Banned wagon
A weekly survey of the things our rulers want to prohibit
TRYING to persuade the public to use less fuel by taxing it ever more heavily has not proved popular in recent years. But never mind, policymakers have dreamed up an alternative strategy for bullying us into fulfilling their treaty obligations on carbon emissions: to force us all to fit double-glazing, draught-excluders and generally seal our homes against the elements. Since January this year all builders have been obliged to calculate an 'energy rating' on the houses they build and tell buyers how much they think it will cost per year to heat each building.
The Liberal Democrats have gone one step further, promising in their manifesto 'mandatory standards' of insulation for all homes — in other words, compulsory double-glazing.
While conserving energy and reducing pollution are noble aims, there is one obvious objection: there is only a tenuous link between the amount of energy consumed by a home and the insulation standard of that home. Some people live in draughty homes and burn little energy because they like being cold; others live in hermetically sealed houses and still manage to drink fuel because they feel they can function only at subtropical temperatures.
But there is a more fundamental issue of freedom at stake: why should the state dictate how we live in our own homes? If you like to hear the wind rattling your window frames, who are Liberal Democrats to tell you that it is not allowed? Asthmatics would have reason to feel particularly aggrieved: there is some evidence that living in an overinsulated home can worsen the condition.
One wonders where it is all leading. Once the state assumes the power to force us to fit double-glazing, it may not be long before it takes that next, logical step and bans us from opening our windows in cold weather.
'I understand that on 20 January last the accused did commit the grievous offence of wasting energy by opening his living-room windows for a full five minutes. .
Ross Clark
Previous page
