IMO farmers may prefer to fight the emissions war on a coal front rather than one closer to home; namely animal methane, machinery CO2 & Truck Transport CO2.
The composition of the total emissions is interesting IMO:
The commentary on animal breeds and feed is interesting also, IMO
So rather than focusing on media tart politicians and their self professed importance it is more important to match policy to emission sources and then consider the task set by our contracting into the Paris Accord.
If any of the political parties were really interested in addressing the issue they would bring Parliament into the 21stC with a giant screens for all to see displaying the relevant facts rather than behaving badly (as posters on HC do) to avoid the topic/subject matter rather than analyse and debate solutions.
Instead we've inherited the cult of the individual from the USA complete with Leadership fixations as if its all about "reality TV"
IMO, to rein in political excesses and silly chopping and changing (as often regressive as progressive) and the woeful waste of taxpayers resources that serve the political parties more that the country, can be remedied by a bipartisan bilaterally agreed strategic plan where the election issues would be to choose which party had the best strategy (policies) to achieve. (in other words tweak the programs but not fundamentally wreck the strategic economic plan.
