Skip to content

I am heading to Jersey today. It will be my first flight for four years. I can’t avoid it: the boat service at this time of the year is poor and by all accounts, pretty darned uncomfortable, as well as slow and expensive.


As it happens I flew to England over the weekend. No excuses nor claims – I just wanted to go see my Mum. Shrug.

30 thoughts on “Oh Aye?”

  1. What has Ritchie got against all the people who work in air travel?
    If we shut down 90% of air travel, then most of them would be out of a job.
    Why do they need to suffer so?

  2. Sounds like a rational actor optimising the net benefits of actions.
    Fine except he doesn’t want to let the rest of us do that ourselves. We aren’t special like him and so we proles must do the more expensive less comfortable more time consuming thing because he misguided believes it’s ‘best’.
    The plane is justified for Nomeklatura only.

  3. Bloke in North Dorset

    He claims he can’t avoid it. Unless he’s going for a shag I can’t think of any other reason that means he has to be there in person.

    And now the thought of him shagging means I have to find the mind bleach.

  4. The plane is justified for the Nomenklatura only.

    That in a nutshell is the tragedy of Capt. Potato: he wants to drive in the Zil lane but he doesn’t have a Zil.

  5. Wonder what he’s up to. Offshore banking errand? VAT dodge ?

    More likely to cunt at the seigneurs about how their failure to squeeze the last ounce of tax from the Jèrriais plebs is killing the polar bears…or some such cockwaffle.

    If the local magistracy had any sense they’d throw deport him back to the UK as persona non grata.

  6. If the local magistracy had any sense they’d throw deport him back to the UK as persona non grata.

    … by canoe, without a paddle

  7. The poor lad just can’t bring himself to say that Luton to Jersey by air is cheap, convenient, comfortable and one of the marvels of the modern world.
    He just has to slag off ferries instead for being not those things.

    Would have been a blast though to go Eurostar to Paris, Rennes, St Malo, have some drinks and meals on the way and charter a boat over while sitting topless on the deck.

    I hope he irons his slacks and shirt and wears a tie for the departed.

  8. He’s a giant bellend but he’s basically irrelevant in the scheme of things. His only value is as a cipher for an entire class of stupid, selfish cunts, but since they’re around us all the time, everywhere, he doesn’t really add much even there.

  9. Interested – my guess is that, in your professional life, you compose those short messages for all occasions inside geetings cards! This one is a masterpiece.

  10. “I can’t avoid it”

    Brings to mind Ian Hislop’s unravelling of Gary Neville’s bullshit: Yes you can. You can join the meeting via Zoom or even not join at all and turn down the money/hero worship or however the fools are paying you.

  11. He’s going to a mates funeral, not even a family member. Something that only 2 years ago he wanted to ban people from attending.

  12. Dennis: Oppressor, Warmonger, Capitalist and Consumer of Petroleum Products

    I can’t avoid it: the boat service at this time of the year is poor and by all accounts, pretty darned uncomfortable, as well as slow and expensive.

    So what? Climate change and the fate of humanity hang in the balance.

    Typical progressive… All for whatever it is until it becomes inconvenient or expense to themselves.


  13. Martin Near The M25

    Well I suppose a sea journey is out of the question because of the risk of being harpooned.

    ” by all accounts, pretty darned uncomfortable”

    Comfort is a momentary interest Comrade. Clearly you are not dedicated enough to the cause.

  14. Of course, it is only because of all those taking “unnecessary” plane trips that there is a plane service at all for the Potato to take.

  15. Paradoxically the post, although inadvertently hilarious in it’s total lack of self-awareness, hits on one of the many Issues with ‘Net Zero’ – people no longer (at least wealthier people) are confined to their local area and are geographically spread out, so travel back and forth to visit family is essential yet those like Murphy would ideally like the option to visit family by plane, or take a journey that he deems ‘unnecessary’ by air removed.

    Not sure if the ordinary people of the world are going to be overly grateful with that meagre fare, so of course the only way of implementing it will be genuine fascism (As opposed to his definition of it) – and you can extend that across the board for any aspect of life where choice has been expanded, even if for his eyes, ‘it’s only for the wealthy’.

    People don’t want ‘Net Zero’ – they might say they do but realistically that kind of abstemiousness is a tiny minority’s pursuit.

    I do hope he is taking public transport to the airport as well…

  16. I hope that somewhere deep in the Jersey jungle there remains a solitary German soldier determined still to do his bit for the Reich and the Aryan race. Then he espies the Murph. With one shot …

    Pipe dreams, eh?

  17. The tosser finally took the bait, well done Mr Parker… i had a couple of goes. but what a fucking hypocrite the fat fucker is..

    T Parker says:
    December 19 2023 at 8:11 pm
    Richard, people look up to you as a leader and thinker on environmental matters, so this is disappointing that you’ve chosen to fly. I trust you decided that, on balance, your time is better spent solving our problems than wasting time on slow boats. The gain of your time to the world is greater than the loss caused by the emissions?

    Can’t say that about the bucket and spade bunch flying to benidorm can we!

    Richard Murphy says:
    December 19 2023 at 9:18 pm
    This was an essential trip not possible to take any other way.

    I notice that not one of the the many trolls making the point that you do has had the decent humanity to recognise the situation that this is for the funeral of friend. Being arseholes from the dregs of humanity is clearly more important to you.

    And for the record, these are the second and third flights I have taken for non work reasons this century, so, politely, stop the crass stupidity of claiming hypocrisy.

  18. Hmm, these two statements contradict each other:

    “I can’t avoid it: the boat service at this time of the year is poor and by all accounts, pretty darned uncomfortable, as well as slow and expensive.”

    Note the colon, as to “why” it’s unavoidable (ie, choices), which compares with:

    “This was an essential trip not possible to take any other way.”

    If it’s the second reason, you don’t write the first, unless you’re clueless.

  19. Sam, that was so amusing. The virtue signalling there is epic. East Timor to Darwin will be bad enough to sort but a bus from Darwin to Sydney? Hitching on a land train might be easier!

  20. @VP

    There’s a knock-on there which often seems to go unremarked. The more we live in an interconnected world where your nextdoor neighbour is just as likely to come from half the planet away as from down the road, then the more globe-crossing flights are going to be made when people visit family for holidays, weddings, funerals, medical emergencies, etc etc. The more people stay more-or-less where they came from, the less aviation is necessary. And if more people happen to stay in countries where per capita CO2 emissions are lower because the country is less developed, the fewer lifetime emissions on other fronts too.

    Guido ran a story some months back showing Home Office civil servants complaining on a forum about having to implement the Rwanda policy and one of them was knocking it not just due to its evil racism etc but they claimed it would “obviously” increase CO2 emissions. Due to the long-distance flight involved, was presumably what they were thinking. What a total ignorance of causality that involves. Per capita CO2 emissions in Rwanda are 0.1 tonnes/year versus 5.2 tonnes/year in the UK. Even if the UK gets that down by more renewable energy and Rwanda’s goes up due to development, those are two stats that aren’t gonna cross over any time soon. Assuming they stay in Rwanda a few years, you get a wonderful reduction in CO2 by shipping more people over there.

    If you’re honest-to-goodness genuinely whole-heartedly committed to Net Zero because your little grey cells are telling you that even a weeny bit more CO2 emission will cause unprecedented mind-blowingly devastating civilisation-ending penguin-frying socio-environmental megacollapse, and even the smallest reduction in CO2 emissions must be pursued AT LITERALLY ANY COST THIS ISN’T ABOUT ECONOMICS PEOPLE YOU CAN’T PUT A PRICE ON THE PLANET OR OUR CONTINUED EXISTENCE, JUST STOP USING FOSSIL FUELS!!!!!!!!, then get stuffing more peeps on flights to Rwanda you hypocritical morons.

    Oh, and tell those people who keep whizzing round the planet on “essential” family visits that their extended family needs to look at the countries they’re all spread across, pick the one where their per capita emissions will be lowest (v. unlikely to be the UK, particularly if they’re from a developing country) and all just stick together there. Preferably within walking distance of each other – no more flights needed, maybe not even any cars! Sorted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *