General Discussion
Clean air
Now this is a subject that affects each and everyone of us whereever you live to a greater or lesser extent.
So the latest stance by our government after lossing twice in court:-
From the BBC series
The government must devise a new plan to clean the air after losing two court cases. As part of the So I Can Breathe series, we examine air pollution in the UK. Who is most to blame and what should be done?
And now this government is dragging their feet by attempting to appeal those decisions.
Shame on the tories and I bet this will not be discussed on the hustings - or will it?
Depends on who will be there to fire the questions.
I have loaded the gun, now who will pull the trigger? Nobody with a deisel vehicle I suppose.
If the lack of U.K. Government intervention in the V.A.G's emmision cheat fiasco is anything to go by I wouldn't hold your breath for any actions being taken short or long term in relation to these court case decisions.
Well! they have lost again and will have to publish before the general elections, but don't hold your breath.
In 2001 Gordon Brown introduced tax incentives to encourage the switch to diesel, so Viaduct you know exactly where blame lies.
Government needs to regulate industry and take citizen's health seriously, irrespective of which party is in power. Isn't that the real issue?
burneside-----------that was in 2001 different situation, it is now 2017, lessons should have been learnt and it is now the tory government that is calling the shots. Were there any desenting voices in the tory party in 2001 not to encourage the switch, I can't remember any, maybe you can.
Perhaps the Labour government should have thought things through properly before encouraging millions of motorists to invest in diesel cars. But then that's Labour for you, utterly clueless.
The whole of the world was encouraged to invest in diesel, the experts of the day were believed not only by goverments but also by the public, but we go through life believing these so called experts and do we ever learn? No we don't. I remember the first nuclear power station at Calder Hall and my father returning home from a meeting and telling us how wonderfull it would be and they had said so much electricity would be produced they would not have to charge for it now how stupid is that but we believed it at the time because they were experts.
There are more working class people in this country than any other so called class. So burneside can decide who supports which class. Are the working class getting or did they get a fair deal under the tories? I will leave you to answer that.
Out of the last 38 years the voting public has entrusted government to the Tories for 25 of those years, and are highly likely to add the next five to that figure. I think that tells you who the public trust more.
The majority of the voting public did not vote for a Tory government. Anyone with a basic comprehension of the 1st past the post electoral system understands that. The 2015 breakdown of votes tells you how popular the Tories really are if all votes were tallied nationally and not along constituency lines.
The majority of the voting public do not trust the Tories..
The governments were elected under the rules of our electoral system, anyone with a basic comprehension of the British Constitution understands that.
The system is not representative of the will of the nation, it is skewed.
@Burnside Why didn't you answer Viaduct's question?
You really think the majority of people in the UK trust the Tories? Laughable.
Read this:
http://theconversation.com/voting-system-gives-tories-a-result-most-uk-voters-didnt-want-41595
The Tories represent 36.9% of those who voted.
Electoral turnout in 2015 was only 66.1%.Here's the link:
http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm
36.9% of a 66.1% turnout figure means the Tories only really represent 24.4% of the UK population
That's below 1 in 4.
They're far from popular.
In that case, with our skewed electoral system, I doubt any government for a very long time has enjoyed majority support. The voters were given the opportunity only six years ago to change the system and that was comprehensively rejected, so one can only assume they are happy with the current arrangements.
Exactly the system isn't fit for purpose. You finally get my point.
It would be the same if the above figures related to Labour, Lib Dems, Ukip or Greens too. I oppose the Tories, but I'd accept whichever party won a fairer PR election.
And as I said, the voting public were given the chance to reform the system and they rejected it, so we have live with what we have, and under that the Tories, in the main, are the most popular party.
Under the current voting system only.
Socio-culturally they are not popular at all.
We were not given the chance to vote for PR. The Tories fear it. Things will change; the political elite has alienated themselves from the people. As older traditional Tory voters die off and they're replaced by people who are expected to work until they're much older with less pension provision (if any) and the rest of the country has less and less financial security, more zero contract hours contracts, lower education, increased poverty (which is happening already) , less civil liberties and so on... then tory support will wane and change will happen.
Citizens will seek a better alternative.
We're witnessing the beginning of the end of the status-quo, from Brexit to Scottish independence. It's the death throws of British imperialism. The Tory party might win this election and screw the nation up, but it is on its last legs. They'll probably turn on each another. Tory dog-eat-dog.
The problem is that under any other system than 'First Past The Post' is that it is unlikely than any Govt would have a majority in the House. Therefore bugger all gets done!
BTW I've just bought a new (never had one before) diesel car (ordered before all this hit the headlines); it does 58 mpg urban and 60+ dual. It has a 1500cc engine.
Am I really polluting more than some of these 3, 4, 5, 6 litre petrol engines that do less than 20 mpg?
Many European countries function well enough with cross party coalitions. Some of them have far better standards of living than the UK and score greater on well-being indices, working hours, time with family, etc.
You know the important things... not just this 'economy' thing that requires we endure years of austerity as apparantly 'we're all in it together'.
Enjoy your new car if it makes you happy.
Diesel cars seem to be portrayed as the main villains. Is that fair?
Yes and no. Diesel car manufacturers drew fire by cheating emissions tests. Diesels are much more polluting than petrol cars on a local scale, and the biggest proportion of pollution in UK cities does come from road transport in general.
But if you look at Greater London (London stats are the most detailed) you see that private diesel cars contribute 11% of NOx - less than you might have thought. Lorries - with far fewer numbers on the roads - produce the same amount.
Zoom into Central London, and just 5% of NOx comes from private diesel cars. That is dwarfed by 38% from gas for heating homes and offices.
There are many other sources of pollution, including buses, taxis, industry and other machinery, such as on building sites. So it's a many-sided problem.
It is the pollutant in the deisel that is causing the problem
This is why the government is so afraid of publishing the report on pollution
To me a car like any other vehicle is a mode of transport that needs to be powered by something. Whether or not that something when found will be economically viable is another problem we will have to face.
But as things stand at the moment our health is at risk.