Tuesday, 27 May 2008

Personal Carbon Credits - Are they mad?

Just when you thought that Labour could not get any more unpopular, up pops the idea of introducing Personal Carbon Credits. I hate this idea on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin. For a start it winds me up when MPs talk about rationing our carbon. Who the hell do they think they are telling us how much fuel we can use? I could understand it if there was a war on and we had a shortage, but this is ridiculous.

MPs involved in recommending this madness say it will help fight climate change. I would like to point out that the temperature has actually dropped over the last decade and scientists are now saying it will drop again over the next decade. So do the MPs think that Carbon Rationing will warm the planet up? I'm confused.

Then of course there's the cost. Estimated at £2bn to set up (that will be at least £6bn then) and a further £2bn to run each year (again let's call that £6bn). Where is this money going to come from? You guessed it - out of our pockets as bloody usual. What planet are these MPs living on?

What you have to laugh about in this report (or else you may go nuts) is the fact that they point out that "The public were likely to be opposed to the proposal." And that there are "practical drawbacks to the scheme". If it is unpopular and impractical, why are they even considering throwing billions of pounds of our money at it?

How the hell is it going to be regulated? We change energy suppliers at the drop of a hat, our direct debits never correspond to the actual amount of energy we use. What about petrol and diesel? Will we have to declare all the fuel we use, and how will they know we are not using more? This report is total pie in the sky and if this kind of committee is what my tax money is spent on, then I want a damn refund.

Isn't our spending black hole big enough?

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

16 comments:

Travis Bickle said...

Why would MPs care about how this works, and the pain it might case the people?

They will, of course, be exempt.

haddock said...

we used to have a buff coloured booklet to take to the shops, the 'coupons' or 'points' were cut out with scissors. Not a computer in sight..... and being poor we could not afford sweets but could swap unused sweet points with rich kids for some of their sweets. That's how it used to work, nowadays there would need to be an extra tier in the model to allow for MPs or their mates to make a fortune on the dealings.

nightjack said...

Welcome to the "second car and spare room" tax. This one is right up there with the window tax.

It is workable now without a massive additional data gathering operation as follows
1. Personal Carbon Allowance at birth
2. Carbon Points deducted for number / size of car (points per car table) - Complicated rebate system for essential car users that needs to be applied for quarterly.
3. Carbon Points deducted for under occupation of houses. Arbitrary points on poll tax bandings with complicated rebate system for families that needs to be applied for quarterly.

System balanced so that the allowances of Mum, Dad & 2 kids are wiped out by a family saloon and a three bedroomed house. Any body running two cars or with a spare room gets clobbered. Works in line with the current ethos of taking your money and then making you ask for it back

Hey presto HMG have found another way into your pockets

Letters From A Tory said...

Sorry, disagree with you Steve. Carbon trading has operated for business in the EU for quite some time, and while it should be expanded to pollution trading it is not without merit.

When making our decisions about driving, flying or getting the train, we should be made to internalise the cost we place on society through pollution. A pollution credit trading scheme would mean that people who don't pollute get paid (literally) for selling their credits while those who pollute heavily have to pay more.

Daily Referendum said...

LFAT,

Yes it all sounds very nice but you are missing the point. We already pay more tax for the polution we cause. When we use more fuel in our homes we pay more tax. When we drive bigger cars we pay more car tax and tax on the fuel we use - which just happens to be the highest in Europe. When will it end? It just opens the door for another level of bloody beaurocracy

Anonymous said...

We should take into account two factors. First the introduction of a personal carbon trading system would do wonders for the already nearly full employment we have. Armies of workers will be needed to administer the scheme. It could justify a further cabinet minister and a new state department. Devolved nations would need to copy the administration, and regional and local committees down to parish level may follow. For socialist MPs expected to lose thair seats at the next election there would be several new Quangos needing well paid chairpersons.
Secondly a further layer of workers would be required to administer the expenses claims of the other tier, More employees in the treasury arm of the civil service would follow as day follows night. Furthermore a vast new computer system will be needed ensuring years of lucrative work for selected friends of NuLab to benefit from.
It would also give a lot of work to the House of Commons, and would help to justify their continued existance despite abrogation of all their powers to Brussels.
Moreover almost all this huge increase in unproductive working population could be recruited through the columns of the Guardian thus ensuring a continuation of the massive client state.

Thud said...

control,control control.

Dave said...

Do I lose points if I fart?

haddock said...

any trading scheme has a trader sitting in the middle creaming off most of the money and rigging the market, this is no different.
The oil 'crisis' is result of 'trading'

trevorsden said...

You say i think 'labour' idea.

but this comes from a committee sadly to relate chared by well known Tory Tim Yeo.

I might have added 'well known Tory numpty Tim Yeo' but the point is still the same.

Super green Hillary Benn has said he sees problems and thinks it unlikely etc etc. So has Tory environment spokesman.

This Committee report is indicative of MPs having nothing better to do with what limited brain power they have and a good pointer to the fact that we could do with less of them to fund some pay rise to put an end to all this expenses gibberish.

Its got to be totally embarrassing that Yeo is behind it. He should stick to writing about golf. Deselection beckons - maybe he can take up residence in one of his own care homes..

Daily Referendum said...

Trevorsden,

When I said Labour, I was referring to this from the BBC news:

Climate Change Minister Joan Ruddock said work on personal carbon trading had not been completely abandoned.

"We have simply decided not to undertake further work paid for by the taxpayer when a number of other studies are under way,"

So if this is not being studied by the government, I take it some private firms are coming up with a solution. No doubt there will be money to be made for a middle-man.

Daily Referendum said...

Dave,

Only if you declare them. I have been known to claim some of mine.

Anonymous said...

Dave,
I'm an American and I just heard about this idea from a radio talk show host here in New York. I didn't believe that any "democracy" could even contemplate such a communistic idea as this. I had to type "personal carbon credits" into Google to see if it is for real, and I found your blog.

Global warming is a global scheme for people like our Al Gore to profit from and to control the population. After all what happens if you don't report all of your carbon use? Do they lock you in prision? Why would they stop at carbon. If they can control how much energy we use, why not control how much food we can eat? After all, there's apparently a global food shortage as well. George Orwell was 25 years to early when he wrote 1984. I can't believe that people are foolish enough to fall for these ideas.

I hope you all fight to shoot this idea down before it gains momentum, and some power hungry politician tries it over here.

Jon P said...

This seemed such a mad idea that cynical old me assumed there must be some other motive behind it. Goodness knows what it might be though. My best guess is this …the government are believers in “peak oil” theory and expect world energy prices to sky rocket (oil at $200 barrel or more). With a system of Personal Carbon Credits they would have in place a ready made rationing system that does not depend on price alone.

No doubt another giant national database that costs a fortune to run and lurches from crisis to crisis. I agree that it would probably cost several billion per annum to run (100 quid each per year?).

Anonymous said...

How much carbon credit would I get for putting every MP on a bonfire and setting it alight? I figure I should get a credit because the carbon cost of burning the wood between their ears would be more than offset by the subsequent reduction in hot air emanations from Westminster.

Jeremy D said...

I can see it now, can anyone say openly traded commodity. It wouldnt be the first time for people to want to make money off others misery... It seems the perfect fix though for the most extreme environut, it should kill many people because farmers will grow less food because these credits will get prohibitively expensive, ie less food production. extreme environuts = less people when you give them your way. Just watch the show on Nat Geo highlighting what would happen with planet earth if every human all of sudden just dissapeared...