The Green Paradox

As I understand it, we should all be making changes in our lives to combat global warming. So why do the government allow the railways to put up their prices, in some cases by 14%. The journey from Ashford in Kent to London now costs just under £90 per week. It would cost a lot less over a month by car. Surely the way ahead is to reduce the prices so that it becomes more economical for commuters to travel by train. The lower the prices the more users. It is simple economies of scale and after all aren't we the taxpayer still subsidising the railway companies.

Air travel for which we now pay a fuel tax, an airport tax, and any other kind of tax they can think of is one of the most exhaustive ways of using our natural resources, so why are we building or allowing a Spanish company to build a new giant terminal to have more passengers from the extra planes that will land at the new runway. How green is that?

Surely the way ahead is to drop the taxes for those airlines who are green and raise them for those who are not. Give tax discounts for the development of airships, which are not as inflammable as everyone suggests, after all with all the space technology that we have devloped over the years, surely we can come up with a solution. The Hindenburg was a very very long time ago. Commercial airship to transport passengers internally , and don't forget that because they don't need a runway they can actually place the travellers in the centre of any city. Doesn't that make for a more green alternative than the present solution.

With the new revelation that secondary schools are too large and should be divided into smaller schools, is a good idea; where? I am all for more local schools, it gives a sense of community, it enables parents to walk their children to and from school, so stopping school rage and the use of unnecessary fuel. It also enables teachers to have more control over the classes and the school environment, to stop bullying, discrimination or even just to be able to stop firefighting and start teaching. But where? The old schools that existed are now built upon. Luxury gated communities now stand where playing fields once were. This was a fantastic idea and an opportunity missed.

The whole idea should have included energy efficient and green sources. Solar panneling, triple glazing, wind turbines, a certain amount of ground as an allotment, to be used as an sustainable recycling plant, a teaching resource, (especially in terms of botany, nutrition, and social skills), new kitchens with experienced staff so that the allotment kids and other members of the school can actually eat what has been grown, plus a policy of building new schools in deprived areas, with a policy of zero tolerance by the police, the staff and the magistrates on vandalism. Each school should have its own cctv system, both inside and outside. Punishments for children should include picking up the litter around the school. If the consistent offenders are not rehabilitated then the parents should be made to do it at the same time. For some parents this may be the longest one to one time thay have ever spent with their child, but also disruptive children should be rewarded for changing. Given the opportunity for extra subjects that they might find really interesting, like videogame graphics or design. This could be held at the local college on a day release system. The good kids get to go to the local college for individual study, the bad kids stay at the school and pick up litter, or turn the compost. School uniform should be compulsory, but not just given to a child and told this is it, but actually explain why they have to wear it and what it means, to them to be part of a society. When a detention is given, it should be that night, and not have to get the parents permission. Punishment should be swift, instant and have an effect. Children of all ages have to learn to take the conequencies of their actions. I wish politicians would do the same.