Archive for Downsizer For an ethical approach to consumption
 


       Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects
cab

Money for insulation?

50% off insulation for all households, apparently:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7609036.stm

How do we get it?
jema

That's just what I was wondering? Had a quick search and came up with no clues Sad
Behemoth

I think the retailers sell 2 for 1 deals and claim based on actual sales.
boisdevie1

The billion quid is spread over ten years so it's no great shakes. And it annoys me greatly that 'the poor' get it for free whilst those who work for a living only get a 50 percent discount.
Jonnyboy

boisdevie1 wrote:
The billion quid is spread over ten years so it's no great shakes. And it annoys me greatly that 'the poor' get it for free whilst those who work for a living only get a 50 percent discount.


why?
Fee

Ahhh, that'll be why Happytechie asked me to phone Scottish Power to sort our cavity wall insulation today!
boisdevie1

Jonnyboy wrote:
boisdevie1 wrote:
The billion quid is spread over ten years so it's no great shakes. And it annoys me greatly that 'the poor' get it for free whilst those who work for a living only get a 50 percent discount.


why?


It annoys me that 'the poor' get everything for free whilst those who work and try hard to make their way in life have to pay for everything. It just seems unfair. And yes, I know that there are poor people who try hard to make a go of things.
As an example, and to broaden out this point a bit, OH has just the one child and so she has to pay for everything whilst others with big families get help with payments for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th child. It just strikes me as being fundamentally unfair.
cab

boisdevie1 wrote:

It annoys me that 'the poor' get everything for free whilst those who work and try hard to make their way in life have to pay for everything. It just seems unfair. And yes, I know that there are poor people who try hard to make a go of things.
As an example, and to broaden out this point a bit, OH has just the one child and so she has to pay for everything whilst others with big families get help with payments for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th child. It just strikes me as being fundamentally unfair.


I'd like to say to out neighbours kids that they should work hard at school, do well, get a job, get a decent place to live, and have a better life... And then I observe that they're in the same kind of house as we're in (which is a nice place to live), they've got food to eat, their folks pay no meaningful rent or maintenance costs for their home, bring home no wages... And I think, why would they be any different? You're right, it can seem frustrating when work does not meaningfully raise someones standard of living, but I for one would not like to live in a nation that throws the poor to the wolves.
lettucewoman

[quote="boisdevie1"][quote="Jonnyboy"]
boisdevie1 wrote:
The billion quid is spread over ten years so it's no great shakes. And it annoys me greatly that 'the poor' get it for free whilst those who work for a living only get a 50 percent discount.


Why do you equate the "poor" only with people who don't have jobs? There are plenty of people who work at badly paid jobs, or who are trying to build their own business, who would be classified as poor. Thse of us who are poor are not all living off the state!
Fee

lettucewoman wrote:
boisdevie1 wrote:
The billion quid is spread over ten years so it's no great shakes. And it annoys me greatly that 'the poor' get it for free whilst those who work for a living only get a 50 percent discount.


Why do you equate the "poor" only with people who don't have jobs? There are plenty of people who work at badly paid jobs, or who are trying to build their own business, who would be classified as poor. Thse of us who are poor are not all living off the state!


Damn right. There are, of course, plenty who are not working and not trying to do anything about it either, but it is annoying when people only think of those people when it comes to things like this.
vegplot

It's free in our area, or it was, I'll have to check.
boisdevie1

cab wrote:
boisdevie1 wrote:

It annoys me that 'the poor' get everything for free whilst those who work and try hard to make their way in life have to pay for everything. It just seems unfair. And yes, I know that there are poor people who try hard to make a go of things.
As an example, and to broaden out this point a bit, OH has just the one child and so she has to pay for everything whilst others with big families get help with payments for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th child. It just strikes me as being fundamentally unfair.


I'd like to say to out neighbours kids that they should work hard at school, do well, get a job, get a decent place to live, and have a better life... And then I observe that they're in the same kind of house as we're in (which is a nice place to live), they've got food to eat, their folks pay no meaningful rent or maintenance costs for their home, bring home no wages... And I think, why would they be any different? You're right, it can seem frustrating when work does not meaningfully raise someones standard of living, but I for one would not like to live in a nation that throws the poor to the wolves.


Exactly. If people work hard and are poor then I think they deserve all the help they can get. BUT I don't think it's fair that those who don't make any effort get more help than those who try very hard.
OP

It may not be fair, but it seems to be government policy.
lottie

We miss the winter fuel payment by being 1 day too young this year---we've already insulated the loft and put in double glazing this year---in spite of having no income at all until october, and we don't have cavity walls---so in spite of being 60 and on a low income next year we'll get no benefit from the measures at all this winter----bigger woolies and burning the local fences is Very Happy the answer.
P.S. Not grumbling----I'd like to see help going to couples struggling on a low wage with young kids anyway.
VM

Children living in households where people don't work are disadvantaged in many ways. I don't see why it is unfair for families to get payments for more children, or for poorer families to get more things for free. The point is that it ensures that children in large families or poor families can still have a decent standard of living. Whatever anyone thinks about the choiices made by adults, once a child is born then any decent society should be thinking of that child's own rights to have enough to eat, a roof over their head, decent opportunities in education, decent health care when they need it etc etc.

I do agree, however, that the way the system works doesn't motivate people to work, which would be better for them and better for their children. Not so much that benefits give people too much as that low paid work gives them too little - and also that the system is inflexible and doesn't make it easy for people to move in and out of work.
JB

The cynic in me thinks that this just sounds like repackaging the existing arrangements with a slight extension, i.e. you can already get that discount is you're on a low income, those on higher incomes have probably already got the insulation and the rest of it isn't a major increase. Yes it's 910 million but not 910 million more.
lottie

There is a constant dilemma with targeted or universal benefits though---targeted benefits tend to be expensive and cumbersome to administer and takeup isn't 100%, but with universal benefits people like my parents get the fuel allowance they don't need and they go abroad for 6 months in the winter anyway!
OP

No - we already have a redistributive tax system that deals with this issue. If there genuinely is money available for insulation, it should be available equally to all. Otherwise where do you draw the line - do we have different prices on a loaf of bread - a high price for the well-off, a lower price for the poor, another price for those on benefits?
Behemoth

Of course a cynic would suggest that installing insulation is just a ploy by the govt to reduce benefits or not increase them cos their bill wont be so big and they wont have to increase benefits/the tax burden to keep up with fuel inflation, hang on....
Treacodactyl

It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off.

I support the emphasis on energy conservation rather than just helping people pay for the energy but perhaps there should be other forms of encouraging people to insulate, especially people who can afford to?
lottie

Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off

That'd be me then---wish I'd waited a year---d'ya think Gordy will subsidize solar hot water panels in lieu? Laughing
judith

Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off.


This is what confuses me about the whole business - we had the bits of the house that could be insulated done under one of these schemes 5 years ago.
Treacodactyl

lottie wrote:
Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off

That'd be me then---wish I'd waited a year---d'ya think Gordy will subsidize solar hot water panels in lieu? Laughing


I also wouldn't be surprised if most people could insulate their loft, for example, cheaper without these 'new' offers. As I posted up a few days ago, you can currently get loft insulation half price and I can't see it on a buy-one-get-three-free offer due to Gordies latest offer.

I did get cavity wall insulation done about 8 years ago under one of these schemes so I mustn't grumble, well not too much anyway. Laughing
OP

Let's not forget that it is not just the energy companies that have benefited from the higher energy prices, the government has too. I recall that in May when there was talk of a proposed tax increase of 2p per litre on petrol, it was estimated that in the period April - May this year the government made an extra 500m in tax from petrol. I assume by now it must run into billions. It feels wrong that such large sums of money should be taken almost by accident from motorists and now dressed up as a pseudo windfall tax on energy companies, with apparently little contribution from the government.
Behemoth

IIRC fule duty was held at its existing levels. May be wrong.
JB

Treacodactyl wrote:
lottie wrote:
Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off

That'd be me then---wish I'd waited a year---d'ya think Gordy will subsidize solar hot water panels in lieu? Laughing


I also wouldn't be surprised if most people could insulate their loft, for example, cheaper without these 'new' offers. ...


The problem with most of the offers that have existed so far for loft insulation, and I suspect the new scheme will operate exactly the same way, is that they are half price for insulation and installation. Which means that you pay about twice what you would for the insulation alone and someone else comes in to your house and does a cack job.
cab

Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off.

I support the emphasis on energy conservation rather than just helping people pay for the energy but perhaps there should be other forms of encouraging people to insulate, especially people who can afford to?


I agree with all of that, although I can't immediately think what other forms of encouragement should be employed.
Jonnyboy

Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off.


It's always been that way I'm afraid.
JB

cab wrote:
Treacodactyl wrote:
It also seems a bit unfair that people who've sorted out their insulation aren't going to get anything whereas people who haven't bothered will get help even if they are better off.

I support the emphasis on energy conservation rather than just helping people pay for the energy but perhaps there should be other forms of encouraging people to insulate, especially people who can afford to?


I agree with all of that, although I can't immediately think what other forms of encouragement should be employed.


They could make insulation, double glazing, etc. VAT exempt.
Behemoth

IIRC it's already down to 5%. But every little helps.

I'm of the view that a crash programme of insulation for all would have more impact than the plethora of schemes and projects for changing behaviours, domestic alternative energy production etc. Not sure how the numbers add up though.
lottie

All I know is I've paid for my insulation once and now I'll be paying for other peoples through my fuel bills Sad
JB

Behemoth wrote:
IIRC it's already down to 5%. But every little helps.


Just had a look at some insulation on screwfix and that suggests VAT is still 17.5% for insulation.
Nick

Materials attract 17.5%, installation 5%.


Quote:
Group 2 Installation of energy-saving materials
Associated notice: 708/6 Energy-saving materials
Item No.

1. Supplies of services of installing energy-saving materials in

(a) residential accommodation, or

(b) a building intended for use solely for a relevant charitable purpose.

2. Supplies of energy-saving materials by a person who installs those materials in

(a) residential accommodation, or

(b) a building intended for use solely for a relevant charitable purpose.

Notes:

Meaning of "energy-saving materials"

1 For the purposes of this Group "energy-saving materials" means any of the following -

(a) insulation for walls, floors, ceilings, roofs or lofts or for water tanks, pipes or other plumbing fittings;

(b) draught stripping for windows and doors;

(c) central heating system controls (including thermostatic radiator valves);

(d) hot water system controls;

(e) solar panels;

(f) wind turbines;

(g) water turbines.

Meaning of "residential accommodation"

2 (1) For the purposes of this Group "residential accommodation" means

(a) a building, or part of a building, that consists of a dwelling or a number of dwellings;

(b) a building, or part of a building, used for a relevant residential purpose;

(c) a caravan used as a place of permanent habitation; or

(d) a houseboat.

(2) For the purposes of this Group "use for a relevant residential purpose" has the same meaning as it has for the purposes of Group 1 (see paragraph 7(1) of the Notes to that Group).

(3) In sub-paragraph (1)(d) "houseboat" has the meaning given by paragraph 7(3) of the Notes to Group 1.

Meaning of "use for a relevant charitable purpose"

3 For the purposes of this Group "use for a relevant charitable purpose" means use by a charity in either or both of the following ways, namely -

(a) otherwise than in the course or furtherance of a business;

(b) as a village hall or similarly in providing social or recreational facilities for a local community.
       Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects
Page 1 of 1
Home Home Home Home Home