ANY government climbdown is swiftly followed by often ill-considered claims
that policy is in shambles and calls for the ministers involved to resign.
This was the response to the latest U-turn on Hips (home information packs)
– but, this time, all the accusations were justified. This was not a timely
retreat, but an inept attempt to save face and spread the blame as widely as
possible for the failure to implement this key reform – which was supposed
to speed property transactions and encourage energy saving.
Before this week’s volte-face, the Government called into question the
eco-consciousness of anyone who pointed out any flaw in the Hip rules.
Ministers contended that the energy performance certificate (EPC) element of
the Hip would raise awareness of the need to reduce domestic carbon
emissions.
But, as the EPC was the only thing halfway resembling a fully formed strategy
to curb our use in our homes of fossil fuels and so help to halt global
warming, what does the Government now mean to do to save the planet?
Real-time meters that show how much electricity is being used are one of the
recommendations of the energy White Paper published this week. But there are
no firm proposals on how and when they will be installed in homes.
When Hips are finally introduced – the new start date is August 1 – they will
be required only for four-bedroom houses. Ruth Kelly, the Secretary of State
for Communities and Local Government, justified the decision to limit the
scheme to such properties, as they offer “the greatest potential to make
energy savings” – which indicates a strange lack of awareness of the way we
live now.
Which owner-occupier do you think most contributes to global warming? The
frugal pensioner couple in a four-bedroom 1,000-sq-ft property or the hedge
fund manager in a 3,000-sq-ft loft, laterally living large with a mega-power
shower, underfloor heating and every type of electric appliance and gadget?
Ms Kelly also illustrates some naivety about the operations of the property
market. It is expected that many sellers of four-bedroom properties will
avoid the £600 fee for a Hip by describing their dwelling as “three bedrooms
and a study”.
The excuses given for the delay in launching Hips until August 1 stretched
credibility to the limit. Ms Kelly admitted there was a shortage of
inspectors to carry out EPC surveys, although, even as happened last week,
her department was insisting otherwise. Her spokespeople are saying
inspectors have trained, but have not proceeded to full accreditation
because of “misinformation and uncertainty”. But the “uncertainty and
misinformation” have arisen from the Government’s bungled handling of the
planning for Hips.
While quick to shrug off any responsibility for the debacle, Ms Kelly did not
offer any apologies to firms that had placed their faith in the Government’s
assurances and had been busy readying themselves for the new rules. On page
9, we report on the case of Martin Hughes, who has taken on 60 full and
part-time energy assessors. What guarantee does he have that Hips will not
be quietly shelved later this year? Should estate agencies and legal firms
that have laid out millions in preparing staff and systems for Hips now
write off that expenditure?
The long-term future of the project must be in doubt as Gordon Brown is,
apparently, antiHip, although plans for the pack were first outlined in
Labour’s 1997 manifesto. Anyone thinking of selling a home this year would
rather like him to make his views explicit on the subject.
THE SUPER INDEX
Views will be divided on whether we need yet another house price index: there
is already enough product differentiation in this sector with Halifax,
Nationwide, Hometrack and the Land Registry being among biggest names to
produce monthly numbers on the performance of the market. However, nerdy
lovers of statistics (a club of which I am a member) will always be happy to
read yet another list of percentages.
The estate agency Chesterton Global is the latest to produce an index of
prices in England and Wales, in collaboration with the Centre for Economics
and Business Research (cebr). This is a meta-index, abstracted from data in
other indices and thus, unsurprisingly, producing a result not so different
from what we already know.
The average price has risen by 9.7 per cent over the past year, but, in April,
the market cooled, slipping by 0.7 per cent. This confirms that weakness was
already setting in even before this month’s interest rate rise. However, the
Chesterton index indicates that the slow-down was less marked among
lower-priced homes – upsetting for first-time buyers who hoped to benefit
from a slackening in the pace of growth.
This may suggest that buy-to-let investors are still accumulating properties,
despite mounting evidence that rates will go up again. Are these buyers
choosing to see only the positive news in all the indices? Let us hope not,
especially for those who are already overextended.
Dear, The "government" can "save" no one, but "saving" is NOT necessary, because global-warming is NOT "man-made"--temperatures were warmer than now around 1000AD, WITHOUT autos/Western living. Global warming IS occuring--not just on Earth, but on MARS (--with not the first IC-engine there), and it is CAUSED by Solar Flares from the Sun, something the EU will someday figure-out Great Britain/USA is "obviously to blame for", on their march to the "Moloch-furnace(--Carthaginians threw their first-born to this deity to stave-off the Roman reduction of their city, post-Hannible's defeat on the plains of Zama) World Socialist(Fascist) Government!
Jek Silberstein, Sun City, USA/Arizona
Shame on Cardinal Keith O'Brien using the emotive comparison of a school massacre to the abortion issue.
In the Third World the Catholic Church's refusal to allow couples to use condoms continues to condemn millions of children to a life of suffering and serves to perpetuate the very cycle of illness and poverty that it claims to want to destroy. What does the Cardinal think about all the hundreds of classrooms of children dying every day from the disease of AIDS as a direct result of the teachings of the Catholic Church ? Perhaps its just "Gods will" that those children should be left to suffer a painful death because of the "sins" of their parents ?? Where is the greater evil ?
Anne Palmer, Windsor, UK
Shame on Cardinal Keith O'Brien using the emotive comparison of a school massacre to the abortion issue.
In the Third World the Catholic Church's refusal to allow couples to use condoms continues to condemn millions of children to a life of suffering and serves to perpetuate the very cycle of illness and poverty that it claims to want to destroy. What does the Cardinal think about all the hundreds of classrooms of children dying every day from the disease of AIDS as a direct result of the teachings of the Catholic Church ? Perhaps its just "Gods will" that those children should be left to suffer a painful death because of the "sins" of their parents ?? Where is the greater evil ?
with all its gross wealth, actively denies Aids ridden couples in Africa and across the world, access to condoms to prevent the death of future generations.
Instead they build hospices to care for the dying, perpetuating the economic demise of those involved.
Anne Palmer, Windsor, UK
Now let me get this straight: the UK is responsible for two percent of the world’s carbon emissions and we are going to save the planet. I must have missed something here.
However, EPCs will certainly be back as they are being imposed on the UK by the EU.
Constantinople_1453, Hastings, England
The trouble is that we as a country are apparently doing well so we consume more and conspicous consumption is still seen as a good thing.
Cutting down on buying new comes before re using or recycling. A worldwide reccession is needed to stem the rise in CO2. Governments would then concentrate on the important needs rather than the unneccesary and luxury.
We often blame the Chinese as they build more dirty coal fired power stations but its only to supply the Wests need for cheaper Cusions and Kitchens (amongst many other items).
Next time you are about to buy something (other than a commodity) ask yourself do I need this? If not do your pocket and the planet a favour and put it back.
Stu, NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE, tyne & Wear
This government have no serious intention of reducing energy bills,they just want to appear to do so to. Flatroofer
Eddie Ward, Crossgates, Radnor County
Anne Ashworth said..
"Which owner-occupier do you think most contributes to global warming?"
That will be me Anne. I live in a two bedroom council house with single glazed windows, no cavity wall insulation, a great big vent in the front door and living room door blowing a force nine gale through the house because we have a back back gas fire boiler and must have ventilation and a great big vent in the upstairs ceiling. I can`t do anything about all this as the government won`t allow me to buy this house for five years . With the end to secure council tenancies coming I can`t spend all the money to sort out the problems.
George Dutton, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Home Information Packs were originally supposed to be about speeding up the home buying and selling process; trying to save the Planet by adding Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) came later. However providing all information from Day 1 of marketing was never going to achieve that objective; wrong answer to wrong question. The Government should think again about how to achieve that objective.
EPCs will be stand alone documents in the rest of Europe. They can be stand alone documents here. Why does Government continue to insist that they must be linked?
If saving the Planet through Energy Performance Certificates is the Government's main objective, sever the unnecessary link with Home Information Packs and roll out EPCs as soon as possible, thereby giving employment prospects to all those who have trained as Domestic Energy Assessors.
Vivien Aldred, Norwich, UK
The whole HIPs thing was doomed to failure.
There are two clear parts that should never have been combined.
1) Searches etc. to speed, and reduce the cost of house sales.
2) Eco reports.
These should be separated and should never have been combined. The former whould have been easy to introduce and really only avoided the current duplication of costs as well as the delays in conveyancing.
The latter is the problem. It is based on economics that do not bear close examination. The hysteria of the 'save the planet' brigade seems to have infected everyone.
Perhaps we should all move to 'carbon efficient' housing or do all the work required to upgrade our existing homes (if we could afford to do so). Can anyone tell me what the carbon cost is of these upgrades? In most cases a lot more than the savings.
The only real measure we have for the home is cost - if people are really worried they should do as we do and heat only the rooms in use - it's a lot cheaper than insulation.
J D S, Cardiff, Wales UK
Have to agree with Brummy Doug. Our tiny little island contributes a miniscule amount to the overall effect of global warming. The biggest polluters in this country are the large, heavy industries anyway. These are where the government should be focusing their efforts to reduce pollution.
However we could all be doing far more than we do, within our own homes. It used to be called "Thrift." It's the sort of thing our grandparents did simply because they had to. Handing down clothes, using bicarb to clean the sink, making meals with leftovers, re-using wrapping paper, etc, etc. Less energy is then used in the recycling process. Like Mrs Littlejohns says, "Less lazy & a little more careful"
HIPS, are a pointless exercise focused on the wrong people. For example, I can fill my property with low energy light bulbs but if the person that buys it decided to change every bulb to a halogen, what good will that do! Is a poor energy report going to make people NOT buy the house they want??
Dave, London,
I have read with great interest the views of the media about the idea of fortnightly rubbish collection. It has been a reality for about two years where I live, and has been a roaring success for those of us who recyle.
I was a member of the pilot scheme (admittedly unwilling) . We could recycle all food waste, as well as the usual compostible items. Unfortuately - when rolled out to to others - the scheme had to be adapted and we could recycle less of our waste. However, I am a firm believer that fortnightly collections CAN work if we are a little less lazy, and a little more careful.
Mrs J Littlejohns, Newport, Gwent S Wales
Dear Anne
I have been watching with interest the progress of the HIP's debate. I was interested in becoming a DEA, but due to the cost of the course being between £2650-£3200 the risk of loosing such a substantial amount of money has made me wait and see if parliment scrap the idea.This could be a factor in why there is such a shortage of inspectors as these costs could build up to a large amount for companies and anybody wanting to retrain as a DEA.
DEAN, leeds, england
AC Frabetti: There is 'me' and there is a 'table'. That I interact with it does not make us a single entity. Ditto 'Environment'.
Dennis, London,
A note on semantics: there is a tendency to refer to the environment as some 'other;' there is 'us' and then there is the woods, the air, the water etc. This is a mistake. We damage ourselves when we wreck the environment. We are a part of the environment and the environment is a part of us. We are not separate units that pass to and fro like islands in the world, only occasionally interacting with it; we are dynamically linked to all that occurs in the world around us. Every act of environmental destruction is really an act of self-destruction; every act of disdain towards environmental preservation and sustainability is really an act of self-disdain. I think we need to start here, the battle for internally clarifying this relationship. It is a consciousness that is presumed in environmentalists. Unfortunately, I am writing from one of the biggest offending countries, the King of making 'things' into 'others,' the USA.
A.C. Frabetti, Stony Brook, NY, USA
The planet doesn't want to be "saved" by the pathetic protestations of puny humans. It's still in an ice age and would prefer to go back to its customary much warmer state. That could indeed give problems for humans, but why should the planet care about us?
David Jenkins, Weybridge, UK
Dear Anne.
I am a heating engineer. Plumbers we used to be called, but as technology and the governments thirst for us all to be evermore 'qualified' and regulated most of us have specialised.
I have been looking at the HIPS energy certificate and wondering what could be done to lower fuel costs in most homes without the need for radical alterations or huge costs. As a company we offer the latest and greenest of technologies, we will also look at you energy usage and 'tweek' you existing system to run as efficiently as in can. This will give you a payback period that makes economical sense. HIPS will never give a true reflection because the inspectors will not be able to keep up with advances in control systems. Our Company www.purusnavitas.co.uk
Dominic Taylor-Lane, wallingford, oxfordshire
"Saving the Planet" is beyond the ability or competence of this Government, or any Government.
We are a small country in a big world; our contribution to global warming is so small, that if the entire country sank beneath the waves tonight, it would make almost no difference whatsoever to climate change.
As Gran said; have the courage to change things that you can change; have the strength to learn to live with what you cannot.
Brummy Doug, Birmingham, England
Great title....of course the planet will save itself. But your point is well made. With the likes of Ms.Kelly knowing nothing about leadership, but aspiring, nay plying, for such roles, the species might not make it in full quota.
mick, Coventry, UK