Sep 28 2007
David Cameron and greenery
I was delighted to see confirmation today that David Cameron will not be running with the idea that people should have to pay a tax to go to the supermarket car park, and has dropped the proposal to tax people for flying to a holiday destination. I am amongst those who have lobbied against both these ideas, and am pleased to see commonsense prevail. The flights tax was only ever a proposal for consultation, and I hear the consultation replies were heavily against.
Most of us want to be green, but we do not want greenery to become a new way of taxing us more or making our lives impossible. If we had to pay to park at the supermarket, we would be living in fear of delays at the checkout as our car park ticket ran out. It would be shopping under more pressure, worrying lest our car had been clamped because the shopper in front of us had more in the trolley than we reckoned, or the check out employee changed over before taking our cash. London has become a nightmare already of complex and varied rules governing on street car parking that requires a degree in applied regualtion to understand when and where you are allowed to park. The rest of the country wishes to be spared that intense hassle.
I find many of the people I talk to want to be green They are practical greens. We want:
1. Good recycling services that are easy to use
2. More fuel efficient vehicles
3. Better home insulation and more efficient boilers
4. More fuel efficient lighting
5. Better public transport so that it is more of an option for more of our journeys
6. Fewer new migrants coming to the UK putting pressure on greenfields and transport facilities
7. Better protection of local green gaps between settlements and beautiful countryside from developers
8. Better managed roads so there are fewer traffic jams causing pollution
We also prefer encouragement to being taxed and bossed around. The most successful green policy in the UK I can remember was the ending of lead in petrol. A simple tax incentive persauded most people to switch to unleaded without a problem, allowing the eventual abolition of leaded fuel. Why not more tax breaks for green conduct to make it easier for people to acquire more fuel efficient vehicles and appliances?
John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College...
Cameron knows that he has to dump a lot of policy group proposals, but that was always his intention. His next challenge is to clearly and unequivocally state his policies to the country and show them that he is different and better than Brown.
The Conservatives will have to be bold and put all their cards down on the table at the conference, which isn’t ideal but they have no choice.
Reply
Above all, don’t allow these so-called green issues to dominate the agenda and the headlines, thereby displacing from public view the issues that they care far more about such as crime, immigration, tax and well run public services.
Reply
As usual, John Redwood talks sense & lifts my heart to read.
Personally, I’d like to see & hear more of him.
I suppose that’s what makes me a Tory.
David Cameron would be well advised to cool the Green Agenda. We will all do what we feel good about, but will be made to feel uncomfortable & maybe aggressive if thought to be found wanting.
PLEASE start attacking Gordon Brown!
Reply
I too am pleased that Mr Cameron is not going to impose crazy so called green taxes on supermarket parking spaces. Sadly for Mr Cameron there is a perception that he is all image when it comes to green policies. I think of the cycling with the car following behind and the glacier episode in particular. I, and I suspect many others are fed up to the back teeth of the new religion of climate change that the green fascists ram down our throats all the time with the state broadcaster (BBC) and Sky among the worst for promoting the new religion.
I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head when you state that easy to access and use recycling is part of the sensible policy to waste fewer resources and to preserve what we have.
With this government’s keenness to tax and tax again, it is no wonder there is such cynicism amongst the population regarding the whole subject of green issues.
The other items you list are good sensible suggestions and are what I would tend to call “Sensible traditional Conservative ideas.”
With many “pressure Groups” such as the green lobby, the Race Relations lobby and the Pink lobby, too much credence is given to their point of view with a disproportionate amount of concessions in relation to their numbers implemented. It seems that if a small group shout loud enough their views will be acted upon, often to the detriment of the majority.
Reply
The Party has not dropped its green tax proposals for aviation. As far as I can see, the ideas of taxing flights rather than individuals (sensible, but it won’t cut overall emissions) and of taxing domestic flights (which the Quality of Life Group was advised would increase overall emissions by transferring flight slots to international services) are still there. Your balanced approach to aviation is more sensible, but is the Party listening?
Reply: we will find out when they announce the policy proposals. I have been stressing that we need to avoid taxing flights into and out of the Uk in a way which simply switches long haul to CDG/Schipol
Reply
John - I agree wholeheartedly, and think that “practical environmentalism” is a very handy summary of this notion. The green “fundamentalists” do the cause harm with their “hair shirt” policies, which just turns the majority of people off the whole idea. Even the liberal use of words like “sustainable”, “climate change” and “carbon footprint” are beginning to turn people off.
In my involvement in our Council’s envrionmental policy I have been trying to play up the sensible, efficiency-oriented aspects of most environmental measures, and have found that this does resonate more with people, and helps takeup of measures 1-4 on your list far better than preaching at them.
Reply
If you think tax is a way to incentivise people to be more environmentally friendly, then you have to actually accept taxation on polluting activity - like flights, driving etc. And as the Tory Government that you were part of demonstrated, lowering taxes (as proposed by your policy group) means that you don’t have money to invest in transport in order to create the “Better public transport so that it is more of an option for more of our journeys” that your fanciful list advocates.
By the way, what a great segway from anti-environmentalism to xenophobia with number 6 on your list. Blaming immigrants for building on greenfield is a fantastic bit of mental gymnastics that’s worthy of UKIP or the BNP. The poorest households in Britain consume the least energy and natural resources (see Environment Agency for recent research on this) and are obviously more likely to use public transport less and take fewer trips abroad.
Of course, if all those foreigners stopped coming to the UK then your average UK family would have a greater share of UK natural resources to consume. Of course it wouldn’t actually do anything to lessen their consumption though.
At the same time those immigrants could continue to use what is likely to be older and therefore less environmentally friendly housing and transport infrastructure (especially those from Eastern Europe) in whatever country they come from. But hey, it’s not like their contribution to climate change in a foreign country is going to impact on the UK is it….?
Reply: We do already have massive taxes on some polluting activities, especially motoring, but less so on others like space heating and air conditioning. There is plenty of money to invest in transport, as we see from the huge sums spent each year on investing in cars, lorries, vans and taxis. The proposals in my Report show how to make it possible to harness more private finance to invest in trains as well.
I dislike your comments concerning housebuilding. It is not unreasonable to campaign for controlled immigration, as my party does, nor unreasonable to point out that inviting in around 200,000 additional people every year clearly places a substantial demand on housing and transport systems. We oppose racism as strongly as you doubtless do.
Reply
I disagree. I actually think that the supermarket car parking charges was one of Cameron’s better ideas, just poorly thought through. The reality is that local authorities have pedestrianised town centres an provided inadequate and expensive parking facilities. Of course this has had the reverse effect and actually damaged town centre trade, as outside the M25, the reality is that in most cases the car is the favoured, practical and most cost effective mode of transportation. Something needs to be done to protect a diverse range of retail options. I don’t believe that people shop at Tesco because of its immense buying power or product quality but simply because it is cheap, easy and convenient to park.
My proposal would be to put all car parking spaces in town centres and at out of town retailers under local authority control. The authority could then set a standard tariff for the whole district. I would also ensure that the local authority had to provide the same number of parking spaces per thousand sq ft of retail space for town centres as out of town has available. I accept your comments about the inconvenience and fretting about overstaying your parking period. However I believe that technology ought to be able to provide a solution to this with perhaps something similar to the oyster card system.
Where I think David Cameron made a major mistake was not presenting the policy well. It was too easily interpreted as a tax on shopping, the poorest will be hardest hit etc. This is nonsense, given the taxes levied on the motorist I hardly think that 50p a week to park at the supermarket is the one most worth kicking up a fuss about. (Interesting development in the left wing press though as a result of this - apparently you can now own a car and stiil be badly off! Driving to the supermarket in a motor car an outrageously bourgeois activity I’d have thought). He should have presented the policy that the money collected from the car parking must be off-set against council tax bills. Therefore in effect those who visit supermarkets and town centres least often by car pay less council tax - an incentive.
Further, a better idea to recycling (which doesn’t actually help the planet as much as people believe) would be for government to offer massive incentives for firms to develop rapidly biodegradable packaging materials. These could then be collected up without the need for endless sorting, plastic crates and different lorries. Special factories could then biodegrade the materials and harvest the methane liberated which could then be used for heating or electricity generation. This would be a more elegant solution to what currently seems to be a rather headless chicken, on the hoof response to climate change (If it is indeed man made). There seems to me to be two sorts of prominent ‘Greens’ those using it for self-promotion and those who see it as a vehicle to end Western decadence and institute a sort of quasi-Marxism.
By the way I thought all of yours and Simon’s proposals were considerably more realistic and better thought through than Zac Goldsmith’s.
Reply: Thank you for your kind comments on the Economic Policy review.
I would far rather we lower car park charges for town centre shopping than raise them for out of town shopping. Why not let us have an hour’s free parking in the town centre car park for the quick shop - after all we pay for the Council through our taxes.
Reply
At last, an MP who understands that going green should be encouraged rather enforced, by making it cheaper to be green.
If you could only get the rest of the party to understand.
Reply
I too am relieved that sanity may prevail. Climate change has taken on a fundamentalist character and the Conservative Pary should have nothing to do with it. It is highly doubtful that climate change is due mainly to human activity. Even if it is, it is arrogant to believe that the UK can do anything about it. Canute and the tide come to mind. Policies should focus on how to deal with the effects rather than how to stop it.
I would concentrate less on policies and more on exposing the failures and horrors of 10 wasted years of Labour. These need to be repeated unrelentingly. Liberal use of ridicule would help.
Reply
I remember reading somewhere (though I cannot remember exactly where, for it was a while ago) that ‘Green’ issues were traditionally linked to Conservatism, when ‘Green’ issues meant e.g. self sufficiency, defence of the countryside and rural issues. This was symbolised simply enough by how voters living in the countryside would vote Conservative.
Then at some later date, ‘Green’ issues were hijacked by the Left and became associated, not with rural dwellers, but with metropolitan townsfolk and through them high taxation, anti-Westernism, misanthropy and so forth. It was interesting to note, on the Biased BBC blog, the evidence of all the Palestian flags and banners proclaiming ‘Revolutions not Runways’ being flown at the Heathrow Climate Camp!
This perhaps provides Mr Cameron with a precedent for his ‘Conservative Green’ activities, and also evidence that not all Conservative ‘core issues’ involve criminals and immigrants but also more photogenic issues about the countryside.
Reply
I’II come clean, I’m a Director of a high st. retail chain. If environmental fervour can be channelled towards levelling the playing field with the supermarkets then I’m all for it (if loaded in my favour, then even better!).
Sadly, one hour (or less) of free parking has disappeared in most areas. I expect it’ll be very difficult to restore as funds would have to be found from elsewhere. I think in your post you allude to much of what is wrong. It’s the hassle of paying to park that’s a nightmare. The bag of change in the glovebox, finding a ticket machine that’s working and remembering what time to return to your vehicle. Some creative thinking on this by government is long overdue.
No-one wants to see resources squandered but a pragmatic approach is required. Keep talking commonsense on green issues. However, to do this, whilst toeing the party line, may require the dexterity of Blondin.
Reply: Thanks for the information. Many Councils could save some money by running their affairs better - just look at the way management consultancy and PR bills have mushroomed in recent years. Doing without some short term parking revenue would not be a huge loss. I did persuade my local Conservative Unitary to offer free parking on Saturdays in the Council car park - reserved the rest of the week for free parking by the very same Council officials that impose the car park charges! Why not start by getting your local Council to offer the Council officers spaces at the week-end, as I do not find many Council officers going into the office on Saturdays?
Reply
Oh groan, groan. I am soooo depressed. There is no worthy opposition in the U.K today. One speech and he manages to become the leader of the party sans proper policies which he makes up on the hoof according to what his advisors think focus groups feel important at the time but are merely headline concerns, forgotten in the media mix some two days later. For Pete’s sake ditch this man now. I am a rank and file Tory voter, or at least I was, but now like so many of my ilk I make a point of voting for others such as UKIP who, let’s face it, are the Tory party of old. It really is depressing and I am not exagerating. Oppostion to the Government in this country does not exist at this moment in time. I will refuse to vote for any party which has swallowed the anthropgenic global warming scare line hook, line and sinker as it shows ultimate naivity and the tendency to follow political fashion which the Conservative party never used to do up until now. There was a proud tradition of letting the public know where the party stood and if it hurt them so be it. Now there is a circular policy system of policy (make sense of that one) where the party thinks it knows what the public cares about according to focus groups etc. and then finds room to bring that idea on board and then creates policy around what a few uninformed members of the public think is important (man-made global warming as I have used earlier as an example but there are plenty more).
In a word or two, ditch Cameron. He is of no use. A Dodo. Worthless. Defunct. Spin master of the third order rather like the type we used to see in the eighties promoting themselves as management consultants. He disapproves of Grammar schools for Gods sake!!!!!! What does that say about the man?????????
Reply: He does not disapprove of grammar schools. It is Conservative policy to keep the ones we have. No previous Conservative Leader in the last 30 years created new ones in parts of the country where they had been abolished, depriving bright children from poorer backgrounds the excellence in academic education afforded to bright children from rich backgrounds through some public schools.
Reply
[...] is Cameron’s dilemma. He has not won the battle for ideas in his party. The fact that John Redwood and Norman Tebbit still matter is proof of this. For all the leafy trees and polar expeditions, he [...]
JR:
Reply
Richard writes;
I remember reading somewhere
Reply
Being green is not optional, it is essential for our future. It is no use waiting till other countries agree what to do we need to start right now with a new scheme. They can follow later. It is not the first time this country has gone on alone and I suppose it will not be the last. Did we not give democracy to the world?
The Conservative party is not one of increasing taxation, but services still have to be provided and paid for. Taxation is a natural result. The total spend should be reduced to the lowest possible but the source of the funding is the question. A fossil fuel levy properly implemented will demand that people and companies be greener. It will also provide the opportunity to remove from the statute book some of the iniquitous taxation of the past: inheritance tax, council tax & stamp duty have all had their day and should go. We should tax people for what they use not simply for existing.
The present government takes a little bit out of every transaction we make and this is wrong. Not only that it is inefficient and the cost of collection is huge. They remind me of Master of the House Thenardier in Les Miserable Two percent for looking in the mirror twice
Reply
Dorthea: “One major sign of the recent Conservative party’s abandonment of traditional Tory values is the support for the free
Reply
David: You said:-
“Being green is not optional, it is essential for our future. It is no use waiting till other countries agree what to do we need to start right now with a new scheme. They can follow later. It is not the first time this country has gone on alone and I suppose it will not be the last. Did we not give democracy to the world?”
Following your proposal we are likely to make ourselves even less competitive internationally than we already are.
You say we gave the world democracy, but in recent years democracy has all but vanished in this country for all practical purposes. Democracy means the will of the majority prevailing…I can think of many things recently that have been the implementation of the views of the minority and should we go down the fascist climate change agenda’s route, that would indeed be another. The majority of people in this country doubt the idea of man made climate change….and that is despite all the money and media propoganda instigated by the government.
Reply
Cliff - I do not find that majority of people in this country doubt the idea of man made climate change
Reply
APL - Apologies for not responding to your point about neo-Liberalism before - your comment appears to have been held over pending conference finale and Mr Redwood’s reply (above).
It is unfortunate that the library of the Conservative party’s research department was sold off in the early 1980s (at bargain basement prices I might add). If this were not the case, many more people within the party might be aware that Conservative history goes back considerably further, and much more illustriously, than the disastrous europhile Edward Heath.
APL writes; I am gratefull to Thatcher, in my opinion, she made the last thirty years of my working life much more productive and much more affluent than it could ever have been under the likes of Heath. If that was the result of Thatcher embracing Hayeks philosophy - free market and all, then that tells me what sort of policies a successful Tory party should persue.
Reply
Thatcher was a little naive in her unleashing of market forces and deregulation.. Did she forsee the rise of the porn industry for instance? Pity Conservatives never see the illegal drug industry for what it is. A business. Crime inc anyone?
Many of the children today are children of the people who existed at that time who put out of work or could not get jobs. ‘Thatchers Children’ as they are often known. Crime is linked to poverty. Fact. End of story.
As for stopping immigrants. How do you stop a 18/30 year old fit and intelligent young man/woman from entering Britain? Should You? Make it more difficult to get here as a sort of test? “Why did it take you so long to get here?”
I must confess to some interest here as I have a Russian wife. As for stopping people coming here. I’m in favour of deporting some of our so called ‘Citizens’ to make room for them.
Often the first thing the East Europeans do when they arrive is to explain to the locals how they should behave. As diplomats no doubt?
Reply