From The Guardian, Chris Huhne on news that the Conservative manifesto promise of a Green Investment Bank may end up being a mere fund:
“Fiscal credibility is key. But we also have to decarbonise the economy. Governments by definition do not have one objective. We are able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Therefore we are able to have low carbon investment and fiscal credibility. That is what we have to combine and that is what we’re going to do.”
I would much rather that our Environment Minister, fresh from another disappointing round of talks in Cancun, would say that decarbonising the economy is key but fiscal credibility is also necessary.
I like that phrase ‘low carbon investment’ and its double meaning though. Is Chris saying that the Government is investing non-specific amounts in low carbon solutions or is he saying that the carbon fighting investment itself is “low� Both could be true and both appear to be applicable. Is Chris Huhne backpedalling because he needs to find an inconvenient loot?
It is the procrastination from really addressing Climate Change and coming up with radical, overdue solutions that concerns and baffles me. Public habits remain the same save for some token recycling when we can be bothered, many windows remain single-glazed and community-based heating solutions remain a distant prospect. I do hope that the trappings of Government office haven’t resulted in the Environment Minister taking his eye off his objectives but when Chris says that it is fiscal credibility that is key rather than the urgent need to act on emissions and then goes on to compare the greatest threat to humanity as ‘chewing gum’, well, I wonder.
A Green Investment Bank is absolutely the correct way to go about funding the huge investment required for environmental and sustainable solutions as it will allow a focussed objective that commercial and corporate institutions do not hold beyond maximising a return for their shareholders.
Money doesn’t grow on trees of course but with electricity charges (and taxable profits) moving sky high again, petrol prices (and taxes) reaching new peaks and popular domestic air travel overripe for a levy, then there is scope for direct taxation being used to fund the solutions that will save us money in the long term, including a Green Investment Bank. This is not to mention that most Green projects represent a good return on private investment anyway.
The message for the supposed ‘Greenest Government Ever’ is – don’t write green cheques that you can’t cash. It remains to be seen whether a Green fund will result in real low carbon investment or just low ‘low carbon investment’. So far it doesn’t look good.
#1 by itsyourself on December 15, 2010 - 4:55 pm
Lack of funding is stifling farmers from getting renewable energy projects built. We need some way to get projects below the £500,000 size limit done. A loan scheme for renewables from £25,000 to half a million would deliver significant benefit to everyone. It is easy to get finance for large schemes but the high street banks are scared to death of small ones. Greenest government ever? Awa and bile yer heid.
#2 by Max on December 15, 2010 - 7:14 pm
No surprises here. In an age of decline no surplus is available for investment.
The recession we are in is in large measure due to high oil prices and the attempts since 2000 to offset the resulting low economic growth with low interest rates and unsustainable, unregulated credit expansion. World oil production is probably past peak . Growing the economy with a credit bubble is finished too. Energy will be getting more expencive and scarce, or the oil-junkie economy will be contracting in response to reduced energy use, in a cyclic fashion. There will never be a surplus to invest in these circumstances. All available resource will be directed to the ever more futile goal of maintaining existing ways of life, including government spending.
Escaping a vicious circle will require hardship now in exchange for less hardship later. Difficult in a democracy.