shows provide in the behavior, and especially, rhetoric (aka, "PR"), of governments and politicians, I never really considered just taking the relevant clips and lining them up. Well done, the clarity and clarifying effect is top notch! 👍 * ... could have though, seems vaguely familiar ... possibly, I just didn't register quite how great of an idea this is.

[@shivambajpayee5801]

News channels should play this clip right before all press briefings and politicians interviews

[@brightonmwemezi4684]

I've read the Prince twice but this show. This is education Machiavelli is looking on like wow...

[@anastasiosgkotzamanis5277]

There is a documentary on youtube about the permanent secretaries that have served the PMs over the decades. Those who were still alive were interviewed and they all quoted "Yes Minister" and "Yes Prime Minister."

[@dnmurphy48]

Pure brilliance, very well done :)

[@TheBustopher]

Thank you very much!

[@Johnny-dz6vl]

One of the best political shows ever made .

[@elizabethp.kanizin9009]

Yes, I am writing notes as I am watching this!! Isn't the Minister?!!

[@CiceroLounge]

Brilliant compilation of discrediting reports.

[@RasPutintheGreat]

Australia is the number 1 fan of this sitcom wayback, look at them now.

[@whateveritis3103]

Yes..we've transported Tony Abbott to "help"...god help you...lol

[@jasoncummings7052]

Bernard smile is absolute gold.

[@Shelsight]

Brilliant post. Simple brilliant. Sad, too, for its truth - but thanks for shining the light...

[@TheBustopher]

I made that SOOO long ago, looking back now for Facebook, but gee, it's getting a stack of appreciation here. Did have a BBC copyright strike on it at the start, but I appealed, and after about two months it got restored

[@ThomasTVP]

Very well put together, and very revealing!

[@Samara.Weaving]

A very important lesson in this clip. This happens in politics all of the time including when a war is about to begin.

[@powell936]

Brilliant. I wish there should be a UK version

[@Nounismisation]

Wow. Well done Peter :)

[@NatalieKehr]

I only became aware of the series when I heard that it was Margaret Thatcher's favourite TV program.

[@blackbird5634]

PHew!! my brain hurts!! This is eerie!! DAmn!!

[@dk6024]

Well played!

[@zoick21]

If this show were made today, the BBC would have it cancelled before the first episode even finished airing

[@josh2Sides2]

Actually they wouldn't they loved it

[@cabletie69]

Very well done.

[@TheBustopher]

Thank you kindly!

[@acegikmoii]

Tony Abbott appeared to be telling the honest truth on "climate".

[@seandonoghue2347]

this is great

[@christopherhill2786]

Now I know where PM Morrison (Australia) gets his script from!

[@anthonythistle1465]

Albanocchio and Pennocchi are no different

[@malcolmabram2957]

Meanwhile forty years later:

[@tammmacdonald7723]

This program ‘ Yes Minister’ and ‘Yes Prime Minister’ are actually training videos. QED.

[@omambianelson4853]

Government bureaucracy at its best

[@kokoeteantigha389]

I'm in government and I'm taking down notes. Vigorously. 😂

[@helenmcconnell643]

Brilliant.

[@sushanalone]

Most Underrated video on KZbin!

[@TheBustopher]

Glad you think so!

[@Lunji]

ah its always funny when people watch Yes Minister and only recognize it in the other side.

[@davidjordan9759]

Yes, one of the great things about it was that we never knew which party Hacker was in.

[@piotrd.4850]

@@davidjordan9759 To quote Gary Oldman - (in) EVERY ONE!!!!

[@madgeordie4469]

This is bloody scary! Yes, Minister was supposed to be a satire of national government, not a handbook guide of how to sleaze out of problems and issues politicians either can't or don't want to address!

[@rexthompson5909]

It functions as both

[@davidmccarthy6390]

As with all satire, it is based on reality(what you are sending up), and in the case of Yes Minister, the material was taken directly from real life examples in the British parliament. The best satire is a mirror of the subject material, and this show was one of the very best, and scarily is still very relevant today.

[@piotrd.4850]

It was documentary anyway.... no you should worry more about 1984, Brave New World and Idiocracy.

[@veroniquendambo3242]

Unfortunately, this is how things WORK! Well, almost everywhere.

[@AnonymousCuIIen]

I like the audience laugh at 00:57.

[@smhorse]

I hadn't remembered that Brenda Blethyn was in this episode. I think she plays a somewhat different character nowadays 😂

[@johnbanks4761]

it is almost like polliticians watched this show..and learned how to do politics from it..and those in the past..somehow got hold of a time machine and took notes

[@channelfogg6629]

'it is almost like polliticians watched this show..and learned how to do politics from it..' - Whereas, of course, the writers observed politics, talked to politicians and civil servants, and wrote the programme on that basis.

[@charlieford5523]

And we are the fools because we always fall for it

[@rat_king-]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/noi1nWhog9F7h5Y

[@jonathanhodgson2659]

Nice to see our colonists trying to learn still from the home country.

[@wintertontoday]

🤣 Did you see the commercial from Tourism Aus a few years back that was written primarily for the Brits? 🤭🥲 Clue: Kylie Minogue is the lead singer.

[@jonathanhodgson2659]

@@wintertontoday Link ???

[@johncalder5703]

This is about the Grooming Report to a t.

[@akapbhan]

Still find it unconscionable how a report about how children were groomed and abused was refused to be released to the public.

[@joshuakane9552]

Boris brought me here!

[@kerrymolloy5912]

this exchange should be playyyed continuously in the debating chamber of parliament in wellington NZ It may light up a very dim diode in the brain of certain govt ministers ,though i feel im wasting my breath.

[@terencej72]

"It is only totalitarian governments that suppress facts. In this country we simply take a democratic decision not to publish them." SIR HUMPHREY AT HIS BEST!!!

[@pt1sa1]

Yet austrailia suffers the worst fires and drought for decades. Says it all

[@samdumaquis2033]

@@jimtaylor294 hahaha, your gullible enough, so when Australia was first colonised by Europeans and the forests weren't cut and preemtively burnt, 1/4 of Australia burt every few years? NO... sooooo ? Logic dictates that theory is horseshit

[@jimtaylor294]

^ That diatribe doesn't even make grammatical sense, and is blatantly distortionist, as controlled burning has been a reality in australia since the first polynesians. Then again your first resort to lame name-calling makes it pretty clear who's really full of shit, without my help XD.

[@BOBBOBBOBBOBBOBBOB69]

The joke is that no matter if it is true or false you discredit things in the same way. Their is no curtainty when it comes to makeing complex decisions.

[@jamsstar2010]

Up to AND including.......

[@alannolan3514]

Way fuggin aye: is that Vera?

[@TheBustopher]

That sure is Brenda Blethyn!!!! I haven't noticed that until your comment!!!

[@RedKnight977]

This very true of Sue Gray report

[@amayastrata4629]

Yes, still waiting for the publication of the Russian report from before the election.

[@cliffyoung4612]

Good old Tony. Did he really become an advisor to UK Board of Trade ?

[@redwolfcanisrufus]

Sums up America too

[@mjguerin63]

Less than 1 term. Indeed, less than 2 years!

[@TheBustopher]

Two or three days short, so didn't quite qualify for the Prime Ministerial perks most former PMs get. Actually up until now, ALL PMs got, because the restriction didn't come in until about 2008

[@naxieysadventures5506]

this man is now in charge of trade in britain....

[@bcnmanhattan5022]

Not surprisingly, he's a Murdoch man

[@ThePrimeMinisterOfTheBlock]

Seriously though, Appleby gave hacker the very tools to use against him in this ep, seems a major mistake on his part

[@josh2Sides2]

Not that he'd be able to remember it all

[@josh2Sides2]

@卐 Infidel 卍 I mean later on in life

[@eleethtahgra7182]

4:15 Huh...apparently someone didnt tell pompeo how to utilize "recomendation" when asked about whether covid19 was man-made.

[@piotrd.4850]

Yeah, but on the other hand, world's response in general followed 4 steps doctrine laid out in the same series :D

[@eleethtahgra7182]

@@piotrd.4850 so basically its the modern form of machiavelli's book.

[@richardryan4344]

It now looks like it was ‘man-made’.

[@TheBustopher]

This video predates COVID by about seven years

[@eleethtahgra7182]

@@TheBustopher I know. Basically its an interview by ABC to pompeo. It goes roughly like this Host: have u seen the report by scientist? Pompeo: I read it, its man made Host: but the report said its not man made Pompeo; blinked......Yes, I have seen the report. In other words, he fumbled badly.

[@DilbertMuc]

This 40 year old series is required reading and studying material at political science studies in British universities, I guess... :D)))))

[@SightForMemories]

Don't guess. Appoint and succeed.

[@johnadams-wp2yb]

99% of Ozzie pollies are drongos, galahs, shirt-lifters, drop kicks, turps nudgers, and as thick as a docker's sandwich. No worries.

[@icarvs_vivit]

I understood about 30% of what you wrote.

[@adoreslaurel]

Good heavens, are you insinuating that there is more than one "pile punisher" amongst our elected representatives?

[@johnadams-wp2yb]

@@adoreslaurel Yep, loads of them do the chocolate cha-cha, and many are so far back in the closet, that they're in fucking Narnia. God's truth.

[@johnadams-wp2yb]

@@icarvs_vivit I know, dyslexia is a bastard eh?

[@icarvs_vivit]

@@johnadams-wp2yb Yeah, thanks for the explanation, btw, that really helped. To show my gratitude, I'm going to tell everyone I know that you are a right old chillan duffer, with a great second lung and own two fars of skizzle in your fort. Eh, caant?

[@Fredjoe5]

"At the moment"? How short-sighted.

[@vivekraychowdhury4348]

How to balance economy/ employment and environment ?

[@mscott3918]

It's quite easy in theory. Unfortunately we have a human population so is impossible to implement.

[@daveasheesh1011]

British Bureaucracy and its legacy in the Commonwealth Countries.

[@LeonJakub]

The politicians handbook.

[@petergreen5337]

I've always wondered if government is so slick why are politicians so thick??

[@nathanparry8315]

You need to watch the TV series. Then you'll understand

[@afish5581]

this aged well.

[@pintificate]

Peter, what you've done here is edit out sections of important dialog thereby rendering the snippets of conversation you present meaningless, and then delved into partisan politics. This is precisely what the creators of this series consciously and assiduously did _not_ do. .

[@TheBustopher]

If one sends up more than about two minutes of Yes Minister, it'll get removed for a copyright strike. The whole idea of that video was to show Abbott was a goose, a fairly easy task

[@acegikmoii]

I think we can see now 10 years down the track, that Tony Abbott was in fact playing the role of Jim Hacker and not Sir Humphrey Appleby!

[@MrKeeft1]

This is quitre brilliant...how do the eriters gwt away with eriting the trutj fir as sit com fictional co,dedy but......i hsd no idea after watching wss it lsst nkghts eop of yes ministers ep this one.. sdolmelone hsd mixed it with real news items.. wiow..who else is watching..

[@ClickBeetleTV]

Anyone have a version of this clip without the Tony Abbott splices?

[@Mr.Monta77]

Very misleading title.

[@TheBustopher]

First paragraph of the description says: "Yes, Minister" is well and truly the principal reference for our government at the moment, and thanks to extracts from episode "The Greasy Pole", intercut with some recent sound bites we can see all too clearly how the techniques of Sir Humphrey are alive and kicking in what Tony Abbott and his ministers are doing"

[@allanfoster6965]

Abbot is a right piece of work.

[@mujiburrehman7591]

👏👏👏👌

[@Joso997]

They are doing this around corona reports now

[@IngoBing]

Hahaha! Hilarious 🤣

[@gurrrn1102]

Nice intercutting with Taney Ebbitt

[@tommske]

maybe people should seek to establish a true democracy.

[@EarlJohn61]

Totally unworkable... If you have a community of more than about 144 souls, you cannot have a true democracy. It just isn't practical to get everyone's opinion on every major issue. You have to go with representative democracy where a group selects someone to represent them (and then hopes they do so correctly) A slightly better system is having electorates that have six (6) sitting members... Every election (assume a 4 year electoral cycle) the 3 members who have been seated for 8 years stand for re-election. In a 2 major party system that gives you "1 for us, 1 for you & 1 for either of us or perhaps a third party" If this were to be implemented in Australia, ideally you would have something like : 13 seats (78 members)+ in NSW 11 seats (66) Vic 9 seats (54)- Qld 4 seats (24)+ WA 3 seats (18) SA 1 seat (6) Tas & 1 seat (6) Territories For a total of 42 seats (252 members) _[noting that + NSW & WA both should have a half seat extra & - Qld is a touch OVER represented]_

[@tommske]

@@EarlJohn61 kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWfFY4KKaKhsgbs This proposal would work

[@camf7522]

Uncanny! Luckily for Australia, the Abbott was removed as PM one day short of qualifying for the Higher PMs Pension entitlements.

[@TheBustopher]

He certainly didn't deserve it anyway.

[@bcnmanhattan5022]

He's now on the British budget

[@ivorbiggun710]

Is that Brenda Blethyn?

[@applesandpears9756]

Yes.

[@ivorbiggun710]

@@applesandpears9756 Thank you.

[@applesandpears9756]

@@ivorbiggun710 A pleasure. :)

[@rogermoore27]

Wowww!!!

[@speenlmar9575]

Long live Sir Humphrey, the real Prince of the 20th century.

[@alanhutchins5916]

'Cranky Environmentalists.......' won't get away with that today.

[@nathanmahloch3318]

In some places you could. But the fact is the battery tech isnt good enough for the world to use green tech. So they will find another excuse. And most of the world isnt sunny or windy enough to produce enough green electricity for cities with modern tech. For example it Isnt sunny enough in germany or uk to use solar for more than a minority % of energy and is far from the equator. In wind world many places on earth arent windy enough on average to power towns and cites. Plus you cant use wind turbines in high elevations because the air denisty is to low and the trubine wont spin. Plus if you cant use green tech within a 100 miles of your city your going to use more green energy to transport the energy from the solar pannel or wind turbine than the green tech produces. So that the green energy is all used up before a drop of energy makes it to the city or town that needs it. Plus even where it make since like solar pannels next to Los angles lots of sun close to the equator. The battery storage tech cant store enough energy for a big city to draw off of during the day much less overnight or a cloudy week. So we desperately need better or new green techs. Unless DOD and NASA finally figrue out space solar because then there is no night clouds. And the microchip the usa highway sytem the internet all started in DOD and DARPA. We still need a battery And it looks like the Lithium batteries just arent ever going to be good enough to power cities and towns. We need a new material. Plus mining for the materials like lithum that make green tech causes pollution anyway in strip mining

[@TheBustopher]

I'm hearing it on one of my Facebook pages right now, in more aggressive tones

[@TS-jm7jm]

i do sincerely wish those cranky enviromentalists would move to india china as well as parts of africa, and do the rest of us à favour and bother those people, alternatively, being in large part carbon themselves, mayhaps they buŕy themselves under a couple tonnes of dirt, for the enviroment ofcourse.

[@topfour9160]

Who are the puppeteers 🤔

[@semunsibirwa8381]

Consummate civil servant

[@darrendavidson9645]

Bit like go to work but don’t go to work but go to work who said that hmmm

[@joshuatzonfortheslaughter]

This...

[@ec7696]

Have to wonder if he watched this or if his adviser did.

[@Daisy-yq1gi]

Political careers last a few years whereas civil servants run the show....

[@silverstrike6048]

It's a good thing only one side does this kind of thing.

[@peterwest5525]

??????

[@TheBustopher]

It was irony from the commenter

[@joyghosh8610]

I understand but there has to an under statement as well!

[@martinconway8174]

Russia Report, anyone?

[@markc7955]

Verbatim

[@mashah1085]

"Mr. Trump Jr., Mr. Kushner...simply tell everyone you were discussing 'adoption'...who could prove any different?"---Sir Humphrey Appleby