Complaint to Ofcom Regarding “The Great Global Warming Swindle”

[Comment 29: The narrator is again expressing highly contentious opinions as if they were facts.]

(In breach of the 2003 Communications Act Section 265, Ofcom 5.4, 5.5, 5.7, 5.11, 5.12)

[Comment 30: In economic debates about climate change, it is now understood that economic development and climate policy complement each other: there is no trade off between them. For example, Research Programme 4 of the high-profile research body, the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research (http://tinyurl.com/ 23rkzm) is “International Development”; and the subtitle of this economic research programme is: how can international development be sustained in a warming world? (http://tinyurl.com/2n3w6h).

Also, there is no-one in the environmental movement who says that the poorest countries of the world should have their access to energy restricted. The reason for this is that the poorest countries have very low emissions. Even if they do develop using coal power, they will not contribute significantly to climate change. It is the OECD nations, EU, US Canada, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Russia; and the newly industrialising countries China, India, Brazil and Mexico, which have large greenhouse gas emissions and which will have to reduce their emissions (but not their economic growth by any significant amount). See the Stern Review, http://tinyurl.com/vgzxv, which states in the Executive Summary, page xiii:

Resource cost estimates suggest that an upper bound for the expected annual cost of emissions reductions consistent with a trajectory leading to stabilisation at 550ppm CO₂ e is likely to be around 1% of (World) GDP by 2050 … (1% of World GDP)…… is significant, but is fully consistent with continued growth and development, in contrast with unabated climate change, which will eventually pose significant threats to growth.

Thus the above statement by James Shikwati is factually incorrect, and given its context, was an apparent attempt both by Shikwati and by the film maker to mislead the audience about the economics of climate change.]

(In breach of Ofcom 5.7)