COMMITMENT TO 3% ANNUAL CUTS IN POLLUTION NEEDS TO BE MORE EXPLICIT

Greens welcomed the announcement today by Scottish Ministers to set a long term target of 80% cuts in climate change emissions by 2050, with interim targets amounting to 3% cuts every year – but Greens expressed disappointment that there are no mandatory targets to cut pollution annually. The watering down of targets goes against the SNP manifesto commitment: “In government we will introduce a Climate Change Bill with mandatory carbon reduction targets of 3% per annum”. Greens also highlighted the political co-operation agreement between the Greens and the SNP which committed to: “reduce climate-change pollution each year.”

Patrick Harvie MSP said: “The SNP has made a commitment to reduce carbon emissions each year. It remains to be seen whether they will make good on that commitment in 2007 and 2008 before the Bill comes into effect.”

Greens suspect that the failure to commit to annual targets in law may be due to an attempt to gain support from Liberal Democrats who have consistently refused, along with Labour, to back annual targets.

Patrick Harvie MSP said: “Whilst there are many good things in the statement, I am concerned that there appears to be a weakening of resolve to make the difference on climate change this year, next year and every year after that. A five-year target means that no government will ever be directly accountable for its actions, or lack of action, and that is very worrying.

“Opportunities abound to cut climate pollution every year. It may well be that 3% cuts every year may still happen under the SNP proposals. However, during the consultation period we urge other parties to join with us in ensuring that the final bill that comes before parliament contains a stronger commitment to reduce pollution every year.

“We must have long term targets of course, but unless we commit to act now it leaves too much room for politicians to avoid responsibility. Moreover, Scotland has a great many opportunities to reduce energy use in homes and business, to improve public transport and to take advantage of our massive renewable energy resources.

“Scotland has the opportunity to be a world leader here. The targets require that all of government works together to join up policy and there can be little doubt that some policies will need to change. We cannot consider aviation expansion or massive increases in motorways and traffic levels as part of the mix. We are also sceptical about the role of carbon offsetting. Indeed, just last week parliament voted for our motion which stated that carbon offsetting cannot be a substitute for reducing emissions directly.”

For more information contact 0790 99 33 074

Notes to editors

1. Extract from the Ministerial statement:

“Our planned Scottish Climate Change Bill will set a mandatory long-term target to achieve an 80% reduction in our emissions by 2050. This target is equivalent to emissions reductions of 3% each year. To ensure sustained progress towards this goal, we will consult on proposals in the bill for targets based on average annual reductions over a five year period. This means we will be held to account each year on the trend of emission reductions.

“We intend that future legislation should set out mandatory requirements for reporting to parliament on performance in achieving the targets.”

2. The Irish government, which includes Greens in Coalition, last week agreed to establish a target of an annual 3% reduction in Irish greenhouse gas emissions.

Http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/its-green-for-go-701434.html

LAND VALUE TAX PROPOSED TO REPLACE COUNCIL TAX AND BUSINESS RATES

Green MSPs have lodged an amendment for debate on Council Tax today (Thursday 21st June) urging government to carry out a review of Land Value Taxation as an option for the replacement of Council Tax. Speaking in advance of the debate Robin Harper MSP will argue that the idea of replacing an unfair property tax with an unfair income tax should be resisted.(1) In 2003 Robin Harper won a vote in parliament which requested that the Scottish Executive undertake an investigation into LVT. This was never carried out. (2)

In the 2003 – 2007 parliament the review of local government finance failed to properly investigate Land Value Taxation (LVT) as an option. The Burt review of local government finance did not take more than a brief look at LVT despite finding: “many positive features of a land value tax which are consistent with our recommended local property tax, particularly its progressive nature.” (3)

Harper says Land Value Tax offers a fairer and more effective local government finance system which will have many more social, economic and environmental benefits than the much criticised and unfair system of council tax. (4) Similar forms of local taxation exist in many other countries including Denmark, South Africa, Jamaica, some Australian states and some cities in the United States.(5)

Greens say a system of land value taxation would benefit those on low incomes and aspiring first time house buyers. LVT would help stabilise property prices, while SNP/Liberal plans for Local Income Tax would worsen housing market distortions. LVT could also be used to support small businesses and enhance links between local government and local taxation. The system would reduce speculation in land and ‘landbanking’, where speculators hold land without developing it while waiting for planning permission or an upturn in property prices.

The proposal would also free up rural land for community benefit, reward more efficient businesses, enable the promotion of sustainable land uses such as organic farming, forestry and affordable housing, be much easier to administer and more difficult to dodge than income tax based systems. LVT would raise the same amount of revenue as the current tax and rate system, but could also be more easily adjusted as appropriate for service provision.

Robin Harper MSP, said: “All the other parties are thinking far too narrowly on this issue – the new politics should look at all the options. It is a shame that the Burt review did not examine Land Value Tax more thoroughly. However, what it did find was that LVT would provide a more progressive form of taxation.

“LVT will target the asset rich, not the poorest in society and is an inherently fairer system all round. It will drive efficiency throughout the land-use system, make more land available and resist speculative planning proposals which distort the market. It will offer public benefits, which are currently captured by private interests.

‘I urge all parties, and there are LVT supporters in the SNP, Labour and the Libdem ranks, to consider LVT as a possible opportunity to break up the polarised arguments over local income tax versus minor tinkering of Council Tax.”

For more information 0790 99 33 074
NOTES TO EDITORS
1. Motion for Debate in the parliament tomorrow morning:
Tory Motion: That the Parliament does not support the introduction of a local income tax as a replacement for the council tax

Green Amendment lodged: Add at end –
“notes the decision, made by the Parliament on 30th January 2003 but never fulfilled, to consider and investigate land value taxation, and calls on the Scottish government to fulfil this commitment before the introduction of legislation on the future of local government finance.”

2. See: http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/site/id/3749/title/_039_Victory_For_Constructive_Politics_039_As_Green_MSP_Wins_Vote_On_Radical_Land_Tax.html

Various proposals for changing Scotland’s system of local taxation have recently been put forward. These range from minor modification of the status quo, to the wholesale replacement of the existing systems by alternatives such as a local income tax.

3. The Burt Review did look at LVT but not in great detail. It did however show a graph indicating the progressive nature of the tax:

Figure 11.1: Comparison of average council tax and LVT bills by band

Council tax band Average council tax bill (2006-07) Average LVT bill

(2006-07)
A 753 254
B 878 531
C 1,004 770
D 1,129 1,039
E 1,380 1,463
F 1,631 2,066
G 1,882 3,707
H 2,258 6,582

4. The key reforms a Green Bill submitted in the last session of parliament proposed was shifting the base of assessment away from whole-property value and onto land value only.

The major provisions of LVT: the basis of assessment is land value the ‘liable person’ is the owner not the occupier of the property rebates on second homes, exemptions on empty property and discounts on underutilised property would be abolished, the existing Council Tax and Non-Domestic Rates databases would be rebuilt to enable the reforms a new means of payment shall be introduced whereby, in cases of low income or insufficient liquidity, liable persons may elect to defer payment the interval of reassessment will be yearly The reforming Bill is proposed in pursuit of fairness, productivity, equity, convenience, democracy, enterprise, efficiency, precision, environmental sustainability, the avoidance of dispute and the removal of macro-economic distortions in the national economy.

Key benefits: Council Tax and Business Rates will be part of same system. Those most capable of paying will pay more. Low income households will pay less. Exemptions and discounts for pensioners. Free up derelict and underused land and empty properties. Tax falls on property owner, not occupier. Will stabilise the housing market. It would finally create a comprehensive land register. Those who use land efficiently, pay less. Difficult to dodge, easier to collect

5. Similar forms of local taxation based on land values exist in many places around the world, including Denmark, South Africa, Jamaica, some Australian states and several cities and communities in the US. Along with several smaller cities in the east, Washington DC, Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania all successfully tax land. In 1981, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, was considered the second most distressed city in the nation by a federal agency. 13 years later, after having implemented a land value tax the number of businesses had doubled and the market value of private real estate had quadrupled.

HISTORIC VOTE AS SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT SAYS NO TO TRIDENT

Green MSPs today expressed their delight that a Green-led debate resulted in an historic vote as the Scottish Parliament sent a resounding NO message to Westminster on the renewal of Trident. The Green motion was agreed by 71 votes to 16, with all but four Labour members abstaining. In a shock result, no Labour MSP could bring themselves to vote for the replacement of Trident. The vote marked the first ever rejection of a nuclear weapons programme in British Parliamentary history.

The Green motion lodged by Patrick Harvie MSP congratulated the majority of Scottish MPs who opposed the renewal of Trident at Westminster earlier this year and called on the UK government not to go ahead with its plans. (2) An amendment inserting a recognition that defence is a reserved matter at the moment was put forward by the Libdems and was accepted by both Greens and the SNP – although Greens said this does not stop the Scottish Parliament using devolved powers to ensure compliance with international law and to protect the health and environment of the Scottish people.

On 14th March 2007 all 6 SNP and all 55 Libdem MPs who voted, voted against the UK government’s decision to replace Trident, with the support of 94 Labour MPs. In a BBC survey earlier this year, a majority of Scottish MPs said they were against Trident renewal. A clear majority of Scots also oppose it. (3)

Green MSP Patrick Harvie said: “MSPs come to this issue from a range of angles; while we can all recognise that defence is currently a reserved matter, upholding international law in Scotland and protecting the health and well-being of the Scottish people are devolved responsibilities.

“It is greatly encouraging that the Scottish Parliament has today expressed the view – shared by the majority of Scots – that the UK government’s plans to replace Trident should be opposed. We will continue to work with everyone who shares that opposition to new nuclear weapons – inside Parliament and beyond. We will also continue to make the case for using the devolved powers we do have to prevent the operation of Trident.”

“What’s even more surprising is that there wasn’t a single Labour MSP who could bring themselves to vote for the UK government’s plans to push ahead with the replacement of Trident. Four of their group voted with us to oppose the replacement, and the rest abstained. It seems that there is no support from Scotland for the UK government’s plans, with the exception of the Conservatives. This is a clear message from Scotland, building on the opposition of Scottish MPs, and the clear opposition of the people of Scotland.”

A legal opinion, by Cherie Blair’s legal firm Matrix Chambers says that to replace or renew Trident would be a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Another legal opinion by eminent international lawyer Philippe Sands QC also finds Trident replacement illegal. (4)

For more information contact 0790 99 33 074

Notes to editors

2. Green motion for debate as amended and agreed by 71 votes to 16, with 39 abstentions (all Labour): That the Parliament congratulates the majority of Scottish MPs for voting on 14 March 2007 to reject the replacement of Trident, recognises that decisions on matters of defence are matters within the responsibility of the UK Government and Parliament and calls on the UK Government not to go ahead at this time with the proposal in the White Paper, The Future of the United Kingdom’s Nuclear Deterrent.

3. A vote in Westminster on 14th March this year saw a majority of Scottish MPs oppose the UK Government plan on Trident. 33 voted against, 22 for, and 4 abstained. See for more details: http://www.scotland4peace.org/Binthebomb/lobby/MPstotal.htm and also http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2007-03-14&number=77&display=allpossible

In a BBC survey of opinion of MPs on Trident renewal last December, a majority of Scottish MPs said they opposed Trident renewal. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6183735.stm

In an ICM poll carried out for Scottish CND, 64% of Scots opposed the renewal of Trident, with 73% opposed for the price tag of £50bn. See: http://www.banthebomb.org/newbombs/poll.htm

4. For information on the legal opinion see: http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/site/id/5025/title/Trident_And_Replacement_039_illegal_039_Say_Lawyers_In_Cherie_Blair_039_s_Firm.html

A legal opinion commissioned by Greenpeace late last year from eminent international lawyer Philippe Sands QC stated that Trident may breach international law, in particular Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the UN Charter and international humanitarian law. Sands advises that the UK’s current policy on the use of Trident is unlawful; renewal or replacement of Trident and the deterrence policy used to justify its replacement or upgrading are inconsistent with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and could give rise to a material breach of that Treaty by the UK.

GREEN MSP PROPOSED AS CONVENER OF CLIMATE CHANGE COMMITTEE

Commenting on the announcement that a Green MSP has been nominated to convene the new Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee, Patrick Harvie MSP said:

“Transport and infrastructure decisions will determine whether Scotland succeeds in tackling climate change. MSPs from all parties understand the vital nature of this challenge, and I hope MSPs will form a hard-working and responsible committee, determined to hold the Executive to account and to inform decisions so that Scotland gets the world class sustainable transport system the country needs.

“Members of the new session’s Committees must strive to work constructively across party lines, putting the interests of the country, and in this case the planet, before short-term political objectives. The decisions we take will have far-reaching impacts long beyond the term of this Parliament, and I welcome the opportunity personally to play a crucial role in this process if the nomination is approved by parliament.”

Committees have the power to hold inquiries across any area of Government activity, and to scrutinise and make recommendations on legislation and policy decisions. The role of the Committees will be greatly enhanced in this session of Parliament. Just as no coalition holds a majority in the chamber, so no party will hold a majority on the Committees, and the Greens have committed themselves again to working constructively with colleagues of all parties on this crucial area of policy.

For more information contact 0790 99 33 074

Notes to Editors

1. The co-operation agreement between the SNP and the Greens, made shortly after the election, included a commitment by the SNP to place a Green as convener of an important subject Committee within the Parliament. The agreement committed both parties to work together on areas of common agreement, but Greens will not be bound to support any SNP policy with which they disagree, nor any budget vote or in any vote of no confidence.