Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#1
Caroline Spelman secretary of state for mouldy food, chic urban dinner parties and climate change said this in March last year in response to those who wanted to build a reservoir in Abingdon, Oxfordshire:
......."there is no immediate need for such a site".
Details here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-12651131
And this is the woman warning of standpipes in the street because of the lack of rainfall due to Man-made climate change.
Shouldn't she resign today?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
she has never been one of the better ministers, very little that she says ever surprises me.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#3
Caroline Spelman Secretary of State also in the first heady days of power rushed out an ill-conceived policy document
to sell our forests th the Timber Industry.Yes she should have resigned then but we can hope she will go in the reshuffle.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#4
Hopefully now some of you can see exactly why I keep banging on about environmental legislation. It affects every, that's every single aspect of our lives.
Take away this awful religious cult belief and instantly life in the UK will improve before our very eyes.
Just in the same way that the lights will go out over the next few years we will certainly face water shortages because of the climate change obsession.
Funny thing about reservoirs and government belief in the myth. In the Australian floods a couple of years ago it caused the deaths of 35 people and 1 billion Australian dollars worth of damage as well as a 30 billion dollar reduction in Australian GDP.
The cause was the fact that a massive dam overfilled with water and flooded the area. The reason why the floodgates were not opened earlier was because of the endless warnings of drought due to climate change so the decision was made to keep the dam closed until it was too late and inevitably the result was a huge deluge.
I'm still waiting from Barry to explain his balanced approach to the government's environmental policy.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#5
More proof of the complete ineptitude:
"I think the likelihood of seeing more desalination plants over the next 10 or 20 years in England is quite high - but you don't want to rely on desalination, it's very expensive, it produces a lot of carbon so that's not good for the environment."
So we, in a developed country, a country hosting the Olympics this year have to put up with a ban on hosepipes and other restrictions and the possibility of the humiliation as the world looks on as people collect water from standpipes with old buckets (or petrol cans even) because Caroline Spelman and her equally inept colleagues worry about our carbon emissions.
This, presumably, is an example of Barry's er, balanced view on the government's climate change and environmental policy.
Still waiting Barry.
#6
Aren't we at risk of using standpipes because our local water organisations are inept at managing their resources?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
let's be brutally honest here philip, the tail wags the dog in this coalition.
the yellows have much more sway than their share of the vote deserves and the new intake of blues trumpeted their concerns for the environment on their election leaflets.
they wouldn't have got in otherwise as green is the colour nowadays.
Guest 656- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,262
#8
Perish the thought we ever see standpipes in the streets of Britian again
#6 very true Bern, very true!
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#9
Bern, it's not as simple as that. You're correct in terms of the water companies not managing water resources properly but combine that with a carbon obsessed government beholden to freakish groups like the world wildlife fund, greenpeace and z-listers such as Prince Charles and this heady brew leads to disaster.
Remember that imposing a hosepipe ban costs nothing. No need for infrastructure, no cost for building reservoirs or desalinisation plants so lots of money saved and, hey, carbon emissions down -hurrah the planet is saved.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#10
Bit confused here by your argument here PhilipP. The 'environment' referred to by the Abingdon campaigners is the scenery and wildlife aspects of the area whereas the government policy that says it should be needed is the one that refers to climate change. It would seem this fanatical desire to prove that the world is constant and unchanging has got the better of you. There is no denying that there is a water shortage and without doubt the water companies are not doing enough to fix their losses or generally actively seek out new supplies. The obvious need for a new reservoir is because there is not enough for the homes etc. already here plus the many thousands more the government wants built. A good move by the water company but a stupid move by a government minister.
Much of Australia has a recent history of drought (climate change or just an unfortunate run of uncharateristic weather?) so the reluctance to open the flood gates had a basis in experience. But then that would not be of much use in attacking climate change or refusing a need for change would it.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
#11
I have to add that denouncing groups such as GreenPeace and WWF as freakish when much that they have achieved has been rooted in science - with a dash of courage thrown in - is a little absurd in itself.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#12
Greenpeace and wwf brave? Lol.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
erm rainbow warrior philip?
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#14
Indeed Howard but does that make them brave?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#15
Foolhardy perhaps. But I admire the pluck of their volunteers.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
#16
I note that Philip chose to ignore the reference to science preferring, in his usual MO, to simply deride. There is a tendency here to just chip away at things that have the potential to do some good without ever really making positive suggestions.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#17
If I understood the question I'd happily give an answer but I don't know where his point lies. It's a rather odd posting.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#18
Some more positive news (or a 'climate change' conspiracy) on reservoirs.
Reservoir projects make progress
Anglian Water is set to build a new £44m reservoir and water treatment works near Newton-on-Trent after getting the go-ahead from West Lindsey District Council. The 230 megalitre scheme, which will use a new pumping station to abstract water from the Trent, should be built by 2014.
Once complete the new treatment works will be able to provide 20 million litres of drinking water per day to the Lincoln area.
Director of water services Paul Valleley said the project was vital because Anglian's region includes some of the driest and lowest lying parts of the country and is also one of the fastest growing areas of the country.
Meanwhile, Severn Trent Water has submitted a planning application to build two new underground reservoirs in Derbyshire to replace the water company's existing Ambergate Reservoir, its largest covered reservoir. It has been in use for over 100 years but has begun to deteriorate.
The new reservoirs are planned be built at, and adjacent to, the existing site near Crich and Fritchley. Work could start at the end of the year and be completed by March 2017. The scheme is regarded as critical to maintain water supplies in the East Midlands.
Read the Anglian Water news release.
Read the Severn Trent Water news release.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
#19
Phiip, if the "he" to whom you refer is me, I am a she. Not that is matters in this debate. But it is just something else you have got wrong because you didn't pay attention.
