Very green... at least on the surface

Yesterday's Telegraph carried a report on the environmentally-friendly new Tory HQ.  ITN apparently did some filming, too.  ConservativeHome has been sent an email, however, that suggests that CCHQ staff needed a little reminding of their responsibilities to the planet before ITN's cameras arrived.  An email to all press and research staff gave the following advice:

"ITN is coming to do some filming at 15:30 on how green our new office is. We will also need to make the office look busy and tidy.  I will be getting them to only film the section of the office from the Macdonald/Fisher desk through to Meeting Room 4 - this means they can get the recycled wooden doors, the green recycling bin and the recycled flooring - please try to be at your desks.   Please also make sure your waste bins are not obviously full of paper - stick it in the recycling bins!!"

Emphasis added to "obviously."

10.30am update:

CCHQ has just emailed me with the following information about the green nature of the new headquarters:

• "The most energy efficient lighting possible using Passive Infrared (PIR) sensors which detect body movement and switch lights on and off as necessary.
• All timber used in the project is either from sustainable sources or is reclaimed.  The floorboards in reception and the break out area, for example, are reclaimed Victorian floor boards.
• The reception desk has been rebuilt rather than buying new.
• Almost all our furniture from Victoria Street has been reused.
• All paint used by JONAP throughout this project has been water based.
• All materials within the wall partitioning are from sustainable sources.
• All waste material from the site has been sent for recycling.
• The Millbank Centre itself takes part in a full recycling program with 80% of waste being recycled."

Comments

[Richard Carey]

Not sure what we gain by this email going public - but it's not a big deal either.

Emails in this kind of vein go out in my company all the time to warn staff for example when customers are touring the facility. The difference is that we don't publish them.

I'd be more worried if we didn't give everyone a gentle nudge when the cameras were coming through. This just shows one aspect of running a tight, professional ship, and that can't be a bad thing.

[Andrew Woodman]

Reminds me of the OFSTED inspection at school. All told to on our best behavior, teachers wearing their best suits instead of coming in dressed like a tramp, and then actually making an effort to teach. That only lasted a week as well.

[Umbrella Man]

Another example of why things like this shouldn't be committed to emails/ paper.

[Scotty]

I agree with Richard Carey on this. What is the point of publishing the email which clearly shows someone was doing their job?

[Umbrella Man]

Absolutely stupid to write "Please also make sure your waste bins are not OBVIOUSLY full of paper - stick it in the recycling bins!!" The use of "obviously" shows the PRy-ness of it all.

[comstock]

Have to agree with Richard- can't see the big deal to be honest. I've temped at a few organisations-large and small-this type of email is common.

[BorisforPM]

I'm with Richard Carey and Scotty - by going to these lengths, you're beginning to look like exactly the sort of zealot you criticise.

So a TV crew is coming in to do a piece about the office, and the people running the place want it not to be empty, and have decided to showcase its selling points. What a shock.

You're above this, Tim. Can't we talk about something interesting?

[James Maskell]

The use of the word obviously seems strange. Does it suggest that they put paper in their bins as normal but make it seem as if its not, instead hiding it behind some used spliffs perhaps...

[Denis Cooper]

From what I can see from the photo above, some of that paper is not ready for
re-cycling - it has only been used on one side, if that, and the other side should be used for rough notes, printing out drafts etc. Few sheets of paper go into this household's recycle bin without having been used on both sides. However it would also be wise to shred every sheet before it leaves the premises - the shredded paper can be used as bedding for rabbits and guinea pigs, and you may even find a local pet shop who would buy it from you for that purpose, EU rules permitting. Or an alternative to electrically powered mechanical shredding is gerbils. They'd enjoy doing the job for you, but you'd need a lot of them.

[EdR]

What's wrong with 'obviously'? Like you haven't put a sneaky piece of litter into the wrong bin while in a hurry! It's not the end of the world, the person writing this e-mail knows it's not the end of the world. But there's a difference between dumping the flier you got at lunch from the guy outside Boots and dumping hundreds of pages of copy paper.

[Prentiz]

Sorry Ed - this is a super-dull story. CCCHQ are doing their media job professionally and want to avoid any stupid bad coverage as a result - hardly grounds for criticism. No doubt this won't stop Lib Dems from making some hay somewhere with this "revelation".

[Geoff]

Denis - if you had guests around for dinner, wouldn't you tidy up a bit? Or would you explain away the dirty napkins by saying that they've only been used on one side so far?

And is electrically powered mechanical shredding allowed if it is windmill/solar powered?

Sorry, feeling slightly facetious today so only meant in that vein but I agree with many of the posters above: a perfectly standard email from any corporation expecting visitors.

Would have been (slightly) more interesting as a story if it had an instruction as to whether ties should be worn or not.

Storm -> Teacup.

[Alan S]

You may all think that it's an email that does not matter.

I think it suggests an organisation that is attempting to deceive.

[matt wright]

To be fair there is nothing new in such e-mails. I remember working for a large manufacturing company many years ago when we had an important party of visitors. We were actually sent round different sections of the site to re-appear to make it look like there were more of us that there actually was!! I bet we can all think of such examples,

Matt

[Scotty]

"Would have been (slightly) more interesting as a story if it had an instruction as to whether ties should be worn or not."
Geoff, that reminded me of a story I heard a few years ago from a friend. Their boss sent an email to remind everyone about their appearance pointing out that a smart tie would show a smart office. Lets just say that some of the ties worn the next day had not seen the light of day for years and even then would have been a crime to good taste!

[Alex Forsyth]

The hypocrisy of the paid section of the Camerloon Clique swings into action with its customary clunking clumsiness.

Presumably the current instructions at CCHQ are NOT to wear a tie.

Now where you come from, Scotty, I imagine ties, preferably tartan, are still de rigeur.

The only question is (being as you tell us that your highly successful Cameron-friendly Conservative association is somewhere in the vicinity of the Arctic Circle) are they to be worn with kilts or horned helmets?

[Denis Cooper]

Yes, Geoff, but I was referring to the everyday economical use of typing paper, not whether to offer a dinner guest a napkin used on one side ... I think to avoid the accumulation of paper to be shredded during those frequent and extended periods when there's not enough sun, and not enough wind either, the shredders could also be powered by exercise machines ... that would make good use of the time and energy spent by staff members keeping themselves fit and trim, and the heat they generated would also help to warm the building during the winter. These small changes would all help to save money (forget about carbon dioxide, at best that's still an unproven hypothesis) and make it less necessary to increase subs, and/or rob the taxpayer, to keep the office running.

[Tam Large]

Like cycling with a limousine following; or flying to a glacier to complain about carbon emissions; or leaving all the lights on. Empty gestures from empty politicians.

Meanwhile, back in the real world: lives are wrecked by finanical ruin from high taxes; people die in dirty hospitals; criminals are not chased in case they hurt themselves; millions starve in the third-world as EU barriers stop them selling here....

[Scotty]

Alex, YAWN.
Don't you ever get bored of continually insulting people instead of putting forward a valid argument!

[Editor]

For those who only like very serious stuff on ConservativeHome - please see the 10.30am update in the main post.

[James]

Firstly, I agree with the above posts that say - so what? This is a non-story, this is utterly standard practice, and as someone has said, this is simply evidence that somebody is being professional and switched on rather than leaving things to chance.

Secondly, and a bit more worrying, is the fact that CH obviously thinks this is some sort of a scoop. A scandal perhaps. I think they're wrong, but it's the motivation that worries me. I'm starting to wonder what the purpose behind CH actually is?

Could we please have a mission statement or somesuch. What is CH actually trying to achieve? Mostly I like CH - it is highly informative and a great summary of the political news of the day. I like that it is not sycophantic, and it is a strength that we can disagree here, and can discuss contentious issues such as opposition to the A List etc.

But articles like this seem to be trying to deliberately undermine the Conservative Party (which I assumed that, for all our differences, we all want to see win the next election). It is like a piece of tabloid tittle tattle dressed up as a scandalous scoop, and can do no good to the Party, but could hand ammunition (albeit pretty rubbish ammunition given the banality of the story) to our opponents.

Please CH, tell us? What are your motives? All bloggers have an agenda, just please don't keep yours secret.

Or am I reading too much into this? Is it just a dull story for a slow news day?

[Alex Forsyth]

Alex, YAWN.
Don't you ever get bored of continually insulting people instead of putting forward a valid argument!

Touchy, eh?

I'll stop querying your credentials when you tell us what they really are. You can keep your name to yourself.

You are claiming to speak, not just for yourself, but for a significent group of Scots Tories who (if your claims are true) are in every possible way untypical of the Scottish Party. That's why people are entitled to know more.

Once I'm happy you are telling the truth I'll never raise the matter again. In fact if you tell us the name of your association I'll be very happy to tell you the name of mine.

You may (or may not) be interested to know that your surprising claims about the location and alleged success of your assoc. have already raised the sceptical interest of at least one MSP.

[Scotty]

Alex, you are getting a bit obsessional about this and it has made me curious in the past but all is revealed!
"You may (or may not) be interested to know that your surprising claims about the location and alleged success of your assoc. have already raised the sceptical interest of at least one MSP.
I am sorry that my views don't seem to be on message and I am amazed that the comments of one poster on this site should be causing such interest. I am now actually finding this quite creepy!

[GU (Given Up)]

The next government will have to deal with building new Nuclear Power stations. Unfortunately governments have to live in the real world, not the fantasy world of Notting Hill's concerns. A world where charmers like Putin live, who think nothing of cutting off supplies in mid winter, to acheive their aims.

How will Green Dave ever be able to commission new Nuclear power stations, the ultimate horror story for any true green, when all they have to do is wave e-mails like this feel good tosh around, screaming hypocrite.

[Alex Forsyth]

Well clearly we are going to get nothing out of the mysterious Scotty, but no surprise there.

When my ancestors left Banffshire their idea of an afternoon's entertainment was a mass hanging, but maybe Highlanders really do think and write like London metrosexuals these days.

Returning to the issue, and to the real world, "Green Issues" form no part of the staple conversation of most ordinary people.

Once again the Camerloon clique show that they take more interest in the dinner-party yap of the far-left (but well-heeled) chattering classes than they do in the concerns of the ordinary man in the street.

Joe Public is more worried about rampant immigration and consequent house price hikes than he is about the megahyped media bogeyman of "global warming".

Cameron's clique is cutting itself adrift from the real world, but should this surprise anyone?

[Luis]

I don't know why all the critics are trying so hard to say this is a non-story !

It's simply a light hearted post- no harm in a bit of variety and I didn't realise Conservativehome was limited to 100% heavy and "worthy" stories. I certainly hope not.

Yes you could see similar emails in many organisations. It basically PR but it does have some relevance when the environment is now such a big policy area. Empty gestures are not unheard of in this field and some "switched on" office manager making sure there is no paper to be seen in the bins before the cameras come round hints of style over substance at least as far as the CCHQ office staff are concerned.

Minor detail this is, but sometimes the details betray more significant attitudes. If not, it is always of some interest to read emails/memos intended for a less public audience. Thanks for sharing, Editor.

[Alex Forsyth]

I don't know why all the critics are trying so hard to say this is a non-story !

I do.

They are ultra-sensitive to any criticism of this ghastly leadership by Thatcherites and Traditional Tories - sorry, I mean "UKIP Trolls"

And with good reason. Like me the Camerloons can see their poll lead disappearing like a morning mist in the harsh light of day.

This morning the Telegraph website is asking whether Cameron is really a Conservative at all.

Don't think he's going to like the scores of uber-critical posts that are appearing there...all the work of "UKIP Trolls", no doubt.

[Jon Gale]

"Or an alternative to electrically powered mechanical shredding is gerbils. They'd enjoy doing the job for you, but you'd need a lot of them."

"And in this room is the paper shredding device - We call him Scratchy."

[sjm]

When our kids had gerbils, Mum and Dad Gerbil were at it all the time, so produced innumerably litters. Mum then ate them all.

I think it was because baby gerbils look very much like uncooked cocktail sausages.

Aren't you all glad I'm back from my holiday?

[malcolm]

Hope you had a good holiday sjm. You're contribution is by far the best on this thread!

[Anti Jihadi]

This is actually two non stories; 1) How green or not the new rented offices are & 2) the unimportant standard pre TV email.

Just goes to show what a pointless cul de sac we are being driven, or should that be cycled, up really.

One interesting question that does come to mind though is did this green posturing cost more, less or the same as just moving into the offices without it would have done.At a time when the Party has a financial crisis it would be good to know that cost was a factor taken into account.

[greg]

I assume we can expect a debunking on the site of George Monbiot's Guardian article today?

[Jack Stone]

This thread is a complete lot of nonsense. Talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill. All the big stories there are to discuss and all people are doing is discussing an e.mail that tells people to basically do there jobs properly and make sure that the partys message gets across well.
You are all completly mad!

[Richard Carey]

It's a shame to see that this story (with the word "obviously" highlighted) has been picked up and run by the Times, on the back of this blog piece. Although it is in all fairness below some remarks by Sir Terry Wogan in the Times' news agenda, so I probably shouldn't be overly worried...