Where do you think Rishi Sunak stands on the Net Zero pledge?
Would you think someone who chooses to take private jets and helicopters cares much about green policies?
What if they let you use your U-LEZ non-compliant car? That’s what readers are discussing in today’s MetroTalk.
One reader has written in to say he thinks the headlines on ‘excessive’ energy company profits is blown out of proportion and there are others that deserve more scrutiny.
And speaking of scrutiny… Do you know what damage your cat is doing to the environment?
What do you think?
It is disappointing to see ‘fury’ headlines every time an energy company is reported as making ‘excessive’ profits (Metro, Fri).
British Gas, one of the major retail energy suppliers with more than 6 million customers, reported profits of just shy of £1billion for six months (against just under £100million for the same period last year).
We need to get things in perspective. The latest figures are a one-off exceptional result. The underlying annual profits are about £300million per annum, hardly profiteering for a company with net assets of £2billion (and so a return of about 15 per cent.
Compare that with our large housebuilders, which are regularly reporting returns on capital of 30 per cent and yet nobody bats an eyelid (except when some executives at Persimmon won the lottery with their pay deals a few years ago).
We consumers are still paying very dearly for all the cowboy suppliers who set up energy supply businesses at the behest of Ed Davey and promptly went bust in quick time, leaving large debts to be picked up… by us. Tony Press, Bristol
Let us know what you think...
Start a text with VIEWS followed by your comment, name and where you live to 65700. Standard network charge applies. Or email mail@ukmetro.co.uk Helpline for Views, Rush-Hour Crush and Good Deed Feed: 020 3615 0600.
Remember, you are more likely to be published if you provide your name and location with your
Full T&Cs here. Metro.co.uk is a member of the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Comments may be edited for reasons of legality, clarity or space.
If Rishi Sunak was serious about ‘energy security’, he would scrap the perverse planning red tape blocking onshore wind – the cheapest source of energy and the quickest to build.
If he was serious about the way families live he would support low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) and not order a review into them (Metro, Mon). Most people don’t want their neighbourhoods turned into rat runs.
It seems that if he is on anyone’s ‘side’, it is that of the fossil-fuel companies. Paul Atkin, London
I had some respect for prime minister Rishi Sunak as a moderately competent administrator after the chaos of the Boris Johnson and Liz Truss regimes.
But no longer – after his announcement at the weekend that he’d ‘support’ people to ‘use their cars to do all the things that matter to them’. He’s trying to ride the Uxbridge anti-ULEZ wave – and that could be disastrous for Britain.
What part of global warming does Mr Sunak not understand? Carbon-induced climate change is not some nightmare future scenario: it’s here today and burning out of control in the Mediterranean, the US and China.
The usual suspects – Iain Duncan Smith, Jacob Rees-Mogg – call moves against dangerously polluting cars ‘a heavy-handed ban that leaves [the public] unable to purchase the vehicles they want’.
Just because some selfish, short-sighted people want something, it doesn’t mean they should be allowed to have it.
If we don’t control our car addiction now, the price we and our children will have to pay in a few years’ time will be unimaginable. Duncan Smith, Rees-Mogg and Sunak are rich enough to escape the consequences.
It’s the rest of us who will suffer. Stephen Spark, Balham
London mayor Sadiq Khan and Transport for London have won the High Court case bought by the five Tory councils against ULEZ (metro.co.uk).
The argument is it will help save the lives of 4,000 people and protect children and elderly with lung conditions and asthma from the most polluting cars.
So, by donating just £12.50 per day into the skint coffers of the Transport for London, you can drive your polluting car/van/lorry into London with mayor Khan’s full blessing to carry on killing up to 4,000 people a year.
If mayor Khan was not just after money, all offending cars would be banned.
So, ban these offending vehicles now and prove it’s not just money you’re after. Brian, London
These elderly car drivers priced out of using their cars by the ULEZ expansion, are they the same ones that get free bus passes? Neil Dance, Birmingham
The green policies of the main parties in Britain seem to be that we can’t afford to save the planet. Shows you what wretches they are.
The green movement warned them 50 years ago but they were just dismissed as cranks – something some of the public are still doing, although increasingly less so. Stuart, Denton
We need to make immediate changes to our lifestyles to have any chance of preventing the Earth becoming too hot to support human life.
Banning private cars and all air travel would be a good start but I’m not holding my breath. Glad I won’t be leaving any descendants to be boiled to death. Lizzie, Liverpool
Apologies for my ignorance but could someone explain to me how hot weather causes wildfires?
I lived in Africa for years with drought and heat, and very few wildfires occurred.
Surely it’s humans that cause them with litter such as glass, cigarettes, etc and the shepherd’s burning the dry grass for a more nutritious growth?
Anabela, London
I believe cat owners should pay an annual licence for every cat and that the monies from this be distributed to rewilding charities to correct the damage done by them to birdlife. Eva Maria Kania, via text
MORE : Rishi says using private jets is the ‘most efficient use of my time’
MORE : Rishi confirms hundreds of new oil and gas licenses will be granted in the UK
MORE : Ulez gets green light: Sadiq Khan wins High Court fight over expansion
