24
25

The conservatives don't care about conserving our planet. (self.ukpolitics)

buildspecifier が 投稿

The Energy Secretary Amber Rudd announced last week that the Green Deal would be scrapped with no replacement scheme to follow. Now, the Green Deal was far from perfect but following a continuous string of assaults on environmental, ecological and energy matters such as the U-turn on Zero Carbon Homes building standards, the ending of subsidies for onshore wind farms, a failed attempt to begin fracking in Lancashire despite widespread public opposition, permitting use of banned bee-harming pesticides on UK farms and triying to relax laws on fox hunting, I would seriously question the seriousness of this government's commitment to the environment that we all have to live in. It seems the conservatives have little-to-no interest in the conservation of our planet.

At least the Green Deal helped reduce the carbon footprint and enhanced the comfort of 15,000 households in the UK, with all funding announcements accounted for within 24hrs of being released - no small feat for a scheme "that hadn't achieved what it had set out to achieve."

In my opinion, this string of cuts show that the conservative party are giving up on the importance of striving for efficiency and eco-friendly practices. Red tape has been choking the noble cause for many years, the coalition kicked it while it was in the death throes and the conservatives just may have put the final bullet in its head.

Do you agree or disagree? I'd love to hear your thoughts!

全 92 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]SillySturridge 10ポイント11ポイント  (32子コメント)

Greenest government ever.

[–]Double-DownRawlsian 19ポイント20ポイント  (5子コメント)

The trouble is that the Conservative Party is a motley crew of different interest groups who, overall, are either not motivated to find a solution to these problems or do not have persuasive solutions. Consider:

  • Cameronites: Almost entirely deficit orientated, little interest in these sort of investment strategies. Not interested in introducing taxes.
  • Thatcherite/libertarian: General resistance to taxes and government subsidies. Would oppose a carbon tax.
  • One-Nation Tories: Very marginal power at this point.
  • Green Conservativism movement: Just not very influential. What little influence it does have is mostly restricted to the NIMBYism which pervades the South.

Alongside this we have widespread scepticism among the Conservative party as to the existence of Anthropogenic Climate Change, reflecting their voters own beliefs. The Conservative government is not interested in expending political capital on it, and wouldn't have a clear policy to expend it on.

[–]MicktheSpud>tfw no real classical liberal party[🍰] 18ポイント19ポイント  (4子コメント)

Thatcherite/libertarian: General resistance to taxes and government subsidies. Would oppose a carbon tax.

As someone who's pretty libertarian, I am completely for a carbon tax. Friedman even supported a carbon tax. The production of carbon harms everyone, therefore there should be a cost imposed on it. It's pretty simple.

[–]frankster 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

And what would be amazing about a carbon tax is that you could reduce other (more distortionary) taxes such as income tax or VAT.

[–]mikef22 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Wow, first time I've heard that from a libertarian. Nice to meet you. I think you are in a tiny minority of the libertarians. Mind you, "libertarianism" seems to mean different things to different people.

[–]thatdamnedsalarianLib Dem (2.38, -4.92) | Social Liberal [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Any libertarian with sense should see that pigouvian taxes and other similar things are necessary for the free market to be as efficient as possible. Anything else is Austrian mumbo-jumbo, which unfortunately seems prevalent amongst internet libertarians at least.

[–]simstim_addict [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

How would a carbon tax work?

We tax carbon so that business moves to less taxing country.

That country is impressed by our ethical standards and then impose a carbon tax too?

This carries on until every nation has become ethically worthy.

During this process we slowly develop carbon free industry which slowly through economic incentives becomes popular.

Just a shame we've nearly placed enough carbon dioxide into the air to knock out civilization already.

Unless you cut now we will certainly place enough into the air to destroy civilization.

But hey. I'm just going on what moderate scientists say and what mainstream economic institutions are saying.

Remember the temperature lags behind the carbon ppm.

You want me to say but cutting industry will destroy the economy and result in wars. Absolutely.

I'm not offering answer I'm saying its too late.

[–]theroitsmith [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think sadly that reflects most of the public. I have only ever met a few people who care.

[–]KarmaUK 22ポイント23ポイント  (10子コメント)

Are green policies profitable? No? That's why the Conservatives don't give a fuck then. That was easy.

[–]TheLeftFoot-of-BobbySinn Féin 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

I wish this was a joke

[–]interiorlittlevenice [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Are Green policies publicly supported?

[–]KarmaUK [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Well, I don't have figures on hand for that, but the public supports more LAbour policies than Conservative ones, yet still voted the Tories in, and I put that down to a combination of feeble opposition, Miliband and a media shitstorm of propaganda.

I do know that the green policies to renationalise the railways are favoured by the majority however, and also higher taxes to fund the NHS properly.

EDIT: Totally forgot the link - https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/04/16/marking-manifestos/

[–]interiorlittlevenice [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Austerity is also favoured by the public though, so whether they think individual things should be funded more is negated by the fact that a majority think spending should be brought down at large.

[–]Kingy_whoGreen Labour [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

To be fair you could chalk that up to poor leadership from the leadership that didn't challenge whether it was necessary.

[–]interiorlittlevenice [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You could also chalk up opposition to NHS privatisation as a failure to educate the public that privatisation means hiring public companies to provide free healthcare instead of forcing poor people to die on the street, but that's just my opinion.

[–]KarmaUK [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Austerity is favoured, but find something besides besides welfare that they'd like to see less budget for, and it's a different matter.

[–]bignastyturtles [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

"We want good things but don't want to pay for it."

[–]15243asd1Tory scum [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Green policies are fucking stupid, they want to give animals the right to roam, no keeping farm animals off the roads.

[–]KarmaUK [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Putting aside that all parties have some stupid policies, we're talking 'green' policies, not Green Party policies.

[–]questions575 10ポイント11ポイント  (14子コメント)

Capitilism and green issues summed up

[–]interiorlittlevenice [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Except, surely, for the immense benefits to billions of homo sapiens that capitalism has directly wrought, sure. Also, let's not pretend that other governments were better- the Communist (or "state capitalist", for no-true-Scotsman fans) states were some of the most polluting of all time, with absolute disregard for the environment.

[–]GummyTheFirstClassical Liberal [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

That cartoon neglected to mention the millions of people who have been brought out of abject poverty due to industrial capitalism who are now able to solve some of these global issues but who cares about reality.

[–]Kingy_whoGreen Labour [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

It's hard to confirm the link between the improvement of standards of living and capitalism. The true driver of the increase in Standards of Living is clearly Technology and I think it's wrong to assume that capitalism is the only system that allows the force of technology.

[–]westhamhazOrwell, Bevan, Jenkins [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

No it wasn't industrial capitalism that bestowed such prosperity. It was pressure from the masses to demand better standards of living. Capitalists, liberals and tories had to cave in. Have you never heard of what life was like during the industrial revolution? Or what life is like for those workers without rights in Chinese and Indian sweatshops?

[–]Tophattingson/r/ukmod [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Or what life is like for those workers without rights in Chinese and Indian sweatshops?

Yes, all those workers who are desperately rushing to get factory jobs in those sweatshops because it pays multiple times more than subsistence farming.

[–]KarmaUK [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Indeed, just because a slap in the face is better than a kick in the balls, doesn't mean we should aspire to slap all the people who need a leg up.

[–]thatdamnedsalarianLib Dem (2.38, -4.92) | Social Liberal [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Chinese and Indian sweatshops

Sweatshops are an unfortunate step on the path to economic development.

[–]slothrr -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

But the Green party is mental, apparently.

[–]tempanought1 downCorbyn=1 year in the Gulag [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Capitalism (that is, the private ownership of property) has more successfully defended the environment than any other political system in history.

[–]waxyelk [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It might be the case that party policy sometimes seems to have little regard for environmental or conservation issues. But I think we need to make a distinction between the party and conservative voters.

A lot of conservative voters are very interested in conservation and the environment. A lot of them are landowners or aspiring land owners themselves. A lot of their personal wealth is often put in to property ownership, or for want of a better expression, they're working towards their "little place in the country".

It just so happens that the party that best represents their interests financially and socially is the Conservative party... so that's who they vote for.

One big area of concern at the moment for a lot of conservative voters.... on the one hand they want to protect our assets and wealth... on the other George Osbourne seems to be wanting to sell off the greenbelt to property developers.

[–]the_ultravixens 5ポイント6ポイント  (7子コメント)

The problem with Amber Rudd is that she thinks

we have to make sure that climate change action is pro-growth and pro-business.

Which would be wonderful if it wasn't complete away with the fairies have our cake and eat it bullshit. Most of the actual hard science points towards the fact that "By contrast, the logic of such studies suggests extremely dangerous climate change can only be avoided if economic growth is exchanged, at least temporarily, for a period of planned austerity within Annex 1 nations", or in plain english a period of managed recession. However this is, of course, completely unpallettable to a "business oriented" government, nothing can threaten economic growth as the ultimate societal imperative after all. Her policies are a load of incoherent rubbish with little to no regard for the underlying physical realities. She calls for market-based solutions without apparently acknowledging that climate change is a massive market failure and collective action problem, which will require significant government intervention at many scales to have a hope of solving. Of course, with morons like her in charge we won't solve it, and our children will pay the price. So be it.

[–]Ewannnn [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm just hoping someone clever manages to make renewables & electric cars more cost efficient asap. Relying on people actually sacrificing to combat climate change isn't going to happen. Either someone's going to invent a solution or we're all going to die from pollution & sea level rise, it's as simple as that.

[–]interiorlittlevenice [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

The reality is that Britain has no impact on anything. Even if the whole West went into recession, lost jobs, raised taxes, and suffered to fight climate change, India and China wouldn't give a shit and it wouldn't matter, because they care far more about economic growth than some hippie protests which they will crush in a few minutes. So there's little point.

Far better to find technological solution to climate change over time.

[–]the_ultravixens [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

And there you have just perfectly illustrated why climate change is a collective action problem. It is exactly that line of thinking which will screw us over.

All of the technical solutions posed thus far are, quite genuinely, Dr strangelove levels of dangerous, with no guarantee they'll work.

[–]AdmiralValdemar [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No snowflake ever feels responsible for the avalanche.

I also find it hilarious this mantra for technology somehow saving us. You mean the technology that got us into this problem? Let's grow our way out of this!

Maybe if we research really hard, we can reverse the laws of thermodynamics.

[–]simstim_addict [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

When I read the mainstream science it basically seems to say its too late.

I reckon we will end up geo enginnering. But only when enough people think its a current threat.

[–]westhamhazOrwell, Bevan, Jenkins [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

And who has influence in these nations? Western companies.

[–]interiorlittlevenice [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Western companies bribe local leaders in order to get valuable contracts, sure.

[–]RoseTintedHaze 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

totally agree, they couldn't care less, its not profitable in the short term so why waste their time. Also, does anyone remember their green tree logo from 2006, just shows what total rubbish that was/is...

[–]BrightCandle [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If it was just our government then the world has a chance, but its not. Does anyone think humans on this planet will genuinely change their habits fast enough such that we avoid our own extinction? Right now almost everyone is relying on new technology saving us, with a runway of a few hundred years to save all the large mammals on the planet from extinction.

The time to act was when this was first found out, which was in the 1970s. We are well well well past the point of no return now, have been for more than a decade.

[–]bottomlines [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Green deal - I don't know enough to comment, but I've heard it was a total damp squib anyway.

Zero carbon homes was pretty unrealistic, and wouldn't have been economic at all - especially when we have a housing shortage. Making it HARDER to build homes isn't a great idea.

Fracking - the actual studies, in the UK, by UK scientists, says that it can be done safely. As for the CO2 emissions, we burn gas already, so this would just be an alternate source rather than extra fossils fuels.

Fox hunting - I don't see what that has to do with conserving the planet.

The biggest problem is that EVERY single "green" policy costs more money than it make, and results in some form of inconvenience. I would say that during a fragile economic recovery, restoring the economy is the more important thing. That is a short term goal, whereas climate change is a much longer term goal. You won't be very popular if fuel prices keep rising. You won't be popular if houses get more expensive to buy because of extra "green" legislation.

I would hope that the current government do make more efforts towards climate change, but I don't think you can blame them for prioritising immediate needs. And after all, even if the UK was perfect, we would hardly make a dent in the scale of the planet.

[–]beleaguered_penguin [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Green deal - I don't know enough to comment

Good

I've heard it was a total damp squib anyway.

Oh, you commented

Zero carbon homes was pretty unrealistic, and wouldn't have been economic at all - especially when we have a housing shortage. Making it HARDER to build homes isn't a great idea.

There will never be a good time to do this. It's a good and necessary idea and has to happen some time.

Fracking - the actual studies, in the UK, by UK scientists, says that it can be done safely. As for the CO2 emissions, we burn gas already, so this would just be an alternate source rather than extra fossils fuels.

It's committing us to using the gas. It's the difference between a pay-as-you-go SIM with a mobile provider and a 100 year long contract that you paid an awful lot up-front to get. We would NEVER be carbon free if we started producing even more of the shit ourselves.

The biggest problem is that EVERY single "green" policy costs more money than it make, and results in some form of inconvenience. I would say that during a fragile economic recovery, restoring the economy is the more important thing. That is a short term goal, whereas climate change is a much longer term goal. You won't be very popular if fuel prices keep rising. You won't be popular if houses get more expensive to buy because of extra "green" legislation.

I think Germany is going to be completely powered by green energy by 2020, or some date like that. How is that not a good thing? Why can't we do that?

I would hope that the current government do make more efforts towards climate change, but I don't think you can blame them for prioritising immediate needs.

Yes we can, they claimed to be the greenest government ever.

And after all, even if the UK was perfect, we would hardly make a dent in the scale of the planet.

It would make 2% of the difference, as someone else commented. That's DOUBLE our 1% of the world's population.

Also, more people using the technologies means they get better over time. How will anything ever improve without people trying?

[–]phead [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I think Germany is going to be completely powered by green energy by 2020, or some date like that. How is that not a good thing? Why can't we do that?

Germany is building coal fired power stations at record rates. Its green moves have been a total disaster leading to massive price fluctuations in neighbouring countries as it dumped excess power.

As it stands green power is an impossible dream without power storage, which we don't have.

[–]Wolenski [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I wouldn't even mind that much if they had a plan to get us off it but they don't even have that.

[–]KarmaUK [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh they have, let all the peasants die and our energy and oil usage will drop!

[–]Floatingvoater [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

There is nothing the UK can do to prevent "climate change".

Even if the UK reduced its carbon footprint to zero, we produce so little of the global human output (less than 2%) that climate change would continue regardless.

[–]SillySturridge [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

therefore do nothing?

[–]lets_chill_dude [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

What it can do is invest in nuclear and renewable technology to become as cost efficient as possible, so that the world's capitalist systems will naturally switch away from fossil fuels.

[–]Kingy_whoGreen Labour [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

What we need to do is thrive with a carbon neutral economy. If we can increase employment and maintain some growth while switching to that kind of economy then the rest of the world will look at us of an example of how it can be done.

[–]TheGentlemanlyMan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah, if we revitalise that victorian image of looking up to the British empire with it's democracy and beauty and power, then we will be great again!

YEAH FOR BRITAIN!