- + Tracy Barret voted on the debate Prostitution should be legalised to protect sex workers from HIV/AIDS
- + Arnavnarian voted on a point for the debate Foreign workers should be given the right to vote in local elections where they work.
- + Arnavnarian joined Debatewise
- + Thebabeofbengal edited the debate Are women superior to men?
- + Elena Porjazova voted on a point for the debate The Candidate Countries Should Be Fast-Tracked To EU Membership In 2012
- + Golmindalin joined Debatewise
- + Arnavnarian voted on a point for the debate Foreign workers should be given the right to vote in local elections where they work.
- + Arnavnarian voted on a point for the debate Foreign workers should be given the right to vote in local elections where they work.
- + Plally7 edited the debate Will mankind make it to the next century?
- + Explonential joined Central London Debating Society
- + Ll Blynch edited the debate Are London Underground staff justified in their strike action?
- + Crissieboy joined Debatewise
- + Arnavnarian voted on a point for the debate Foreign workers should be given the right to vote in local elections where they work.
- + Elena Porjazova voted on a point for the debate The Candidate Countries Should Be Fast-Tracked To EU Membership In 2012
PAY MORE TO PREPARE BRITAIN FOR SNOW.
Britain has once again ground to a halt due to the snow. There has been a chorus of criticism, the government should have prepared more! Councils don’t get enough gritters out! Our transport system should not freeze up! Indeed we could prepare better, but it would cost a pretty penny to do it, for a relatively mild Britain it is not considered worthwhile. A more unpredictable climate as climate change begins to bite might however change that.
Pay more to prepare Britain for snow.
Yes, because... it makes Britain a laughing stock
Other countries laugh at Britain when they see the transport infrastructure failing under moderate snowy conditions. They laugh because they have snow which is twice as heavy and twice as fast and yet they are able to muddle through it. Britain looks pathetic as it wimpers through a few inches of white soft meltable material. Money should be spent too avoid further embarressment. What international Treaty can be achieved with Britain suffering from a lack of respect?
Other European countries that have similar weather to Britain are facing similar problems. Of course Czechs, Latvians and Lithuanians are better able at handling these situations, they know that they will face these conditions to a severe degree every year. They know what to expect and how much money needs to be put aside for it. Britain, and surrounding EU countries do not have this luxury of foresight, so budgeting is almost impossible. Therefore, other countries have no right or reason to laugh or see Brtain as weak or incapable. It is a matter of differing circumstances.
Vote on this point: it makes Britain a laughing stock
See history of changes to this point
Pay more to prepare Britain for snow.
No, because... the money would have to be drained from another public service
But the money is there for Governments time after time to spend money on our transport systems. The problem is they decide to spend the money on big projects such as trams, underground and high speed lines. This is a visable way of Government improving the transport system, and this wins them votes. There is no kudos in spenidng money on maintenance, which is why it is often left by the wayside. Politics should be about spending money to better everyone's lives, not spending money to win votes.
We have seen the pre budget report. We have all sat around criticising where the money has been spent and where the money is coming from. How would we feel if a large chunk was taken out of our NHS, the police or other front line public services in order to cope with a little bit of snow? We would not be happy. We would complain.
It would cost around £5m to grit all the roads once and £15m to grit them three times. Then theres the cost of stockpiling the grit, having the gritting machins to dispense the grit, hiring grit dispenser drivers. Then the trains need to be dealt with. The estimated cost for all of this would be £600m. £600m could pay for 69,930 home-care placements, 120,000 school places or 14,446 miles of road resurfacing. All of these imporvements would help us through out the year, surely this is not a sacrfice we should make for a bit of snow.[1]
- ^ anna bowden, 23rd December 2009, The Guardian
Vote on this point: the money would have to be drained from another public service
See history of changes to this point
Pay more to prepare Britain for snow.
No, because... The money that would need to be spent is not worth the two or three bdays a year which imporvement would prevent.
We are only disrupted by snow two or three days a year. The sheer costs of putting in place heaters or stockpiling snow grit and purchasing more grit dispensers is not worth the one or two days in which Britain suffers from travel delays. If these sorts of weather patterns continued more regularly, then yes the money should be invested, but until that day comes, Britain should just uddle through those 3 out of 365 days of the year.
Pay more to prepare Britain for snow.
No, because... no more money need be spent, a change of living is what we need
In Germany where the travel system is thoguht to be one of the best in Europe, they have a different attitude to travel. They ahve more cars per head in their population but each car does less mileage. That is becuase Britain seems to like to travel. Whether it be shopping or working, it tends to be further away from home than what teh Germans would travel. This results in us placing too much reliance on the transport system. If we lived more like the Germans then we would find it easier to cope with when teh snow fell. The disruption would be minimised.
Vote on this debate: Pay more to prepare Britain for snow.
Modified:
06 Apr 2010
Point 1. it makes Britain a laughing stock
Other countries laugh at Britain when they see the transport infrastructure failing under moderate snowy conditions. They laugh because they have snow which is twice as heavy and twice as fast and yet they are able to muddle through it. Britain looks pathetic as it wimpers through a few inches of white soft meltable material. Money should be spent too avoid further embarressment. What international Treaty can be acieved with Britain suffering from alack of respect?
Other European countries that have similar weather to Britain are facing similar problems. Of course Czechs, Latvians and Lithuanians are better able at handling these situations, they know that they will face these conditions to a severe degree every year. They know what to expect and how much money needs to be put aside for it. Britain, and surrounding EU countries do not have this luxury of foresight, so budgeting is almost impossible. Therefore, other countries have no right or reason to laugh or see Brtain as weak or incapable. It is a matter of differing circumstances.
Point 1. the money would have to be drained from another public service
We have seen the pre budget report. We have all sat around criticising where the money has been spent and where the money is coming from. How would we feel if a large chunk was taken out of our NHS, the police or other front line public services in order to cope with a little bit of snow? We would not be happy. We would complain.
It would cost around £5m to grit all the roads once and £15m to grit them three times. Then theres the cost of stockpiling the grit, having the gritting machins to dispense the grit, hiring grit dispenser drivers. Then the trains need to be dealt with. The estimated cost for all of this would be £600m. £600m could pay for 69,930 home-care placements, 120,000 school places or 14,446 miles of road resurfacing. All of these imporvements would help us through out the year, surely this is not a sacrfice we should make for a bit of snow.[1]
But the money is there for Governments time after time to spend money on our transport systems. The problem is they decide to spend the money on big projects such as trams, underground and high speed lines. This is a visable way of Government improving the transport system, and this wins them votes. There is no kudos in spenidng money on maintenance, which is why it is often left by the wayside. Politics should be about spending money to better everyone's lives, not spending money to win votes.
Point 2. The money that would need to be spent is not worth the two or three bdays a year which imporvement would prevent.
We are only disrupted by snow two or three days a year. The sheer costs of putting in place heaters or stockpiling snow grit and purchasing more grit dispensers is not worth the one or two days in which Britain suffers from travel delays. If these sorts of weather patterns continued more regularly, then yes the money should be invested, but until that day comes, Britain should just uddle through those 3 out of 365 days of the year.
Point 3. no more money need be spent, a change of living is what we need
In Germany where the travel system is thoguht to be one of the best in Europe, they have a different attitude to travel. They ahve more cars per head in their population but each car does less mileage. That is becuase Britain seems to like to travel. Whether it be shopping or working, it tends to be further away from home than what teh Germans would travel. This results in us placing too much reliance on the transport system. If we lived more like the Germans then we would find it easier to cope with when teh snow fell. The disruption would be minimised.