IntenseDebate - Velopraeceptor

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - If the Government won'... · 0 replies · +1 points

Exactly. We're adding a million people to our population every five years. There's no way sufficient homes and related infrastructure can be built to meet that demand.

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - The Health Foundation:... · 0 replies · +1 points

But almost any action taken to excess can be dangerous. People have died laughing. (Not under this government, obviously).
Gluttony may well be dangerous, and you have every right to be concerned when you see people eating what you think are the wrong sort of foods. But you have no right to confiscate that lobster thermidor, nor has the Government the right to tax it or criminalise it.

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - The Health Foundation:... · 2 replies · +1 points

Alcohol and tobacco are very different from foodstuffs. There are clear risks attached to both, and both have been regulated and licenced for a great many years.
The recent focus by regulators on food is simply mission creep.

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - The Health Foundation:... · 5 replies · +1 points

On the contrary, I think obesity is a serious issue. But it is not the role of government to attempt to solve it. Schools, churches, charities, businesses, clubs and societies, friends and neighbours can all play a part in helping their fellow citizens.

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - The Health Foundation:... · 9 replies · +1 points

What should Government do to tackle obesity?
Nothing.
It is not the job of Government to decide what we eat or how much. Those decisions are for individuals and families.
Clear labelling of foods, quality standards, maybe even some healthy eating guidance, certainly: but that's it.
Government should restrict its attentions to the day job: defence of the realm, sound money, law, order and justice, strong borders, and creating the conditions where free enterprise can flourish. All of which, it is currently making a complete pig's ear!

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - James Frayne: So how s... · 3 replies · +1 points

Population, population, population!
A sustainable future is not possible unless you know how many people will be crammed onto these islands of ours. How many houses we need, how much energy, what sort of transport infrastructure, how much land can be devoted to nature all depend on the number of people. If the population were 50 we could all roar about in Aston Martins with negligible side effects. If there is to be 70, 80, 100 million of us it's a very different picture.
But government doesn't even discuss population. Indeed, it has a failed immigration policy that pumps the population up by about a million every five years. Behave like this and your "green" credibility is zero.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Iain Dale: The next BB... · 0 replies · +1 points

I think Rod Liddle should run the BBC.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - The Politics of And. G... · 0 replies · +1 points

It took me a while to spot it, then it came to me that the Brexit party logo is an arrow pointing right, leading away from a big capital E. Once seen it's difficult to unsee!
An excellent piece of graphic design.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Howard Flight: The dam... · 0 replies · +1 points

Agreed.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Stephen Crabb and Desm... · 0 replies · +1 points

Far more sensible to have a foreign aid programme based on outcomes, not simply on cash spent. Or, sometimes misspent.
I suggest a target to change the lives of one million of the world's poorest people through improved food supply, clean water, education, medicine, etc.
Spend up to £5,000 per person - a truly massive amount in a third world environment - and that's a budget of £5-billion. It would change lives and we could feel proud.
It's also approx £9-billion saved.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with Velopraeceptor

People I'm following

Velopraeceptor