||May. 30th, 2006 02:00 pm|
âœWhat is unbelievably depressing about the governmentâ™s response,â he said, âœis that they see, in the evidence about greenhouse gases, not an opportunity to promote environmental concern but a chance to make the case for nuclear power. ... Having made a big issue of the greenhouse effect, it became clear that energy efficiency was the best way to deal with it, but â¦ the governmentâ™s position has been characterised by a malign reluctance to have anything to do with the notion of energy conservation.â|
Tony Blair, 1988
Don't get me started about the new edition of Part L of the building regs. It's all very tedious and detailed, but basically it's a humungous implementation cock-up of something that might actually help. Monbiot puts his finger on a big part of the trouble (inspectors don't care about energy use) but even if they did, it is in fact impossible at the moment to determine whether a building meets or does not meet the new Part L. This was the responsibility of Prescott's department as was (the ODPM) and IMO provides better reasons to sack him than his private life. Sure, he has an important political role to play in the Labour Party, but the man's a complete shower as a Minister of State.
Don't get me started on the Government and nuclear vs energy conservation.
Let's just say my colleagues were most depressed when what we thought was our outlandish conspiracy theory (4 ministers suddenly changing ?= shift to nuclear) turned out to be true, and a senior civil servant commented "That's it - it's time to return to the days of Yes Minister and ensure the ministers are prevented from doing anything!" He wasn't joking, either.
I'm not posting this from work...