Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Virtue signalling and having to show we are different to the EU.
He is a better man than this which just shows the pressures of party and media politics on someone who is frankly inexperienced.
Maybe he’s not a better man . I think many were willing to give him a chance as he seemed the polar opposite to Johnson and were relieved when he took over. We’ve just got nasty , useless and spineless in a posh suit with a now very annoying over enthusiastic manner .
He is weak.
He is not standing up to teenage scribbler crap advisors who have looked at Uxbridge and gone 'sir, sir, I know this one, please sir.'
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sure (I grew up with one). But only 5% of the population use them. That is not the vote share the Tories are looking for.
It is, rural areas are the Conservative core vote and it is a big issue for them, it is not a big issue for the other 95%
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
I didn't mentioned oil boilers (not me)
The only thing I find surprising is the end of ICE car sales is 5 years earlier than the EU so it would be good if someone could explain the commercial benefits of doing this
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Slightly different bans.
The UK's 2030 is for pure petrol/diesel only; hybrids would still be allowed.
The EU's 2035 is for anything with a combustion engine, so includes hybrids.
Tory: We left EU to do our own thing and the massive single market next door to us makes not a jot of difference.
Also Tory: EU says 2035 - we should too.
Pathetic on stilts.
It will be hilarious to see the gymnastics performed as the Brexit cabal explain to us why we should be in tune with the EU .
The net zero rumours are moving quickly tonight, with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak unusually jumping in to reiterate he is "committed to net zero".
It had been circulating that Mr Sunak could be planning on pushing back a ban on new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 to 2035.
On this, the prime minister said: "No leak will stop me beginning the process of telling the country how and why we need to change.
"As a first step, I'll be giving a speech this week to set out an important long-term decision we need to make so our country becomes the place I know we all want it to be for our children..."
"Our politics must again put the long-term interests of our country before the short-term political needs of the moment."
What utter drivel . And his last sentence is vomit inducing , he’s clearly putting short term interest first . The best thing Sunak can do for the country and its children is to fxck off back to California.
He has no clue. Or he does but aussie advisors are whispering crap in his ear.
Remind me how the last aussie election went?
Tomorrow's another day, but it's just possible that this will end up annoying people on both sides of the Conservative electorate.
Teal-curious Conservatives will be hacked off at any watering down of greenery by Sunak. We're starting to see Conservative MPs sounding off about that already.
Red meat Conservatives will be cross if Sunak wimps out of giving the British people their God given freedom to burn stuff and pollute the atmosphere. (I wonder if that was the reason for the leaks- to try to nail Rishi's underlength trousers to the mast?)
If he manages to lose votes support ways... that's quite an achievement.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sure (I grew up with one). But only 5% of the population use them. That is not the vote share the Tories are looking for.
It is, rural areas are the Conservative core vote and it is a big issue for them, it is not a big issue for the other 95%
They are already voting Tory.
They may not have all bothered to vote, some may have gone RefUK, this will fire up the rural core vote to turn out
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
I have no particular knowledge of it to be honest and certainly think Sunak is taking a huge gamble
However as the conservative will lose in 2024 so the issue will be for labour
You seem to think I am some right wing conservative when nothing is further from the truth
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
There is also the cost of installation and finding enough trained engineers to install them
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 12m In today's poll from @DeltapollUK the Tories were on 5% for 18-24 year olds. And 18% for 25-54 year olds. Don't think this evening's announcements are going to help with that.
It might if they drive a petrol car or live in a rural area reliant on oil boilers
The petrol car thing is about this mythical 18 year old buying a new petrol car, or not, in 7 years time.
How many 18 years olds are interested in what they will buy in 7 years?
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
They do until it affects their wallet, see ULEZ and the Uxbridge by election
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
There is also the cost of installation and finding enough trained engineers to install them
There wont be a sudden demand for alternatives to oil boilers. How long do they last? It is a ban on new ones. They are not all going to fail in 2030.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
He doesn't care. It is desperate bid to claw something back against a 20 point Lab lead by pandering to the ageing tory vote who can't understand why it is not 1953 anymore.
The net zero rumours are moving quickly tonight, with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak unusually jumping in to reiterate he is "committed to net zero".
It had been circulating that Mr Sunak could be planning on pushing back a ban on new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 to 2035.
On this, the prime minister said: "No leak will stop me beginning the process of telling the country how and why we need to change.
"As a first step, I'll be giving a speech this week to set out an important long-term decision we need to make so our country becomes the place I know we all want it to be for our children..."
"Our politics must again put the long-term interests of our country before the short-term political needs of the moment."
What utter drivel . And his last sentence is vomit inducing , he’s clearly putting short term interest first . The best thing Sunak can do for the country and its children is to fxck off back to California.
He has no clue. Or he does but aussie advisors are whispering crap in his ear.
Remind me how the last aussie election went?
The Coalition actually won most votes on first preferences even if they lost on 2PP
And because the Greens got > 12%, and the pro-environment Teal independents another 5%
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
I didn't mentioned oil boilers (not me)
The only thing I find surprising is the end of ICE car sales is 5 years earlier than the EU so it would be good if someone could explain the commercial benefits of doing this
Because the bans are not the same. As things stand, I think the UK is still going to allow hybrids after 2030. So the UK's limits on how cars can be powered will be stricter than the EU's until 2030 and looser after 2035. Swings and roundabouts. But the important thing is that the two dates are for different things, so it's a bit tabloid to try to compare them.
As for why it might be comercially better, it might be that early adoption will bring more car manufacturing investment to the UK; for the home market initially, for export later. I don't know.
But given that one of the common complaints about ULEZ was insufficient notice, giving seven years notice seems like a good thing to do.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sure (I grew up with one). But only 5% of the population use them. That is not the vote share the Tories are looking for.
It is, rural areas are the Conservative core vote and it is a big issue for them, it is not a big issue for the other 95%
They are already voting Tory.
They may not have all bothered to vote, some may have gone RefUK, this will fire up the rural core vote to turn out
This is either, as you suggest, a stroke of electoral genius, or (one of) the last resort(s) of a scoundrel.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
He doesn't care. It is desperate bid to claw something back against a 20 point Lab lead by pandering to the ageing tory vote who can't understand why it is not 1953 anymore.
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
I have no particular knowledge of it to be honest and certainly think Sunak is taking a huge gamble
However as the conservative will lose in 2024 so the issue will be for labour
You seem to think I am some right wing conservative when nothing is further from the truth
The reality is the market is way ahead of Sunak.
There will be no new petrol cars for sale in 2030.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
There is also the cost of installation and finding enough trained engineers to install them
There wont be a sudden demand for alternatives to oil boilers. How long do they last? It is a ban on new ones. They are not all going to fail in 2030.
I assume you accept that I did not raise boilers but now it has come up modern combi boilers will continue to be installed for some years to come and with a life span of 20 years or more
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
There is also the cost of installation and finding enough trained engineers to install them
Imagine if today's Tories were in charge during the Industrial Revolution.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sure (I grew up with one). But only 5% of the population use them. That is not the vote share the Tories are looking for.
It is, rural areas are the Conservative core vote and it is a big issue for them, it is not a big issue for the other 95%
They are already voting Tory.
They may not have all bothered to vote, some may have gone RefUK, this will fire up the rural core vote to turn out
Farmers have been screwed by Brexit and so not sure the rural vote is as solid as it once was . The best thing for the Tories is a period in opposition where hopefully sanity returns.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
As I am sure everybody on this site would agree, I have thoughts on heat pumps 😀😀😀
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
As I am sure everybody on this site would agree, I have thoughts on heat pumps 😀😀😀
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
I have no particular knowledge of it to be honest and certainly think Sunak is taking a huge gamble
However as the conservative will lose in 2024 so the issue will be for labour
You seem to think I am some right wing conservative when nothing is further from the truth
The reality is the market is way ahead of Sunak.
There will be no new petrol cars for sale in 2030.
"The Rock" is on ITV. It's still on the SanFran bits so there's still time to jump in. Damn, Michael Biehn was good looking, before alcoholism robbed him of his looks and voice.
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
They do until it affects their wallet, see ULEZ and the Uxbridge by election
The Tories fluked a win there as many didn’t bother checking if their cars would be compliant and now seem to have taken a 400 vote win as some huge endorsement on dropping a series of climate proposals . It seems the Tories election campaign will consist of let’s leave the ECHR so we can be like Russia and Belarus and lets junk our net zero plans .
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Yes, the banning of new ICE cars would have pushed down the price of used ICE cars. So you are right - but in the opposite way to that you are intimating.
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
They do until it affects their wallet, see ULEZ and the Uxbridge by election
The Tories fluked a win there as many didn’t bother checking if their cars would be compliant and now seem to have taken a 400 vote win as some huge endorsement on dropping a series of climate proposals . It seems the Tories election campaign will consist of let’s leave the ECHR so we can be like Russia and Belarus and lets junk our net zero plans .
It does smack of winning at any cost. Keep the gravy train rolling and to Hell with the consequences.
I thought I liked Sunak, but he is more malevolent than Johnson. Johnson just sold the nation for a tilt at the top job. Sunak is content to sell the planet.
She has a point. Is it right to deprive someone of their entire livelihood on the basis of hearsay and anonymous allegations - made to the media not the police?
I suppose you could argue that Brand has the money to fight libel actions but it still doesn’t seem quite right
Following the universal rule that social media is getting worse in the 2020s, YouTube has become even more capricious and arbitrary over the past year or two. I posted the other day how many military enthusiasts and historians have set up their own platform (armchairhistory.tv?) to bypass YouTubes habit of demonetizing those with violent content, in the same way as the film/media crowd set up Nebula to get around fair use violations. The future for Brand and his cohort is to set up their own hosting website, a GBNews/YouTube hybrid where they can pontificate to their heart's content.
Weirdly, because you spend most of your time on Twitter and I live on YouTube, this might be the only time ever where I am ahead of the curve zeitgeist. Does the Knappers Gazette need a YouTube correspondent?
YouTube and TikTok need government legislation banning streaming services from just automatically loading up the next mindless video when the last one ends. Or at least forcing them to do that for under 18s. TikTok is the worst. My son sits staring at it for hours at a time sometimes, constant stream of nothingness. Shows great irritation when we suggest he switches off and gets some fresh air.
(I recognise the hypocrisy of me writing this on an iPhone I spend far too much time on).
You can switch that autoplay off on YouTube. Or you could. I'm on a train and cannot check. ☹️
Youtube autoplay can be turned off for normal videos, but Youtube Shorts, which is basically Tiktok on Youtube, will play the next one as you scroll onto it. Just like Tiktok, then, it means you can lose hours just scrolling.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
As I am sure everybody on this site would agree, I have thoughts on heat pumps 😀😀😀
I actually have a heat pump. In a rural area. Where it is currently raining hard with strong winds and lots of mist.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
He doesn't care. It is desperate bid to claw something back against a 20 point Lab lead by pandering to the ageing tory vote who can't understand why it is not 1953 anymore.
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
They do until it affects their wallet, see ULEZ and the Uxbridge by election
The Tories fluked a win there as many didn’t bother checking if their cars would be compliant and now seem to have taken a 400 vote win as some huge endorsement on dropping a series of climate proposals . It seems the Tories election campaign will consist of let’s leave the ECHR so we can be like Russia and Belarus and lets junk our net zero plans .
Did ULEZ help them hold on to Uxbridge or was it the cancelling of a negative Johnson incumbency factor?
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 1h Hmmm, Tories seem to be ripping themselves apart on #Newsnight. Just feels like 1996 all over again.
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
He wouldn’t be welcome after his controversial London mayoralty campaign against Khan .
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
They do until it affects their wallet, see ULEZ and the Uxbridge by election
The Tories fluked a win there as many didn’t bother checking if their cars would be compliant and now seem to have taken a 400 vote win as some huge endorsement on dropping a series of climate proposals . It seems the Tories election campaign will consist of let’s leave the ECHR so we can be like Russia and Belarus and lets junk our net zero plans .
Did ULEZ help them hold on to Uxbridge or was it the cancelling of a negative Johnson incumbency factor?
Maybe a bit of both . ULEZ certainly played a role helped by a poor Labour campaign .
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
He wouldn’t be welcome after his controversial London mayoralty campaign against Khan .
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sure (I grew up with one). But only 5% of the population use them. That is not the vote share the Tories are looking for.
It is, rural areas are the Conservative core vote and it is a big issue for them, it is not a big issue for the other 95%
They are already voting Tory.
They may not have all bothered to vote, some may have gone RefUK, this will fire up the rural core vote to turn out
Farmers have been screwed by Brexit and so not sure the rural vote is as solid as it once was . The best thing for the Tories is a period in opposition where hopefully sanity returns.
The best thing for the country would be the Conservatives pulling down the shutters and fucking off for good. They can't be fixed. It's a new centre-right party that's needed. This party needs a DNR.
The only viable right of centre party that could replace the Tories is one led by Farage even further right
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 1h Hmmm, Tories seem to be ripping themselves apart on #Newsnight. Just feels like 1996 all over again.
This is nothing . Wait for the drama when they put leaving the ECHR in their manifesto .
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 1h Hmmm, Tories seem to be ripping themselves apart on #Newsnight. Just feels like 1996 all over again.
Interesting that Simon Clarke referenced Thatcher, jobs and the market in his thread.
Old school conservatism versus Sunak's gerontocracy.
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Would that be the Zac Goldsmith who lost his seat in the 2019 General Election, but retained his membership of the legislature and role as a Government minister due to his close friendship with the PM of the time and closer friendship with said PM's wife?
What fun to see him questioning the current PM's mandate.
This isn't a blip. Look at the underlying numbers in both the Deltapoll and Ipsos polls today (helpfully summarised in the threads below). They're awful for the Tories.
At the risk of turning into @Heathener, the prospect of something close to a Tory wipe out is being underplayed.
Just because it's never happened (ignoring what happened to the Liberals) and just because they've existed for so long (so had the Liberals) doesn't mean it's never going to happen.
I’m pretty instinctively a Tory kind of guy. A Unionist through and through, proud to be British, a believer in capitalism and private enterprise, encouraging people to work hard to get on and rewarding ambition.
I really have no idea what this government is about anymore. It is high tax, low service, short sighted and, particularly anywhere near the Home Office, deeply unpleasant bordering on unBritish. I am in something approaching despair. What on earth happened to Cameron’s new Tories?
Short answer: they lost the referendum.
Long answer: Cameroonism didn't really have a good answer to the question "what are the Conservatives for?" The coalition was a bit of an "in office, not in power" experience and some sort of reaction against that was probably inevitable. I don't like the form that has taken any more than you, but I can sort of understand it. Add to that the change in the age graph; the Conservatives are a "waiting for God" party now in a way they weren't before. That has consequences.
As for the higher tax, lower services issue... I'm willing to cut Sunak some slack there, though I wish he'd be honest about it. The UK has been writing post-dated cheques for decades, and the electorate has rewarded governments for doing that. They were bound to be cashed eventually, and it's not entirely Sunak's fault that it's on his watch.
The medium answer: They lost the referendum, then didn’t stick around to honour the result.
Yes. It was essential to the Tory project in 2015/16 that Cameron, having given us the choice, remained as PM to see it through. If he had thought that a Leave result was undeliverable and was a resignation issue he should have said so in advance, as giving the people the choice was the manifesto commitment. He didn't.
That travesty was compounded by failing to appoint a genuine Brexiteer as PM in his place.
They have never recovered from those two disasters.
And yet, writing that down highlights quite what a mad gamble Cameron took.
There is no way he could plausibly remain PM after June 2016; he had recommended one course of action to the British population, and they voted against it. It wasn't technically a vote of confidence, but it had the same weight.
Besides, Cameron would (presumably) have negotiated an arrangement closer to the EU than May's or Johnson's. Given the buckets of shit poured on May, is it really plausible to think that Cameron negotiating something would have ended better?
I think so.
He shouldn’t have taken a prominent role in the referendum, so he could still have been PM no matter what. But even given the way it panned out, he should have hung around to make a deal as he said he would.
By the way, I hear Aklu Plaza is closing. They couldn’t get permission for the ‘banqueting suite/community space/wedding venue’ on the third floor in time, and the ‘shop’ downstairs was a rat infested front
Once upon a time it was a Debenhams, I remember mum and dad driving me and my brother there from Ilford every couple of weekends.
Did your family not know there was a Debenhams in Ilford?
@PippaCrerar · 53m Tory peer @ZacGoldsmith , who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
Goldsmith has been hinting at defecting to Labour. I wonder if he might now go through with it?
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 1h Hmmm, Tories seem to be ripping themselves apart on #Newsnight. Just feels like 1996 all over again.
Interesting that Simon Clarke referenced Thatcher, jobs and the market in his thread.
Old school conservatism versus Sunak's gerontocracy.
This isn't a blip. Look at the underlying numbers in both the Deltapoll and Ipsos polls today (helpfully summarised in the threads below). They're awful for the Tories.
At the risk of turning into @Heathener, the prospect of something close to a Tory wipe out is being underplayed.
Just because it's never happened (ignoring what happened to the Liberals) and just because they've existed for so long (so had the Liberals) doesn't mean it's never going to happen.
I’m pretty instinctively a Tory kind of guy. A Unionist through and through, proud to be British, a believer in capitalism and private enterprise, encouraging people to work hard to get on and rewarding ambition.
I really have no idea what this government is about anymore. It is high tax, low service, short sighted and, particularly anywhere near the Home Office, deeply unpleasant bordering on unBritish. I am in something approaching despair. What on earth happened to Cameron’s new Tories?
Short answer: they lost the referendum.
Long answer: Cameroonism didn't really have a good answer to the question "what are the Conservatives for?" The coalition was a bit of an "in office, not in power" experience and some sort of reaction against that was probably inevitable. I don't like the form that has taken any more than you, but I can sort of understand it. Add to that the change in the age graph; the Conservatives are a "waiting for God" party now in a way they weren't before. That has consequences.
As for the higher tax, lower services issue... I'm willing to cut Sunak some slack there, though I wish he'd be honest about it. The UK has been writing post-dated cheques for decades, and the electorate has rewarded governments for doing that. They were bound to be cashed eventually, and it's not entirely Sunak's fault that it's on his watch.
The medium answer: They lost the referendum, then didn’t stick around to honour the result.
Yes. It was essential to the Tory project in 2015/16 that Cameron, having given us the choice, remained as PM to see it through. If he had thought that a Leave result was undeliverable and was a resignation issue he should have said so in advance, as giving the people the choice was the manifesto commitment. He didn't.
That travesty was compounded by failing to appoint a genuine Brexiteer as PM in his place.
They have never recovered from those two disasters.
And yet, writing that down highlights quite what a mad gamble Cameron took.
There is no way he could plausibly remain PM after June 2016; he had recommended one course of action to the British population, and they voted against it. It wasn't technically a vote of confidence, but it had the same weight.
Besides, Cameron would (presumably) have negotiated an arrangement closer to the EU than May's or Johnson's. Given the buckets of shit poured on May, is it really plausible to think that Cameron negotiating something would have ended better?
I think so.
He shouldn’t have taken a prominent role in the referendum, so he could still have been PM no matter what. But even given the way it panned out, he should have hung around to make a deal as he said he would.
By the way, I hear Aklu Plaza is closing. They couldn’t get permission for the ‘banqueting suite/community space/wedding venue’ on the third floor in time, and the ‘shop’ downstairs was a rat infested front
Once upon a time it was a Debenhams, I remember mum and dad driving me and my brother there from Ilford every couple of weekends.
Did your family not know there was a Debenhams in Ilford?
That only opened with the Exchange shopping centre c.1991!
"The Rock" is on ITV. It's still on the SanFran bits so there's still time to jump in. Damn, Michael Biehn was good looking, before alcoholism robbed him of his looks and voice.
Michael Biehn is closer in age to Joe Biden than to Sadiq Khan
Tom Cruise is 61. Brad Pitt is 59. The world turns, and we turn with it...
If Sunak was going to be in office longer than 12 months and he actually did row back on new zero policy then it would disprove the old canard that by-elections change nothing.
Uxbridge.
By elections have changed things before, the rather small but long overdue planning reform Boris was planning got abandoned after a NIMBY by election defeat to the Lib Dems. For shame.
I can't think of a by election ever changing things for the better.
I can tell my local MP in a safe Tory seat is getting nervous. They have sent me a first ever letter, and it is to oppose further expansion of housebuilding in the constituency.
Desperately hoping the Nimbys can save the Tory bacon.
If Sunak was going to be in office longer than 12 months and he actually did row back on new zero policy then it would disprove the old canard that by-elections change nothing.
Uxbridge.
By elections have changed things before, the rather small but long overdue planning reform Boris was planning got abandoned after a NIMBY by election defeat to the Lib Dems. For shame.
I can't think of a by election ever changing things for the better.
I can tell my local MP in a safe Tory seat is getting nervous. They have sent me a first ever letter, and it is to oppose further expansion of housebuilding in the constituency.
Desperately hoping the Nimbys can save the Tory bacon.
Is the government planning to force petrol stations to stop selling fossil fuels at some point?
Perhaps in typical joined-up government fashion they could speed this process up as a way of placating the people who are upset about delaying the ban on new vehicles.
"The parallels between Argentina and Britain’s inept political class Over the past few decades, both countries have experienced near financial catastrophe at the hands of reckless leaders.
Trump always was moderate on abortion. Pence was Trump's link to the evangelical right. Trump complained he was not getting credit from them for delivering their agenda. For Trump, everything was transactional.
This isn't a blip. Look at the underlying numbers in both the Deltapoll and Ipsos polls today (helpfully summarised in the threads below). They're awful for the Tories.
At the risk of turning into @Heathener, the prospect of something close to a Tory wipe out is being underplayed.
Just because it's never happened (ignoring what happened to the Liberals) and just because they've existed for so long (so had the Liberals) doesn't mean it's never going to happen.
I’m pretty instinctively a Tory kind of guy. A Unionist through and through, proud to be British, a believer in capitalism and private enterprise, encouraging people to work hard to get on and rewarding ambition.
I really have no idea what this government is about anymore. It is high tax, low service, short sighted and, particularly anywhere near the Home Office, deeply unpleasant bordering on unBritish. I am in something approaching despair. What on earth happened to Cameron’s new Tories?
Short answer: they lost the referendum.
Long answer: Cameroonism didn't really have a good answer to the question "what are the Conservatives for?" The coalition was a bit of an "in office, not in power" experience and some sort of reaction against that was probably inevitable. I don't like the form that has taken any more than you, but I can sort of understand it. Add to that the change in the age graph; the Conservatives are a "waiting for God" party now in a way they weren't before. That has consequences.
As for the higher tax, lower services issue... I'm willing to cut Sunak some slack there, though I wish he'd be honest about it. The UK has been writing post-dated cheques for decades, and the electorate has rewarded governments for doing that. They were bound to be cashed eventually, and it's not entirely Sunak's fault that it's on his watch.
The medium answer: They lost the referendum, then didn’t stick around to honour the result.
Yes. It was essential to the Tory project in 2015/16 that Cameron, having given us the choice, remained as PM to see it through. If he had thought that a Leave result was undeliverable and was a resignation issue he should have said so in advance, as giving the people the choice was the manifesto commitment. He didn't.
That travesty was compounded by failing to appoint a genuine Brexiteer as PM in his place.
They have never recovered from those two disasters.
And yet, writing that down highlights quite what a mad gamble Cameron took.
There is no way he could plausibly remain PM after June 2016; he had recommended one course of action to the British population, and they voted against it. It wasn't technically a vote of confidence, but it had the same weight.
Besides, Cameron would (presumably) have negotiated an arrangement closer to the EU than May's or Johnson's. Given the buckets of shit poured on May, is it really plausible to think that Cameron negotiating something would have ended better?
I think so.
He shouldn’t have taken a prominent role in the referendum, so he could still have been PM no matter what. But even given the way it panned out, he should have hung around to make a deal as he said he would.
By the way, I hear Aklu Plaza is closing. They couldn’t get permission for the ‘banqueting suite/community space/wedding venue’ on the third floor in time, and the ‘shop’ downstairs was a rat infested front
Once upon a time it was a Debenhams, I remember mum and dad driving me and my brother there from Ilford every couple of weekends.
Did your family not know there was a Debenhams in Ilford?
That only opened with the Exchange shopping centre c.1991!
"The parallels between Argentina and Britain’s inept political class Over the past few decades, both countries have experienced near financial catastrophe at the hands of reckless leaders.
Off topic: Trump is just going back to his roots on abortion. In 2016, I observed that, judging by their past behavior, Trump was the candidate of Playboy magazine, and Clinton was the candidate of Ms. magazine. (Both magazines, as you probably know, were, and are, strong proponents of no limits on abortion.) In practice, Clinton and Trump agreed on other issues, too.
(Credit where due: If he was trying to make a joke, Trump succeeded brilliantly when he said, recently, he could get the two sides on abortion together, and make everyone happy.)
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
I didn't mentioned oil boilers (not me)
The only thing I find surprising is the end of ICE car sales is 5 years earlier than the EU so it would be good if someone could explain the commercial benefits of doing this
I don't have cruise control and I don't have a max speed limiter. I have zero problems driving in places like Edinburgh where the limit is 20mph on almost all roads, and can still look where I'm going.
Am I some kind of driving savant? I don't think I am. Why are people pretending it's difficult?
It depends on the car. Many cars are designed to work better at certain speeds than others.
My car if I'm at 20 then I need to be in third gear to maintain that and in third gear minor changes in foot pressure (or slope of the ground) can lead to accelerating or decelerating.
If I'm at 30 then I can cruise (with or without cruise control) in fifth gear and minor slope/pressure changes don't result in sudden speed changes. Indeed if exiting a 30 and going to National Speed Limit then may need to drop down from fifth to fourth in order to rapidly accelerate.
Bigger issue is the fuel efficiency. Cruising at 30 in fifth is far more fuel efficient than at 20 in third, in my vehicle at least.
Despite your Alberto Ascari levels of car control. You can't get away from the drag equation. It takes 2.25x as much energy to move your car through the air at 30mph as it does at 20mph.
Drag Force = 1/2 x ρ x v^2 x Cd x A
Yes, but that's not the only factor involved now, is it?
As many including myself have mentioned whether you are accelerating or not matters a lot more than drag - doing 30 while cruising at 30 is far more efficient than doing 30 while ragging your vehicle from 0 to 70. You might not appreciate this fact, I understand.
And again, gears matter. While I'm driving I typically have the real time MPG displayed on my dashboard, which I appreciate is an estimate but still a reasonable estimate. Cruising at 30 in fifth displays a better MPG than cruising at 20 in third does.
IIRC, petrol and diesel cars are typically at their most efficient when driven at their lowest comfortable speed in top gear, typically around 40 to 50 mph. With EVs, of course, the slower the better as far as efficiency is concerned, which makes EVs fantastic for town use. Of course modern cars also have cruise controls / speed limiters which makes keeping to speed limits a doddle.
Yes exactly, hence why 30 is good for me as my car does handle 30 in its top gear. Though it gets about the same fuel efficiency whether travelling 30-50mph. Below 30 (so lower gears) or above 50 the fuel efficiency drops, increasingly significantly.
Cruise control aiding sticking to the speed limit is a good point and as many cars cruise controls have a minimum speed of 25mph that's another reason why 30 mph speed limits is better than 20mph ones. 👍
Cruise controls might be limited to 25 mph, but I don't think speed limiters are.
My speed limiter goes down to 30km/h, which is just under 20mph. I guess it would be 20mph if I set it to miles.
Traditional cruise control at town speed is a bad idea, although a lot of modern cars do have “active cruise” which starts and stops with the car in front.
For the sake of completeness, I did set my car (2005 Mercedes E500) to display in mph, and the speed limiter minimum is indeed 20mph, then going up in 5mph (as opposed to 10km/h) increments.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
There is also the cost of installation and finding enough trained engineers to install them
Also the capacity to manufacture them in the quantities needed as well as the entire supply chain to support it.
If this woman in LA says Brand raped her then she needs to accuse him in court
Likewise the 16 year old girlfriend. She claims sexual assault
SO GO TO THE POLICE
Enough of this anonymous denouncing. Even in court their identities will be disguised. So what are they afraid of? Brand is not gonna send the mafia after them
Not quite. These women are anonymous, and perhaps not wealthy. Who knows. BUT C4 and The Times have put themselves directly in line for a massive defamation action worth gazillions if they cannot get their story to stand up.
There are well known reasons why women often do not wish to go to criminal courts over sexual matters. Ask Cyclefree. But C4 and the Times have said 'publish and be damned'. Brand can sue them, just as those the DM described as the murderers of Stephen Lawrence can sue the DM for millions. We are still waiting. Let us wait and see on this one too.
Given that Brand was well-known for having some very expensive media lawyers on retention, who would immediately shut down any negative story about his behaviour, there was a good public interest in C4 and The Times standing up to him.
Genuine investigative journalism needs to be encouraged, especially in situations such as this. The Times also broke the Rotherham story, which led to hundreds of convictions .
Why Brand is still headline news four days later, on the other hand, is something of a mystery.
In case no-one noticed, Azerbaijan just started a war against Armenia, over a long-disputed territory. Armenia could traditionally rely on Russia to help them out in such situations, but Russia obviously doesn’t have a spare Kalashnikov right now.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Yes, the banning of new ICE cars would have pushed down the price of used ICE cars. So you are right - but in the opposite way to that you are intimating.
The banning of new ICE cars, is way likely to lead to them going up in value used, as a consequence of the constraint in supply. We saw this in 2021 and 2022 thanks to the pandemic.
Which is why the policymakers are determined to implement ULEZ everywhere, to stop people holding on to their last car and keep it running, leaving petrol as a weird enthusiast thing that people do on Sundays, as they do with horses at the moment.
What is really worrying the Germans is a potential EU ban on manufacturing petrol-powered cars, for export to countries that buy lots of cars and aren’t interested in banning petrol.
Off topic: Trump is just going back to his roots on abortion. In 2016, I observed that, judging by their past behavior, Trump was the candidate of Playboy magazine, and Clinton was the candidate of Ms. magazine. (Both magazines, as you probably know, were, and are, strong proponents of no limits on abortion.) In practice, Clinton and Trump agreed on other issues, too.
(Credit where due: If he was trying to make a joke, Trump succeeded brilliantly when he said, recently, he could get the two sides on abortion together, and make everyone happy.)
Trump has his own views on abortion, but his more religious supporters (and religious Republicans in general) are still over the moon that he got Roe overturned and made the subject an issue for individual States.
For decades, that decision has been seen as an infringement of the rights of the States to decide these moral issues themselves; has been seen as symptomatic of both the outsized influence of liberal NY, CA, and DC, and the centralisation of government in Washington.
Oh no, not another Russian special forces unit commander Colonel killed in action, and most of his unit taken out defending an already bombed-out village. Damn shame.
Oh no, not another Russian special forces unit commander Colonel killed in action, and most of his unit taken out defending an already bombed-out village. Damn shame.
But of course it is a shame for the Russian conscripts. "Soldiers who want to be civilians ..."
Spent yesterday in Mid Beds - Everyone I spoke to wanted to discuss the best way of defeating the Tories. The voters of Mid Beds have decided, partly because of Nadine but also Boris and Truss that they need a kicking. Quite possible that the Conservatives will end up fourth -behind the independent candidate!
Postal votes expected to go out next Tuesday. Often postal voters haven't had much literature when they cast their votes but because the campaign has been going on for some time already, thanks to Nadine's delayed resignation, those with postal votes know who to vote for. Only posters evident were Lib Dem diamonds in Barton-le-Clay. The Lib Dem campaign is firing on all cylinders.
Peep Show is masterpiece. Only a few comedy programmes of recent decades can be considered its peers IMHO - maybe The Royle Family, Derry Girls, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Succession. I think this article overdoes the bleakness of the show, though, and the era. And the writer fawns over the absurdly overrated Fleabag so is clearly an idiot.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Slightly different bans.
The UK's 2030 is for pure petrol/diesel only; hybrids would still be allowed.
The EU's 2035 is for anything with a combustion engine, so includes hybrids.
Tory: We left EU to do our own thing and the massive single market next door to us makes not a jot of difference.
Also Tory: EU says 2035 - we should too.
Pathetic on stilts.
It will be hilarious to see the gymnastics performed as the Brexit cabal explain to us why we should be in tune with the EU .
It’s simple
You don’t want to be behind the EU because of the political cost.
The question of whether the political benefit (sorry, I meant “international influence as a result of leading the way on climate change”) from being more aggressive than the EU is worth the benefit
That’s the thing about Brexit: it allows us to choose. Sometimes it will make sense to be the same as the EU, and sometimes it will make sense to be different
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Yes, the banning of new ICE cars would have pushed down the price of used ICE cars. So you are right - but in the opposite way to that you are intimating.
The banning of new ICE cars, is way likely to lead to them going up in value used, as a consequence of the constraint in supply. We saw this in 2021 and 2022 thanks to the pandemic.
Which is why the policymakers are determined to implement ULEZ everywhere, to stop people holding on to their last car and keep it running, leaving petrol as a weird enthusiast thing that people do on Sundays, as they do with horses at the moment.
What is really worrying the Germans is a potential EU ban on manufacturing petrol-powered cars, for export to countries that buy lots of cars and aren’t interested in banning petrol.
Except ULEZ is about air pollution in cities, and the transition away from ICE cars is about reducing carbon emissions (though helps a bit with the former).
A sensible policy would be to allow low emission but air polluting cars to keep driving outside of cities. Which is basically what the policy is at the moment 👍
Genuinely starting to think that Sunak could end up a bigger vote loser than Truss, and that bringing back Boris is maybe not completely nuts.
If the opposition have any sense they’ll tie Sunaks announcement to Truss who basically said the same thing in her speech. The public will surely think oh dear if it’s a Truss suggestion .
One of the few good things about the Tories is that they finally got serious about the environment. Now Sunak has decided to bin that. It's politically absurd. People who care about the environment vastly outnumber the people this will appeal to.
They do until it affects their wallet, see ULEZ and the Uxbridge by election
The Tories fluked a win there as many didn’t bother checking if their cars would be compliant and now seem to have taken a 400 vote win as some huge endorsement on dropping a series of climate proposals . It seems the Tories election campaign will consist of let’s leave the ECHR so we can be like Russia and Belarus and lets junk our net zero plans .
I’d rather that we aren’t like Russia because we *choose* not to be. You seem to rely on international agreements to restrain us.
CPI 6.7%, down from 6.8% last month and below the BoE’s 7.1% forecast.
UK inflation remains above average but is converging again with small upticks elsewhere compared with a tiny fall here. We may see one more 0.25% increase but it must be touch and go now.
CPI 6.7%, down from 6.8% last month and below the BoE’s 7.1% forecast.
UK inflation remains above average but is converging again with small upticks elsewhere compared with a tiny fall here. We may see one more 0.25% increase but it must be touch and go now.
The key is the oil price, which crashed in November last year, and is now 20% higher than the early December trough of $76. Q1 2024 could see inflation rising again.
Headlines from Mail and Express tell us why Sunak has pandered to the ageing tory membership vote yet again.
Pathetic.
Hope he can show his face to his daughters tonight with hanging in shame.
I don't think the Luckyguy vote is likely to save him.
Great idea taking one of the very few long term consensus policies the country has, and ripping it up. What an utter plonker.
Whatever you think of stuff like HS2, offshore wind and Net Zero, the success of these policies is being undercut by the seemingly deliberate introduction of uncertainty in each.
How can the private sector and households make sound investments in the face of all this?
(It was 2030 for no new ICE cars, and no gas boilers in new homes from 2025. Both seem sensible and achievable to me)
The 2026 ban on off-grid oil boilers will be delayed to 2035, with only an 80% phase out target at that date too.
That is sensible as in rural areas like here virtually everyone relies on oil
Sunak has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons and it will be fascinating to see how this unfolds
Not for the feint hearted conservatives I believe
The ban is on new oil boilers.
And would energy infrastructure in rural areas be able to cope with the demand for all the new heat pumps?
What infrastructure do you need for a heat pump?
As I am sure everybody on this site would agree, I have thoughts on heat pumps 😀😀😀
I actually have a heat pump. In a rural area. Where it is currently raining hard with strong winds and lots of mist.
What would you like to know?
😀
Rain and mist at the same time?
Are you sure your house hasn’t fallen into the lake?
In fairness it could also be construed as an attempt to pervert the course of justice. Either way, it is a serious offence and if this was done knowingly jail must be a real possibility.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Yes, the banning of new ICE cars would have pushed down the price of used ICE cars. So you are right - but in the opposite way to that you are intimating.
The banning of new ICE cars, is way likely to lead to them going up in value used, as a consequence of the constraint in supply. We saw this in 2021 and 2022 thanks to the pandemic.
Which is why the policymakers are determined to implement ULEZ everywhere, to stop people holding on to their last car and keep it running, leaving petrol as a weird enthusiast thing that people do on Sundays, as they do with horses at the moment.
What is really worrying the Germans is a potential EU ban on manufacturing petrol-powered cars, for export to countries that buy lots of cars and aren’t interested in banning petrol.
Except ULEZ is about air pollution in cities, and the transition away from ICE cars is about reducing carbon emissions (though helps a bit with the former).
A sensible policy would be to allow low emission but air polluting cars to keep driving outside of cities. Which is basically what the policy is at the moment 👍
That’s a polite way of telling people to either buy an EV or get the bus. As people start to realise that this is what’s happening, expect public opinion to swing considerably.
Of course everyone is in favour of ambiguous “net zero” pledges, provided they’re not personally affected.
CPI 6.7%, down from 6.8% last month and below the BoE’s 7.1% forecast.
UK inflation remains above average but is converging again with small upticks elsewhere compared with a tiny fall here. We may see one more 0.25% increase but it must be touch and go now.
The key is the oil price, which crashed in November last year, and is now 20% higher than the early December trough of $76. Q1 2024 could see inflation rising again.
Agreed, That is the fly in the ointment as food price inflation moderates. We don't seem to have got the same fracking boost from the US that we had the last time. Normally they have been able to produce new oil in substantial quantities fairly quickly.
"The Rock" is on ITV. It's still on the SanFran bits so there's still time to jump in. Damn, Michael Biehn was good looking, before alcoholism robbed him of his looks and voice.
Michael Biehn is closer in age to Joe Biden than to Sadiq Khan
Tom Cruise is 61. Brad Pitt is 59. The world turns, and we turn with it...
Peep Show is masterpiece. Only a few comedy programmes of recent decades can be considered its peers IMHO - maybe The Royle Family, Derry Girls, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Succession. I think this article overdoes the bleakness of the show, though, and the era. And the writer fawns over the absurdly overrated Fleabag so is clearly an idiot.
But Fleabag is so edgy as the main character breaks the fourth wall while taking it up the backside !!!!
Peep Show is masterpiece. Only a few comedy programmes of recent decades can be considered its peers IMHO - maybe The Royle Family, Derry Girls, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Succession. I think this article overdoes the bleakness of the show, though, and the era. And the writer fawns over the absurdly overrated Fleabag so is clearly an idiot.
The whole point of Peep Show is the bleakness of the characters lives, and their low horizons limited by their character flaws. That's how it becomes funny. Happy lives don't make good comedy.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Yes, the banning of new ICE cars would have pushed down the price of used ICE cars. So you are right - but in the opposite way to that you are intimating.
The banning of new ICE cars, is way likely to lead to them going up in value used, as a consequence of the constraint in supply. We saw this in 2021 and 2022 thanks to the pandemic.
Which is why the policymakers are determined to implement ULEZ everywhere, to stop people holding on to their last car and keep it running, leaving petrol as a weird enthusiast thing that people do on Sundays, as they do with horses at the moment.
What is really worrying the Germans is a potential EU ban on manufacturing petrol-powered cars, for export to countries that buy lots of cars and aren’t interested in banning petrol.
Except ULEZ is about air pollution in cities, and the transition away from ICE cars is about reducing carbon emissions (though helps a bit with the former).
A sensible policy would be to allow low emission but air polluting cars to keep driving outside of cities. Which is basically what the policy is at the moment 👍
That’s a polite way of telling people to either buy an EV or get the bus. As people start to realise that this is what’s happening, expect public opinion to swing considerably.
Of course everyone is in favour of ambiguous “net zero” pledges, provided they’re not personally affected.
Exactly, the same as taxes.
The moment they are impacted they are not very keen.
If this woman in LA says Brand raped her then she needs to accuse him in court
Likewise the 16 year old girlfriend. She claims sexual assault
SO GO TO THE POLICE
Enough of this anonymous denouncing. Even in court their identities will be disguised. So what are they afraid of? Brand is not gonna send the mafia after them
Not quite. These women are anonymous, and perhaps not wealthy. Who knows. BUT C4 and The Times have put themselves directly in line for a massive defamation action worth gazillions if they cannot get their story to stand up.
There are well known reasons why women often do not wish to go to criminal courts over sexual matters. Ask Cyclefree. But C4 and the Times have said 'publish and be damned'. Brand can sue them, just as those the DM described as the murderers of Stephen Lawrence can sue the DM for millions. We are still waiting. Let us wait and see on this one too.
Given that Brand was well-known for having some very expensive media lawyers on retention, who would immediately shut down any negative story about his behaviour, there was a good public interest in C4 and The Times standing up to him.
Genuine investigative journalism needs to be encouraged, especially in situations such as this. The Times also broke the Rotherham story, which led to hundreds of convictions .
Why Brand is still headline news four days later, on the other hand, is something of a mystery.
In case no-one noticed, Azerbaijan just started a war against Armenia, over a long-disputed territory. Armenia could traditionally rely on Russia to help them out in such situations, but Russia obviously doesn’t have a spare Kalashnikov right now.
Interestingly Medvedev blamed the lack of assistance on Armenia cosying up to the West. Struggling to retain support among their more transactional client states so they need to (at least pretend) Armenia is being made an example of?
"Poppy Simister-Thomas" is pretty good, though. Could only ever be a Tory candidate.
Really? A classic LibDem name, surely? Double barelled and the rather wet "Poppy"...
Reginald SiNister-Thomas would be a good wicked Tory though…
My year's PPE group of about 16 in my Oxford college produced 2 MPs both Tory -Tim Smith (recipient of Al Fayed envelopes) and Gyles Brandreth -enough said!
Rather balanced opinion on inflation from Dharshini David on the BBC site
Dharshini David
Chief economics correspondent
It was some of the areas which saw the largest price rises earlier in the year - food, hotels and restaurants - which helped inflation to fall against expectations in August.
Although many of those items were still getting more expensive, the rate at which their prices increased has slowed.
The Bank of England focuses most closely on so-called core inflation which disregards food and energy but includes items such as the prices of meals out, clothes and entertainment.
That too has slowed, from 6.9% to 6.2% - suggesting that firms may be finding it harder to push through higher prices, as consumers become more wary about shelling out on treats.
The numbers raise questions over whether the Bank of England will raise rates tomorrow.
The chancellor says they show that the plan to cut inflation is working.
The data increases the chances that the government meets its pledge to halve inflation this year - but inflation in the UK remains particularly stubborn compared to other rich countries.
CPI 6.7%, down from 6.8% last month and below the BoE’s 7.1% forecast.
UK inflation remains above average but is converging again with small upticks elsewhere compared with a tiny fall here. We may see one more 0.25% increase but it must be touch and go now.
The key is the oil price, which crashed in November last year, and is now 20% higher than the early December trough of $76. Q1 2024 could see inflation rising again.
Agreed, That is the fly in the ointment as food price inflation moderates. We don't seem to have got the same fracking boost from the US that we had the last time. Normally they have been able to produce new oil in substantial quantities fairly quickly.
The oil price is being driven by some very high-level realpolitik, as always, but right now the East is beating the West in this regard. We’re seeing China buying oil priced in Yuan, and China and India washing dodgy Russian oil back into the global markets to keep funding the war in Ukraine.
The crux of it, is that the key relationship between the Biden administration and the Saudis has deteriorated, and the President is in hock to the environmental lobby over the fracking lobby locally. At some point, his advisors are going to point out that the ‘gas’ price in the States is perhaps the single most correlated issue with his prospects of re-election next year. Sunak needs to get on that train too. They need to assertively point out that Putin is no friend, and has every intention of starving the MENA region of food this winter.
Presumably car firms that have been investing on the basis of 2030 will be pretty pissed off as well.
As a provincial science master, I take comfort in not really understanding business, but I can't help wondering if Rishi understands even less than I do.
The interesting question is why did Boris advance this target from 2035 to 2030?
2035 is the Europe wide target so I have no idea why the UK is 5 years earlier
Because car manufacturers are going to beat the 2030 deadline, some by several years.
This is anti-green posturing, with no basis in what is going on in the real world. You must be delighted.
Jim Pickard 🐋 @PickardJE · 19m is he really suggesting that delaying green reforms will make Britain a better place “for our children”?
This type of commentary is completely divorced from the economic concerns of the average voter. For some people's children it might mean the difference between being able to afford a car and not being able to afford one.
Yes, the banning of new ICE cars would have pushed down the price of used ICE cars. So you are right - but in the opposite way to that you are intimating.
The banning of new ICE cars, is way likely to lead to them going up in value used, as a consequence of the constraint in supply. We saw this in 2021 and 2022 thanks to the pandemic.
Which is why the policymakers are determined to implement ULEZ everywhere, to stop people holding on to their last car and keep it running, leaving petrol as a weird enthusiast thing that people do on Sundays, as they do with horses at the moment.
What is really worrying the Germans is a potential EU ban on manufacturing petrol-powered cars, for export to countries that buy lots of cars and aren’t interested in banning petrol.
Except ULEZ is about air pollution in cities, and the transition away from ICE cars is about reducing carbon emissions (though helps a bit with the former).
A sensible policy would be to allow low emission but air polluting cars to keep driving outside of cities. Which is basically what the policy is at the moment 👍
That’s a polite way of telling people to either buy an EV or get the bus. As people start to realise that this is what’s happening, expect public opinion to swing considerably.
Of course everyone is in favour of ambiguous “net zero” pledges, provided they’re not personally affected.
It's happening naturally though. 20% of all new cars being sold are already EVs. By 2030, most large manufacturers will have been selling EVs only for several years.
Second hand petrol cars will be around for another 15 - 20 years. It's a pretty chill revolution, as they go. 66 years between flight and the moon.
Comments
He is not standing up to teenage scribbler crap advisors who have looked at Uxbridge and gone 'sir, sir, I know this one, please sir.'
The only thing I find surprising is the end of ICE car sales is 5 years earlier than the EU so it would be good if someone could explain the commercial benefits of doing this
Teal-curious Conservatives will be hacked off at any watering down of greenery by Sunak. We're starting to see Conservative MPs sounding off about that already.
Red meat Conservatives will be cross if Sunak wimps out of giving the British people their God given freedom to burn stuff and pollute the atmosphere. (I wonder if that was the reason for the leaks- to try to nail Rishi's underlength trousers to the mast?)
If he manages to lose votes support ways... that's quite an achievement.
The post Brexit 1950s revival is almost complete. Just hanging and flogging to finish the set. And I am not necessarily joking.
However as the conservative will lose in 2024 so the issue will be for labour
You seem to think I am some right wing conservative when nothing is further from the truth
@PippaCrerar
·
53m
Tory peer
@ZacGoldsmith
, who quit as environment minister in June, describes Sunak’s net zero decision as “a moment of shame” for UK.
He also raises question of PM’s mandate… unlikely to be the last to do so.
As for why it might be comercially better, it might be that early adoption will bring more car manufacturing investment to the UK; for the home market initially, for export later. I don't know.
But given that one of the common complaints about ULEZ was insufficient notice, giving seven years notice seems like a good thing to do.
There will be no new petrol cars for sale in 2030.
It's over.
He is being appalling advised.
"Piss off Brunel, that's all far too expensive"
I thought I liked Sunak, but he is more malevolent than Johnson. Johnson just sold the nation for a tilt at the top job. Sunak is content to sell the planet.
What would you like to know?
😀
Glen O'Hara
@gsoh31
·
1h
Hmmm, Tories seem to be ripping themselves apart on #Newsnight. Just feels like 1996 all over again.
Trump is ironically now a moderate on abortion compared to DeSantis and Pence
https://apnews.com/article/trump-desantis-abortion-ban-republican-primary-5bdbba55f9c2f328d49b5fbe9727677e
Old school conservatism versus Sunak's gerontocracy.
What fun to see him questioning the current PM's mandate.
https://unherd.com/2023/09/peep-show-is-a-national-humiliation/
Perhaps in typical joined-up government fashion they could speed this process up as a way of placating the people who are upset about delaying the ban on new vehicles.
Over the past few decades, both countries have experienced near financial catastrophe at the hands of reckless leaders.
By John Gray"
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2023/09/argentina-britain-political-class-john-gray
(Credit where due: If he was trying to make a joke, Trump succeeded brilliantly when he said, recently, he could get the two sides on abortion together, and make everyone happy.)
Genuine investigative journalism needs to be encouraged, especially in situations such as this. The Times also broke the Rotherham story, which led to hundreds of convictions .
Why Brand is still headline news four days later, on the other hand, is something of a mystery.
In case no-one noticed, Azerbaijan just started a war against Armenia, over a long-disputed territory. Armenia could traditionally rely on Russia to help them out in such situations, but Russia obviously doesn’t have a spare Kalashnikov right now.
Which is why the policymakers are determined to implement ULEZ everywhere, to stop people holding on to their last car and keep it running, leaving petrol as a weird enthusiast thing that people do on Sundays, as they do with horses at the moment.
What is really worrying the Germans is a potential EU ban on manufacturing petrol-powered cars, for export to countries that buy lots of cars and aren’t interested in banning petrol.
For decades, that decision has been seen as an infringement of the rights of the States to decide these moral issues themselves; has been seen as symptomatic of both the outsized influence of liberal NY, CA, and DC, and the centralisation of government in Washington.
Postal votes expected to go out next Tuesday. Often postal voters haven't had much literature when they cast their votes but because the campaign has been going on for some time already, thanks to Nadine's delayed resignation, those with postal votes know who to vote for. Only posters evident were Lib Dem diamonds in Barton-le-Clay. The Lib Dem campaign is firing on all cylinders.
You don’t want to be behind the EU because of the political cost.
The question of whether the political benefit (sorry, I meant “international influence as a result of leading the way on climate change”) from being more aggressive than
the EU is worth the benefit
That’s the thing about Brexit: it allows us to choose. Sometimes it will make sense to be the same as the EU, and sometimes it will make sense to be different
A sensible policy would be to allow low emission but air polluting cars to keep driving outside of cities. Which is basically what the policy is at the moment 👍
What a positive outlook on life you have
Are you sure your house hasn’t fallen into the lake?
Of course everyone is in favour of ambiguous “net zero” pledges, provided they’re not personally affected.
The moment they are impacted they are not very keen.
Interestingly Medvedev blamed the lack of assistance on Armenia cosying up to the West. Struggling to retain support among their more transactional client states so they need to (at least pretend) Armenia is being made an example of?
Dharshini David
Chief economics correspondent
It was some of the areas which saw the largest price rises earlier in the year - food, hotels and restaurants - which helped inflation to fall against expectations in August.
Although many of those items were still getting more expensive, the rate at which their prices increased has slowed.
The Bank of England focuses most closely on so-called core inflation which disregards food and energy but includes items such as the prices of meals out, clothes and entertainment.
That too has slowed, from 6.9% to 6.2% - suggesting that firms may be finding it harder to push through higher prices, as consumers become more wary about shelling out on treats.
The numbers raise questions over whether the Bank of England will raise rates tomorrow.
The chancellor says they show that the plan to cut inflation is working.
The data increases the chances that the government meets its pledge to halve inflation this year - but inflation in the UK remains particularly stubborn compared to other rich countries.
The crux of it, is that the key relationship between the Biden administration and the Saudis has deteriorated, and the President is in hock to the environmental lobby over the fracking lobby locally. At some point, his advisors are going to point out that the ‘gas’ price in the States is perhaps the single most correlated issue with his prospects of re-election next year. Sunak needs to get on that train too. They need to assertively point out that Putin is no friend, and has every intention of starving the MENA region of food this winter.
Second hand petrol cars will be around for another 15 - 20 years. It's a pretty chill revolution, as they go. 66 years between flight and the moon.