Labour says it will insulate 2m houses in first year to cut bills

36 comments
  1. They should be insulating houses to save on energy use to help our homeworld. The bills should be cut through nationalising the energy companies and all energy production.

  2. Completely and for free? Grant supported? Loans? How. I want to know *how.* Only doing it completely and for free is worth voting for, because everything else is effectively a means test.

  3. In before the Conservatives ask where the money’s coming from despite this costing a fraction of what they’ve spaffed on tax breaks for people who have too much money as it is.

  4. >Labour says it will insulate 2m houses in first year to cut bills

    I’m actually confused with this. Wasn’t there a program around 5 years ago for this that was being actioned?

  5. This is exactly part of the reason Labour won’t win in a general election or remain in power for as long as conservative governments have. For the average working family this policy will not benefit them in any way and the vast majority of voters choose to vote for parties and policies that directly benefit them not for parties and policies that may benefit them sometime in the future. The Conservative party are very good, albeit through deceit and empty promises, at hammering home how their policies will benefit YOU directly.

    Instead of choosing a select segment of the population that will benefit from this policy why not aim to reduce energy bills for everybody through taxation on energy companies. IMO energy cannot be part of a free market economy because it is a necessity in life therefore energy companies will of course use this knowledge to profiteer as much as possible.

    Combining instant benefits to the vast majority of the population with long term efficiency targets and also greener energy solutions would massively improve their electability.

  6. I could do with government incentives, currently living in a solid brick house, it gets quite cold in the winter.. sad times

  7. I could do with government incentives, currently living in a solid brick house, it gets quite cold in the winter.. sad times

  8. Where I live the walls cannot be filled with insulation and the outside already has an insufficient layer of insulation. They’d have to use those insulated plaster boards on the inside of each home. As I live in a block of flats, they’d probably class doing that as a fire hazard and not bother. Leaving my home and my neighbours with next to no insulation.

  9. It’s a good policy, but people are very resistant to having their homes insulated. There are already all sorts of schemes and grants and programs for this going unused…

  10. Didn’t they try this a few years back and very few took them up on the offer because they thought it was a scam?

  11. Remember when we were discussing Insulate Britain and their tactics?

    A lot of people argued very passionately that they would never achieve anything, that they’re turning the public against them, that protest is counterproductive if you inconvenience the public in any way…

    I’m not saying there’s a *direct* causal relationship here, but nor am I saying that Insulate Britain’s protests are completely irrelevant to Labour’s decision here.

  12. Good stuff – watch the Tories steal this policy in the next budget, bringing it forward by a year and reducing bills for 2m households as well as usage of fossil fuels.

    Then watch the dunces on this sub and others churn out the same old tired rubbish about how Labour is spineless and dies fuck all .

  13. May backfire, when I think of a drive to insulate houses I instantly think of those idiots who were glueing themselves to the roads. Maybe this is an act of appeasement by a, mostly, irrelevant party?

  14. It was Labour that introduced the green energy levy in the first place to pay for home insulation grants amongst other things, 23 pence on every pound of your electricity bill. Very progressive, a tax that falls the hardest on the poorest.

  15. It’s not a bad sign of intent, but it’s undeliverable. There just aren’t enough skilled tradesman to do that many. To get the companies investing in skills and labour they need more time. The government would be better placed to say there will be a scheme that will run and be funded for a minimum of 5 years but with ambitions to extend it. That’s the sort of time frame you need to build the capacity to deliver it.

  16. It has to get into power to do that, I used to be a party member, I won’t be voting for them, and it’s clear they don’t want socialists in the party and view them as anti-Semites.

    Maybe they can rely on the Tory voter switching?

  17. It will make little difference plus when do the political movers and shakers actually stick to their pledges?

Leave a Reply