Gordon Brown is facing the prospect of another significant backbench rebellion - this time over climate change.
More than 80 Labour MPs have signed an amendment to the Climate Change Bill, which would force ministers to promise greater cuts in carbon emissions.
The bill commits Britain to make at least a 60% cut in CO2 emissions by 2050. The MPs want that to rise to 80%.
How are they going to achieve this, exactly?
Meanwhile Mr Brown hailed "major progress" at the G8 summit, as leaders agreed to halve CO2 emissions by 2050.
Last year's G8 would only "seriously consider" a 50% cut in C02 but on Tuesday it said it would "consider and adopt" the goal in an international agreement.
Mr Brown said the deal was "beyond what people thought possible".
It is beyond what's possible. Has everyone got absolutely fucking insane?
Look, you all know my views on anthropogenic climate change; but leaving aside what I, or you, personally think about the phenomenon, these targets are utterly loony.
This government has committed the UK to an EU target of 20% energy provision from renewable sources by 2020. A couple of months back, it was revealed that not only were we nowhere near that target, but the government had absolutely no idea of how it was going to reach it.
Now we are supposed to cut carbon emissions by 50%, or 60%. Or 80%, or... well, fuck it, let's cut carbon emissions by 110%. Why not? The government can commit to any figure that it likes and that does not alter the fact that they have no real idea how they can cut emissions by 20%, let alone anything else.
The prime minister said he hoped part of that change could see households across the UK switching to electric or less-polluting cars.
Listen up, you dozy twankunt; electric cars have to be charged from an electricity source. These electric plugs are mainly fuelled by electricity from fossil-fuelled powerstations but with the added bonus that you are losing massive amounts of power, through the powerlines, as you transport it across country.
That is not very Green. The only way in which electric cars will actually contribute to reduced emissions is if the source of the electrical power, i.e. the powerstation, is not carbon-emitting. And, at present, we have only two realistic options for reliable electricity generation: nuclear (slightly Green but with its own problems) or fossil fuel (not Green).
As regular readers will know, your humble Devil is a great believer in technology, and 2050 is a long way away. I think that by the time 2050 comes around, we will be using electric or hydrogen-powered cars.
Further, I think that we will have built and adopted nuclear fusion technology, or zinc oxide powerstations, or massive tidal or wave power generators by then. I firmly believe that we will not be burning any significant amounts of fossil fuels by 2050.
Or maybe we will be using technologies as yet unknown and unknowable to us.
But I still would not commit to signing any fucking agreement to drop carbon emissions by a specified amount because I don't have a crystal fucking ball; I can bet on certain technologies but I don't actually know what is going to happen.
All of these witterings about targets is just political grandstanding; by which, of course, I mean that these fuckers are signing up to certain obligations that they do not know how to fulfill (even if they are sincere about meeting these targets, which I doubt).
It's absolute barking insanity. Not only that, it's incredibly fucking irresponsible.