Seen elsewhere
Twitter
Support

 

Buy

Click images for more details

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« On food and fearless advisers | Main | Concerto for a rainy day »
Thursday
Jan032013

Tummy tickling

The Telegraph claims to have a splash on Conservative ministers' attitudes to windfarms - in particular those of planning minister Nick Boles and DECC's John Hayes.

The Daily Telegraph has been told that Mr Boles warned Mr Hayes in the letter that people “bitterly resented” having onshore wind farm developments imposed on them by planners after an inquiry.

It is also the first evidence of a Tory ministerial alliance against Liberal Democrat attempts to introduce more onshore wind turbines.

The intervention will be a major boost for communities which are fighting the construction of turbines near their homes.

The Conservatives, as we know, can do little or nothing about energy policy in the UK, since the coalition agreement awards this to the LibDems. This announcement therefore reeks of the blue half of the government reacting to the continuing rise of UKIP in the polls by trying to tickle the tummies of some disgruntled rural voters with a view to slowing the exodus of their voters to Farage's team.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (6)

Round and round the garden,
like a teddy-bear.
One-step.
Two-steps.
Tickle under there!

Yup, Bishop, that pretty well summarises UK politics and the intellectual capabilities of its politicians!

Jan 3, 2013 at 11:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterRoyFOMR

I can confirm that

people “bitterly resented” having onshore wind farm developments imposed on them by planners after an inquiry

In fact it's more than bitter resentment. Local people are told that Localism means they can shape their own future. They spend £10ks on fighting public inquiries, with 99% of local people on their side, including their local parish councils, their district councils and their MP. They produce what seems like a cast-iron and logical case against a wind farm. And then along comes a Government appointed Planning Inspector from a hundred miles away who disregards the evidence and allows the wind farm to go ahead because in his opinion it will make a valuable contribution to saving the planet. Local resentment has turned into local anger. People are prepared to vote for UKIP regardless of the consequences, because they know that a vote for Con, Lab or LibDem means more of the same destructive wind turbine policy.

Jan 4, 2013 at 6:55 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

The way that the Conservatives could turn the tide is for Eric Pickles at the DCLG to instruct the Planning Inspectorate to dismiss all appeals rather than allowing most of them (as happens at the moment). He could use the Localism Act as the reason for dismissing appeals.

Jan 4, 2013 at 7:06 AM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

All home owners within 2 km of a wind farm should be offered full market value for their properties updated to now from when the wind farm was built.

Jan 4, 2013 at 6:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlecM

Entirely self inflicted. Only 3 Conservative MP's (plus the 2 tellers- one of which was Anne Widdecombe - I forget the other) used a bit of grey matter on the vote for the infamous Climate Change Act 2008, while the snow was falling outside.

Perhaps this arrogant piece of green smuggery may remind the rest of them why we are at where we are at and why UKIP is rising.

http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/james-blog/1810260/businessgreencom-names-shames-climate-change-bill-three

Jan 4, 2013 at 7:58 PM | Registered CommenterPharos

The fight over windfarms (as well as energy policy in general) is one reason I do not believe the coalition will run to full term. At some stage the Conservatives must side with voters (and common sense) on windfarms and stop them. They did not make sense even before the news broke about them having shorter than advertised working lives. However stupid politicians are, they have their chances of being re-elected firmly at front of mind.
Surely the "get out" is the phrase "Climate Change" and with only 15% of global emissions (and falling) covered by the (temporarily patched up and soon to die) Kyoto protocol, any policy we pursue can have nothing to do with "Climate Change" therefore the act does not apply.

Jan 5, 2013 at 5:02 AM | Registered CommenterDung

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>