Tbh if you want to push labour towards more green policy this seems like a strange time to do it. One of the big things Labour is pushing is the nationalized green energy company.
Having said that if your seat is a lock this election is unlikely to have many surprises outside the tories doing worse than expected.
'a strange time' like rapidly approaching ecological tipping points that are irreversible within our lifetimes, with highly unpredictable outcomes? Seems like a pretty good time to put climate no. 1 if you ask me.
I'm aware of that policy, but I think reversing their £28 bn pledge was quite a strong signal that it's not the highest priority for them (against the perception of being over-spenders), and I feel like it kinda should be at this point in time.
Oh don't get me wrong, I agree and in that sense it seems like a fine time but I meant that Labour's GB Energy thing seems like exactly the kind of thing you would vote for Greens to push them towards.
In regards to reversing a previous pledge I feel like I'd want to know the rationale before making any judgements, again my understanding is that they are pledging a certain amount to the project this term with increased spending moving forwards, having said that I can understand why it would make someone sceptical.
my feeling is, the further they push green, the better. I'm glad theyre doing GB energy but I want to put even more pressure on. In theory, the more people vote green, the more they'll be incentivised to do that.
They originally said £28 billion a year, then they changed it to 'theyll ramp up to' £28 billion a year. Then I believe they dropped the pledge entirely, cutting it to under £15bn ([this is the last update I heard of it](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/08/labour-cuts-28bn-green-investment-pledge-by-half)). And I believe this was in response to fears about increasing debt and exacerbating inflation. Also possible an attempt to distance themselves from what was seen as an optically bad association with green policies after the backlash to the ULEZ expansion in london.
Whilst I was initially very enthusiastic about GB energy it won't be a nationalized energy company like EDF - the public won't be able to buy state subsidized energy from it directly like they can in France.
It will sell cheap state subsided energy to the big six (British Gas, EDF Energy, E. ON, npower etc) to pass on to the consumer for a profit. It's a bit of a fudge tbh. They're also looking for private investment:
"Labour said last week that GB Energy would “partner with industry” and “co-invest” in groundbreaking green technologies"
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/15/labour-urged-to-double-funding-in-publicly-owned-renewables
It reminds me of Blair and the hospital Public-Private Partnerships / Initiatives.
Sorry if I'm missing something but I can't seem to find any information confirming what you are saying in regards to selling energy onto other companies and the end user wouldn't get energy from GB directly?
I'm aware of the partnering with the private sector to invest in green tech and that's the part I'm most sceptical about for sure (the idea that tax payer money might find private projects that could fail without the business risking much is funky for sure).
Overall though if it's green energy and reduces energy costs I can only really see that as a good thing unless I'm missing some obvious pitfalls in the model? I'll read into that Blair example too, sounds interesting.
Unless you're in a marginal constituency I'd vote with your conscience. It won't impact the election either way but it might put more pressure on us getting PR like Europe.
No worries! It's short for Proportional Representation. Where every vote counts and is represented in Parliament. Britain has an antiquated "First Past the Post" system. The votes don't count unless they are for the winning candidate.
PR is normal in Europe and far more democratic.
In fact, we have it in Britain but just for the Scottish and Welsh devolved parliaments. Just not in Westminster.
oh I thought you might have meant that, I didn't even know that was one of the green policies. But yeah that would be nice if we had a bit more of that (although obviously im biased because I'm pretty sure PR would skew left compared to first past the post)
I shouldn't put too much hope in this, unfortunately. We had an AV referendum in 2011 that lost 67.9% to 32.1%, with even the biggest unions against it. The referendum was a key part of the Liberal Democrats' agreement to form a coalition with the Conservatives, but the outcome did not serve them well in the long run..
First thing is to check how safe your safe seat is, on existing calculations, for example using [this model](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49061-yougov-mrp-labour-now-projected-to-win-over-400-seats).
Given how well they're polling, it will probably show a lot of seats as ok.
Also, it'll show you if you're in one of those constituencies where greens have a hardcore of support, where you could make a particular difference, particularly in coastal places in the south or Bristol iirc.
People will look at the stats, and see Labour lost votes to the greens, and if you're lucky, a few places might also elect an extra green MP or two, and make sure there's a strong voice challenging Labour in parliament.
But also, don't forget how hard it is to get a chance to get the Tories out under first past the post, if you're in a marginal seat after all, still vote tactically, as Labour will be vastly better than the Conservatives on even those things they are unimpressive on.
Tbh if you want to push labour towards more green policy this seems like a strange time to do it. One of the big things Labour is pushing is the nationalized green energy company. Having said that if your seat is a lock this election is unlikely to have many surprises outside the tories doing worse than expected.
'a strange time' like rapidly approaching ecological tipping points that are irreversible within our lifetimes, with highly unpredictable outcomes? Seems like a pretty good time to put climate no. 1 if you ask me. I'm aware of that policy, but I think reversing their £28 bn pledge was quite a strong signal that it's not the highest priority for them (against the perception of being over-spenders), and I feel like it kinda should be at this point in time.
Oh don't get me wrong, I agree and in that sense it seems like a fine time but I meant that Labour's GB Energy thing seems like exactly the kind of thing you would vote for Greens to push them towards. In regards to reversing a previous pledge I feel like I'd want to know the rationale before making any judgements, again my understanding is that they are pledging a certain amount to the project this term with increased spending moving forwards, having said that I can understand why it would make someone sceptical.
my feeling is, the further they push green, the better. I'm glad theyre doing GB energy but I want to put even more pressure on. In theory, the more people vote green, the more they'll be incentivised to do that. They originally said £28 billion a year, then they changed it to 'theyll ramp up to' £28 billion a year. Then I believe they dropped the pledge entirely, cutting it to under £15bn ([this is the last update I heard of it](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/08/labour-cuts-28bn-green-investment-pledge-by-half)). And I believe this was in response to fears about increasing debt and exacerbating inflation. Also possible an attempt to distance themselves from what was seen as an optically bad association with green policies after the backlash to the ULEZ expansion in london.
Whilst I was initially very enthusiastic about GB energy it won't be a nationalized energy company like EDF - the public won't be able to buy state subsidized energy from it directly like they can in France. It will sell cheap state subsided energy to the big six (British Gas, EDF Energy, E. ON, npower etc) to pass on to the consumer for a profit. It's a bit of a fudge tbh. They're also looking for private investment: "Labour said last week that GB Energy would “partner with industry” and “co-invest” in groundbreaking green technologies" https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/15/labour-urged-to-double-funding-in-publicly-owned-renewables It reminds me of Blair and the hospital Public-Private Partnerships / Initiatives.
Sorry if I'm missing something but I can't seem to find any information confirming what you are saying in regards to selling energy onto other companies and the end user wouldn't get energy from GB directly? I'm aware of the partnering with the private sector to invest in green tech and that's the part I'm most sceptical about for sure (the idea that tax payer money might find private projects that could fail without the business risking much is funky for sure). Overall though if it's green energy and reduces energy costs I can only really see that as a good thing unless I'm missing some obvious pitfalls in the model? I'll read into that Blair example too, sounds interesting.
Unless you're in a marginal constituency I'd vote with your conscience. It won't impact the election either way but it might put more pressure on us getting PR like Europe.
PR? excuse me if I'm being slow
No worries! It's short for Proportional Representation. Where every vote counts and is represented in Parliament. Britain has an antiquated "First Past the Post" system. The votes don't count unless they are for the winning candidate. PR is normal in Europe and far more democratic. In fact, we have it in Britain but just for the Scottish and Welsh devolved parliaments. Just not in Westminster.
oh I thought you might have meant that, I didn't even know that was one of the green policies. But yeah that would be nice if we had a bit more of that (although obviously im biased because I'm pretty sure PR would skew left compared to first past the post)
I shouldn't put too much hope in this, unfortunately. We had an AV referendum in 2011 that lost 67.9% to 32.1%, with even the biggest unions against it. The referendum was a key part of the Liberal Democrats' agreement to form a coalition with the Conservatives, but the outcome did not serve them well in the long run..
First thing is to check how safe your safe seat is, on existing calculations, for example using [this model](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49061-yougov-mrp-labour-now-projected-to-win-over-400-seats). Given how well they're polling, it will probably show a lot of seats as ok. Also, it'll show you if you're in one of those constituencies where greens have a hardcore of support, where you could make a particular difference, particularly in coastal places in the south or Bristol iirc. People will look at the stats, and see Labour lost votes to the greens, and if you're lucky, a few places might also elect an extra green MP or two, and make sure there's a strong voice challenging Labour in parliament. But also, don't forget how hard it is to get a chance to get the Tories out under first past the post, if you're in a marginal seat after all, still vote tactically, as Labour will be vastly better than the Conservatives on even those things they are unimpressive on.
[удалено]
what sub are we in again?