Search results

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the impact of social discount rates on the economic significance of CO₂ mitigation in the benefit‐cost analysis of recent amendments of Building Regulations Part L.

The benefit of mitigating CO₂ emission by raising the standard of building in amended building regulations is estimated by an integrated‐assessment economic model called DICE at different social discount rates proposed by economists and government.

The benefit of CO₂ mitigation is highly sensitive to the choice of social discount rate that the value of social discount rate is a crucial factor to decide the economic viability of recent and future amendments of Building Regulations Part L. The more positive the social discount rate used in the benefit‐cost analysis, the less sustainability appears to be because higher discount rate tips the balance in favour of current benefits against future costs.

This paper focuses on the impact of social discount rates on the shadow price of CO₂ emission. Further researches are needed to estimate the private benefits and costs to construct and operate buildings complying with amended Building Regulations Part L so as to produce a solid benefit‐cost analysis on the amendment of the building regulations.

If sustainable development, similar to other traditional investment, is subject to feasibility judgement in a common metric, more attentions are needed to be given by sustainability literature on the issue of discounting.

This paper for the first time evaluates the environmental benefits of amending the Building Regulations and the sensitivity of the benefits to the choice of social discount rates.

Talking of newspapers Charles Prestwick Scott said “At the peril of its soul it must see that the supply is not tainted. Neither in what it gives, nor in what it does not give, nor in the mode of presentation, must the unclouded face of truth suffer wrong. Comment is free but facts are sacred.” The aim of this monograph is to adhere as closely as is possible to Mr Scott's opinion. As far as the facts of the proposed legislation are concerned, these will of course be untainted; the commentary which follows from these facts however, being free, proposes to examine and analyse the untainted factual supply.

In the present European crisis every intelligent individual of British birth must feel that a tremendous debt of gratitude is due to the British Navy, which, by keeping open the lines of traffic across the seas, has ensured the supply of daily food to the country. Although this journal does not concern itself with political matters, it does concern itself with the question of the maintenance of an efficient food supply in this country at all times, and the one question is indissolubly bound up with the other. Few people probably have any idea of the enormous extent to which they are dependent for the very food which nourishes them upon the ships that enter London and other ports of the English coast. Every day in the year nearly three‐quarters of a million pounds' worth of provisions are imported into this country, in addition to what we actually produce ourselves, and last year no less than two and a quarter million tons of grain, 360,000 tons of chilled and frozen beef and mutton, 170,000 tons of tea, 250,000 tons of sugar, and many other foods in proportion, were landed in the port of London alone. These figures, in view of the present crisis, completely shatter the absurd position of the “Little Navy” nincompoops.

The enormous danger of enemy influence in regard to the control and management of the food supply of the country and the great evils attributable to this cause justify us in reproducing the following able article by MR. RONALD MCNEILL, M.P., from the Evening Standard of October 26th:—

The following report was brought up by Dr. P. Brouardel, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine of Paris, President of the Commission, and was submitted for the approval of the Congress:

This paper uses the Missouri Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 budget as a case study to illustrate two aspects of the recent state budgetary problems: its structural budget deficits and the politics involved in balancing a budget. The paper also highlights the dilemma that government faces in meeting constant public demand for services while revenue sources are restrained.

From a recently published letter addressed to a well‐known firm of whisky manufacturers by Mr. JOHN LETHIBY, Assistant Secretary to the Local Government Board, it is plain that the Board decline to entertain the suggestion that the Government should take steps to compel manufacturers of whisky to apply correct descriptions to their products. The adoption of this attitude by the Board might have been anticipated, but the grounds upon which the Board appear to have taken it up are not in reality such as will afford an adequate defence of their position, as the negative evidence given before the Select Committee on Food Products Adulteration and yielded by the reports of Public Analysts is beside the mark. The introduction of a governmental control of the nature suggested is not only undesirable but impracticable. It is undesirable because such a control must be compulsory and is bound to be unfair. It would be relegated to a Government Department, and of necessity, therefore, in the result it would be in the hands of an individual—the head of the Department—and subject entirely to the ideas and the unavoidable prejudices of one person. It is impracticable because no Government or Government Department could afford to take up a position involving the recommendation of particular products and the condemnation of others. No Government could take upon itself the onus of deciding questions of quality as distinguished from questions merely involving nature and substance. A system of control, in order to be effective and valuable alike to the public and the honest manufacturer, must be voluntary in its nature in so far as the manufacturer is concerned, and must be carried out by an independent and authoritative body entirely free from governmental trammels, and possessing full liberty to give or withhold its approbation or guarantee.

THE BBC's television services have a longer history than is generally realised. Experiments were going on in 1925 and 1926, broadcasts were being put out as early as 1933 or 1934, and on 2nd November, 1936 the BBC gave Great Britain the world's first regular television service, operating on the 405‐line standard in the Very High Frequency channels.