Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. I deal with evidence and not with frightening computer models because the seeker after truth does not put his faith in any consensus. The road to the truth is long and hard, but this is the road we must follow. People who describe the unprecedented comfort and ease of modern life as a climate disaster, in my opinion have no idea what a real problem is.
With the ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars less than four years away now, there remains one seemingly insurmountable obstacle: nobody wants to buy electric cars.
With the ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars less than four years away now, there remains one seemingly insurmountable obstacle: nobody wants to buy electric cars.
Last year, sales of EVs achieved a market share of just 23.43%. Newly released figures for last month show this fell to 20.6%. The Government has set a target this year of 33%, rising to 66% in 2029.
Once petrol and diesel cars (known as ICE vehicles, short for Internal Combustion Engine) are banned in 2030, zero emission cars must make up at least 80% of the market, with the rest filled with hybrids. However, the latter will also be gradually phased out by 2035. Zero emission essentially means battery-electric, although hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles would also qualify.
To enforce the switch to EVs, the government introduced the ZEV (Zero Emission Vehicle) mandate. Motor manufacturers who fail to hit their ZEV target for the year must either buy credits from manufacturers who have exceeded targets or pay a fine of £15,000 for every car below target.
There are certain allowances available, but these are not significant. The only other option open to manufacturers who fall short is to carry forward their deficit, in the hope they are in surplus in a year or two time. Understandably, this has been likened to taking out a payday loan!
The first year of the ZEV mandate was 2024, when the target was 22%. Actual EV sales that year only reached 19.6%, leaving an effective shortfall of 47,000 cars. At £15,000 a time, that means a fine of around £700 million. The Department for Transport will publish its full analysis next month, which will list surpluses and shortfalls by manufacturer and the actions they have taken to comply, e.g. pay a fine, buy allowances or carry forward.
Last year, EV sales increased to a share of 23.9%, but this was still well below the target of 28%. Motor manufacturers it seems are building up massive deficits in EV sales, which sooner or later will have to be paid for.
Worse still, most EV sales go to fleet and business sectors, driven by generous tax breaks. It is estimated that only about 10% of private buyers go for electric.
The reasons are well known. EVs cost much more to buy, and most models don’t have the range that drivers need. On top of that, buyers face massive losses when trading them in because second- hand prices are so low.
But there is one other factor which is often overlooked.
It is reckoned that four in 10 households don’t have off-street parking, so cannot easily charge at home. Using a public charger means that running costs would typically be triple those of a petrol- car when fuel duties are excluded. That is, I should point out, if you can actually find one on the way home from work that is not already in use.
Local councils such as my own have already made it clear that trailing cables across the pavement is not permitted and that enforcement action will be taken. Where then will EV drivers be able to charge their cars?
There are plenty of fine words from central and local government about installing more public chargers. But the simple reality is that there will never be enough – local councils don’t have the money, and it is not their job anyway to waste taxpayer money in this way.
Cardiff City Council are a case in point. It is estimated that there are about 200,000 cars in Cardiff, about half of which don’t have access to off street parking. The City Council has just announced plans to install 80 new EV charging stations, plugged into lampposts outside residents’ homes.
The plan won’t make the slightest difference when there are 100,000 cars which all need charging. But it will create real difficulties for the poor beggars who happen to live next to one and will have to find somewhere else to park. The thought of all the other motorists on the street competing to get to that lamppost first every night and the aggro which will undoubtedly follow is frightening.
It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the objective of successive governments and council planners all along has been to force us out of our cars and onto public transport.
First published JoNova; Ordinary residents of trial cities will only be permitted 100 days per year outside their 15-minute region. But special people get a free pass.
First published JoNova; Ordinary residents of trial cities will only be permitted 100 days per year outside their 15-minute region. But special people get a free pass.
Labour council brings in ‘perverse’ 15-minute driving rules – it could roll out across UK
Labour ministers have drawn up plans to hand councils powers to bring in 15-minute cities branded ‘Stalinist’ and ‘perverse’.
By Aaron Newbury 10:18, Sun, Jan 25, 2026, Updated: 10:41, Sun, Jan 25, 2026
15-minute cities are a new concept based on the idea that a person living in one will be able to access everything they need within a quarter of an hour by walking or cycling. They are sometimes accompanied by restrictions on motorists.
Oxford, which is actively implementing a plan to introduce the scheme, has seen its local authority plot to divide the city into six “15-minute neighbourhoods”. This would see drivers needing to secure a permit for residents so that they could travel for 100 days for free through the traffic filters in the city.
A separate permit would allow just 25 days of free travel, with drivers hit with fines should they move around the city beyond those allocated days.
For some conspiracy theorists, this has come to mean an attack on freedom, arguing that people will be restricted from leaving their homes and forced to live within a 15-minute radius of where they live.
This has been widely debunked.
Nicholas Boys Smith, the chairman of urban planning think tank Create Streets, has written widely on the subject.
He said: “If you live in any neighbourhood built before the 1950s then the chances are you already do live in a place with some or many of the characteristics of a 15-minute city and are able (more or less) to walk to the pub, to the corner shop or to a nearby school. If you are richer, then you are more likely to live in such a place.”
Other users asked: “Why is having amenities near people a bad thing?” Or described the concept as “a dream”.
Oxfordshire County Council confirmed to Big Issue that the proposed traffic filters trial has nothing to do with the concept of 15-minute cities.
Councillor Andrew Gant, Oxfordshire County Council’s cabinet member for transport management, told Big Issue: “I read the article in the Daily Express and my jaw nearly hit the floor. I mean, it is a quite extraordinary misrepresentation of what this scheme does.
Why would anyone choose to travel more than 15 minutes from home?
Because something they need is more than 15 minutes away, of course.
If everything you need is within 15 minutes of home, lucky you. But if everything you need is the wrong side of one of those “traffic filters”, this new law is going to hurt.
If your kid’s school is the wrong side of one of these “traffic filters”, does this mean you need to find your kid a new school? Like the awful school just down the road which you rejected in favour of the 20-minute drive to the better-quality school?
Do you now have to put up with the overpriced corner store, when there is a much better supermarket 20 minutes drive from your house?
The suggestion people should use more public transport or cycle more to avoid the new 15-minute city restrictions is absurd. Not only is British weather cold and rainy much of the time, from 2024 to 2025 there was a 10% uptick in bike robberies in Oxford. Driving in a locked vehicle is more comfortable and far safer than using public transport or riding a bike down lonely tracks, especially for women returning home from late shift work.
These new laws restricting travel are a recipe for hurting ordinary people, people who aren’t well connected enough to get a special pass.
If local governments had attempted to actually create 15-minute cities, by working to improve the availability of local amenities, I would not have had a problem with that. But there would still be lots of people who have to travel further than 15 minutes, for work or school or taking care of elderly relatives, or any number of other reasons.
Punishing people who are already doing it tough, in the hope magic 15-minute eco-cities will somehow arise out of the cruelty being inflicted on ordinary people, that’s just nasty.
This article accuses UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer of a “Brexit betrayal” by potentially committing Britain to large financial payments to the EU for enhanced single market access.
Starmer has pursued a “Brexit reset” since taking office, aiming for closer economic ties without rejoining the EU, single market, customs union, or restoring freedom of movement—key Labour manifesto red lines he has repeatedly reaffirmed.
This article accuses UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer of a “Brexit betrayal” by potentially committing Britain to large financial payments to the EU for enhanced single market access.
Starmer has pursued a “Brexit reset” since taking office, aiming for closer economic ties without rejoining the EU, single market, customs union, or restoring freedom of movement—key Labour manifesto red lines he has repeatedly reaffirmed.
Britain faces handing huge sums to the EU for better access to the single market under Keir Starmer‘s ‘reset’.
The PM is pushing for closer ties with the bloc under huge pressure from Europhile Labour MPs and ministers, arguing it can boost the economy.Daily Mail Online has the story.
Legislation expected as soon as next month could sign the UK up to EU rules on food standards, the electricity market, animal welfare and pesticide use.
That has been billed as implementing a deal agreed last year, but Sir Keir has already made clear he wants to go further – while stressing that fully rejoining the customs union and single market are off the table.
Downing Street said today there were ‘clear, indisputable benefits of closer alignment.’
Brussels sources have been making clear the government will have to ‘pay to play’ if Labour wants to remove more barriers.
Diplomats told the Financial Times that the bloc’s ‘red lines’ meant the UK would have to obey EU rules and contribute to its budget.
Another official questioned whether there was any appetite in Europe for another renegotiation.
‘Brussels is now preoccupied with the Ukraine war, European rearmament and internal negotiations over the next budget cycle,’ they said.
‘There is no remaining bandwidth at this point, while arguably there might have been back in July 2024.’
Sir Keir sparked a storm at the weekend by telling the BBC that he was looking at better access to the single market.
‘I think we should get closer and if it’s in our national interest to have even closer alignment with the single market, then we should consider that,’ he said.
‘If it’s in our interest to do so, we should take that step.’
Critics fear the PM will be forced into more concessions as he desperately hunts for ways of saving his leadership.
The EU is pushing for a ‘youth’ free movement deal that could mean large numbers of people coming to the UK to work.
Before Christmas the government announced it is paying £570million to rejoin the Erasmus student exchange programme.
On an annual basis the sum is double what Boris Johnson rejected as too expensive in 2021.
It is equivalent to roughly a fifth of the entire EU funding envelope for Erasmus+, although the government insists a chunk of the money will go on travel for British youngsters.
Meanwhile, factory owners face further cost increases as they are asked to pay the extra bill for upgrading the country’s electricity grid through higher network charges. Worse, a scheme to protect the 500 most-intensive energy users from next year will be funded by all factories and businesses, making a bad situation worse for the vast majority.
…
Miliband, and more importantly Reeves, seem paralysed by indecision. They need to adopt the Stonehaven report or better still, take ownership of the gas supply industry. Labour has had 18 months to decide. Without a plan, the transition to net zero could wreck the manufacturing sector.
What is the Stonehaven report? The Stonehaven report was produced by Greenpeace, and advocates imposing price controls on gas companies, to stop them from cashing in when renewable output collapses.
Power Shift: how the Labour government can bring down bills and bolster net zero by curtailing the power of gas
…
Executive summary
The UK is facing an enduring energy affordability crisis that affects millions of households, undermines industrial competitiveness and slows progress on climate goals. Even though renewables are now the cheapest form of electricity generation, UK consumers and businesses continue to pay inflated electricity prices that are pegged to the extremely high and volatile price of gas.
The unaffordable gas-driven pricing of our electricity market has caused a cost of living crisis, forced the closure of many businesses and industries, and damaged our economy. Since 2021, our overreliance on gas and its volatile prices has forced the government to make £40 billion in emergency payments to help households cope with their soaring bills, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent prices soaring. These inflated prices have resulted in the UK spending £90 billion more on gas than if prices had stayed the same, equivalent to £1,300 per person.
Now the Labour government has a unique opportunity to deliver an energy system that is fit for the future: providing energy security by ending reliance on fossil fuels, and unlocking cheaper renewable electricity for consumers and businesses by taking gas power out of the electricity market.
This new research by Greenpeace UK and Stonehaven outlines our recommendation to stop gas setting the price we pay for electricity and control the negative impacts of gas in the electricity market. Our recommendation is to bring gas plants into a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) system, administered by the National Energy Systems Operator (NESO). In this model, gas plants would provide a strategic reserve of energy, at an agreed price, when this is needed to meet electricity demand. This would ensure that gas plants get regular, stable returns, while keeping energy costs for the rest of the economy stable and noticeably lower.
This policy could be delivered – and start producing meaningful savings – in the next two years. Our analysis shows that it would result in annual bill savings across households and the economy of £5.1 billion in total in 2028. This represents a saving of £65 a year to the average household and £3.3 billion across all businesses and industry. Rapidly implementing our recommendation would contribute a significant amount towards the government’s vital pledge to lower household energy bills by £300 a year. Additional bills savings can be made via a range of alternative interventions, including moving policy levies into general taxation, extending the Contracts for Difference scheme to 25 years and improving energy efficiency, as outlined by E3G’s Clean Power Mission report.
As this paper shows, this is not just an energy policy – it is a social, economic and climate policy in one, enabling this Labour government to simultaneously lower bills, support vulnerable households, strengthen British industry and accelerate the clean energy transition.
The report claims gas plant operators would be fairly compensated based on the economic value of their assets, but given fossil fuels allegedly face imminent Net Zero enforced shutdown, that measure of “fair value” would probably be a long way from the value such assets would enjoy were they allowed to operate for their full planned life, and were not forced to withdraw from the market every time the wind blows or the sun shines.
And of course, hanging over any negotiation would be the possibility if gas plants don’t agree the plan, nod and smile, the British government could simply expropriate their assets – “take ownership of the gas supply industry”, as Britain is currently doing to the rail industry.
There is another possibility – following the electoral wipeout in the recent Welsh election, and a strong showing by the right wing climate skeptic Reform party, in one of Britain’s most left wing regions, Britain’s ruling Labour Party may be seriously considering dumping Net Zero.
Blair Institute urges Labour to reset clean energy plans in favour of ‘cheaper power 2030’
The Government is under increasing pressure to focus on lowering cost.
October 23rd 2025, 1:39 pm
Labour’s flagship clean power 2030 target is under fresh scrutiny after reports the government may quietly abandon the pledge, as a Tony Blair Institute paper urges ministers to focus instead on delivering “cheaper power 2030″.
Since taking office in 2024, Labour has embarked on a series of reforms aimed at scaling up the rollout of renewable and nuclear energy as part of its goal to phase out fossil fuels and achieve 95% decarbonised electricity in the UK grid by 2030.
Labour’s plans also include establishing GB Energy, a state-backed company intended to co-invest in clean-technology projects and support domestic supply-chain growth.
However, Labour’s decision to halt new North Sea oil and gas licensing and maintain a higher windfall levy has drawn criticism from the industry, which warns the policy risks undermining investment and jobs.
Amid growing pressure from the offshore sector, The Guardian reports that Labour ministers are considering a rethink of their energy strategy in an effort to counter the rise of Reform UK.
There is more at stake than Britain’s manufacturing sector. One of the other crown jewels of Britain’s economy, the London Banking sector, is also threatened by expensive energy. As AI driven financial trading becomes more of a thing, Britain’s Banking sector increasingly needs access to vast amounts of cheap energy to compete with other major trading centers. Banking directly contributes just under 5% to British government revenue, likely a lot more when you consider the constellation of service industries which support the banking sector. Unlike manufacturing, bankers can relocate by hopping on an airplane Fridan night, and be ready to continue trading the following Monday at already operational overseas trading centers. If the British Government loses the revenue it receives from the banking sector, it’s game over for the British economy.
Agriculture is also in trouble – between the rewilding craze, which aims to remove access to vast tracts of land and give them over to weeds, to punitive attacks on the use of agricultural chemicals and fertilisers, Britain will be lucky to have any food production left by the middle of this century.
Time is short. British manufacturing is enduring a sharp contraction, high revenue mobile industries like banking must be weighing up their options, and Agriculture is clinging on by their fingernails. Every moment the British government hesitates to follow President Trump’s example and ditch Net Zero adds to the risk the British economy will suffer a catastrophic economic collapse, which might take decades or even centuries to reverse.
The previous government declared that from 2028, 600,000 heat pumps would be installed every year in British homes as part of the drive towards net zero.
ChatGPT
Labour refuses to recommit to 2028 deadline amid looming budget cuts.
Ed Miliband is poised to ditch targets for heat pumps amid budget cuts that threaten his net zero ambitions, industry sources have told The Telegraph.The Telegraph has the story.
The previous government declared that from 2028, 600,000 heat pumps would be installed every year in British homes as part of the drive towards net zero.
But official communications regarding the deadline have been dropped since Labour took power last year, and any mention of installation targets was absent from the party’s 2024 manifesto.
Labour has refused to recommit to the 2028 deadline, which was set by Boris Johnson’s government in 2021. The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is expected to announce the changes in her spending review on June 11.
It comes after The Telegraph revealed last week that cuts to the Department for Energy and Net Zero (Desnz) budget could force Mr Miliband to reduce funding for his flagship Boiler Upgrade Scheme, which provides up to £7,500 to homeowners looking to install a ground or air source heat pump.
Funding for the scheme is expected to expire in 2028, and the Government is yet to confirm whether it will be renewed.
“The conversations I have been involved in suggest they’re planning to get rid of the 2028 deadline, and it’s not in any of their PR,” one source told The Telegraph. “Because the budget is limited and this government isn’t the best with finances, the Warm Homes Plan will also get shrunk.”
The energy department, led by Mr Miliband, is said to be bracing for budget cuts as Ms Reeves frantically tries to fill an estimated £30bn black hole in Britain’s finances.
The overall annual growth in day-to-day spending has fallen to 1.2pc in real terms, meaning unprotected government departments are facing cuts.
Reductions to his department’s budget could force Mr Miliband to reduce funding for heat pump installations, while officials are also said to be looking for savings in Labour’s “warm homes” policies, which provide funding for home insulation.
Another industry source said: “I’ve not heard talk of the target for months. Setting an ambition is great, but setting absolute target numbers is always a problem.
“The aspiration was based on a number of policy initiatives, all of which have been delayed.”
This is likely to deepen a rift in the Cabinet between Mr Miliband and Ms Reeves, who in January urged Labour MPs not to tolerate “blockers who put their own interests above those of the country”.
Ministers are said to be prioritising Labour’s pledge of building 1.5 million homes, rather than installation targets for heat pumps.
One of Britain’s biggest chemical plants is at risk of closure after the site’s Saudi owners paused a multimillion-pound upgrade project, citing high energy prices and a lack of Government concern for the crisis-hit sector.
One of Britain’s biggest chemical plants is at risk of closure after the site’s Saudi owners paused a multimillion-pound upgrade project, citing high energy prices and a lack of Government concern for the crisis-hit sector. The Telegraph has the story.
The Olefins 6 ‘cracker’ facility in Teesside, controlled by Sabic, employs hundreds of workers and had been undergoing a major conversion to run on gas feedstock.
But Sabic paused that work months ago and is now understood to be on the verge of announcing the plant’s closure amid spiralling costs and concerns about high energy prices.
However, bosses recently said they were looking to scale back their European presence or exit the region entirely. Another cracker in the Netherlands was shuttered last year.
The closure of one of the UK’s most significant chemical plants would deal a fresh blow to the Government as it prepares to unveil its industrial strategy.
Earlier this year, chemical company bosses warned Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, to expect mounting closures as the industry reached “breaking point”.
Sources close to Sabic suggested the plant’s closure was partly due to Britain’s high energy prices as well as the perceived lack of interest shown by the Government in the crisis-hit sector.
Sir Keir Starmer is poised to accept the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and align with EU rules to hit net zero.
The Government wants to rejoin the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) carbon market, which it left when Brexit took effect at the end of 2020.
But The Telegraph can reveal it will mean changing British rules to match EU laws, accepting decisions from a foreign court and pressure to stay in lockstep with Brussels’ net zero policies.
Britain set up its own UK ETS, which also aims to incentivise companies to pollute less, but its carbon price is much lower than the EU’s larger and more successful market.
Rejoining the EU ETS will increase the UK carbon price, making it more expensive to pollute and cutting emissions further and faster, which will help reach the net zero goal but could increase costs for consumers.
The prospects for the Government’s plans to impose the installation of heat pumps at a rate of 600,000 per annum and then a million by the mid-2030s are looking gloomier by the day. According to the Telegraph, while heat pumps being fitted on a one-by-one basis to homes where a Government grant has been secured have to be installed by a certified installer, that’s not the case for heat pumps being installed in new builds
The prospects for the Government’s plans to impose the installation of heat pumps at a rate of 600,000 per annum and then a million by the mid-2030s are looking gloomier by the day. According to the Telegraph, while heat pumps being fitted on a one-by-one basis to homes where a Government grant has been secured have to be installed by a certified installer, that’s not the case for heat pumps being installed in new builds. Anyone with the gift of the gab, pipe-cutters, a drill and a socket set can do the job:
Defective heat pumps will be fitted in new homes under Net Zero plans, the Government has been warned.
From 2027, new homes will be fitted with a heat pump as standard under rules that are expected to be introduced within weeks.
But while heat pumps installed under Government grant schemes in existing homes must be fitted by accredited technicians, there are no such standards for new homes.
Households have been warned that, as a result, “rogue traders” may be fitting their heat pumps, potentially leading to a mis-selling scandal.
Owners of new builds fitted with heat pumps have already reported issues linked to poor installations that have left their homes cold and expensive to run.
If the Government is to meet its house-building targets, heat pump installations will more than quadruple between new build and existing homes by 2027.
“Most people who install low-carbon technologies see genuine benefits and would recommend them to family and friends, but public trust is being eroded by the actions of some rogue traders and shoddy installations,” said Andy Manning, the Head of Energy Policy at Citizens Advice.
“Installers of green upgrades like solar panels and heat pumps don’t have to be accredited unless they’re carrying out work that’s funded by Government grants.”
It is not known exactly how many heat pumps were installed in new builds last year, but 98,000 were sold across the country – the vast majority for existing properties.
But industry experts have said there is a dearth of well-trained installers even at current levels, and ramping up installations without better regulation and training is likely to lead to poorly-installed technology.
John Hornby bought a newly built five-bedroom home in a Shropshire hamlet in 2021, fitted with an air source heat pump that failed to keep the house warm and left him paying £500 a month on electricity during the winter.
An independent assessor commissioned by Mr Hornby found that both the heat pump and the radiators were too small for the house, a common complaint among owners.
Two smaller homes on the estate had been fitted with the same size heat pump, despite bigger homes requiring larger technology, suggesting a lack of understanding by the installers. An inspection of the insulation in the home’s bathroom also found gaps, meaning heat was escaping.
It seems the way is open to a legacy of problems with poorly installed, badly configured and inappropriately sized heat pumps being foisted on those who buy new builds in the years to come. Some of course will be properly installed, but how is any homebuyer supposed to be able to discriminate?
Despite this almost incomprehensible level of Government negligence don’t get excited about the prospect of either Net Zero or Ed Miliband being put out to grass. Tim Stanley thinks the Secretary of State for Energy’s job is secure:
Rumour has it, his head’s on the block. Rachel Reeves, having killed the private sector with her first budget, is now all about cuts and growth – and Net Zero is perceived to be a costly jobs killer.
But I think he’s safe. A poll of Labour members found he’s the most popular minister. Why? Because he’s the only one doing something they like. Telegraph readers might regard the Government as far-Left but remove Net Zero and its policies are to cut foreign aid, cut benefits and raise defence spending, making it seem far-Right to the grassroots.
Miliband helps maintain a pretence that Labour is different-ish from the Tories, thanks to videos of him touring wind farms with Blue Peter energy. His sticky-backed plastic, Groovy Gang, ‘cool kids pick up litter’ vibe is enhanced by a cosmic self-assurance that borders on the guru.
That’s despite an interview on Radio 4 last week suggested that Mr Miliband’s aspirations and dreams diverge widely from reality.
The Labour-run London Borough of Camden (LBC) has been forced to scrap a hugely controversial Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) scheme centred on Dartmouth Park on the eastern edge of Hampstead Heath – home to Ed Miliband, Benedict Cumberbatch and numerous other Labour luvvies. The plan had been to impose an 18-month ‘trial period’ with the least possible public consultation.
The Labour-run London Borough of Camden (LBC) has been forced to scrap a hugely controversial Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) scheme centred on Dartmouth Park on the eastern edge of Hampstead Heath – home to Ed Miliband, Benedict Cumberbatch and numerous other Labour luvvies. The plan had been to impose an 18-month ‘trial period’ with the least possible public consultation.
Attempting to put the best spin on it, LBC calls this a “pause”, but the scheme – a pet project of cycle-fanatic Cllr Adam Harrison, “Cabinet Member for Planning and a Sustainable Camden” and CBC’s Deputy Leader – was always unworkable. Uproar among locals, who discovered Camden’s brief ‘nonsultation’ was to be held during last summer’s holidays, was led by the Highgate Society which commissioned expert analysis of LBC’s dodgy metrics.
Locals packed protest meetings and deluged their council with complaints, not least about the scheme’s obvious potential for raising money by fines. With vehicle access from the north, east and south denied to thousands of homes in the LTN, voters demanded to know how ambulances, deliveries and visitors could reach them, or how anyone less than 100% fit would be able to get the shopping home?
Among many issues they highlighted were inevitable gridlock on Highgate Road, Highgate West Hill and other bus routes on the proposed LTN’s boundary, and increased air pollution on children’s walking routes to the area’s schools – ironically the same good schools which attract so many upwardly-mobile Labour supporters to leafy Dartmouth Park’s expensive homes.
Highgate West Hill is frequently disrupted by emergency repairs to water mains and flooding caused by natural springs (photo: dphnjointaction.com)
Having wasted vast amounts of TfL’s money on consultants while plotting Dartmouth Park’s LTN in secret, Camden’s Labour regime has been handed an expensive lesson in not annoying one’s diehard voters. Its problems include a private company called Commonplace, and an unusually articulate local population.
Commonplace Digital Ltd is a privately-owned “citizen engagement platform” which claims to “inspire thriving places, powered by data and collaboration”. On its touchy-feely website rows of smiley, young and casually-dressed “customer success managers” and “business development managers” promote the platform.
What Commonplace actually does is to sell machine-readable online surveys to councils and developers – relieving them of the trudge of asking local people what they think and reading the responses properly, while still getting the result they first wanted via an ostensibly democratic process.
The snag, as we in Bedfordshire know to our cost, is in the questions asked and the boxes you’re allowed to tick. Our council’s Commonplace survey on local cycling and walking issues produced 826 responses, of which over 100 tried to explain – only possible in the “other comments” box – that by far our worst problem is how to get across the A1 safely into Biggleswade without using a car: a walk/cycle underpass is needed, obviously.
Chancing the A1 at Biggleswade (photo: Mike Wells)Waiting to cross the A1 at Biggleswade (photo: Mike Wells)
But in its published LCWIP plan, based on this “engagement”, Central Beds Council felt able to ignore the lethal risks run by locals trotting or wheeling their children across the A1 carriageways, because the online Commonplace survey had asked no machine-readable question about it. The metrics didn’t prove a need, which happily allowed CBC and National Highways to carry on ignoring the danger.
People are increasingly suspicious of the skewed questions asked in Commonplace surveys, and in the case of Camden’s proposed Dartmouth Park LTN, many refused to participate. Instead, 773 locals emailed their council direct, as well as emailing individual councillors. Here in Beds our ward councillor just leafleted over 800 locals about our Biggleswade problem, asking what they need to get onto town safely, and the scores of replies were a revelation.
Ask people what they really think, without leading questions or tick-boxes, and what you get is ‘quote gold’. Many said roughly what was anticipated, though in their own inimitable words; others made important points that hadn’t even occurred to campaigners. Analysing genuine replies like these – as opposed to machine-readable surveys – takes time and thought, and Camden is now having to go back to the drawing board and read its hundreds of non-Commonplace responses, acutely aware that having wound up the Highgate Society and Dartmouth Park’s vigilant locals, its cunningly-worded online “consultation” cannot alone justify imposing a disastrous LTN.
Labour is facing a backlash over a key net zero role being advertised with an annual salary equivalent to £255,000. The Chair of the Low Carbon Contracts Company, sponsored by Ed Miliband’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, would earn £102,500 a year to work two days a week.
Labour is facing a backlash over a key net zero role being advertised with an annual salary equivalent to £255,000. The Chair of the Low Carbon Contracts Company, sponsored by Ed Miliband’s Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, would earn £102,500 a year to work two days a week.
It is equivalent to a full-time salary of £255,000. But the job advert has sparked a backlash from politicians and campaigners.
Tory peer Lord Mackinlay, who chairs the Net Zero Scrutiny Group, told GB News: “The LCCC is yet another Government quango few will have heard of which is merrily adding to the black hole of Net Zero waste.
“This latest advertised role of chairman at a huge part-time salary speaks volumes about their approach.
This is absolutely scandalous. The LCCC does nothing of value, merely administering govt subsidy schemes for renewables, such as CfDs and Capacity Market payments. A junior civil servant could do the job perfectly competently.
But it seems where Net Zero is concerned, money does not matter!
You must be logged in to post a comment.