There IS a debate to be had. That the heir to the throne, especially from an unelected position of influence, is taking such a partial stance a worry, especially either avoiding debate or trying to demonise those with views he evidently not does not hold but feels empowered to suggest should not be allowed. By all accounts many more informed from both sides were pleasantly surprised that this discussion was held at all, and seem impressed it was conducted by protagonists and chair in a civilised and open-minded way. Though it is a pity how unprofessional on-air non-media types, no matter how clever, can be very hard to, um, er, listen to for a protracted period. I maintain a continued interest and watching brief on the more rarified umbrella debates about climate, but still prefer to operate at a pragmatic and realistic level in areas of reducing waste, increasing efficiencies and, as a new bolt-on, looking at triage-based direction of funds to sensible mitigation and coping contingencies. All the enviro quangos and NGOs and charities in the country flying off with countless ministers to a pleasant resort every year to moan but not agree on very much seems a poor investment vs. say, investing in proper maintenance of waterways under perhaps more pressure from concreting over the countryside with affordable housing or installing defences in one areas developing flood plains, that simply deflect a further burden downstream.
Posted on: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 16:03:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015