« "No one should be penalised for trying to do the right thing" | Main | Have your say in ConservativeHome.com's May survey »

Comments

The whole idea is quite mad. It could not be administered effectively and would be political suicide. What's worse it comes from Tim Yeo whos do as I say, not as I do attitude on this is sickening.

Thats just what we need another - expensive quango to soak up money for no benefit. What world do you live in Mr Yeo?

Close down all schemes and quangos. Westminster and overpain journos totally out of touch with reality.

I hope the idea is firmly rejected as I fear that Mr Yeo has lost his marbles with this one. Lunacy - and Socialist-sounding lunacy at that!

The whole idea that there is a tension between economic and environmental well-being is nonsense. With oil prices spiking we need to move to greater fuel efficiency for the sake of our wallets and for the sake of the planet. Forcing people to account for their carbon footprint will serve many sound policy objectives.

I groan whenever Yeo is on and I bet his carbon footprint is bigger than mine.

I really hope Yeo's report is promptly consigned to the waste-bin of history, and that the Conservatives state upfront that they are against any increase in taxation on fuel use or introduction of 'carbon permits'.

People have already seen through the 'green' thing as being nothing more than a socialistic ruse to tax and control. When it costs you £85 to fill up your car and six months-worth of heating-oil costs you £1200 the idea of yet more bureaucracy leading to increased [indirect] taxes is anathema to every right-thinking person.

This greenery is just like a modern religion: the eco-types invent the 'sin' [burning fossil-fuels]. Anyone who dares question the doctrine is is branded a heretic. Believers must either do penance (living in cold houses, driving horribly cramped and unsafe microcars) or the rich people can buy the equivalent of medieval 'papal indulgences' in the form of carbon-credits.

Enough of such nonsense!

People talk about a wonderful Cameron strategy but let's remember how wrong he was on green policy. He was also very wrong to allow Oliver Letwin to say that social issues were replacing economic issues. Wrong to match Labour on spending. Wrong on grammar schools.

As I already posted on another thread, I was horrified when I heard Tim Yeo's proposal on Today. Of course the BBC will be wetting themselves when they hear of any suggestion of Green Taxes. Someone needs to get on the airwaves and rebut the idea that this is Conservative Policy as it is a sure vote loser. What people want is less Government, less tax and less interference in their daily lives.

It appears that environmental fervour like treason is largely a question of dates!

Ooh, I love to dance a little sidestep
Ooh, I love to sweep around the widestep
Cut a little swathe and lead the people on
- Governor of Texas

...He meant them how he meant them at the time..

"People talk about a wonderful Cameron strategy but let's remember how wrong .."

Yes essentially wrong when ever he has jettisoned core Tory values and gone for the 'Ubers' agenda. Perhaps he would have better spent the time trying to express Conservative values in a more up to date language, than tried to rubbish them. Eg rather than not talk about immigration, he should have engaged in a debate out population sustainability.

Ever since the days of Sir Stifford Crapps politicians have hectored us into doing things that they say are good for us, and which nearly always turn out to be money-wasting and bureaucratic. If there is a genuine concern about our carbon footprints then let our leaders address such questions as:
Why do I need a car to do my shopping?
Why isn’t there a school within walking distance?
Why are the trains so awful?
Why is our country so overcrowded that southern motorways are one long traffic jam?
Why do I pay VAT on improvements to make my house more energy efficient and then have some little twerp tell me that it must go into a higher council tax band?
Why don’t we do more to educate scientists and engineers who could solve some of the problems?
Why does over a kilogram of my Sunday newspaper go straight into the recycling box without ever being opened?
I’m sure you could think of many others.
So please, no more Greenery-Brownery from the Conservative party.

A Dewar: To be fair to Tim Yeo he sees these personal accounts as an alternative to green taxes.He's wrong to support either but we should understand his argument.

Given that the main causes of the cost of living issues we are facing are environmental in nature, it certainly smacks of poor short termism to switch focus away from environmental and sustainability issues.

Vince, I am sure he does but he is looking at it from a very privileged position. He will be able to afford to buy extra credits to fly as much as he wants and turn up his thermostat if he wishes but if these greenies really thought the planet was in such danger they wouldn't fly at all - would they?

Your ordinary hard working person would have to think twice before filling the car, turning on the light, running the kids to football practice or guides or booking the family holiday to Majorca. I fact we already do. Just more worry in an already worrying world.

"He will be able to afford to buy extra credits to fly as much as he wants"

That's going to be the case regardless, unless you are saying you want some form of major redistributive policy.

An idea so left wing and stupid that even Dave has rejected it. Pretty impressive, Mr Yeo.

(People talk about a wonderful Cameron strategy but let's remember how wrong he was on green policy. He was also very wrong to allow Oliver Letwin to say that social issues were replacing economic issues. Wrong to match Labour on spending. Wrong on grammar schools.)

Is that the same David Cameron who has led this party to HUGE local election victories? The one who has lead us to RECORD highs in the polls? Or maybe its the David Cameron who more than two to one would prefer as our PM...

I will take his strategy over yours anyday.

Audery

Yeo is out of date. The wheels are coming off the CO2 bandwagon, and the AGW story is fast unravelling. Stern is completely discredited, and many climate scientists have stated that the IPCC findings are largely based on flawed interpretations of flawed computer models. I suspect that, despite the best efforts of Gummer, Goldsmith and Yeo, the Party's leadership is well aware of the doubtful science which has hitherto sought to underpin the whole GW scam. The question is - how and when to withdraw from the Green Agenda which has cost us so dear (especially those on low incomes who have been hit the hardest).
As for Tim Yeo, member for Barking-(mad), his pronouncements over the past few years have done the Party no good at all.

Dave - You miss my point - I don't want any policy. Purchasing Carbon credits would add EXTRA cost to a holiday, a gallon of petrol or an extra digit on the thermostat. People do not want extra taxes, green or otherwise.

Thank heavens for John Redwood.
I have rarely heard such a daft idea as Personal Carbon Footprints. The cost of extra staff and computers (of doubtful accuracy)would be vast, and how many people would understand, or bother, with it?
How could a Conservative get involved in such a farrago?

Once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified the comrades will start imposing carbon taxes by qmv, red lines or not.Dave will have no say then as hwe will have let matters rest.

Tick,tock.

I don't think that just because the chattering classes are jabbering about climate change, it means we should not address the problem.

I'm afraid that picking up litter and a few trees here and there is going to solve anything. Nevertheless, I don't think that the personal carbon accounts are workable. What is workable however, is a proper carbon trading scheme instituted by the government for all companies.

Burning Our Money is on Tim Yeo's case:

"Setting on one side the fact that global warming seems to have stopped, and anyway nobody understands WTF's happening, and all those Doomsday scenarios are based on 50-100 year forecasts that are the worst GIGO crap you can possibly conceive, and anyway we only produce 2% of global emissions so a UK scheme would achieve SFA, and we'd stuff our own prosperity for no significant gain... setting all that on one side, don't these berks understand how rationing works?

As explained on Saturday's Supersizers Go Wartime, the poor sell their ration books to the rich. The rich then dine hugely on champagne and caviar - rendered all the more delicious because nobody else can get it - while the poor live on carrots and black market snoek.

The black market was a major problem during the War, and we were under U-Boat blockade at the time. How much worse it would be in today's globalised open markets: the Bunsfield style consequences of illegal importation of black market petrol can only be guessed at (unless of course Yeo and Monbiot propose a full submarine blockade... you wouldn't put it past them)."

More:
http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2008/05/ration-books-coming-back.html

It's worth remembering, when you hear the virtues of the Boy Milipede being extolled as the "saviour of New Labour", that personal carbon credits were his own pet hobbyhorse when he was at Environment. He thought people would buy eveything with a carbon card, like a credit card. He was told by many voices that the idea was unworkable and Hilary Benn has quietly dropped it. To see it resurface as a Conservative proposal, presumably made with a straight face, is extraordinary.

"If there is a genuine concern about our carbon footprints then let our leaders address such questions as:"

Indeed why do they worry about our carbon foot prints when they are letting foot prints into the country as fast as they can possibly arrange to let them in.

I posted on John Redwoods blogg a little calculation I did on road miles..

The ONS reports that between 1995 -2005 road mileage went from 340 bn miles to 400 bn miles.

As there are 30 million licence holders that's 13,000 miles per year.

Between 1995-2005 they have increased our population by at least 2 million, which the Government reliably informs us are all making a economic contribution to the country, so thus fair to assume are road usurers. As such those added people have added some 26 bn road miles to the total or account for approaching 50% of the increase we have seen in the last decade!

The Government also seeks to increase our population by another 6 million people, who will contribute some 78bn road miles. No guesses when Government ministers talk of the need to curtail the demand growth, what and where the demand growth is coming from!

"With oil prices spiking we need to move to greater fuel efficiency for the sake of our wallets and for the sake of the planet."

We have something known as the market to do this. It might not be perfect but it's a hell of a lot more efficient than the state.

"Forcing people to account for their carbon footprint will serve many sound policy objectives."

Telling the electorate you plan to "force" them to do anything will probably result in a massive V sign on election day. Threaten the consumer society and you're electoral toast.

I learn that the peat cutters in the west of Ireland intend to vote NO in the Lisbon CONstitutional Treaty referendum because of EU proposals to stop this age old activity.

"People talk about a wonderful Cameron strategy but let's remember how wrong he was on green policy. He was also very wrong to allow Oliver Letwin to say that social issues were replacing economic issues. Wrong to match Labour on spending. Wrong on grammar schools.)"

A later commenter said in reply:

"Is that the same David Cameron who has led this party to HUGE local election victories? The one who has lead us to RECORD highs in the polls? Or maybe its the David Cameron who more than two to one would prefer as our PM... "

It is also the same Cameron who realised that unless he changed his ways he was going to burn at the stake at last Tory conference. Cameron has greatly benefited from the political suicidal tendencies of Brown and his (Cameron's) victory at C&N was for no other justifiable reason.

Cameron has yet to show that he is in fact a Conservative with a big 'C'. Who was it who put Yeo in charge of the Tory environment brief - have a guess? It was the same person who put Ken Clarke of " I want Parliament to having all powers of a parish council" fame in charge of the Democracy think tank?
We await the real David Cameron to stand up (unfortunately he might already be doing so).

Amazing that nobody on this thread has mentioned Tim Yeo's penchant for scooting off on golf trips around world. The man is a high-class hypocrite.

It's amazing that the Conservative party still tolerates this sort of behaviour.

Playing golf???!!!!!

Something is clearly happening to world climate. It may or may not be caused by the activities of mankind. What is certain though it cannot be stopped without the cooperation of India, China and the "third world". Since that cooperation is unlikely to be forthcoming, it seems unlikely we can stop climate change happening. Accordingly it is basically silly to try to stop global warming and all our efforts should be put into coping in the future with the likely consequences.

Yeo and the rest of the EU carbon tax merchants would do well to read this report contained in Melanie Phillips blog (the search facility in MP's blog will find it) in the Spectator. I paste the first paragraph as a taster - she posted on the 20th May.

"Brr! The climate cools for reality-deniers
Tuesday, 20th May 2008
I have previously written about the work of Lawrence Solomon for Canada’s National Post. He has been regularly charting in his column the ever-increasing number of climate scientists around the world who have been either crying foul about the man-made global warming scam or, having initially signed up to it, have been having second thoughts about it. This was a journey of discovery for him, to put it mildly; he had previously been inclined to believe the claims that ‘deniers’ were oil industry stooges, since he himself had worked for an anti-nuclear energy group and so was duly cynical about the way that industry’s scientists could twist the truth to suit their paymasters. But then to his astonishment he discovered that, when it came to MMGW, the scientists who were corrupt weren’t pushing the boat out for big business but for its holier-than-thou green challengers".

Over to Mr Yeo! Do read it all.

Amazing that nobody on this thread has mentioned Tim Yeo's penchant for scooting off on golf trips around world. The man is a high-class hypocrite.

It's amazing that the Conservative party still tolerates this sort of behaviour.

Posted by: Bishop Hill | May 26, 2008 at 17:53

Bishop Hill: I have well and truly commented about Yeo's golfing contribution to the world (and his efforts in the Golf Weekly) in my comment in the main body and before Yeo was given his own spot in Tory Diary in which your comment has appeared.

Fore!

An increasing number of reputable scientists are observing that global temperatures have not increased for the last ten years. The rate of global CO2 increase appears to have stabilised. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation appears to have moved into the start of a cold phase. Solar Cycle 23 is longer than average, and cycle 24 is late starting, both of which suggest a colder climate. NASA have been warning that Solar Cycle 25 will be very weak, further evidence that we could be facing a colder climate which will continue well into the future.

All of these features coming together could mean that far from continued global warming we are in for 30 years of extremely cold weather. A period possibly resembling the Dalton or even worse, the Maunder minimum.

If this should prove to be the case carbon trading will be the least of our worries - we should already be striving to ensure that we have our own independent energy supplies, and that our housing stock is as well insulated as is humanly possible. Time may not be on our side.

It may well be that the warm spell from the 70's to the mid 90's was nothing to do with CO2 at all, just the climate cycling, as it has for millions of years.

"It's amazing that the Conservative party still tolerates this sort of behaviour."

The bare faced nerve of the hypocrite!

Regarding the title of the article, my response is, Thank God for that, commonsense has prevailed

I'm completely with Cameron and not Yeo on this one. This is a silly idea that suggests those who are promoting it have lost touch with the real world in which most people actually live.

People are getting pretty fed up with this AGW business and apart from being dubious on the evidence, it looks very much like a godsend to a government whose natural instincts are to meddle and control. It's an excuse for tax and intrusion and they obviously don't take it seriously themselves. Eco-towns???

Yeo's scheme seems immensely complicated and expensive; it's up to the worst excesses of New Labour. If Cameron is going to dump it, so much the better.

There's certainly a case for encouraging energy independence and energy efficiency, but ridiculous carbon footprint and carbon trading schemes like this aren't the answer.

Max, I’d be very interested to see links to articles supporting these predictions. From what you’ve written, I suspect much of it is based on the Space and Science Research Center’s "RC Theory". Is that the case?

[email protected]

Some links you might find useful

http://www.icecap.us
http://www.climateaudit.org
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com

Steve McIntyre's Climate Audit is a mine of information, but you need to take the time to find your way around the site - it can seem a little dry at first but it's very content rich if you're patient.

Max

I can't decide if Yeo is a useful idiot, or if only the second part of the description applies.

The current fantasy of man-made global warming is due to come to an end soon. Economic pressures will concentrate minds, and all the self-flagellation over carbon dioxide production will have to be forgotten, in order that the real problems can be addressed.

Tim Yeo was on the hard left of the party in the 80's and 90's and became part of the political spectrum to the left of Labour when they adopted vast rafts of Thatcherism rather than face humiliating defeat after humiliating defeat.

I can remember conversations with other conservatives over whether this person actually belonged in the party when he was oiling around cabinet.

Bear in mind that his politics are the politics of the late 70's early 80's when a large number of people joined the conservatives as the only realistic route to power. I have little or no respect for him.

He can be safely ignored as a dinosaur.

Amazing that MP Yeo should adopt this crazy idea of Miliband`s - that socialist, atheist and europhile MP. We need these cards like a hole in the head.

Unfortunately, all Tory environment spokesman Peter Ainsworth can say (Daily Telegraph today) is "This is a very interesting idea and although it does have potential we should proceed with caution." The last thing we want is more government spending on idiotic schemes like this.

Edward,

I'd hardly expect Ainsworth to say, "This carbon nonsense is like a record which the public wanted to hear last month, but its time is passed. It's a vote loser and forget it".

Yeo has been a failure and a liability in every political job with which he has been entrusted. What worries me is the lack of judgement of those who entrusted him. Is there some dark secret somewhere?

I notice there is no mention of offsetting. Do folk who have lush gardens and thereby increase CO2 absorbtion not deserve a bonus?

Delighted to hear of John Redwood's contribution.

I am sure that his economic views will come to the fore in these changed times and that we will see him in the Shadow Cabinet in a leading Shadow department.

Strangle this project whilst its still a twinkle can we?
Whilst the idea and principle is laudable its doomed, doomed do ye hear.
To facilitate such a project will require veritable hoards of civil servants, a bureaucracy of breathtaking proportions and the intrusive nature of the data will be unsupportable.
Full marks to Tim for the ideas, but, nul point for practicality.

I would suggest that every member or supporter of the Conservative Party and indeed al right minded people reads Nigel Lawsons book 'An appeal to reason' In my view it is one of the most important books of our generation.
This shows what a mass error the whole global warming issue has become and how damaging the politics of this is becoming to our country.

Crazed europhile lackey a la Ken Clarke.

Yeo's proposal is something we might expect from a bossy, interfering, authoritarian, statist New Labour enthusiast. Just as the Conservative Party is coming back out of the wilderness, Mr Yeo seems to want to smother its recovery with the terrifying prospect of a new Green Gestapo poking into every corner of our lives.

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