Truss decides to drop save energy campaign

Lost Seasider said:
Erm, the news has been nothing but "energy crisis" for the last few months, if people haven't already worked out that maybe it'd be a good idea to save energy where they can then what good is an advertising campaign going to do now?
Click to expand...
Thats a point of view, i accept. So why has J Rees Mogg spent some time working out a campaign, for it to be stopped ? Seems to be more she has a bee in her bonnet about the nanny state , which helps define her policies. Im sure a lot of people would benefit from some direction and advice Plus I think other european countries have been encouraging economies on energy whether for companies or individuals . Better that than power cuts in the winter.
 
Always tangerine said:
Thats a point of view, i accept. So why has J Rees Mogg spent some time working out a campaign, for it to be stopped ? Seems to be more she has a bee in her bonnet about the nanny state , which helps define her policies. Im sure a lot of people would benefit from some direction and advice Plus I think other european countries have been encouraging economies on energy whether for companies or individuals . Better that than power cuts in the winter.
Click to expand...

Alternatively, she just thinks it'll make her government look stupid, and doesn't want journalists camped outside ministers houses counting how many lights are switched on.
 
So what a campaign would have been a waste of public money to tell people to use their common sense. More of a Sunak fan than Truss but having a good laugh at Krankie the Tartan Fuhrer upset because she hasn't had a phone call from Liz yet.😂😜😀
 
Trammo said:
So what a campaign would have been a waste of public money to tell people to use their common sense. More of a Sunak fan than Truss but having a good laugh at Krankie the Tartan Fuhrer upset because she hasn't had a phone call from Liz yet.😂😜😀
Click to expand...
At least the wee Cranky has won several elections on a manifesto, something Truss will never do.

How about Truss starts behaving like a Prime Minister instead of a ideologue?
 
Trammo said:
So what a campaign would have been a waste of public money to tell people to use their common sense. More of a Sunak fan than Truss but having a good laugh at Krankie the Tartan Fuhrer upset because she hasn't had a phone call from Liz yet.😂😜😀
Click to expand...
I don’t think much of Liz Truss either... however she described NS as an attention seeker... seems Nicolas little outburst has proven LT right... now that’s a first😁
 
Always tangerine said:
Apparently govt had been preparing a campaign for months but Truss decided it was too " Nanny state" Of course it might save energy and reduce bills. Shame shes running our country.


https://twitter.com/x/status/1578135758040403971
Click to expand...

Would have been a complete waste of time and money. Almost everyone I know is all too aware of the need to save on their bills. They also know the basics on how to save energy.

If you want or need the government to tell you these things then I’m glad you’re not running the country. 😉
 
Malced said:
Would have been a complete waste of time and money. Almost everyone I know is all too aware of the need to save on their bills. They also know the basics on how to save energy.

If you want or need the government to tell you these things then I’m glad you’re not running the country. 😉
Click to expand...
Thats your friends and family sorted out then . You seem to see things in black and white only .
Plus assumptions about what I want. Fortunately neither you or me are running the country .
No need to make it personal.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
So will this potentially affect the illuminations? It would seem a bit silly to keep all those lights shining when
the country is going through an energy crisis.
Click to expand...

Anything that uses electric is potentially affected. There’s a cost of living crisis caused primarily by the price of energy.
But there’s not currently an energy supply crisis. We’ve plenty of supply for now. Yea there’s contingency planning and it’s right to be prepared and have strategies to implement. But it would be a complete overreaction to start shutting down non-essential things that consume electric. There’s absolutely no need.

The Leisure, Tourism and Hospitality sectors are a very significant part of our economy. Yet they’re all non-essential.

So pray tell, why single out Blackpool lights? Yet we’ll allow BFC’s floodlights? Electric is used aplenty across these sectors. There’s so many examples. We can’t selectively decide to shut one or two things down on an ad hoc basis. It wouldn’t make a difference if Blackpool shut our lights down yet the rest of the country had no restrictions. That’s why we need to do things consistently, based on need, based on evidence.

Blackpool pleasure beach must use a lot of energy too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Always tangerine said:
Thats your friends and family sorted out then . You seem to see things in black and white only .
Plus assumptions about what I want. Fortunately neither you or me are running the country .
No need to make it personal.
Click to expand...

Nothing personal apart from it being your message I’m replying to.

Turn your gas boiler down by one degree. Only boil the amount of water you need for your brew.
Unplug items left on standby. There you go. Now you’re sorted too. You can be part of my friends and family.
 
Lala said:
Well as none of us can supposedly afford any form of energy this Winter won’t we cut back by default anyways ?
Click to expand...
The problem is those who need electricity for their health or survival, but cannot afford it. I read a heartbreaking article about parents who were going to have to put their daughter into permanent care, because they could not afford the electric for her equipment at home.

We also know everything we need to do, tbs apart from knocking down the heating another degree, we do it all anyway. Many, however, don't know what to do. Helping them will not only protect the national supply but will save them money.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
The problem is those who need electricity for their health or survival, but cannot afford it. I read a heartbreaking article about parents who were going to have to put their daughter into permanent care, because they could not afford the electric for her equipment at home.

We also know everything we need to do, tbs apart from knocking down the heating another degree, we do it all anyway. Many, however, don't know what to do. Helping them will not only protect the national supply but will save them money.
Click to expand...
If someone can’t afford the energy costs for their child’s medical needs then it is cheaper for the government to support them financially than put their child I care.

A child in permanent care costs the government a fortune, so yes, you would like to think that would be resolved sensibly.

The rest of us will have to cut back, and if we don’t have the money that’s what we will have no choice but to do.

The supply demands alone may govern that this Winter if the blackouts come to fruition.

The cancelled campaign was more about supply than cost, which is a separate issue in this instance I think.
 
Lala said:
If someone can’t afford the energy costs for their child’s medical needs then it is cheaper for the government to support them financially than put their child I care.

A child in permanent care costs the government a fortune, so yes, you would like to think that would be resolved sensibly.

The rest of us will have to cut back, and if we don’t have the money that’s what we will have no choice but to do.

The supply demands alone may govern that this Winter if the blackouts come to fruition.

The cancelled campaign was more about supply than cost, which is a separate issue in this instance I think.
Click to expand...
I think the point is that supply may come under pressure (at peak times) regardless and there are some very simple measures that people can take to help the country manage that situation.

A straightforward and really simple ‘take it or leave it’ information campaign could make a big impact👍
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
I think the point is that supply may come under pressure (at peak times) regardless and there are some very simple measures that people can take to help the country manage that situation.

A straightforward and really simple ‘take it or leave it’ information campaign could make a big impact👍
Click to expand...
I guess I’m just thinking that use less gas and electric is a message most of us have already received one way or another.
 
Lala said:
I guess I’m just thinking that use less gas and electric is a message most of us have already received one way or another.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it’s more about when you use the electricity you do use and understanding the ‘big’ electricity consumers. (Not everyone understands)

So for example switching off TV’s from standby etc.. is all fine and dandy, but it make next to no impact…

By contrast not using your kettle between 4pm and 6pm can have a massive impact, because that’s the time when the system is under most pressure.

Using your washing machine in the evening / during the night is another example.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Yes, but it’s more about when you use the electricity you do use and understanding the ‘big’ electricity consumers. (Not everyone understands)

So for example switching off TV’s from standby etc.. is all fine and dandy, but it make next to no impact…

By contrast not using your kettle between 4pm and 6pm can have a massive impact, because that’s the time when the system is under most pressure.

Using your washing machine in the evening / during the night is another example.
Click to expand...
I get that.

But the target audience who won’t get this, are aso being labelled here as those who won’t be able to afford it anyway.

That’s the general media and public perception, not necessarily mine.

So is spending billions on a very simple message that won’t affect the target audience that much anyway really a good way to spend public funds ? When these funds are already being paid out in billions to help people just to get by, never mind boil a kettle unnecessarily, a good way to spend more billions ?
 
Lala said:
I get that.

But the target audience who won’t get this, are aso being labelled here as those who won’t be able to afford it anyway.

That’s the general media and public perception, not necessarily mine.

So is spending billions on a very simple message that won’t affect the target audience that much anyway really a good way to spend public funds ? When these funds are already being paid out in billions to help people just to get by, never mind boil a kettle unnecessarily, a good way to spend more billions ?
Click to expand...
As I say maybe people are missing the point here. It isn’t about ‘Saving Money’, it’s about reducing system demand at key times of the day.

The ‘target audience’ is everyone 👍
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
As I say maybe people are missing the point here. It isn’t about ‘Saving Money’, it’s about reducing system demand at key times of the day.

The ‘target audience’ is everyone 👍
Click to expand...
I do get that, and so do most of the audience I think.
 
The best way to regulate use is not some simpletonian radio ad. It’s by price. We’re all price sensitive. The price increases have done more to change our energy habits than any banal cheesy government strapline could ever do.

Anyone who hasn’t already got the message must be simple. No amount of ‘simple’ messaging is gonna make any difference. Why should we run a national campaign just because some dullards out there. We can’t keep catering to the lowest IQ. It’s insulting and a waste of airspace and government funds.

There’s multiple 24hr rolling news channel coverage on this topic. We don’t need to supplement it for those who have been held in captivity in a gimp outfit in some basement for the last 18 months and have somehow escaped in the middle of an energy price crisis unbeknownst to them.

Winter is gonna be depressing enough without listening to that smug gravelly voiced radio guy spewing out boring tedious advice such as Hands Face Space.

What would it have been for this energy crisis?
Probably ‘Turn Down, Turn Off, Keep it Off’.
Oh Fuck off!!!

They’d be better going with my innovative campaign to speed-hoover in the dark. And I wouldn’t have wanted quite as much as £15m.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
So will this potentially affect the illuminations? It would seem a bit silly to keep all those lights shining when
the country is going through an energy crisis.
Click to expand...
Silly?

The illuminations are a massive source of revenue for the Town and contribute positively to the economy. Why on earth would you switch them off?

The whole point here is to maintain enough flexibility in the system to ensure we don’t need to impact our economy.
 
Walthamstow_Seasider said:
The government probably need an information campaign to correct Truss's misleading claims that households won't be paying energy bills of more than £2500 which is just BS.
Click to expand...

The price cap is on a unit. Based on what households use, the average household will only pay around £2.5k.

If it was a price cap it would mean we could all use as much as we want and not pay over that amount.

Many large households already paid that much or more prior to the energy crisis. I don’t think they’d be expecting pay less than pre-crisis prices.

We’d have been paying an average of £6k per household without her intervention. I presume therefore you’re happy she intervened.

As are many business owners cos they’ll be able to stay afloat over the winter as a result of her direct intervention.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Erm, the news has been nothing but "energy crisis" for the last few months, if people haven't already worked out that maybe it'd be a good idea to save energy where they can then what good is an advertising campaign going to do now?
Click to expand...
To help people who aren't in control of every media brief going around. Instead, why don't you ask, what harm can it do? You really are a characature on legs.
 
Malced said:
That’s not the message from government. The price cap is on a unit. Based on what households use, the average household will only pay around £2.5k.

No one should think it’s a price cap of £2.5k. If it was a price cap it would mean we could all use as much as we want and not pay over that amount.

Many large households already paid that much or more prior to the energy crisis. I don’t think they’d be expecting pay less than pre-crisis prices.

We’d have been paying an average of £6k per household without her intervention. I presume therefore you’re happy she intervened.

As are many business owners cos they’ll be able to stay afloat over the winter as a result of her direct intervention.
Click to expand...
It was the message from Truss that she claimed on her car crash tour of local radio last week.
 
The government and taxpayers stand to benefit from any additional cuts in energy use because of the energy support scheme.
I’m pretty sure the campaign would have paid for itself many times over.
 
What with the high energy prices this is surely the most fleeced we’ve ever been!
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Silly?

The illuminations are a massive source of revenue for the Town and contribute positively to the economy. Why on earth would you switch them off?

The whole point here is to maintain enough flexibility in the system to ensure we don’t need to impact our economy.
Click to expand...
Yes silly
 
Malced said:
The best way to regulate use is not some simpletonian radio ad. It’s by price. We’re all price sensitive. The price increases have done more to change our energy habits than any banal cheesy government strapline could ever do.
Click to expand...

In fact, if anything the bigger mistake is to cap the price, it would have been better to let the cap reflect the market price, and make direct contributions to the domestic users' bills instead, that way the incentive to reduce energy consumption remains, and those that can cut back would be better off.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Silly?

The illuminations are a massive source of revenue for the Town and contribute positively to the economy. Why on earth would you switch them off?

The whole point here is to maintain enough flexibility in the system to ensure we don’t need to impact our economy.
Click to expand...
I can see both sides.

Either we are potentially in a drastic situation regarding energy, or we are not.

If we are then the illuminations are a luxury if people can’t boil a kettle for 3 or 4 predicted hours of a day.

Here comes the growth argument again.

Do we shoulder those consequences in the name of economic growth ? Or can we boil a kettle for our cuppa soup which is all we will be able to afford to live off anyway with the cost of living crisis issue/hype ?

It‘s no wonder with so many conflicting predicted catastrophes that none of us know what stance to support.

The message that most of us have surely gleaned is spend wisely, live by your means and use less energy.

That conflicts with spending money on financing the illuminations and wasting energy unnecessary yet supporting economic national growth ?
 
It is estimated that the cost of the latest government support to cap energy prices is £89bn. If this public information campaign cut energy usage by only 0.1 % then the saving to the taxpayer in reduced support would be around £89m.
 
Lala said:
I can see both sides.

Either we are potentially in a drastic situation regarding energy, or we are not.

If we are then the illuminations are a luxury if people can’t boil a kettle for 3 or 4 predicted hours of a day.

Here comes the growth argument again.

Do we shoulder those consequences in the name of economic growth ? Or can we boil a kettle for our cuppa soup which is all we will be able to afford to live off anyway with the cost of living crisis issue/hype ?

It‘s no wonder with so many conflicting predicted catastrophes that none of us know what stance to support.

The message that most of us have surely gleaned is spend wisely, live by your means and use less energy.

That conflicts with spending money on financing the illuminations and wasting energy unnecessary yet supporting economic national growth ?
Click to expand...

We’re nowhere near to a situation where we have to start shutting down things. It’s very unlikely it will happen at all this winter. There’s no harm being prepared to manage electricity better if push were to come to shove. Lots is happening behind the scenes with businesses to ensure they have plans in place to lower demand at peak times.

Anyways, if it were to mean you had to wean off your coffee addiction, then maybe it’s a price worth paying.
 
Lala said:
I can see both sides.

Either we are potentially in a drastic situation regarding energy, or we are not.

If we are then the illuminations are a luxury if people can’t boil a kettle for 3 or 4 predicted hours of a day.

Here comes the growth argument again.

Do we shoulder those consequences in the name of economic growth ? Or can we boil a kettle for our cuppa soup which is all we will be able to afford to live off anyway with the cost of living crisis issue/hype ?

It‘s no wonder with so many conflicting predicted catastrophes that none of us know what stance to support.

The message that most of us have surely gleaned is spend wisely, live by your means and use less energy.

That conflicts with spending money on financing the illuminations and wasting energy unnecessary yet supporting economic national growth ?
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier you and others might be missing the point.

It’s highly unlikely that we require some kind of Government diktat that requires people not to boil their kettles (during what is actually a 2 hour period each weekday really).

It’s more about giving people a set of very practical and easy to grasp measures that they can choose to incorporate into their lives this winter.

There’s no need for us to start damaging the economy by shutting businesses down…. Simply having a brew at half past six instead of half past 5 or putting your washer, dishwasher, tumble dryer on before bed or during the daytime even instead of at peak time.

It doesn’t need everyone to do it necessarily, but if people can conveniently make changes and simply be mindful of using high load items during peak hours


I think comparing a minor change like delaying your brew for an hour to switching off a business that generates millions in revenue (when it’s operating at off peak times in any case) is a bit silly….
 
bollieboy said:
It is estimated that the cost of the latest government support to cap energy prices is £89bn. If this public information campaign cut energy usage by only 0.1 % then the saving to the taxpayer in reduced support would be around £89m.
Click to expand...
There’s other financial advantages as well… The tighter the system is at peak times, then the more bullish pressure on the market price… So the more subsidy required from Government.

A well targeted awareness campaign would pay for itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top