Chris Huhne MP: Tax pollution, not people

Green Tax SwitchThe green tax switch is shaping up to be the biggest campaign we have ever run as a party, and it is in an excellent cause. The time for talk on climate change is over, and the time for action has arrived.

We have one key message which could not be simpler on the doorstep. We should tax pollution not people. If we are to change our behaviour, it is the role of government to lead us collectively away from our dependence on fossil fuels. We need green taxes not to raise revenue for the state – taxes are high enough – but to switch off climate chaos.

By using green tax revenue to take the low paid out of income tax and cut 2 pence off the basic rate, we can nudge our society towards sustainability and strike a blow for fairness and social justice. How much each individual taxpayer saves will depend on their own behaviour. The greener we go, the more we save.

The green tax switch campaign has its own website on which local parties are reporting their activities during the October action week and beyond. We will have more than 125 street stalls the length and breadth of Britain, and it is not too late to organise one and add it to the website. We will be calling on the Government to tax pollution not people, and collecting signatures on a petition to the Prime Minister.

There are meetings and discussion groups organised throughout the country. For local opinion formers, some areas are holding a green tea. There will be more than 1 million leaflets – a Focus on climate change – going out to households across the land.

The campaign pack is free, and everything can be accessed through www.greentaxswitch.com. You can download material for focus. There is a mailing to Lib Dem supporters that can go out on its own or in another mailing, and the recent party political broadcast this week was on our green tax switch and its

“this is the biggest and best campaign we Liberal Democrats have ever run”

In short, this is the biggest and best campaign we Liberal Democrats have ever run. It is a campaign with strong and unique themes that can and should run all the way through to the general election.

The objective is to shift the environmental debate away from talk and onto practical solutions to the problem. The question is no longer whether we have a problem but how we solve it. And we can solve it.

We have already successfully tackled one enormous problem – the hole in the ozone layer – by outlawing chlorofluorocarbons. With politics changing across the world – including the United States and China – we can reach an international solution to humanity’s greatest threat.

Here in Britain, public opinion is shifting as the evidence of rising seal levels, storm damage and extreme weather events take their toll. To give just one example, the Thames Barrier has been lifted 55 times in the last five years against 12 times in the previous five.

All the parties are now agreed on targets, but if targets were the solution to problems this would be the best-run country in the world. With our campaign, we become the only party prepared to go beyond generalities and targets and talk about specific plans to change behaviour.

In the Liberal Democrat debate in the House of Commons on Monday 16th October, we set out our plans to raise duty on new gas-guzzling cars to £2000 a year. A steeply graduated duty will encourage 72 per cent of new car buyers to switch to greener new cars, according to MORI.

We also set out our plans to tax flight emissions not passengers, encouraging full planes. Our flight emissions tax would raise four times as much from flights – including freight flights – and mark a small step towards fair taxation for an industry where there is no VAT on tickets or duty on fuel.

These two green taxes are crucial because they affect the area where Britain’s carbon emissions have been growing most strongly. Transport emissions are up 18 per cent since 1990, whereas emissions in other sectors are down. If we do not tackle aviation, every part of our carbon allowance will be used up in flying around by 2050 with nothing left to heat our homes or drive our cars.

Our guarantee is that the extra tax revenue from green taxes will go back in lower income taxes, taking 2 million people out of income tax altogether, abolishing the first 10 pence starting rate of income tax, cutting 2 pence off the basic rate, and raising the threshold at which the higher rate starts from £38,000 to £50,000.

The green tax switch is just the start of the policy plans we have to tackle climate change, but it is the big and courageous political move that has left Labour and the Tories scrambling to catch up. Let’s get out and tell people that the Liberal Democrats are once again leading the debate on how to change our society and leave our children a planet worth living on.

Chris Huhne MP is the Liberal Democrats’ shadow environment secretary. You can find out more about Chris at http://chrishuhne.org.uk/

Read more by .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

6 Comments

  • Richard Huzzey 21st Oct '06 - 10:12pm

    Anyone wondering where their nearest stall is can find out here:

    http://www.flocktogether.org.uk/showOrganisation.php?Organisation=567

  • CheapWallpaper 22nd Oct '06 - 12:58am

    This has been said before, but to campaign on the ‘tax pollution, not people’ slogan when we want to replace council tax with LIT is nonsensical. I don’t have a problem with LIT (although I do think having a house/land value tax somewhere is a very good idea), it’s just the rhetoric I find hypocritical.

  • Paul Griffiths 22nd Oct '06 - 8:50am

    I’d be more receptive to CheapWallpaper’s line if I thought that most people currently paid their council tax by remortgaging their house, rather than setting aside a portion of their earned income.

  • CheapWallpaper 22nd Oct '06 - 10:08am

    The slogan ‘Tax pollution, not people’ implies the amount we tax people is going to be related to how much resources they use, not how much they earn. LIT is the opposite of that.

    Council tax may be paid by a ‘portion of earned income’ (aren’t all taxes?), but the actual taxes amount is not related to the amount that you earn. LIT is.

  • Paul Griffiths 22nd Oct '06 - 10:56am

    I agree that council tax is not directly related to the amount you earn, but nor is it credibly related to resource usage. Only the most ardent supporter of resource-based taxation, including LVT, thinks that it can or should completely relace IT. Given that IT will continue to form part of the mix, I suggest that switching from IT to resource taxation can be most easily accomplished at the national level. That said, if local resource taxes can be economically implemented, I would have no problem with using them to reduce LIT too. In the meantime, we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

  • Mark Wadsworth 25th Oct '06 - 2:18pm

    For sure. But as our current “green” taxes only raise £35bn odd, as against turnover/profit/income taxes of £350bn-odd, “green” taxes can best be seen as rationing/behavioural taxes rather than real money raisers.

    Chris Huhne was a big fan of LVT until a few months ago (and rightly so). What happened there then? Again, to be honest, LVT will never be much more than a rationing/behavioural tax, but so what?

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Tristan Ward
    @Jennie "It’ll blow your mind to discover that there are HUMANS that produce both gametes, or neither" I'm not aware of any examples of humans who produ...
  • Tristan Ward
    @Jennie "anyone who has had their ovaries removed or gone through menopause is no longer a woman" Obviously this is not correct. "Yes, the majority o...
  • cim
    As far as voting complexity goes, there's two separate bits to that. 1) How difficult it is to understand how to vote? Closed List is exactly equal to FPTP, ...
  • Tim Boura
    @Chloe You said "Fully understand that Mark. The problem is one set of rights should not take precedent over another. Does a female inmate have a right not t...
  • Jenny Barnes
    Seems to me that what most people mean by "biological sex" is "gender assigned at birth" . Gender. So the supreme court ruling makes very little sense....