The Big Ask Climate Debate comments_328 April 2008
It is in everyones interest to ensure that we are energy efficient. However,I and many others on fixed incomes such as pensioners and low paid are worried that all this talk from politicians on the need to encourage carbon emissions, will simply be an excuse to slap very hefty tax increases onto the public.
There is a lot of talk about increasing very substantially the motor tax charge onto cars with big engines. What are we who purchased our cars a few years ago do should we not be able to afford the new rates of tax ? The car represents the only means of getting around for many of us and it is already expensive to keep them on the road. I bought my 2.5 litre car five years age in order to tow a Touring Caravan and enable me and my family to have a holiday, as going abroad is too expensive. Both were second hand when originally bought but are seviced regularly.
Should hefty motor tax rates become reality, then even this pleasure would be taken from us and all others in a similar plight.
Surely, any proposal that is considering tax increases as a means of forcing people to change their way of life should bear in mind that there are millions of citizens who cannot afford to throw away or just replace everything.
Not all of us qualify for Government tax credits or benefits but are just above these qualifying limits.
Any change should only be applied to New cars or light bulbs purchased etc.
Ed Duerden
As a Facilities professional, I think it's time all new commercial developments were encouraged or even forced to find ways of generating as much of their own energy as possible.
Schemes were non-hazardous waste is burnt and ALL the energy used for heating or hot water with NO polution output should become more commonplace. This is not new technology and is currently under used.
Industrial and commercial development such as factories, shopping centres and business parks should all be encouraged or forced to generate as much of their energy needs as possible. With massive factories and warehouses, space-intensive shopping centres, small industrial and office units hidden into the countryside, there's plenty of space to site solar and wind generating facilities that could reduce the demand on fossil fuel energy, at the same time as not being too visually intrusive.
These changes need to be introduced at the the design stage with tough enforcement by local authorities; lead the by the Government.
Andy Townend
As an Average Woman in the Street I fear I have little answers to the immense problems we now face. Like most other people, I have to rely on those in power - both economical and political - to make the appropriate suggestions and changes.
However, just because we are a silent majority does not mean that we don't care or are unwilling to make the sometimes difficult changes necessary.
Mr Blair and any successor should not be afraid to implement and enforce the changes that are needed.
Our country has faced many hardships in the past, surely we are made of stern enough stuff to now do what is necessary to save our planet?
Suzanne Santurri
Does nobody realise this is another ploy by Blair ? He was told all this years ago, but felt safe in his untouchable position - now nobody wants him - its just another way of pretending he is doing his best for the country - he doesnt care - there's no monetry value for him. And people laugh at you for thinking otherwise
Annie Virgo
Sorry Tony Juniper all was going well until the last sentence when you stated that if Mr Blair led the rest were likely to follow.(A good point to massage Mr Blairs ego) But if you are nieve enough to believe that China and India will follow then you do all live in cloud cuckoo land.Now if in the next round of WTO/Gatt agreements levies on goods produced in these polluting countries were enforced then we might see some action.At the end of the day MONEY talks and somehow that needs to be global,Just taxing the UK citizens more will have absolutely no effect on a world problem,All we will do is export more of our industry to these countries and worsen the situation on a global basis.
Chris Woodruff
Dear Prime Minister
You are capable of great leadership, courage and moral leadership. Over Iraq you took strong and decisive action mobilising our troops and commiting between £3-6bn of public funds to ensure that at some future date Britain would not be held to ransom from the threat of WMD.
Similarly your war on Terrorism has seen you deploy military, financial and intelligence on a massive scale to face down this threat which could last a generation.Yet Climate Change is bigger, much bigger than both of those and you have failed to take similarly decisive action or invest on anything like a similar scale.
Worse than that it is hard to see even one decision that you have taken on a domestic issue with Climate Change factored in, whether that be the £1bn you spent on road building last year and your plans to widen and duplicate motorways, the incomprehensible plans that you have for massive airport expansion to allow even more families to visit their homes abroad every week-end, something which is completely unsustainable, or allowing Royal Mail, a publicly owned body to move all post by road rather than the less damaging rail option.You have failed most in failing to engage with the public. When floods were widespread in 2002, rather than leaving the fuel escalator on and ring fencing it to improve public transport and give people a choice, you told the public that the money was needed for schools and hospitals. As a result if I go and see a show in London on a Saturday night the last train back to Newbury just 40 miles from a world capital is 10.30pm. This does not give me any choice.
To maintain our world leadership position other countries want to see how we have addressed and solved the issues of economic growth and low carbon emissions, this is where you can deliver and if you listen to Tony Juniper he will tell you how it can be done without damaging the economy.
Come on Tony decisive action now will be your legacy for future generations, you wouldn't want it to be Iraq now would you?
Adrian Foster-Fletcher
ONe way that we can achieve an immediate cut is to make diesel cheaper than petrol, then everyone will be encouraged to buy diesels, saving 30% of CO2. But DO NOT bring in road charging as it will penalise the poor, by pricing people out of the low paid jobs that this country relies upon. Also their is NO VIABLE alternative way for most people to get to work unless they live and work in a city. Also how does encouraging drivers to use country lanes as oppose to motorways help? Flowing traffic moving at good speeds is surely much more environmentally friendly than congestion? Stop picking on motorsits who only account for a tiny percentage of the problem and are used as skapegoats, we depend on this to keep the economy going to PAY for the additional "green taxes"
Paul Daniell
You have admitted that global warming is big , why will you not tackle the airline industry , we need to cut 60% carbon emissions, we all need to change our life styles. Are the ministers going to lead by example ?
would the government be prepared to legislate regulation to cut carbon emissions.
Would you encourage more people to have a more life style? By cutting the costs of wind turbines and solar panels for houses ?
Also would take the packaging industry to hand, they have a so called voluntary code to reduce packaging , but packaging has gone up. The packaging only ends up in land fills. We need to recyle more but the councils are not exactly helping, how can the government encourage the country to recycle more ?
Christine Robinson
Do governments not act supposedly for the benefit of its electorate? If so, then why are tax levies not placed on inefficient light bulbs and electronic equipment? I used to have a portable ITT televeision about ten years ago that when you pressed the off button on the remote, the TV turned off and pushed the on button out. There was no standby facility. Perhaps manufacturers should be encouraged to return to this old technology. My bigest issue is my car. Living in a rural are, to get to work, I have to use my car. It does about 40 mpg. However, I cannot aford to replace my car fora more efficient one, there are no public services to get me to work, so what do I do to reduce my vehicle emissions? Suggestions on this would be most valuable because I think it would apply to a lot of people.
Finally, the lungs of the planet are being detroyed for palm oil plantations destroying the habitats of Arangutans and the like. Can we not encourage our supermarkets not to buy this food ingredient to take the demand away for this product and help reduce the amout of deforestation?
There are many issues we have to deal with as part of climate change and would like to make a difference. Oh, and one final thought, can local planning laws not be changed so that it is easier to get a wind turbine? I want one but getting through red tape will be nightmare and is therefore putting me off at the moment.
Chris Hudson
Don't you think Tony Blair has done an excellent job serving for the people of Britain?Now that I am at the age of 18, i would vote for him if he was to stand in the elections!why arent you standing in the elections?and what difference will this debate on climate change make if your going to leaving the office very soon?global warming is increasing and not one significant progress is being made to try and make this more aware for the people of Britain??Why isnt anybody bothered about global warming Mr Blair?Are you too interested in Iraq and Afghanistan that you overlook the issue of Global Warming?Why is the majority of England beginning to think you are under the foot of George Bush, as in what he says goes!Why is the labour party becoming less popular as days go by?Yes it may still be popular in certain areas, but the majority of the people are turning their backs on the Labour Party because they dont deliver what they promise, e.g. major cut in council taxes was in our area, but instead it has increased!
Mohammed Ali
I find it hard to believe that it is beyond the capacities of the Government to find a way in which winter temperatures can be taken into account in measuring the amount of fossil fuels used in one year. Work out the average temperature - add a small corrective factor for colder days or warmer days. Not tricky with complex mathematical resources available to Government.
Likewise with hotter summers - if people buy fans or air conditioners for heat waves, take account of the days above an agreed seasonal average temperature. Not rocket science.
If there are no annual targets, or annual reviews, there will be less impetus to maintain steady, and widely publicised, progress towards carbon emissions reductions.
The price of fuel should not make any difference. The same amount of carbon dioxide is emitted per litre whether petrol costs 50p per litre, or £1. If fuel use rises when the price falls, this is just the sort of thing the annual binding reduction targets need to be hitting.
Saying these things make an annual binding target impossible just looks like a weak excuse, hiding a lack of commitment to real action.
Sarah Clayton
More comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
