And if you don’t behave according to Lib Dem principles.. He will ‘apport’ you to the ‘proper authorities’…

Nice to say Google also has some useful adverts on this topic as well…

The liberal approach should be to allow people to do as they wish, but ensure that a) they make an informed choice when doing so and b) the full costs of their actions are paid for, not just the monetary costs of their product.

In other words, a pigouvian tax on the externalities of the fuel burnt, etc. Which is what I proposed earlier and Joe has linked to. That’s not an illiberal ban, it’s allowing people to make an informed choice. Which is the heart of modern liberalism unless I’ve missed something.

Miaow.

Can you quote me where I supported this ban?

And by all means persuade individuals. I’m sure that there are millions of us in this society who don’t feel lectured at enough.

But please face the fact that businesses have a duty to respond to raw incentives and ignore lecturing.

There are lots of little things I can do in my own life to slightly reduce my carbon footprint. Some of them are easy, save me money or make no real difference to me so I’m happy to do them. Others make my life a little harder or deprive me of a luxury I rather enjoy, so I don’t.

What they all have in common is that they make no measurable impact on global warming, and still wouldn’t even if everyone did the same.

If people choose to do this stuff then great. If, by regulating manufacture, we can get more environmentally-friendly goods without asking consumers to wear a hair-shirt, even better.

But banning things like patio-heaters manages to achieve the worst of all worlds: it annoys people because the EU is banning something they genuinely like and find beneficial; it gets people thinking “I’m doing my bit for the environment by giving up my patio heater, so I don’t need to do more” whilst actually making sod all different to global warming. (Not to mention the effect on manufacturers of patio heaters).

And – though this is irrelevant to the patio heater issue – homeopathy is, in my view, absolute nonsense. It is – fact – water.

The facts.

As an adsence user, it would be against my terms of contract to encourage people to click the links in order to simply make the site money, that would be wrong. But, y’know, if you’re curious about what their message is…

Has Fiona called for the abolition of flights from Newcastle and Durham to Brussels? After all, there is or was a ship across that route that people from the NE could use. If we were a “let’s ban it party” then those flights would seem like things to ban.

Me!

That’s right. It’s just my own suggestion for what might go on the tin of a homeopathic remedy. But of course I’m always open to debate and negotiation. What would your suggested label be? How about:

“Beats cancer every single time.”

I would have to concede that my line now looks a bit leaden by comparison.

When you want to tell a lie and deceive the public, use an unattributable quote.

You should get a job with an advertising agency, Laurence.

Davies knew that the key to getting a strong parliament position (so that it wouldn’t be watered down in subsquent Minesterial negotiation on the final decision) was to get a solid compromise: and the best way to acheive a good compromise is to start by asking for something well abovw what you actually want and which no one is ever going to give you…

Liberal Democrats are always decrying the pisspoor media at large for its myopic hystericism; so why do we allow our rationality to completely disappear over Europe?

That’s for the tories!

I think the point about the relative carbon emission figures for patio heaters is that they will emit four tonnes of CO2 if they are run non-stop all year. This is the only plausible way of getting a figure of four tonnes. Assuming the comparison is to a car being run all year, the comparison is “apples and apples” but neither is realistic.

Yes, good point, and I’d like to see less talk of banning and a lot more labelling. How about this one for Homeopathic products?

“Repeated medical trials have failed to prove the efficacy of this remedy.”

Essentially a polite way of saying, “you’re wasting your money.”

This is because we understand some people can eat in moderation, why can’t the same understanding be passed on to the practice of carbon emissions and energy efficiency?

Or do those that wish to ban patio heaters here believe we should all be forced on to a diet of rye bread and celery?