Where did it all go wrong?
Messy from the outset, poor implementation of the project resulted in only 28,000 of the 123,000 applications for grants being issued. By the time the scheme was halted, just 6,000 green improvements had been installed in homes across the nation.
A lack of qualified workers made installing green home technologies a slow process.
Already trained builders were reluctant to take time off work to gain accreditation theyโd need to work with green technology. Having to pay from their own pocket for qualifications, without security regarding the longevity of the โgreen homes schemeโ deterred many from making the investment.
Not to mention, most tradesmen are booked for work months in advance and availability of those trained in green tech are not easy to come by.
Creating another barrier was the US company that was outsourced for administering grants. Those approved for grants found it difficult to gain concise advice on planning, while other applicants went completely unanswered.
The termination of the botched scheme not only meant the loss of government finance for those willing to make changes to their housing infrastructure, but also a loss of the hundred thousand green job opportunities that it was predicted to create.
Unfortunately, itโs not the only time government attempts to make UK homes greener have fallen through. In 2015, the goal-similar โgreen deal loan schemeโ was abandoned, too.
Itโs no wonder construction workers are wary of investing their own time and money in gaining green tech knowledge. They have already watched the government repeatedly fail to commit to supporting sustainable projects within the housing industry.
But you know what they say, if you donโt succeed – try, try again.
Time for a fresh approach
A new manifesto called the โpeopleโs dividendโ has been proposed for making the transition to a low-carbon nation. ย This time, the focus is on supporting the public throughout the process.
The 70,000-word proposal is a collective effort from MPs, citizenโs juries, business executives, union leaders and members of the Institute for Public Policy Research.
It prioritises billions of pounds of funding for re-training for those in high-carbon work forces (like construction and oil or gas companies), so that green home improvement grants which follow can actually be successful.
Also included are financial budgets for offering free public transport, creating more green spaces, in addition to supporting towns and cities in creating better cycling paths and pedestrianizing roads.
Getting regional and local authorities involved will increase efficiency, by giving them the agency to shape โgreenโ changes that are realistic and required in each unique community.
Could the optimistic plan work?
What makes this different from previously unsuccessful โgreenโ strategies is that it prioritises financial grants in combination with optimising public well-being by providing training schemes and better infrastructure.
Its authors believe this double-barrelled approach could be the only realistic way to get the British public on board with transitioning to net-zero emissions.
Admittedly, the proposal is lengthy. It is comprised of over 100 recommendations for creating a successful and strong social impact while also meeting carbon cut targets.
However, itโs not unrealistic. It wouldnโt be the first time an idealistic approach to crisis was implemented by a government. The manifesto is being compared to the one which resulted in the creation of the NHS in 1948.
So why shouldnโt this plan go through? The debate on if, when and how we need to cut national emissions has already been answered. Feasible action is now needed.
What is promising is the new proposal has finally mapped a comprehensive strategy, one which uses foresight to anticipate obstacles to reach its end.
For now, it is only a report, not a policy. But seeing as government officials have fumbled their own plans for a greener nation, it might be time to take some advice from outside sources.
Stay tuned, weโll be on the lookout for any updates.
0 comments
