« Julian Lewis makes the case for replacing Trident | Main | Samuel Coates is 'In Two Minds' about Trident »


So Brown is a hypocrite? Words like Bears,Woods, Popes and Catholic spring to mind.

Good to see the Telegraph standing up for ordinary middle-class citizen against Cameron's authoritarian socialist plans.

I think our Dave has just put his foot in it.

Brown admits to being a Socialist; Cameron doesn't, so who is the bigger hypocrite?

So, who represents those of us who don't want Green taxes?

I wonder whether banging on about the environment is any more popular than banging on about the EU?

Without a doubt Brown is a hypocrite

and whichever Tory thought up this stupid idea is a complete idiot

Blair was in there straight away like a rat up a drainpipe
" I am not going to criminalise air travel "

typical overblown and innacurate Blair rhetoric -
probably made dent in the 11% lead though!

You should read the thread below Janet Daley's Telegraph article yesterday and on BBC Online >>>> THE PUBLIC DOES NOT LIKE GREEN TAXES.

The public don't like new taxes and especially not now after all Labour's increases and especially not taxes on pleasure.

Welcome to the real world outside Notting Hill.

It is of course hypocritical of Brown who invented taxes on foreign holidays not for any virtuous reason but as a tax raising wheeze. But Brown being a seasoned politician knows how to hit below the belt and fights for himself and his party. For Brown as (for Cameron) the Conservative party are the enemy to be attacked and anathematised on the least excuse.

Not so long ago I had hopes that this evil government would be overthrown and we would return to freedom. This latest nonsense has extinguished all hope. The public will never back this policy. It is too late to drop it. This is going to hang around Cameron's neck like “we’re all right” hung around Kinnock’s. You’ve blown it Dave, time to go.

This is going to hang around Cameron's neck like “we’re all right” hung around Kinnock’s

Yes it's just another "gong" to join "Hug a Hoodie" and a couple of other gems.

I suppose we have to wait for the hated and despised Blair to go before we can find out what the public really think about this "Tory" kindergarten.

The public might back this policy, if they were convinced that it was necessary.

However so far the great majority haven't paid much serious attention to the theory of anthropogenic global warming. They've seen the media constantly yacking on about it for years, and few people have bothered to argue against it, but now that the practical implications of believing it are starting to emerge they are starting to question it. For a small, often fanatical, minority "the debate is over", but for the majority the real debate is only just beginning. Not that it'll
make much difference who wins that debate, once the EU has control.

Why the fuss about the proposed 'green air-flight' tax? I don't go abroad, have no intention of going abroad, so i think it's a great idea! After watching 'airport', i think the taxes should be set at a high rate to discourage our yobbish trash from blighting other countries!

i think the taxes should be set at a high rate to discourage our yobbish trash from blighting other countries!

One could almost sympathise with that.

Well, it seems that the innate OE contempt for the mobocracy is coming out at last.

Let's have a few more of these aristocratic policies from "Dave". Nothing like a bit of honesty for a change.

And if they cook his goose - tant mieux

You've got nothing to say of any intelligence at all have you 'Alex'?

Brown?of course he his a hypocrite but not just on the topic of aircraft taxes. He spoke about insulation of homes as a green initiative....but he removed ten million pounds out of the budget which was to provide grants for home insulation.
I criticise DC for not making the point about offsetting other taxes at the same time as the airline taxes were announced. Surely,an elementary PR point? I also criticise the fact that the ten million pounds removed from the home insulation grants has apprently been forgotten by the DC team. Lets sharpen up on the PR front. DC take note and do something to remedy the situation and fast!

You've got nothing to say of any intelligence at all have you 'Alex'?

Is that so, Malcolm?

Seems we have more in common than either of us supposed.

As posted yesterday & before, both parties are guilty of inconsistency in their approach to green taxes, in the context of the Council Tax.

Brown wants us to improve home insulation, but then will take double-glazing into account when valuing homes for Council Tax.

A few weeks ago Caroline Spelman criticised Labour for wanting to take holiday destinations into account for Council Tax, as privacy going out of the window. Yet now we want to take every air journey destination into account for the air miles tax.


For some reason the Tax Payers' Alliance is maintaining total silence on this week's green tax debate, at least on its website. Anyone with any idea when it might break cover?

I'm surprised that we are drilling down to details on green taxes 2 years before an election. All taxes are unpopular and politicians of all hues have lost credibility with tax so talking about replacing one tax with another doesn't wash with the (tax-paying) public. Also I don't understand why we are advocating a system of (air miles) rationing that would require a huge IT system. I think we should stick to principles at the moment and wait until it is the appropriate time to talk details.

Why has DC done this ( announcing the G-tax plans)...? The abscence of having ANY real policies at the moment! Instead of hypothecating abstract bolloc*s that haven't been fully ironed out, he should annonce policies that will HELP people; not just lift more of their cash off of them a'la NoucheLabour. Wishlist: council housing restart; bringing dentistry back into the NHS; border police creation; low-paid to be exempt from income-tax;referendum on EU membership. That'll do for a start!

The Sun is more direct:

"It makes us uneasy that Mr Cameron’s first detailed policy is a new tax.

Maybe I've missed something but I havent seen any detail. The Conservative air tax proposals seem to be: probably VAT on flights, some sort of fuel duty (how much?), Osbourne talking about maybe taxing flights rather than individuals. Its still very vague.

As long as it is offset by reductions in taxes elsewhere (income tax, marriage tax breaks, etc. ) - and Tory spokemen must really be emphasising that more - it shouldn't be a big deal.

Before anyone else comments on the Green Tax, catch up with Channel 4's 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'


Apparently the whole programme itself is going to be re-broadcast. Watch out for it.

The only rubbishing I have seen has been of the director. And one of the contributors was a bit miffed, claiming his contribution was included 'out of context'.

The programme's conclusion (that global warming is NOT caused by us but by the sun's stream of particles fluctuating from time to time) has not been challenged, though.

This greening of the Conservatives could be a big mistake. I have never believed that we need bl**dy great propellors stuck in our back gardens - they don't do the slightest good whatsoever, unless you are a giant power company in receipt of taxpayer's largesse.

On the other hand, as I have said a number of times elsewhere on this web site, we still have a couple of years, at least, before a General Election (unless Gordie jumps just after his coronation but that is unlikely). And politics is a dirty business!

I'm afraid that for every group of a few hundred thousand that might be upset, Dave is after the millions of voters who could support him and, incidentally, us, on the way to taking power. Think about it. I have.

Are Cameron's Conservatives still Tories?

The Daily Telegraph's online Speakers Corner page has already had more than 200 comments on the above topic, sparked mostly by the Air taxes and almost entirely negative.

You shouldn`t be surprised at Alex talking his usual nonsense. His agenda as become very clear. A Labour victory at the next election.

Don Hoyle
Incorrect - the programme has been critiqued on several other angles.

There is a good site for those interested in understanding why climate change is so widely accepted but where the issues overall are pretty well explored:


As regards the Great Climate Change Swindle I refer you to:
In which Carl Wunsch responds to his work being misused - he is more than miffed

Also worth reading
This covers the cosmic ray theory, If you read comments there are a couple from one of the researchers to the paper used by Channel 4.

You shouldn`t be surprised at Alex talking his usual nonsense. His agenda as become very clear. A Labour victory at the next election

Really Jack? I thought that was your agenda.

I mean you are still supporting Cameron, aren't you?

I want the Conservatives to win with a leader of substance; not lose with a pale pink gadfly.

I've read the Carl Wunsch response and it gives the impression of someone who is trying to appease those that are upset by the programme rather than a complete retraction. The key sentence in his clarification is when he states that he is a teacher, could it be that his employer is upset at his words on the Channel4 programme.
If he was really that miffed he would have stated clearly and unequivocally that man made CO2 is the main driver of climate change. He does not and only uses the usual ambiguous parlance on the subject, making statements such as "almost surely has a major human-induced component", "the science of climate change remains incomplete". If we intend to completely change the way that we live I would like statements that said 100% certain due to completed research, beyond dispute and not contested by any scientist.
By the way Ted if the cosmic ray research needs some more work, then what is your view on the hockey stick graph and the refusal of its creator to have it independently audited.


No theory is ever unequivocally claimed 100% proven - it ceases to be a theory and becomes a fact. The Great Climate Change Swindle however aimed to show that there was no basis for the science and alternatives theories had equal validity and proofs. I do not think it did so.

I started as a sceptic but not a denier (one with a closed mind). Many of the posters here and on the Telegraph are clinging to a Channel 4 hour long programme as the final and absolute evidence that the thousands of scientists and multiplicity of papers have been trumped. My sceptism came from the exaggerated claims of the green true believers. The use of comparisons with 19th century cold period for example is always a weakness.

However I am more convinced by the evidence for human influence on climate change and find the increasingly desperate and miseading "evidence" against is providing more comfort to me in this belief. That doesn't mean 100% acceptance and if true that the hockey stick theory not properly audited then I would view it sceptically.

Presumably we can't look forward to USA-levels of fuel tax then.

If you are a sceptic then use the web to research the lack of an independent audit of the hockey stick graph produced by Michael Mann and the unquestioning acceptance of it by the climate theory orthodoxy. Two Canadian experts in statistical analysis — Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick were supplied with information on the science and maths behind the graph and found it full of errors. When they presented their findings they were denied any more access to the data and the world has been denied an audit ever since but in the mean time we are expected to blindly fall in behind every measure to combat man made global warming.
I do not base my sceptisism on one Channel4 programme but I did find that it encapsulated very well the blind acceptance of every piece of "evidence" for man made GW, whilst any dissenting voice is pilloried and treated as a "carbon criminal".
It is the totalitarian traits of the GW orthordoxy that I object to whilst personally I keep an open mind but my present view is that it is a con kept alive by gravy train scientists and tax hungry politicians.

Back to Brown. Of course he is a hypocrite, he and Labour have been getting away with it for 15 years why stop now. Most interviewers are inadequate people who never pick up the lies. Tory spokesmen on the other hand show respect to interviewers and rarely look good.

These green air proposals are utterly mad.

On a crowded island we need air travel, ask the Scots.

Limiting people to one air holiday, apart from being stupid would require a computer system nearly like ID cards.

Limiting the flights to Europe shows a lack of knowledge of what is going on.

Even if it that stupid at least some effort could have been made to wrap the package up with some presentation, it was obviously a god send to Labour and something the BBC gould highlight instead of the collapsing NHS.

It so childish I can only think it is deliberate to mark Cameron's green credentials and will eventually be forgotten.

This was a blunder of epic proportions. It's a bad policy, but it's worse politics. It suprises me the usually astute Editor hasn't called it for what it is.


Mayor Livingstone's carbon allowance plan is "hare brained" says One London Party

"Ken Livingstone's call for the Climate Change Bill to be 'strengthened' by personal carbon allowances is typical of the hare-brained thinking of statist politicians," says Leader of the One London Party at the London Assembly Damian Hockney. "Rationing travel is not something which a free society should even contemplate."

"Politicians are jumping on the environmental bandwagon just as the wheels are coming off. There is strong scientific evidence that the current increase in carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere is a natural consequence of global warming rather than its man-made cause. Yet politicians are now making grandiose plans to reverse climate change. They can't even run a decent Health Service or transport system, so any claims they make that they can influence nature should be taken with a huge pinch of salt.

"When Ken Livingstone, David Miliband and David Cameron all agree, it is clear that something is amiss. To claim that man-made carbon emissions can be reduced by 60% by 2050 without devastating living standards both here and in developing countries is nothing less than fraudulent.

"These politicians are hiding behind unachievable targets set way in the future, by which time they will be mere footnotes in political history, in order to distract public attention from their failings on other issues and to find excuses to pile on yet more taxes and controls. It is a cynical exercise which the public must reject.



The One London Party will challenge Mayor Ken Livingstone to a public debate on the causes of climate change at next week's Mayor's Question Time by asking the following question:

“The Great Global Warming Swindle”
Damian Hockney
The Mayor recently backed the showing of Al Gore’s documentary “An
Inconvenient Truth” at City Hall. In order to further the debate on
climate change, would he also support the showing of the recent Channel
4 documentary, “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, in which eminent
scientists argue that climate change is driven by solar activity and
that the current increase in carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere
is a natural and harmless consequence of global warming rather than its
man-made cause? Does the Mayor agree that if this hypothesis is
correct, spending money on reducing man-made carbon emissions is
futile? Can the Mayor quote any research which disproves or casts doubt
on this hypothesis?

“The Great Global Warming Swindle” -
Damian Hockney

Because we should obviously be swayed in our policy by some nobody from UKIP/Vanitas/One London or whatever party it is this week...

"I don't think the Conservative proposals are properly costed or thought-out and I think people will be very angry about that."

Hypocrisy is right - Brown can raise air passenger duty illegally during the PBR as a revenue-raising measure, and that's okay. But Conservative proposals to rebalance taxation in the longer term interest in favour of families and hard work and to dissuade emissions and pollution are unacceptable? If this is going to be the level of coherence of the Brown Government, bring it on, I say.

Alex Forsyth:Yes it's just another "gong" to join "Hug a Hoodie" and a couple of other gems.

I make no apologies for highlighting this again: I am amazed by a few people posting on here parading how staunch a Conservative they supposedly are by parroting a Labour line of spin. DC never said "hug a hoodie", I believe Tony McNulty did. Perhaps you might like to put the Conservative line next time, not the Labour one?

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker