Truss decides to drop save energy campaign

Malced said:
Of course they can be more than one thing. It’s not either or. They can pass on a useful public message to wash your hands and stay indoors unless essential yet still have political bias during their election coverage. So you’re logic is flawed imho.
Click to expand...
The political bias during elections is heavily skewed to the right, whether TV or papers.

In the interests of balance, the likes of Farage is given a platform when he has absolutely minimal support at the ballot box.
 
Mr Tangerine Man said:
Agent Truss 👍
Click to expand...

Haha well the help she’s providing is the help she’s providing. There’s no getting away from that. I’m sure many on here are benefiting from the various forms of help. But ssssshhhhh let’s dare not mention that uncomfortable truth.
 
Malced said:
I’ve covered this on various posts and directly replied to BFC about it. Absolutely the way that usage is being regulated is due to price. That’s why we don’t need an advert to tell us to reduce usage. I don’t get why you can’t see that. The consequences of the prices being high are another issue albeit very much related. That’s what you seem to be getting hung up on.

That’s a different issue to whether an ad is useful or not. You then come out with that emotive stuff about people dying of hypothermia. Well that’s why the government has stepped in to help keep
prices down for all, and provide extra help for the most needy.
Click to expand...
You’re big, they’re small, you’re clever, they’re stupid, you’re rich, they’re poor.

I hope for your sake, your dick is as big as your ego 👍
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
You’re big, they’re small, you’re clever, they’re stupid, you’re rich, they’re poor.

I hope for your sake, your dick is as big as your ego 👍
Click to expand...

There is no I and them. You want an ad campaign but you can’t say what for.

You seem obsessed with the rich and feed off divisiveness.
It’s not about rich and poor. As I’ve said, it’s the poor that already know only too well how much their gas and electric are costing. Yet you think they need to be told to turn their boiler down again. Give me a break.

There’s been so much publicity about this. People are already living with the price rises and the hardship. But they need telling about it?

The phrase ‘to choose between heating and eating’ is sadly a common one. But you think we need the Government to remind us to switch the landing lights off when we go to bed? Get a grip.

You want to tell the elderly to be wary of sophisticated heating themed scammers? Pathetic.

You don’t have a clue what you want other than to complain about the fact Liz Truss made a decision.

We can rightly complain about her performance as PM thus far for the adverse impact on the economy. But you want to single out a pointless ad campaign that never got off the ground and turn it into some ideological class war.

I said a while ago we should agree to disagree. Believe me, the more you go on, the more distant our positions become. Especially as you don’t seem to have a clue what you’re arguing for.
 
Wizaard said:
The political bias during elections is heavily skewed to the right, whether TV or papers.

In the interests of balance, the likes of Farage is given a platform when he has absolutely minimal support at the ballot box.
Click to expand...

I agree there’s bias to the left and the right. I don’t know how that’s skewed one way or another but I suspect the right will claim bias against them and the left will do the same.

I take your point about Farage. When you say minimal support at the ballot box, that’s at the end of a campaign. The system affords politicians publicity so they can do better at the ballot box if they successfully sell their message. So they live or die by their own sword.

Ballot box doesn’t equate to election seats under our system. Farage has historically had a sizeable percent of the vote but not many seats. So when you consider it from that perspective he probably does earn/merit the publicity.

I’m no Farage fan but we should ensure we don’t exclude fringe parties just because we expect they won’t be successful at the election.
 
Malced said:
There is no I and them. You want an ad campaign but you can’t say what for.

You seem obsessed with the rich and feed off divisiveness.
It’s not about rich and poor. As I’ve said, it’s the poor that already know only too well how much their gas and electric are costing. Yet you think they need to be told to turn their boiler down again. Give me a break.

There’s been so much publicity about this. People are already living with the price rises and the hardship. But they need telling about it?

The phrase ‘to choose between heating and eating’ is sadly a common one. But you think we need the Government to remind us to switch the landing lights off when we go to bed? Get a grip.

You want to tell the elderly to be wary of sophisticated heating themed scammers? Pathetic.

You don’t have a clue what you want other than to complain about the fact Liz Truss made a decision.

We can rightly complain about her performance as PM thus far for the adverse impact on the economy. But you want to single out a pointless ad campaign that never got off the ground and turn it into some ideological class war.

I said a while ago we should agree to disagree. Believe me, the more you go on, the more distant our positions become. Especially as you don’t seem to have a clue what you’re arguing for.
Click to expand...
I’m saying people don’t really understand the issues and what action is required. You don’t understand them for a start off and your supposedly one of the better informed folk đŸ«€
 
Malced said:
Price is a terrible driver but it is what it is. Sorry but the price is higher so that inevitably leads to behavioural change. That's fact terrible or not.
My view is that people are more than informed already.
Click to expand...
Scrapping the support means price is an even bigger driver.

How Truss has the gall to stay on defies belief. Nothing she stood for remains.
 
Malced said:
I agree there’s bias to the left and the right. I don’t know how that’s skewed one way or another but I suspect the right will claim bias against them and the left will do the same.

I take your point about Farage. When you say minimal support at the ballot box, that’s at the end of a campaign. The system affords politicians publicity so they can do better at the ballot box if they successfully sell their message. So they live or die by their own sword.

Ballot box doesn’t equate to election seats under our system. Farage has historically had a sizeable percent of the vote but not many seats. So when you consider it from that perspective he probably does earn/merit the publicity.

I’m no Farage fan but we should ensure we don’t exclude fringe parties just because we expect they won’t be successful at the election.
Click to expand...
Sizeable? Has he ever kept a deposit?
 
Wizaard said:
Scrapping the support means price is an even bigger driver.

How Truss has the gall to stay on defies belief. Nothing she stood for remains.
Click to expand...

The support hasn’t been scrapped by any definition of the word. Rather the support will remain fully in place for this winter and will then be reviewed.

Giving it for two years gave confidence and stability, but the counter argument was that we were committing to eye wateringly expensive support for year 2 when we don’t yet know what energy wholesale prices will be at that time.

But like I say, the support hasn’t been scrapped.
 
Malced said:
The support hasn’t been scrapped by any definition of the word. Rather the support will remain fully in place for this winter and will then be reviewed.

Giving it for two years gave confidence and stability, but the counter argument was that we were committing to eye wateringly expensive support for year 2 when we don’t yet know what energy wholesale prices will be at that time.

But like I say, the support hasn’t been scrapped.
Click to expand...
Fair comment. 75% scaling back would be fairer.
 
Ok
Wizaard said:
Sizeable? Has he ever kept a deposit?
Click to expand...

I’m not here to answer simple questions that can be answered by a quick Google search. But I’ll humour you.

Sizeable is a word open to subjectivity. But it’s a word I think is appropriate. His party and his percentage support is significant and has influenced elections and election results. There’s no getting away from that no matter whether you like the guy or not.

The deposit is lost if you get less than 5% of the valid votes. He has always achieved much more than that when he has stood for election. On his last general election he was 2nd in the seat with over 30% of votes. That’s sizeable.
 
Malced said:
Ok

I’m not here to answer simple questions that can be answered by a quick Google search. But I’ll humour you.

Sizeable is a word open to subjectivity. But it’s a word I think is appropriate. His party and his percentage support is significant and has influenced elections and election results. There’s no getting away from that no matter whether you like the guy or not.

The deposit is lost if you get less than 5% of the valid votes. He has always achieved much more than that when he has stood for election. On his last general election he was 2nd in the seat with over 30% of votes. That’s sizeable.
Click to expand...
Just checked. UKIP had 12% of the vote in 2017, their highwater mark.
 
The knock on impact of removing this support will be huge
They talk about average bills being ÂŁ2500 and maybe going up to ÂŁ5000 but that will be a lot more for larger households - mine's far higher and that's with no one in during the day
If a majority of middle income households disposable income is redirected to cover these huge hikes in energy costs then spending on everything from ' luxuries ' such as to visits the pub / restaurants / cinema to ' essentials ' like clothing and food are going to be adversely impacted
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
The knock on impact of removing this support will be huge
They talk about average bills being ÂŁ2500 and maybe going up to ÂŁ5000 but that will be a lot more for larger households - mine's far higher and that's with no one in during the day
If a majority of middle income households disposable income is redirected to cover these huge hikes in energy costs then spending on everything from ' luxuries ' such as to visits the pub / restaurants / cinema to ' essentials ' like clothing and food are going to be adversely impacted
Click to expand...

Agree. If we’re in the same predicament next year then the support package will likely be renewed.
All they’ve done is take away the 2 year commitment because it reduced the here and now borrowing requirement and helps create the market confidence they’re seeking. The government have not said there’ll be no further support but rather they will review the needs nearer the time.
 
Malced said:
Agree. If we’re in the same predicament next year then the support package will likely be renewed.
All they’ve done is take away the 2 year commitment because it reduced the here and now borrowing requirement and helps create the market confidence they’re seeking. The government have not said there’ll be no further support but rather they will review the needs nearer the time.
Click to expand...
They have also said it will be targeted which tells me middle income households will take a caning
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
The knock on impact of removing this support will be huge
They talk about average bills being ÂŁ2500 and maybe going up to ÂŁ5000 but that will be a lot more for larger households - mine's far higher and that's with no one in during the day
If a majority of middle income households disposable income is redirected to cover these huge hikes in energy costs then spending on everything from ' luxuries ' such as to visits the pub / restaurants / cinema to ' essentials ' like clothing and food are going to be adversely impacted
Click to expand...
The clown apparently in charge was happy to give tax breaks to the super wealthy in order to boost the economy, common sense tells you that wouldn't happen, but if you hammer people with household incomes between 50000 to 150000 then you just see what happens to the economy.
If disposable income is put into the hands of the energy companies nearly every other part of the economy will take a massive hit!!
 
Talk of triple lock being ditched now for pensioners, that’s not going to be popular with many who don’t have gold plated pensions.
 
J
gjr69 said:
The clown apparently in charge was happy to give tax breaks to the super wealthy in order to boost the economy, common sense tells you that wouldn't happen, but if you hammer people with household incomes between 50000 to 150000 then you just see what happens to the economy.
If disposable income is put into the hands of the energy companies nearly every other part of the economy will take a massive hit!!
Click to expand...

Surely to God the Government must at least try to limit some more of the damage with another windfall tax?
 
Malced said:
Agree. If we’re in the same predicament next year then the support package will likely be renewed.
All they’ve done is take away the 2 year commitment because it reduced the here and now borrowing requirement and helps create the market confidence they’re seeking. The government have not said there’ll be no further support but rather they will review the needs nearer the time.
Click to expand...
The new Chancellor is talking about cutting pensions. More support is unlikely after April if they're annoying their key demographic.
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
They have also said it will be targeted which tells me middle income households will take a caning
Click to expand...
They said it will be the vulnerable and low earners. This means benefit recipients and probably those around the minimum wage.
The rest of us, no matter how little over the minimum wage will get no support and will carry the costs for it all, as ever.
 
glasshalffull said:
J


Surely to God the Government must at least try to limit some more of the damage with another windfall tax?
Click to expand...

On what exactly?

Profits from oil and gas extracted overseas? That's a good way to say goodbye to those companies forever, maybe not the greatest move in the longer term.
 
Last edited:
Tangerinemoss said:
The Chairman of Shell disagrees with you.
Click to expand...

The Chairman of Shell disagrees with himself: https://energywatch.com/EnergyNews/Oil___Gas/article14244627.ece

The UK government introduced what is referred to as a windfall tax on the oil industry as a result of the current high price levels of oil and gas.

But according to supermajor Shell, the policy will impede new investments, even in green energy, reports The Times.

The media refers to a statement made by Shell CEO Ben van Beurden at a conference in Oxford. He reportedly argues that the UK will be seen as an ”unpredictable” place to invest.

”Would we now invest less in oil and gas [in the UK, -ed.] because it’s higher tax? I think that’s probably inevitable for the whole industry,” van Beurden remarked, according to the newspaper
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Two weeks ago the triple lock on pensions was sacrosanct. Today, Jeremy Hunt says not. Who's the PM?
Click to expand...
The Triple Lock has been confirmed as the latest U-Turn. Apparently Truss and Hunt agreed that that needed to go

She is a total imbecile, and Hunt really is a hunt! They have just isolated the pensioners of this country and they have gone from one extreme to the other. They are a laughing stock. I am not sure what is best. A General Election? Probably, I can't see any other solution. Of course they won't do it as they would get slaughtered but I have never known such a shambolic Government as this one now, they are embarrassing. In fact, since Camamoron decided we needed a Brexit vote they have stumbled from one disaster into another. And the thing is they have done so much damage that it is hard to see how any party can fix it.
 
Last edited:
hertfordseasider said:
The Triple Lock has been confirmed as the latest U-Turn. Apparently Truss and Hunt agreed that that needed to go

She is a total imbecile, and Hunt really is a hunt! They have just isolated the pensioners of this country and they have gone from one extreme to the other. They are a laughing stock. I am not sure what is best. A General Election? Probably, I can't see any other solution. Of course they won't do it as they would get slaughtered but I have never known such a shambolic Government as this one now, they are embarrassing. In fact, since Camamoron decided we needed a Brexit vote they have stumbled from one disaster into another. And the thing is they have done so much damage that it is hard to see how any party can fix it.
Click to expand...
And just when Labour was needed Corbyn took the party off on a philosophical sabbatical. Stupid imbecile. I'm more certain now than ever, that Labour needs to reoccupy the centre-left ground and build a country for the many, not the few.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top