This week we saw a summit take place in Anchorage Alaska, where not only Obama and Kerry showed up but also some foreign minister from various
countries. The talks were of course the changing climate and how we can "save the world" and all that.
But one can't help sitting here with a bitter taste in his mouth after not only seeing Kristian Jensen of Denmark sign that treaty and at the same
time offer Obama the oportunity to come see Greenland and the melting ice caps.
The irony arises because Kristian Jensen was only just put officiall in office a little over a month ago, as was his boss in the PM chair Lars Løkke
During the election campaign which ended mid june, (couldn't quite rival that of an American campaign but was still womit inducing in its nature),
Lars Løkke Rasmussen quite clearly with a simple "yes" answered the question wether they would be spending more money on climate if they were elected
in office. This was broadcasted on national tv for all to see and hear.
Now.... in just under two months, amongst a lot of other, contradictary to his campaign, decisions, Lars Løkke Rasmussen has decided that while it's
fine Kristian Jensen can go around and preach "save the climate!", back home in Denmark, he and his cabinet would be spending LESS money on stopping
the climate from changing.
A total of 50 million dollars (quite a large sum by Danish standards) is to be cut from the green initiatives.
Initiatives that not only would be used to inform the public how to make the right decissions but also initiatives that would help enfore ecological
development, more sustainable energy, and less reliance on fossil fuels.
I am incredibly embarresed on behalf of my governments lack of climate interest but what can one do?
The public in Denmark is very slow at waking from the illusion that they could possbily have put the x in the wrong spot during the election.
I leave you here with a couple of links... I'm sorry I couldn't find a way to translate the news paper link.
The video link is Lars Løkke Rasmussen in a campaign interview by national tv. The reporter litteraly asks:
"Should there be allocated more money to curb climate change?"
edit on 2/9/15 by flice
because: (no reason given)