« Party to set up joint policy groups with the CDU-CSU | Main | More Tory MPs criticise "nauseating" and hypocritical Brown for Margaret Thatcher's Downing Street meeting »

Comments

Re "We are saying that because of the VAT relief, we would require homeowners to upgrade the energy performance of their homes." What does that mean? Sounds suspicious to me. We have a lot of old housing stock in this country which try as you may is hard to make energy efficient especially compared to modern standards (I know because I have tried). So what do we do? It costs a lot to backwards engineer and is generally inefficient. And knocking down old houses and starting again makes no sense either. Why not just tax the rich (i.e. not the struggling middle classes) and let them pay instead. No of course not. So leave us alone.

he tories ditched the green agenda we would have less problems in the party

Well said Zac, the report contains some of the best recommendations that Cameron has received thus far. We have to acknowledge that markets have done nothing to incentivise the changes needed in time to make a difference. "Blueprint for a Green Economy" puts the case intelligently for a Green Revolution, conservativism that is in the same tradition as Disraeli, Shaftesbury and Wilberforce before.

''We are categorically NOT proposing to tax holidays. We are ONLY targeting domestic, short-haul, commuter flights'' - Zac Goldsmith.

Have you ever considered that some people in this country go on holiday in other parts of the UK which you may just see as a 'commuter flight'. We don't all go on holiday to Mexico.

Even if you are right, which you arn't, the fact that this has been allowed to get out of control and receive so much bad press shows that the Cameroons are not serious about winning. You were off-message in your interviews Mr Goldsmith so you have made this alot worse.

I haven't looked at the report (no doubt, many of its critics haven't either), but does it undertake to consult with industries (especially the car industry) to get their co-operation in phasing in cleaner products?

Some facts that ought to interest Zac.

So many young people do not bother to vote because issues of concern for them are not taken seriously by the major parties. The environment is one of those issues that many young people have a great deal of concern for and may actually encourage them to go out and vote.

A welcome antidote to some of the misinformation. Zac, do not be discouraged by the initial reaction to your report by some Conservatives (or, in the case of these blogs, by some claiming to be Conservatives who may or may not be so); there are many of us who are longstanding Party members and who are very encouraged that our Party is at last making the running on this.

However, it was a pity there was no executive summary, or at least a list of the recommendations (or principal recommendations). Whilst this might make it more likely that a few of us sit down and read the whole report (I intend to do so this week-end), it has made it easier for people to cherry pick their own misleading tit-bits. Maybe even now a separate web only publication of an exec summary would be useful?

The free market will and does help the environment. For example multinational corporations introduce cleaner technology because they have alot to gain from uniform poroduction with uniform technology. The more investment occurs the better control there is over air pollution for example. For example only 30% of Indonesian countries comply with environmental regulations whereas 80% of multinationals do.

The cure is capitalism not government.

This report is perhaps the most important document of the whole policy process because if we get this wrong, there is not going to be a way to fix our planet.

As an industrialised, rich country, we have a duty to lead the way on issues such as climate change, energy security and overall quality of life. Complaining that whatever we do is meaningless against the actions of rapidly industrialising countries is pointless and defeatist, and entirely goes against the fact that we believe 'we're all in this together'.

We should and must take the lead, show what can be done, and encourage others to join us in recognising that our planet is the only one we have, and we must do everything we can to preserve it.

It's right that true carbon and environmental costs should be borne by the polluters. Moving taxes from goods (ie work) onto bads (ie pollution) is a classic Tory way to recognise the impact that our actions have on our society.

The authors recognise that returning to the Stone Age is simply not an option; they have instead proposed a set of policies which are people-led, to incentivise us to work towards a greener, cleaner, healthier environment.

Sounds like furious backtracking from Goldsmith (probably prodded by Cameron.)
Mr. Goldsmith, don't you know that even suggesting supermarket car parking charges is on the same level as closing public lavatories? i.e. political suicide.
And what about country people who rely on 4x4s?

Damage done, I'm afraid.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

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:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker