The Independent's front pages always remind me of student newspapers and Shane Greer has done a good job at unpicking one or two of them on TheFisk.com. My favourite Independent front cover came from last April. A typical headline about global warming was crowned with an invitation to win free flights to the USA. There was also 3rd December 2005's edition. The newspaper's editorial pages encouraged readers to holiday at home but the travel section included the following headline adverts:
- Discover Syria...
- Journey Latin America...
- 91 flights a week to Dubai...
- Book now for festive fun in Lapland...
- Smile! You are in Spain...
- Innsbruck-Tirol; Fly midweek from £79 return...
- Sydney £569...
What other examples of green hypocrisy can you think of from politicians, businesses, celebrities?
Today's delicious Indy front page isn't a case of hypocrisy - it's just a silly mistake. 'Who's The Greenest?' asks the newspaper. The three major parties' views on greenhouse gases, renewable energy, green taxes, recycling and nuclear power are compared. Unfortunately for The Indy they get their nuclear power and nuclear weapons a little muddled up. "The Conservatives are sitting on the fence at the moment. Nuclear weapons are not yet explicitly ruled in or ruled out," the front page declares. "Officially, 'possible as a last resort'." Oh dear!
On ConservativeHome tomorrow shadow defence minister Julian Lewis MP will certainly not be sitting on the fence - or getting power stations and weapons confused - but will be presenting the case for replacing Trident.
To answer your question... here are three other examples of green hypocrisy:
Al Gore's massive personal use of energy.
David Cameron's chauffeur following his bike.
The high energy use of the Department of The Environment.
Posted by: Jennifer Wells | March 12, 2007 at 10:40
Something I wrote about last night on Tory Radio.
Lets even take a look at Government decisions such as the one to move to digital TV. How many TVs will then have a digibox underneath which will require a seperate power supply just because of this one decision? Millions I would suggest. Would is the implications for carbon emissions for this one decision?
The simple fact is that people still want bananas - which unfortunately have to be shipped here. People on the whole cannot use public transport for the vast majority of journeys (certainly if you live outside of London). People want those cheap good imported from China, and so on.
As I have written before, how many of our politicians have drastically reduced their road miles, have energy saving bulbs everywhere in their house and office, have a water meter, put their kids on the school bus, and don't fly. Not many I would suggest.
(PS - yes I do have a water meter, no I havent been abroad in the last 12 months, Yes I have only owned a car for 3 years out of my 32 years and yes I do use energy saving bulbs - but they really arent very bright!)
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | March 12, 2007 at 10:55
1. Tim Yeo thinks flying is the anti-Christ, yet trots around the planet playing golf.
2. Colin Challen, Chairman of the APPG on climate change, asked the group if he could attend the climate talks in Nairobi last November. The group agreed it would pick up half the cost of the air ticket. When the bill arrived, he had bought a first class ticket. Something odd about a socialist opponent of the right to fly, taking a first class seat, sipping champagne, and jetting into Africa?
3. Nick Hurd, self-avowed eco-warrior, permanently tanned, presumably not from a sunbed.
4. The entire shadow cabinet (except Peter Ainsworth) flying up to Scotland for its awayday.
5. David Cameron flying on private jet to view the melting glaciers.
Posted by: Surrey Boy | March 12, 2007 at 11:18
Well a few nuclear weapons going off would resolve global warming - nuclear winters r us
Not sure it's the greenest solution though :-)
Posted by: Ted | March 12, 2007 at 12:41
Most people are interested in environmental issues and want to help . They are positive about it not negative .
At the same time they are wary of the cost to them in taxes and are very suspicious of politicians on this matter - with good reason . There is a widspread assumption that the major gains which ordinary peple have made in terms of travel and particularly of frequent holidays abroad are now being targetted by the political class
( who will themselves be protected from any penalties ) . They really resent being hectored , preached at and threatened by environmental fanatics .
How Dave et al have allowed themselves to be bounced into the green fanatic camp is beyond me . You will notice that Labour haven't . This Conservative team is supposed to be politically street smart and yet they have made a serious mistake on this one .
Rx- go quiet on the matter ,
- drop the taxes idea " we were
misunderstood "
-stick to platitudes and benign smiles
from now on and for God's sake don't be
seen to threaten people's liberty to
travel.
Posted by: Jake | March 12, 2007 at 12:55
Cameron telling us on WATO that airline traffic forecast to grow exponentially......yes but those forecasts relate to ASIA not Europe which is why the A380 appeals to China
Posted by: ToMTom | March 12, 2007 at 13:08
A green tax is a tax that is imposed in order to change peoples behaviour to achieve en environmental goal. It should generate no net revenue for the Exchequer. To quote DC in today's Telegraph -
“What we have said is any green taxes we introduce will be offset by cutting taxes on families, or on business, one for one,” Mr Cameron told the BBC.
“People need to know these are green taxes, not just another way of the Chancellor putting his hand in your wallet.”
As long as he sticks to his promise to give the money back in tax cuts - whats the problem/
Posted by: renny | March 12, 2007 at 13:43
" As long as he sticks to his promise to give the money back in tax cuts - whats the problem "
dum
surely no one can be that naive .
Posted by: Jake | March 12, 2007 at 14:08
There are 60 million potential voters out there - surely not all of them are as cynical as you Jake.
Posted by: renny | March 12, 2007 at 14:27
David Cameron as set the agenda on the environment. I doubt if the Conservative Party had not campaigned so hard on this issue that the environment would be as important an issue as it is now.
He as set the agenda now we need to start laying down the policies. We have to get it over to people that if we are to deal with climate change, people must change the way they live and those that pollute will have to pay.
If we are straight with people on this issue, sell the polices right, people will support us.
Posted by: Jack Stone | March 12, 2007 at 14:32
Renny:As long as he sticks to his promise to give the money back in tax cuts - whats the problem/
Exactly! It's like a chap trashing a restaurant. Nobody minds so long as you offer to pay up afterward.
Posted by: Bullingdon Chap | March 12, 2007 at 14:35
Jack. Can you enlighten me as to what Cameron will do to manage the increasing pollution from China, India, and Brazil? Obviously since the polluter pays are you suggesting something like import tarriffs?
Cameron jumped on a bandwagon (environmentalism) and is now a hostage to fortune as a result. I listened to him on Today this morning talking about his taxation proposals and my heart sank. This is apparently an issue that he believes strongly in yet struggled to sound interested, let alone articulate the position clearly.
I recall seeing someone say that Cameron is in danger of becoming "hug a hoodie, steal your holiday" in the eyes of voters. Hardly agenda setting.
Posted by: anon | March 12, 2007 at 14:40
Environmentalism has may comparisons with a religion - a new , suspicious , zealous and preachey one which is unforgiving of those who doubt or do not believe .
It is emphatically not the job of the Tory leader to get glued up with this new orthodoxy and completely not the course that the Tory should take
( and it will not win an election )
the job of a Conservative government should be to pick a sensible , restrained and always reasonable path through this quagmire , not dash in and look like Animal Lib Front on a mission .
Telegraph not Independent .
Posted by: Jake | March 12, 2007 at 15:21
The Conservatives will be supporting Labour on Trident?
Vote Conservative Get Labour!
Posted by: TimberWolf | March 12, 2007 at 15:44
As Dave has voiced his support for Trident, will he also support the building of new Nuclear stations, or will he listen to the lunatic Friends of the Earth, and think building wind farms will provide our required energy?
Posted by: RobinClash | March 12, 2007 at 16:36
I wish politcians would compete to increase our freedom rather than to restrict it.
Posted by: Richard | March 12, 2007 at 18:10
Jake so we should let those on The Telegraph write our manifesto. Says a lot about you and your fellow right-wingers that The Telgraph is seen to be the font of all wisdom when to most its viewed as a paper stuck in the past and that`s had its day. A perfect description of most right-wingers!
Posted by: Jack Stone | March 12, 2007 at 19:28
"The newspaper's editorial pages encouraged readers to holiday at home but the travel section included the following headline adverts"
So as good free-marketeers, you think newspapers should muzzle their advertisers, do you? Or is it, conversely, that newspapers' editorial lines should be influenced by their advertisers?
Posted by: Doctor Fegg | March 12, 2007 at 21:21
"So as good free-marketeers, you think newspapers should muzzle their advertisers, do you?"
Depends on what appears in the contract they draw up. If there's an absense of government coercion then in true free-market style they can agree to do whatever they please.
Posted by: Richard | March 12, 2007 at 21:57
The thousands of climate-change deniers who don't actually drive an SUV or 4x4.
Posted by: Mark Fulford | March 12, 2007 at 22:54
"Jake so we should let those on The Telegraph write our manifesto. Says a lot about you and your fellow right-wingers that The Telgraph is seen to be the font of all wisdom when to most its viewed as a paper stuck in the past and that`s had its day. A perfect description of most right-wingers! " thus jack stone.
Dear Jack,
This is Tory Diary not [email protected] and the aim is -presumeably- to set up public opinion so as to win the next election for the Tories. Public opinion ie the opinions of the centre ground the securing of which will win the election ,has to be very carefully cultivated . Forget about going after those who aren't going to vote for you anyway eg pe0ple who read the Independent .
the telegraph is generally ,the main paper of the Tory party -to categorise it as right wing is trite though it is to the right of the labour party if that helps.
Posted by: Jake | March 12, 2007 at 23:02
My God. I wouldn't like Julian Lewis within a mile of the nuclear button
Posted by: greg | March 13, 2007 at 07:43