Ah, sorry Raisingirl,I meant Which? says that the sale of new gas boilers would be banned after the mid twenty thirties, not the ones folk already have.
I agree that govt. debates are a waste of time. I've signed a few petitions (easier than getting off my backside and actually turning up at a protest) and then watched the subsequent debate. They all have a jolly time saying this and that and then go home and that's the end of it. Have done my fair share of marches - but we seem to have more and deadlier bombs than ever. The poll tax riots (not part of those, but did get summoned to court for not paying although had to pay in the end of course), did result in that tax getting thrown out. I would gladly swap my gas boiler for a heat pump boiler, change my windows to proper double glazed, put up insulation on the inside of the walls (no cavities in mine and anyway brick needs to breathe) and change my diesel car to electric - if I could afford it. As not on any kind of benefits we wouldn't qualify for any govt. help with any of this, even if it was forthcoming. All of this needs a serious, concentrated push and serious funding and I don't see even a glimmer of wanting to go in this direction from the govt.
I wonder if the fact there were so many people not paying the poll tax that ultimately sank it. Thatcher wasn't afraid to go toe to toe with people if ideology suited. Miners strike anyone?
BTW I didn't pay the poll tax and never got taken to court. I should have paid though and got the demand both at university and at home. Totally ignored them and they went away and then they changed the system to this current one. Didn't strictly oppose it as the principle of all adults capable of paying for local services individually rather than the blunt system of paying for the value of your house has merit imho.
As to this protest, has it had any better results than a simple petition and debate? All I can see is it's going result in legislation that will make protesting more difficult in the future. Seems an own goal without any benefits.
Nobody is talking about the issue only about the protest activity and how to stop it. Even those supporting their ideal on here are discussing their methodology not their aims. And I do not think their basic aim of social housing being insulated is something I think is right. I think it's something needed for all housing and the state should perhaps pay based on need and ability to pay not just when it's owned by state. They haven't gone far enough imho with their aims.
Of course I haven't heard anything about their aims other than something about state putting in insulation in the state owned housing. No details at all. Are there any other details?
When I was a student I lived in an old victorian house in Manchester. The occupants of the house paid the bills. To keep heat in, we put a layer of thick clingfilm over the sash windows to form a kind of cheap double glazing, and shut the curtains as soon as we were in the house in the evening. There were better houses available but they cost more. We made our choice and lived with it. I don't understand why anyone expects the government to pay for their cavity wall/loft insulation/ more efficient boiler/ or double glazing. It reduces your energy bill, so why wouldn't you do it yourself? It also improves your house if you own it, either as a landlord or an owner occupier, and improves the energy rating if you sell.
I just despair of government in general I think. I listened to Barclay defending the gov on their Covid record, I heard all the dross about vaccinating the world, and then us becoming island(s) Britain. I heard all the gov stuff about global warming and.... I heard all the gov stuff about Brexit, more money for the NHS and how it would allow Britain to be a global trading super power - and we're still arguing over NI and a deal that was actually signed, done and dusted. And Brexit is nothing to do with shortage of staff apparently.
I don't think it's just this gov either - as when tackled on zero hours contracts, the labour party (who you can't judge until they're in power - if ever) baulked over making them illegal. They also presided over WOMD and that farce that could be seen as the lead into the current ISIS issues and even Afghanistan.
Power makes all of them appear to think that they're some form of god and that their opinion only matters. Maybe it's always been this way and I'm just getting grumpier and g r u m p i e r and ... as I get older.
So another moral mind game - what if this gov becomes a right wing dictatorship? What if they proposed more stringent civil disturbances laws. Would disruptive protests be valid? If the proposed laws then went on the statute book, would it be valid to break those new laws (whatever they happen to be) to protest against them?
The problem (in my warped mind), is that govs seem to see that it is totally valid to simply lie to the people. Trump did it to great effect. Blair did it - and Boris seems to do it on a daily basis. So what is the recourse? How can the 'people' force the truth - I know and understand that in politics, being politic means that at times you have to be evasive and non-committal - that's fine, but should blatant lying be accepted or acceptable?
I have the view that all politicians are in it to get their piggy noses in the trough. There are a few that did sterling work for their constituents. Dennis Skinner , the beast of Bolsover was one. I didn't like his politics, but did admire the man. He always took the side of the downtrod working man to get something sorted. When he retired, there was hardly a word said against him. The constituency changed from Labour to Tory when he retired. The rows of back to back miners houses had become nice owner occupied housing estates. My brother lives on one of them. Dennis Skinner lived just around the corner, also in a nice house. Job done maybe. One of his quotes
“I am proud to stand up for my class, to say publicly that I am from
good working-class stock. I am proud to be a trade unionist, to be a
member of the Labour Party and to be a socialist. I stick to my
principles. I know no other way in politics. I make mistakes, everybody
does. Nobody is perfect. I have no monopoly on the best way of being an
MP. I try not to let anybody down. I’ve sailed close to the wind in my
life but always for the good of the cause, to champion those at the
bottom of the pile who deserve better.”
My MP is next to useless.
I was brought up to work hard and then I would achieve something. I had part time jobs before I left School, and Summer and xmas jobs while at Uni. All my friends did the same. Now we seem to have a generation who go to Uni for the experience, not to get a qualification, and try to get their first job at 21 or 22. Everything has to be brand new and now, even if it is bought on credit, and when everything goes pear shaped, they expect mum and dad to bail them out, it is always someone elses fault, not the fact they were living beyond their means.
In the past, before career politicians became the norm, there were committed MPs that you could respect even if you totally disagreed with their politics. I suppose there's one or two still about, but they don't come to the fore any more. The ones in power have views that could turn on a sixpence if it meant holding onto their job. The country is in a shambles and two ministers are squabbling over which of them gets to use Chevening. Johnson is playing with his painting set, perhaps he never learnt to play the fiddle🤔
In the past, before career politicians became the norm, there were committed MPs that you could respect even if you totally disagreed with their politics. I suppose there's one or two still about, but they don't come to the fore any more. The ones in power have views that could turn on a sixpence if it meant holding onto their job. The country is in a shambles and two ministers are squabbling over which of them gets to use Chevening. Johnson is playing with his painting set, perhaps he never learnt to play the fiddle🤔
Absolutely. Ironically, most of the ones who come to mind were actually Labour politicians although our Conservative MP in the 70's was broadly liked by people of all political persuasions. I couldn't vote Labour even in a One Party State!
I've never voted for either Labour or Conservative. but if I had to vote for one over the other, it's be Labour. IMHO Tories just don't give a toss about poor/ downtrodden/ minorities, nor have they ever done. Their list of dodgy doners is totally endless. I wonder if there's anyone so despicable that they'd actually refuse money from.
Posts
Have done my fair share of marches - but we seem to have more and deadlier bombs than ever. The poll tax riots (not part of those, but did get summoned to court for not paying although had to pay in the end of course), did result in that tax getting thrown out.
I would gladly swap my gas boiler for a heat pump boiler, change my windows to proper double glazed, put up insulation on the inside of the walls (no cavities in mine and anyway brick needs to breathe) and change my diesel car to electric - if I could afford it. As not on any kind of benefits we wouldn't qualify for any govt. help with any of this, even if it was forthcoming. All of this needs a serious, concentrated push and serious funding and I don't see even a glimmer of wanting to go in this direction from the govt.
BTW I didn't pay the poll tax and never got taken to court. I should have paid though and got the demand both at university and at home. Totally ignored them and they went away and then they changed the system to this current one. Didn't strictly oppose it as the principle of all adults capable of paying for local services individually rather than the blunt system of paying for the value of your house has merit imho.
As to this protest, has it had any better results than a simple petition and debate? All I can see is it's going result in legislation that will make protesting more difficult in the future. Seems an own goal without any benefits.
Nobody is talking about the issue only about the protest activity and how to stop it. Even those supporting their ideal on here are discussing their methodology not their aims. And I do not think their basic aim of social housing being insulated is something I think is right. I think it's something needed for all housing and the state should perhaps pay based on need and ability to pay not just when it's owned by state. They haven't gone far enough imho with their aims.
Of course I haven't heard anything about their aims other than something about state putting in insulation in the state owned housing. No details at all. Are there any other details?
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
IMHO Tories just don't give a toss about poor/ downtrodden/ minorities, nor have they ever done.
Their list of dodgy doners is totally endless. I wonder if there's anyone so despicable that they'd actually refuse money from.