More hot air

Like most of those who study history, Napoleon III learned from the mistakes of the past how to make new ones.

Pop Quiz hot shots: What had an investment of £1bn, yet in the first eight months has only achieved less than 1% of its stated aim. Go on I bet you can’t.

I’ll give you a clue. It’s a scheme that was developed by the government. Oh, wait, sorry, might ned to be a bit more specific.

Give up? It looks as though the scheme might. It is, of course, the Great British Insulation Scheme, which has failed to rise to its potential, instead sinking in the middle like an over-beaten Victoria Sponge.

Launched with his customary bombast and flim-flammery fanfare by the then Prime Minister Boris Johnson it was an attempt to help lower income households (which these days feels like most of us) reduce their household bills, reduce energy use, and save the planet. Yada, yada, yada. Mostly it gave journalists like me an opportunity to write a series of awful food-related puns (see above, and also here).

Now it appears that the scheme is struggling because it is beset by too much bureaucracy, insufficient contractors willing to  carry out the work, and with overly stringent eligibility criteria.

Of course it’s overly bureaucratic. In exactly the same way that its parent, the ill-fated Green Homes Grant, and its grandaddy, the Green Deal were. It’s not as thought we could have expected anyone setting up the schemes to have actually learned from the errors of previous schemes, is it? Not if, you know, history is anything to go by.

If you are requiring companies that deliver the work to be properly registered so that the government can police the quality of the work – which scrutiny will probably be of questionable quality in itself – then that automatically excludes those companies, competent though they may be, who can’t or won’t jump through the bureaucratic hoops. It would be far easier for anyone wanting to take advantage of the scheme could call their local, trusted builder to do the work, who would then purchase the materials from the local builder’s merchant. The relevant amount of grant/subsidy/bunce, call it what you will, could then be claimed back. I remember doing something very similar way back in the day with thermostatic radiator valves. OK, the initial layout in terms of cost to me was smaller, but the fiver or so back on each one was no less welcome  That, however, is way too simple a solution for today’s civil servants who seem to want to complicate everything they touch. A sort of anti-Midas touch if you like.

Yes, we need to refit our ageing housing stock so that it is better suited for purpose. We need to reduce our energy use, our reliance on fossil fuels, and get to net zero by whenever the date is. However, can we be sure that increasing the insulation of thousands of properties, even if a scheme could be made to work the way it is envisaged, will actually reduce the amount of energy use that is desired? Or will people simply use exactly the same amount of energy to enjoy their warmer homes, that they are walking around in sporting t-shirts and shorts in February?

via GIPHY