So We Can’t Trust The World Bank, WTO, OECD, On Climate Change Then

Whether we should ever trust such groupings of the global illuminati on anything is a bit of a power of course but here we’ve interesting proof that we should not trust any of them on the subject of climate change.

For it appears that having the right – meaning woke or woo – views on climate change is a precondition of getting the job in the first place:

International climate change groups and influential advisers on the global shift from fossil fuels have written to the OECD expressing “grave concerns” over Australian politician Mathias Cormann’s bid to be its next secretary-general.

Former Australian finance minister Cormann’s record in a government that “persistently failed to take effective action” to cut emissions while blocking international action meant he was “not a suitable candidate”, the letter says.

Cormann is one of only two remaining candidates for the top OECD role after two candidates – Swiss banker Philipp Hildebrand and Greek politician Anna Diamantopoulou – withdrew earlier this week.

Cormann’s move to place climate action at the centre of his campaign has come under sustained criticism from environment groups in Australia who have pointed to the record of the coalition government he was a minister in.

This does rather pose the question of what the OECD is supposed to be doing.

The letter to Christopher Sharrock, chair of the OECD’s selection committee, says: “As the world begins the monumental task of recovering from Covid-19 in the context of the need to take urgent systemic action to avoid a climate catastrophe that will further entrench poverty and inequality, we firmly believe that the public record of Mathias Cormann should preclude him from being selected as the OECD’s new Secretary-General.”

Cormann’s role as Australia’s finance minister between 2013 and 2020 made it “highly unlikely” he could play an effective role in advocating for ambitious action on cutting emissions, the letter says.

Not that perhaps. We have the International Energy Authority to think about how to fuel civilisation, we have COP this and that to discuss treaties and plans about climate change. It’s possible that we might want other organisations to do those other things that need to be done in life.

You know, not asking John Lewis to deal with radicalisation but instead stick the last of retailing, that sort of thing?

The other way to put this is that if becoming part of the global illuminati is predicated upon having a specific view of climate change then we can’t take seriously any of the illuminati on climate change. For their views will be preconditioned, will just be the usual groupthink.