Excellent article as per usual George, but I am starting to think that the political donation issue is only a subsidiary issue to how Andy Burnham is being controlled. Opening up new North Sea Oil and gas fields is a bizarre hill for Burnham to die on. It means little to the UK economically. 1/4 I suggest here that the capture of our politics by the fossil fuel industry is very bizarre given governments pay over $7 trillion in fossil fuel subsidies, suggesting FFs are not the most economical option. x.com 2/4
x.com
I am not financially knowledgeable enough to know the reason for this. But it is quite likely that the main stock market value of fossil fuel companies, is in their reserves. i.e. that if fossil fuel burning was phased out, they'd become worthless. investopedia.com 3/4
www.investopedia.com
That the very rich are massively invested in this, and would lose most of their investments if fossil fuel burning was phased out. I suggest, that Burnham was ordered not to cap big political donations. THE BIG QUESTION, IS WHO HOLDS THIS POWER AND HOW DOES IT OPERATE? 4/4