Climate summit - do our leaders care?

Pross

I agree with the above posts although I suppose one question is whether quite so many people need to attend in person (not just world leaders but all the 'interested parties' and media).

focuszing723

Well, that's just dandy isn't it. So basically you're saying working towards a Cakestop Utopia is futile because the discussion is online based.

Is that what you are saying?

rick_chasey

Pross said:

I agree with the above posts although I suppose one question is whether quite so many people need to attend in person (not just world leaders but all the 'interested parties' and media).

Corporate world is the lion's share of emissions and ultimately they are the people who will have to deliver and abide by the various new legislation that comes in so it is rational and sensible to be present to have a say.

Hell I almost went, and probably would have if 2023 wasn't quite such a shocker.

Pross

focuszing723 said:

Well, that's just dandy isn't it. So basically you're saying working towards a Cakestop Utopia is futile because the discussion is online based.

Is that what you are saying?

No Utopia is possible without Elon as our leader and climate change cannot be fixed unless Elon takes charge to show how it should be done is what I say.

focuszing723

Pross said:

focuszing723 said:

Well, that's just dandy isn't it. So basically you're saying working towards a Cakestop Utopia is futile because the discussion is online based.

Is that what you are saying?

No Utopia is possible without Elon as our leader and climate change cannot be fixed unless Elon takes charge to show how it should be done is what I say.

Finally, common sense prevails.

briantrumpet

focuszing723 said:

Pross said:

focuszing723 said:

Well, that's just dandy isn't it. So basically you're saying working towards a Cakestop Utopia is futile because the discussion is online based.

Is that what you are saying?

No Utopia is possible without Elon as our leader and climate change cannot be fixed unless Elon takes charge to show how it should be done is what I say.

Finally, common sense prevails.

Just needs Esther McVey to inject her ministerial expertise on the subject.

surrey_commuter

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

...
It’s just practical to recognise car driving is unsustainable on 2 axis - climate change and the geometry of urban living and the continuing rate of urbanisation.
...

I did enjoy the irony of that part given your posts in other threads.

?

rick_chasey said:

There is a huge shift in the way that we travel and the gov't is burying its head in the sand about it.

I don't have the answer, but there needs to be a rethink about how we do public transport, for a whole host of reasons. Whether it is environmental, working habits post-corona, demographics, urbanisation, etc etc.

Tot take on example, the elizabeth line is looking like public transport for the wrong era - people don't travel like they used to post-Corona, and you can tell. It's empty most of the time.

I have no idea of the capacity but TFL and co are always claiming "it is the busiest railway line in the UK"

I always assumed they were cherry picking data so would be interested to hear the other side of the story

rick_chasey

Yes, there has been a remarkable pick up as people return to work. There was some worry when it opened in the immediate post-covid aftermath

Pross

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

...
It’s just practical to recognise car driving is unsustainable on 2 axis - climate change and the geometry of urban living and the continuing rate of urbanisation.
...

I did enjoy the irony of that part given your posts in other threads.

?

rick_chasey said:

There is a huge shift in the way that we travel and the gov't is burying its head in the sand about it.

I don't have the answer, but there needs to be a rethink about how we do public transport, for a whole host of reasons. Whether it is environmental, working habits post-corona, demographics, urbanisation, etc etc.

Tot take on example, the elizabeth line is looking like public transport for the wrong era - people don't travel like they used to post-Corona, and you can tell. It's empty most of the time.

I have no idea of the capacity but TFL and co are always claiming "it is the busiest railway line in the UK"

I always assumed they were cherry picking data so would be interested to hear the other side of the story

I love the Elizabeth Line, I used it on Saturday as I couldn't rely on hitting the last train home if making the full journey by train so compromised on driving to Slough and getting the train from there. Quick, clean but also because it never seems to get crowded like other lines (possibly due to having fewer stops in central London). I suppose it could be the busiest due to frequency of service if compared to mainline trains but nowhere near as busy as traditional Underground routes.

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

...
It’s just practical to recognise car driving is unsustainable on 2 axis - climate change and the geometry of urban living and the continuing rate of urbanisation.
...

I did enjoy the irony of that part given your posts in other threads.

?

rick_chasey said:

There is a huge shift in the way that we travel and the gov't is burying its head in the sand about it.

I don't have the answer, but there needs to be a rethink about how we do public transport, for a whole host of reasons. Whether it is environmental, working habits post-corona, demographics, urbanisation, etc etc.

Tot take on example, the elizabeth line is looking like public transport for the wrong era - people don't travel like they used to post-Corona, and you can tell. It's empty most of the time.

I have no idea of the capacity but TFL and co are always claiming "it is the busiest railway line in the UK"

I always assumed they were cherry picking data so would be interested to hear the other side of the story

Spoken like someone who never uses it. 20 million journeys a month on the Elizabeth line. Roughly the same as Thameslink, Southern, Great Northern and Gatwick Express combined. It feels a bit empty because everything is twice as big as a normal underground station/train.

TheBigBean

New railway lines can be a success. Memo to Starmer.

TheBigBean

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

focuszing723

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

Again, you're just trivializing Cakestop with this nonsense.

Pross

They could use virtual reality goggles so that they feel like they are actually in a face to face meeting (or use holograms).

Jezyboy

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

I think analysing the usefulness of the "jollies" would be interesting.

I'm sure everyone here will have their own opinions on the usefulness of both jollies, and teams meetings.

IME a teams meeting gets to a size when it has too many people in quicker than an in person one.

In general effective teams meetings are an additional set of skills that not everyone has, and I'm not going to especially begrudge everyone getting together in person, so long as something useful comes out of the process.

TheBigBean

The only reason to organise a call/meeting with lots of people is to try to embarrass people into doing stuff. There's never going to be meaningful negotiation with lots of people present. Best case scenario is you can work out who has strong views on what.

This all works even less well on an international stage as you can't even bounce people into stuff, so the only point of events such as COP are to facilitate one to one discussions between people. It would be more effective to have these organised as required.

The bit that is missing from it all is organisation.

Maybe they can agree to create a climate change organisation then stop the meetings.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

pblakeney

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

My last business in person meeting was early March 2020.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

I do a lot of both. I find it much harder work to read reactions over a screen, if the correspondent even has their camera on. And the half second lag just means you constantly interrupt one another.

Jezyboy

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

My last business in person meeting was early March 2020.

Haven't you left the world of work though!?

pangolin

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

I do a lot of both. I find it much harder work to read reactions over a screen, if the correspondent even has their camera on. And the half second lag just means you constantly interrupt one another.

Honestly I have over 90% of my meetings online and these were issues in early 2020 but I feel people are much better at handling them now. First one is any easy fix, set expectations that cameras should be on.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

I think that says more about you and your job than the politicians.

They're there for most of the week. It's not all big set pieces meetings. That's just the bones on which the meetings etc hang, whether they're behind the scenes, chance encounters etc. Much easier to read the body language and get a gauge of the room in person. Impossible to do that over teams.

(you may find it worth noting that most recent research puts full time WFH as 10-20% less productive than going into the office...)

pblakeney

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

My last business in person meeting was early March 2020.

Haven't you left the world of work though!?

I have, but that was 3 years of complicated high manpower design. I have had "business meetings" since then. Retirement doesn't mean watching daytime TV.

rjsterry

pangolin said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

I do a lot of both. I find it much harder work to read reactions over a screen, if the correspondent even has their camera on. And the half second lag just means you constantly interrupt one another.

Honestly I have over 90% of my meetings online and these were issues in early 2020 but I feel people are much better at handling them now. First one is any easy fix, set expectations that cameras should be on.

Just had a Teams meeting with client, planning officer and conservation officer. Sound quality was so bad that the client had to phone me afterwards to ask what everyone had been saying. Pretty sure the conservation officer was also trying to catch up on emails in the background. Given that the meeting was part of a paid-for service, it could have been much better.

Jezyboy

pangolin said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

I do a lot of both. I find it much harder work to read reactions over a screen, if the correspondent even has their camera on. And the half second lag just means you constantly interrupt one another.

Honestly I have over 90% of my meetings online and these were issues in early 2020 but I feel people are much better at handling them now. First one is any easy fix, set expectations that cameras should be on.

I actually think people were more engaged in these meetings at the start of the pandemic, and people are less prepared to sit in long teams meetings and pay attention now.

Cameras on is fine in theory, but can get a lot of push back from the socially awkward, and can bollocks up an entire meeting when there's a poor internet connection.

pblakeney

FWIW I always found large FTF meetings a waste of time too.
Someone grandstanded and everyone just listened. A couple of brown nosers asked questions and meeting was over. An email would have covered them.
Small group highly focused meetings FTF or remote are much more productive.

pangolin

rjsterry said:

pangolin said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

I want to take issue with people saying that stuff can't be done on Teams and the only way to achieve something is to have a big jolly in the middle-east. I think this is nonsense. The issue requires people to commit time to it and to have someone coordinating efforts.

If it was held in a large Novotel outside Lille in the drizzle would you be happier?

Video conferencing is fine for presenting something but is little better than a phone call for meaningful conversation.

I almost never have in person meetings and haven't for many years.

I do a lot of both. I find it much harder work to read reactions over a screen, if the correspondent even has their camera on. And the half second lag just means you constantly interrupt one another.

Honestly I have over 90% of my meetings online and these were issues in early 2020 but I feel people are much better at handling them now. First one is any easy fix, set expectations that cameras should be on.

Just had a Teams meeting with client, planning officer and conservation officer. Sound quality was so bad that the client had to phone me afterwards to ask what everyone had been saying. Pretty sure the conservation officer was also trying to catch up on emails in the background. Given that the meeting was part of a paid-for service, it could have been much better.

You will get useless folk in meetings in person too, as I'm sure you know.

Not got much sympathy for poor internet / sound to be honest, people have literally had years to sort this stuff out.

TheBigBean

This afternoon, I have calls at 1pm, 2.30pm and 3pm. That would be a days work in person. Plus, how could I post on BR and pick up a vomiting child at 2pm?

focuszing723

Another thing, how productive are they during a flight and consequential jet lag? I guess it's OK to use modern communications then.