This letter was in the Guardian this morning, referring to the new Green New Deal report:
Ten years ago this week the Lehman Brothers collapse heralded the worst global economic crisis since the 30s, the political, economic and social effects of which are still being felt today. To help ensure that these adverse trends are reversed it is crucial to return a sense of hope for the future, including through economic security for all, while fully protecting the environment.
A key part of this should be the urgent consideration and adoption by political parties and local campaigners of a “jobs in every constituency” green infrastructure programme. This would involve making the UK's 30m buildings super-energy-efficient, accelerating the shift to renewable electricity supplies and storage, and tackling the housing crisis by building affordable, properly insulated new homes. A transport policy would need to rebuild local public transport links, properly maintain the UK's road and rail system, and encourage a shift to electric vehicles. This approach is labour-intensive, takes place in every locality and consists of work that is difficult to automate — and so could provide a secure career structure for decades.
The tens of billions required annually to fund this massive infrastructure programme will require traditional government borrowing at the current low interest rate to help rebuild local economies. Additional finance could come, for example, from fairer taxes and the creation of savings opportunities in local authority bonds and green Isas.
Such diverse economic activity would not only improve social cohesion and environmental sustainability but should also make our economy more resilient in the face of any repeat of the economic crisis of a decade ago.
Vince Cable MP, David Drew MP, Angus MacNeil MP, Caroline Lucas MP, Craig Bennett CEO, Friends of the Earth, Jonathon Porritt Green party, Colin Hines Convener, UK Green New Deal Group, Prof Richard Murphy City, University of London, Jeremy Leggett Founder, Solar Century, Ann Pettifor Progressive Economy Forum, Tony Juniper Environmentalist, Charles Secrett Sustainability adviser, former director of Friends of the Earth, Tom Burke Chairman of E3G, Prof Tim Lang City, University of London, Neal Lawson Director, Compass, Robin McAlpine Director, Common Weal
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Full support and offer to help
Thanks
Might you let Colin know?
It is a little confusing to see you sign a letter that says tax funds spending, when you frequently harshly criticise others for making the same statement.
Are you aware that politics is about the art of the possible?
Read the report….
I’m worried that you are so open about this being uncosted and unfunded. That there is no mention of a mechanism to prevent abuse e.g. The Renewable Heat Incentive in NI. And that there are no economists on the list of signatories that were prepared to insert a sentence about use of a carbon tax as a funding mechanism and to harness market forces to pull us in the right direction.
Read the report please….
It’s not uncosted
And I am quite specific about how to fund
When did Vince Cable become a convert? He was more than happy to sell off the Post Office, support a Government deliver austerity and repeat the lie that Labour caused the crisis ad nauseam. I suppose we should be grateful that he has seen the light, if he really has, but I haven’t heard him say anything about this. It feels like a degree of Lib Dem desperation jumping on someone else’s bandwagon.
Politics is the art of the possible
I accept the compromises that come with it
I could seek to be as pure as the driven snow
I have always known that deals must be done…
Glad to see my MP David Drew on that list. Good man.
How do you propose to super insulate all the single brick skin buildings like mine that exist around the UK, the majority of construction until after the war? Insulation has been the business plan since the 1970s, my loft is 4ft deep in free government provided insulation that’s been applied by owners over 40 years but that’s all that can be done. Having millions of people laying down more of it isn’t going to help.
Anything that can be insulated already has been done or designed in to new buildings.
Perhaps tax energy less if you want to pull people out of fuel poverty, rather than tax them to spend on them to bring out of fuel poverty. Energy taxes cost them directly and even more indirectly in the costs of the goods and services they consume.
I am assured by those with technical expertise that what you are saying is not true
In almost all cases old brick-built properties with a single skin could be insulated to the required standard using either internal (trade off is loss of internal space/disruption) or external (trade off is possibly aesthetics). The number of properties where neither is feasible I think is very small.
I’ve looked into it for my brick built house which was constructed in 1860.
I was all raring to go with subsidised external cladding – the finance was in place etc – then when they came to fit it – oh we can’t do bay windows – sorry everything cancelled. They’d canvassed my whole street not noticing that every house has bay windows. Not surprised the fitting company went bust. Asked the fitting supervisor about internal insulation – advised me against it due to the cost, aesthetics and return on investment.
As Neil notes – internal insulation. The preferred route would be – vacuum panels using aero-gels. This would give outstanding thermal perfomance – whilst also preserving room area. That said it would mean some education (no Mrs Smith you cann’t whack a nail in the wall to hang a picture). The report made the point about job creation – an areo-gel/vacc panel manufacturing site(s?) would be most interesting. The tech all exists, missing is the political imagination and money (in that order).
It is also common for us to use a traditional brick outer skin and build that around an original single layer or non-traditional constructed building to create a void for insulating materials. The increased use of plastic and polymers means that we do not have to metal components which can corrode. The provision of weep holes and ventilation helps to combat condensation
Combine this with a programme for new double glazed windows and doors and you basically have new homes. OK – you might lose a bit of garden and the footpaths around the house also have to be dealt with but the thermal improvements are immense – I have a friend whose family live in a house so treated – its as warm as toast.
As this post suggests, all you have to do is provide the capital to do it. Not only does it create a better home, it also creates jobs and tax revenue and even improves the housing market. I fail to see what there is not to like………………
……….unless you are a stupid, callous politician of a certain ideology who does not understand what the State’s role in the economy is of course.
I was involved in Labour’s Decent Homes work in the early 2000’s in social housing. But you know what – many of the kitchen and bathroom’s, windows etc, will be coming up for renewal in the next 5-15 years. But still, there are cuts.
We cannot go on under this economic illiteracy so this Green Deal is step in the right direction.
I searched for your address on epcregister.com.
Seems you need to spend £6-9K up front to save £273 over 3 years. None of that on insulation which is judged good.
I’d certainly ask for someone else to pay that other than me!
Given my house is pretty new it’s in the target group
Price of everything and value of nothing?
The insulation of homes on a wide scale is an absolute no-brainer the main driver being the environmental impact. Therefore the fact that is has not yet been taken up is further proof that the current (and to be fair some previous) administration(s) have no brain 🙂
On a slightly different tack, it frustrates me that all of the houses being constructed in my area almost certainly have gas boilers and inadequate insulation. All new homes should be insulated to the highest standard and equipped with a non-fossil fuel heat source such as air source heat pumps. We know that the switch is going to have to be made at some point in the future so why not start now?
Phew. Glad that you wrote ‘politics is the art of the possible’ and you suggest that the article be read. I did and I can’t tell you what a relief it was to read Green QE (with QE so far being used to relieve the poor bankers…).
Nice one Richard.
I did what was possible
Renewables and intelligent economics rarely mix, just use 0.1x the price nuclear and heat homes round the clock, or wait on fusion, no one in your list of names can ever answer any serious questions on renewables. No mention of Dieter Helm? The late Sir David McKay explained it best, as does Euan Mearns, it’s not costed, not by those names of anti-capitalists you list.
With respect, that’s pure nonsense
Readcwhat Jeremy Leggett has to say
And stop wasting my time
I have exchanged e-mails with Helms – he was right on the EU ETS (econometrically carbon taxes are better) but is very much a gas man & that ain’t going to get us where we need to be (low/zero carbon). Mckay gave a good explanation (in his Hot-Air book) but made some incorrect assumptions with respect to wind – which in turn skewed/skewered his argument that RES can’t deliver. Mr Mearns endlessly explains how RES can’t work – & then has to retreat – he has been doing it for years – he is certainly consistent – consistently wrong. As for the meme “anti-capitalists” – far from it – most of those who support renewables see a key role for private enterprise thus I’ll take your “anti-capitalist” meme as – “anti-fossil” – which only leaves me to say: say what you mean – mean what you say.