Quality of Life report dominates Sunday papers

Leaks of the contents of John Gummer and Zac Goldsmith's policy group report signal that the three most controversial issues have been settled amicably:

• The Sunday Times' headline story is that there will be significant rebates on stamp duty, VAT and council tax to reward environmental efficiencies. Putting emphasis on "incentivising the good" rather than "taxing the bad" is sensible in the light of the TPA's recent demolition of green taxes.
• Nicholas Watt in the Observer reports that Gummer has abandoned the highly unpopular "green air miles" proposals but does intend to target taxes at the aviation industry for using planes that are especially environmentally unfriendly.
• Watt reports that Gummer won the nuclear power battle as well, despite Goldsmith saying he would "fight like hell" against it. The report will endorse nuclear power but with the caveat that the nuclear industry will have to pass certain tests. A "senior Tory" sees this as evidence that the political realities of being a candidate have softened some of Goldsmith's radical positions.

The Sunday Mirror links "furious behind-the-scenes rows at Tory HQ" on these issues with Johan Eliasch leaving the party. Thankfully though, the finished product promises to stave off a lot of unwanted unrest.

The other headline proposals are on energy efficiency in the home. They will recommend that household electrical appliances should be regulated more so that the worst offenders don't enter the market and the others will carry labels at the point of sale so consumers can see how much energy it uses. Plasma screens and permanent stand-by functions would be banned.

The Independent on Sunday seems to be alone in revealing a side to the report that delves into social psychology. It quotes Jules Peck, Director of the report, saying that they have been "rethinking the whole way we look at the world". The report will talk about the "hedonistic treadmill where individuals can never be satisfied", and say that "treating [the market] as a god and doing its bidding does not make men and women happy". That excessive material consumption can be both bad for the environment and bad for people is undoubtedly true and looks to me to be the most interesting aspect of the forthcoming report.

Noon update: The Mail on Sunday reports that the cost of a family saloon car could rise by as much as £2000 under plans to tax high carbon cars.

Deputy Editor

Comments

[Alan S]

Is this really right? There cannot really only be green tax cuts because there'll be no new revenue to pay for the cuts in family taxation.

[Alan S]

you seem to be missing out the still highly controversial increases in taxation of air travel or have these beenb ruled out?

[Radical Tory]

''Gummer has abandoned the highly unpopular "green air miles" proposals but does intend to target taxes at the aviation industry for using planes that are especially environmentally unfriendly''.

Which will be passed onto the consumer making it more difficult for poor people to travel. So much for supporting the strivers.

''household electrical appliances should be regulated more so that the worst offenders don't enter the market''.

So less choice for the public on what they want to buy. The 'worst offenders' can also be the most cost effective, why does he want to make life harder for poorer people? All this will lead to is consumers paying more for less choice whilst paying more in tax to pay for more red tape as well.

There should be cuts in tax even if people don't become 'environmentally efficient'. People should not have to bargain to get their money back

[Deputy Editor]

Alan S, they haven't ruled out air taxes but further details of them haven't been leaked today. I'm sure they will want to restrict airport expansion and tax domestic flights a lot more, but I'm not sure what will replace the green tax miles allowance plan.

[Tony Makara]

It would be good if the Conservative party did more to encourage sea-travel. I always travel by sea and find the experience much more enjoyable than other modes of transport. On ships I've watched movies in cinemas, watched live cabaret performers, taken saunas, watched the sun rise and set over the sea, had splendid meals in ship restaurants etc. The whole 'Sea-Travel' experience is so underrated. Apart from once being caught in a storm force eleven in the north sea during the equinox, my experiences of sea-travel have been first-rate.

[Radical Tory]

''That excessive material consumption can be both bad for the environment and bad for people is undoubtedly true and looks to me to be the most interesting aspect of the forthcoming report''.

Even if I accepted this, which I don't, so what? Why is it bad for people to own things, to aspire to own more?

Who defines what is excessive? This all sounds very socialist.

It's not the job of government to make people happy. It's to provide a sphere of freedom so that they can pursue happiness.

[Radical Tory]

Did I just read the above correctly? They want to ban plasma tv screens!!??

I hope I'm getting this wrong.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

LCD technology is on the verge of overtaking plasma regarding larger screens, smaller plasma screens have never been an option in any case. With the attendant problems of burn in we've just been waiting for other technologies to create as good a picture and that time is pretty much here. The irony is that CRT still gives the best picture but nobody seems interested in them anymore.

[Radical Tory]

Cardinal Pirelli - you obviously know more about technology than me. I don't even own a plasma tv. I do wonder though why this report wishes to ban them if they are going out of fasion already? It seems the market will do the work for them. No doubt Goldsmith and Gummer just don't trust the market.

I don't know why they propose some of these things. Just a few day ago Cameron was saying we are the party of freedom and now we have a report saying airports should not be allowed to expand and it should be more expensive to travel by plane within the UK. Just a few days ago he was talking about the importance of the family and now we have a report which wants to give council tax rebates to those homes which don't produce much rubbish i.e. those with one person or a couple rather than a family.

If he adopts these ideas his words are hollow.

[Moral minority]

Plasma screens, particularly the 42 inch and larger versions, are far superior to LCD. The difference is most noticeable on sport. Banning plasma screens will lose a lot of votes.

The social psychologising is disgraceful. It is typical of the nanny state. How go Goldsmith and Gummer know what makes people happy? How do they define hedonistic? How do you define excessive consumption.

This report smacks authoritarian puritanism. It belongs in the dustbin. Eco-fascism has no place in the Conservative Party.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Moral Minority - you are as out of date and out of touch with your politics as with your knowledge of technology, LED backlighting is the future.

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9775350

"Banning plasma screens will lose a lot of votes."

Desperate, desperate stuff.

[Radical Tory]

I think Moral minority is right about the electoral impact of banning plasma tv's. if the Conservative Party does indeed propose this it has the potential to damage us if the media and other parties focus on it.

It has the potential to make the Conservatives look controlling, interfering and frankly just plain weird. People are dying due to waiting lists and estates are being taken over by yobs and we're talking about banning plasma tv's! They couldn't appear more out of touch if they tried.

It could have the same impact as Blair's idea to take yobs to cashpoints for on the spot fines - it made him look out of touch. This will occur if we let other parties and the media the chance to focus on such ideas - let's not give them that chance and bin it.

[Former Tory]

This is in response to the 'Follow the lead of the Kent Conservatives - organise EU Treaty rallies', thread as it is censored for comments:
"kick UKIP into the long grass"
It's fairly apparent from the content above that you've cut and pasted and plagiarised from UKIP material and yet you don't even have the decency to acknowledge the source.
This is par for the course with the Tories and the reason I left them to join UKIP was the self-delusion combined with the outright dishonesty in fooling the grassroots and general public over the Conservative message on the E.U.
You don't mean what you say because you know this is just an impossible wish list unless you leave the E.U. which will never, ever happen under the Tories. Over to you..........

[James Maskell]

Im concerned here about the entire strategy. We are overall planning on keeping a balanced budget. Any increases on expenditure will have to be paid for by increase on environmental taxation. However the proposals in this report are calling for clearly far higher tax increases than would normally happen, because they are proposing environmental tax rebates on energy efficiency. The areas in which taxation will increase are going to become crippling, surely. That will lead to urgent action being done to avoid paying it, that is changing behaviour and consumer habits. That then leads to a massive cut in tax receipts, which leaves us with a black hole to pay for our other tax rebates and increases in expenditure.

Are we sure these numbers are going to add up? I foresee a terrible fudge that will haunt us in the next General Election. We are treading a very fine line here.

[Radical Tory]

James makes a good point. Either people change their behavior due to these incentives and so tax revenue falls (if we are to believe Cameron that means poorer public services and breaking our pledges). Or people don't change their behavior so we end up taxing them so much that they hate the Conservatives.

What a mess. Labour will rip this apart.

[James Maskell]

While Im banging on about it, I should declare an interest in that I work in a corner shop, one of the places which will be affected most by some of these proposals. Tesco's and Asda can pay the fines, but independent shops will find themselves under more pressure. The FSB is annoyed enough about regulation upon small businesses. Zac Goldsmith has talked about how small shops are dying off (lets not forget, Zac campaigned in favour of the small shops in his area) and yet we are proposing to punish shops for excess packaging. Small shops, which use cash and carrys or other wholesalers and dont get much of a choice about packaging methods, will have to pay fines, which would have been forced on them by the wholesalers. The fine will be passed down to the customer. Supermarkets can pay the fines easily with their enormous profits. Small shops cannot and struggle enough to reach the profit margins they current get in order to stay in business.

[Moral minority]

Cardinal Pirelli, I have three top hifi and home cinema dealers in my area. The Hifi magazines say that they are amongst the best in the country.

All say that large plasma screens (especially those manufactured by Pioneer, Panasonic and Fujitsu) are superior to their LCD equivalents. Those three manufacturers have raised the standards of plasma televisions with their latest models. HDTV looks much better on a plasma than a LCD equivalent.

Do you know better than them? I doubt it!
You just go along with the official line.

[Traditional Tory]

Plasma screens and permanent stand-by functions would be banned.

That will go down a bundle with the snazzy chav element.

What icon of the aspirational undercalss is he going to hit next. Stretch limousines?

More votes down the toilet

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Out of date and arrogant with it. In not reading the 'Economist' article from a couple of days ago that I gave a link for you've just made yourself look a fool. You have clearly read a few bits from old 'What Video' magazines and ignored the concept of technological progress.

"You just go along with the official line."

You, sir, are a troll, and a poor excuse for one at that. I've got your number. I may not post often, but I recognise your type from elsewhere. You could be someone I ridiculed earlier under a different name or a new one, but no matter. I have a Panasonic plasma at the moment, I will be trading that in for an LCD screen when the new technology comes into play soon, if you get sold an obsolete screen then that's just another reason to laugh at you.

[Traditional Tory]

I don't replace my own TVs until they wear out but I do own some holiday cottages wherein I have installed expensive state of the art TVs for my guests, some of whom are likely to be fussy about such things.

Possibly these have plasma screens. Those are those soft jelly things aren't they? I think this laptop has one.

Like 99% of the public I assumed such things were state of the art and until a few minutes I had no idea anybody objected to them.

Sheer jealousy, I suppose.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

You have an LCD screen, a plasma screen would be covered in glass (although a glass screen would also be used for all other types).

[Traditional Tory]

Well, what's wrong with them? Dont these home cinema giant TVs have plasma screens?

I was recently at the home of a multi-millionaire vulgarian who had three of them. One was located in a bedroom decorated and furnished in the colours of Manchester United. He reads the Sun, so may well be a Conservative voter.

Needless to say I felt politely obliged to congratulate this gentleman on his excellent taste.

[Moral minority]

COMMENT EDITED

I received that advice recently when obtaining quotes on setting up a home cinema.

My dealers install plasmas and small LCD screens all the time. They say that large plasmas are better than LCDs. I would rather take their word than The Economist's. Their businesses depend on their professional knowledge and expertise.

If LCDs are so much better, why are Pioneer and Panasonic continuing to make plasmas. Surely that would lose money by continuing to sell inferior products at premium prices.

The Economist article you quoted comments "Matsushita, whose Panasonic brand accounts for the lion’s share of plasma sales world-wide, expects plasma panels to hang on to 30% of the market for flat-screen TVs bigger than 37 inches." The reason why LCDs are taking a larger share of the market is that they are much cheaper, about a third of the equivalent plasma. You own a Panasonic yet wish to exchange it for an LCD that Panasonic believes to be inferior to its current products.

Having looked at the latest LCDs and plasmas, I preferred the plasma and plan to purchase the latest Pioneer 1080P model, the best available IMO. That is freedom of choice, unfortunately an anathema to Gummer and his eco-fascist chums like Cardinal Pirelli.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Editor (or deputy ed)

I believe that such abuse can lead to the person being banned or suspended. I shall leave that to your capable judgement.

Personally I buy future proof equipment, not what I am told is good today. In fact, if I was planning on changing I would leave it twelve months or so until the choice is there, as today is not a good time. If you do have to change now you have to pay the price I suppose.

[Moral minority]

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN BY THE EDITOR.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Wet? Wrong person. I pointed out a factual error believing that people with specialist knowledge in any area have a duty to explain. I deal with people who don't take advice every day, they only have themselves to blame.

[voreas06]

Frankly if I have the choice of HDTV technology or reducing CO2 emissions so I make my childrens lives more bearable then I will just have to live with not seeing every spot and pimple on Andrew Marr's head. That is not even the choice I am faced with. Instead the choice is save the planet and watch LCD TV's or destroy the planet and watch Plasma's. It is going to be such a hardship but I will choose to save the planet.

[Derek]

This argument is ridiculous. It will not matter one iota which TV you watch or whether you have a stand-by. Any savings you make are miniscule and in any case carbon dioxide is not driving climate change - so relax. Even if CO2 did cause a slight warming you can still relax safe in the knowledge that the Chinese alone will put out more CO2 in a week than the whole of the UK in a year.

One more point - an increase in CO2 is actually beneficial to plants so will increase growth of trees and crops.

[Moral minority]

The Editor owes me an explanation. He overwrote a reasonable response to Cardinal Pirelli's hysterical and OOT plea to ban me for destroying his pitiful argument.

[Editor]

You used playground insults against a fellow commenter Moral minority. It's important that everyone plays the ball, not the man. Back to the thread please.

[Josh]

I've got to give them credit for not dissing nuclear power though. As bad as the report may be, I was expecting it to be worse.

[Radical Tory]

voreas06 - do you really believe you face the choice between saving the planet and watching LCD tv's? Are you just being sarcastic?

Your comment just seemed weired.

[Moral minority]

Josh, we have not seen the report yet. The leaks are bad enough.

[Alistair]

It takes one to know one MM.

But as Ive observed before, it's always hugely enjoyable to watch the Tories doing what they do best -- abusing each other.

Meanwhile -- while the Tories witter about irrelevancies -- our Prime Minister acts!

[James]

Oh Derek, Derek...where have you been?

"...carbon dioxide is not driving climate change - so relax..."

"Even if CO2 did cause a slight warming..."

"...an increase in CO2 is actually beneficial to plants so will increase growth of trees and crops..."

Well then, I guess the Stern Report, the International Climate Change Conference, and all those pesky people who will insist on using SCIENCE to inform their arguments have been barking up the wring tree. They should have just asked Derek.

[Martin Cole]

"It has to be a no-brainer for ordinary people," he added.

The above is from politics.co.uk website quoting Zac Goldsmith (multi-millionaire according the BBC 24 news this evening), on TV this morning, talking about stamp duty rebates. (Note the implication that the duty
will continue at present rates).

Own goal or what, those who actually watched Andrew Marr's lightweight programme this morning, would consider the above quote generous, it came over to me as a remark intended to mean either "ordinary people without brains might even get this" or "ordinary people (who we all know do not have any)brains ....."

Why put such a political lightweight on in the first place.... oh yes, I forgot Gummer and the force-fed BSE Burger!

[Michael Davidson]

Banning plasma TV screens? This cannot be right surely? I heard on the radio news before that they want to ban large 'American-style' refrigerators as well? If so, this is seriously worrying.

Some of the proposals are good, but I did not join the Conservative party to see us interfering in what people can and cannot buy. I have a plasma screen and a big refrigerator - am I going to have these taken away from me?

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Also pleased that there has been no kneejerk reaction against nuclear power.

[601]

Banning plasma T.V and thing like it?

Shouldn't the Tory party be the party of aspiration?

I wonder if cameron has a plasma t.v in his substansial homes?

[Radical Tory]

Zac Goldsmith is certainly a lightweight. Let's face it do we honestly think he would be where he is if it weren't for his family?

He just appears out of touch and very nervous when on tv. He isn't appealing to people in places like Stockton South and Tynemouth (places we need to win to be in power).

I think Cameron surrounds himself with such people because 1. there his friends 2. they make him look slightly more competent than he really is. As usual very bad judgement on Cameron's part.

[TomTom]

Zac Goldsmith really impresses.....not the TV viewers....but obviously Cameron & Co. He is The Typical Tory for the 21st Century - OE plus Inherited Wealth and a great ability to sound vacuous as the general public stares open-mouthed that such an airhead gets exposure to make the Tories look complete prats.

This is Self-Destruction in slow-motion...watching Goldsmith makes voting Labour seem just so attractive

[Edison Smith]

Zac Goldsmith said in the Sunday Times that he "simply hasn't had the time" to read all of John Redwood's report on the economy.

That simply is not good enough.

Yet another sign that (no pun intended) the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

[voreas06]

Radical Tory "voreas06 - do you really believe you face the choice between saving the planet and watching LCD tv's? Are you just being sarcastic?

Your comment just seemed weired."

yes it was a silly argument and I was in parts being sarcastic, but I really wouldn't care less about what goods I could buy if my house got flooded by rising sea levels. Some perspective is needed I think. I am more than happy to sacrifice standby buttons, big fridges and plasma TVs if it helps to stop my insurance going through the roof and possibly my housing falling into the sea. Sorry if it ruins your choice agenda but I feel most people will agree with me.