« Too much materialism? | Main | Saatchi & Saatchi to run Labour's election advertising campaign »


Well, weve lost EasyJets support for the next General Election then. Well done guys. Who are we going to alienate next?

And don't forget trains are subsidised by the

Isn't he being misleading about widening the debate to the regions? I thought they were talking about routes where train travel could be as convenient as air (aka. London to Paris or London to Manchester)...Edinburgh to Belfast, for example will not fall into that category (unless we build a tunnel). Perhaps VAT on domestic flights is too blunt an instrument, but surely its worthwhile looking at how we can keep internal travel as low carbon and efficient as possible? Politics of and again!!

Air passenger duty is a mean stealth tax that was introduced by Kenneth Clarke. Clarke also introduced insurance premium tax, another stealth tax. Gordon Brown learnt all his tricks from Our Ken. Gummer and Goldsmith are merely carrying on Ken's and Gordon's nasty habits.


Despite being 547 pages long, the report is still too vague about what might be done to reduce carbon, particularly by adopting new technologies for transport. Tax is still seen as the key, but surely there are other ways to reduce carbon than stiffing us for living in the modern world?

It's worth noting that EasyJet are attempting to deal with the environmental issues of air travel and their point about old vs new planes is good. We should encourage replacement of older planes and further incentivise new technology with better tax breaksboth in the air and on the road.

EasyJet have gone to the trouble of putting a proposal for an 'ecojet' which makes sense. I hope (and suggest) they take a stand at the party conference and put their point of view.




Has he even read the aviation chapter of the report? Gummer and Goldsmith propose changing APD from being per passenger to per flight, and are clear that whilst they'd love to be able to simply tax fuel use instead, international aviation conventions prevent this.

What an idiot.

Easjet is of course correct. I'll be using them more and voting tory less. Well done Cameron et al you just lost another vote. You think you can get enough liberals to make up for the people you are alienating? If Cameron thinks this he's in for a shock.

EasyJet is the one of the problems with the whole debate on air travel.

They single-handedly made airflying so cheap, it's increase demand for air by a huge amount.

You can bet that Cameron will win out this debate, atleast he is not "pretending" to be green like Brown.

Jaz - why is it a problem to offer poor people the chance to travel to far away places. Why do you seem to dislike poor people? You must really hate China, do you think they should just all live in poverty as well?

Why would Cameron win this debate? His ideas are just weird and not in touch with the country. Also people don't even want this debate! They care about schools, hospitals etc not making it more difficult for them to travel.

I won't be voting tory come the next General Election just like many other sensible tories.

Radical Tory, I doubt you ever voted Conservative in your life so there's no vote to lose!

Raj - I haven't just voted Conservative I've also stood as a tory candidiate in local elections. However this is not about me. Please focus on the issues. If you don't think tories are being turned of by Cameron than you will get a shock come the next General Election. I'm trying to warn the Cameroons, if they want to bury their heads in the sand so be it.

We love you guys:

Raj,can you actually try to comment on the issue and stop attacking Rad Tory,this is a forum for ALL veiws and he still has the right to say what HE wants,he is not alone on his veiws,i have been a conservative all my life (i am 38) and i really don't like what mr goldsmith and mr gummer have come up with either as for easyjet i think they are not the problem at all they live in a competative market as we all do so if they can sell seats cheaper then thats a good thing after all don't you ever look for value for money in your day to day life ?

The most revealing comment was on a Channel 4 programme a couple of months ago (No, not the great global warming swindle). It asked could one fly and not feel guilty, which apparently is a concern of the programme makers and those who commissioned it. At one point it was pointed out the modern aircraft were good in that they emitted less pollution and used far less fuel than their counter parts of a couple of decades ago. The greenie retorted, no that was in fact bad as it had made air travel cheep, and therefore contributed to more people flying. Are Gummer and Goldsmith in danger of becoming neo-Luddites? If they are not careful, they may be spun that way…

Radical Tory

"I haven't just voted Conservative I've also stood as a tory candidiate in local elections"

Yes, of COURSE you have. I really believe you - as much as I believed Tony B.Liar's 45 minute WMD claim.

Isn't it interesting that we have "Traditional Tory" and now "Radical Tory". Anyone else think they've been spawned by the same anti-Conservative machine?

"I'm trying to warn the Cameroons"

Warn them about what? Moving left of hunting gypsies with fox-hounds?

How about offering to cut taxes as an incentive rather than impose them? Alternatively, how about ceasing this irritating desire to tell people how they can and cannot travel?

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