PERSONAL CARBON TRADING COULD CUT FUEL TAXES
Posted on May 26, 2008Greens today warmly welcomed the report on personal carbon trading published by the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. (1) The Committee backed the idea, adopted as Scottish Green Party policy in 2006, although the Labour Government has recently put its work in this area on hold.
The scheme would give every UK resident an annual allocation of carbon, based broadly on equal shares of a national limit. People with lower carbon lifestyles can then sell their quotas to those who wish to pollute more, making this scheme both fair and redistributive.
Greens agree with the Committee’s view that it would be directly effective at delivering carbon reductions, unlike so-called “green taxes”, as the overall limit would be reduced each year in line with climate targets. The party also backs the Committee’s call for the Government to bring in a range of measures alongside personal carbon accounts to help people go green in their daily lives.
Patrick Harvie MSP said:
“There’s huge potential for a fair and effective system like this, helping people assess their carbon emissions and rewarding greener lifestyles. We can’t simply reply on so-called “green taxes” – they just drive up costs, particularly for people on lower incomes, without delivering any direct carbon reductions. The Treasury’s rejection of personal quotas gives them little choice but to continue with hugely unpopular tax increases.
“The Committee’s report is a great piece of work, and they have set out how effective and fair personal carbon accounts could be, alongside direct measures like better public transport and funding for household micro-power. The political parties must now say whether they have the courage to do the right thing and work together to make this idea a reality. We do, but do the others?”
Notes
1. The EAC’s report is available here.
HATE CRIMES BILL FORMALLY INTRODUCED BY PATRICK HARVIE MSP
Posted on May 20, 2008Today sees Patrick Harvie’s Sentencing of Offences Aggravated by Prejudice (Scotland) Bill move one step closer to law with its formal introduction in Parliament. (1) The Bill has been backed by 45 backbench MSPs from all parties except the Scottish Conservatives, and Scottish Ministers have also given this legislation their full support. One of Parliament’s Committees will now be assigned to consider the general principles of the Bill before reporting back to the Parliament as a whole.
Patrick Harvie MSP said:
“Today marks another substantial move towards overcoming residual prejudice in Scotland. Disabled and LGBT Scots continue to experience some of the worst examples of intolerance and violence, and this Bill will, if Parliament backs it, help make that kind of unacceptable behaviour a thing of the past.”
Faye Gatenby, the Campaigns, Parliamentary and Policy Manager for Capability Scotland, added:
“Research conducted by Capability Scotland in 2004 clearly showed the range of difficult experiences disabled people have had in terms of discrimination, abuse and even violence. Disabled people are Scottish citizens too, with equal rights, and we need to see an end to this kind of unacceptable behaviour.
“This legislation sends a strong message that these crimes will not be accepted by Scottish society. We welcome the work that Patrick’s done on it, we’re pleased that Scottish Ministers have backed it too, and we hope it’ll receive support across the chamber.”
A picture of Patrick Harvie signing the Bill ahead of its introduction is available.
Notes
1. The full list of Bills in progress is here:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/bills/billsInProgress/index.htm
REVITALISED CONVENTION NEEDED TO SAVE INDEPENDENCE DEBATE – GREENS
Posted on May 15, 2008The party’s call for a more inclusive process was today backed by Professor Phil Hanlon, a founding member of the Constitutional Commission.
Green MSP Patrick Harvie said:
“The SNP clearly reckon they’re more likely to win a referendum in 2010 with David Cameron in charge at Westminster. Memories of Tory misrule are longer in Scotland, so they calculate his presence will encourage the undecided left to back independence.
“For their part Labour have shifted from cynical opposition to a referendum to cynical support for one and back again, via the Calman Commission and internal splits on a scale unseen since Major’s Tories. Wendy’s done more u-turns than the Dukes of Hazzard, and all because she thinks she can see some elusive tactical gain.
“The questions to be asked would, as things stand, be decided by two divisive processes. Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats are talking to themselves through the Calman Commission, although its future must be in doubt after this tumultous week. On the other side, the SNP are only talking to their own supporters through the so-called National Conversation, and taking for granted that we support their position. In both cases it looks like the answer is in the question.
“Neither side has yet made a convincing attempt to start a broader discussion, nor have they made any significant effort to say what the constitution should actually be for. Their processes should be merged, and they should be opened up. We are today calling for a revival of the Scottish Constitutional Convention, and encouraging all parties with an interest in Scotland’s future to come together and to work with both the public and civic Scotland.
“During that debate, Greens will set out our vision for a socially just Scotland, a sustainable Scotland, and a Scotland at peace with its neighbours. We will argue for the independence option to include a commitment to a written constitution with a bill of rights. Our support for independence is grounded in local decision-making and decentralism, not nationalistic fervour or identity politics. We will also argue for a middle option that will include as many as possible of the powers needed to deliver a sustainable vision for Scotland.
“But the Convention should consider the questions which should be asked above all to ensure that people are faced with the clear options they really want, rather than the limited range of ideas to suit political parties’ interests. It should also make sure proper open public debates are held the length and breadth of Scotland, not just an arid array of politicians debating their fixed positions from raised platforms.
“Scotland’s future must not be a hostage to transient political advantages for Labour or the SNP. Whatever is decided will settle the issue for a generation at least, and this is too important an issue to be decided by SNP tactical calculations or by how unpopular Wendy Alexander is.”
Professor Hanlon added:
“The future constitution of Scotland is, obviously, far too important an issue to be left to any sectional interest. Yet, equally important is the benefit to Scottish society that would flow from a truly inclusive and involving process. Empowerment is not just an idea – there are practical benefits for the wellbeing of the people of Scotland if we get this right.”
Notes:
1. Scotland’s Parliament, Scotland’s Right is available online here:
http://www.almac.co.uk/business_park/scc/scc-rep.htm
SALMOND “LIVING IN FOOL’S PARADISE” ABOUT DECLINING OIL PRODUCTION
Posted on May 9, 2008Questioned by Green MSP Patrick Harvie at First Minister’s Questions yesterday (1), Salmond claimed that Scotland will remain a net exporter of oil “for decades to come”. The energy industry’s view is that Scotland’s consumption of oil will exceed North Sea output in less than ten years (2), there is clear evidence that North Sea output peaked in 1999 (3), and the Royal Bank of Scotland’s most recent data shows that output is down by 14% over the last year alone (4).
Patrick Harvie MSP said:
“For the leader of a party which has been addicted to oil rhetoric since the 1970s, Alex Salmond is singularly ill-informed about the state of the industry. He’s apparently oblivious of the fact that North Sea oil has been declining since 1999, which even Mike Rumbles knows. The absurd suggestion he made today that Scotland will export oil for generations to come shows that he’s in complete denial about plummeting North Sea production.
“The First Minister was invited to prepare Scotland for the post-oil world, but instead he would apparently rather live in a fool’s paradise. It’s absurd for him so suggest that spending £10m on a marine energy prize is enough to prepare for a low carbon economy, especially alongside the SNP’s massively unsustainable expansion of the motorway network.
“The solutions for peak oil are the same as those for climate change, but what’s required is determined action, not familiar words about long term targets which were announced a year ago. It’s increasingly clear that the SNP’s historical dependence on oil has not been broken.”
Chris Skrebowski of the Energy Institute said:
“Alex Salmond’s predictions are simply wrong. Even with optimistic assumptions about future North Sea oil production, and even if Scotland was allocated all of that production, an independent Scotland would be likely to be a net importer of oil by 2015 or 2016. By that stage, given the global decline in output which has already begun, we will have to buy oil on the open market for two or three times the current price.
“It’s completely fraudulent to suggest that Scotland can just live off its oil wealth now.”
Notes
1. For the Official Report of this week’s First Minister’s Questions, see:
http://tinyurl.com/6mk4rp (Scottish Parliament site)
2. See Chris Skrebowski’s comments above. To contact Chris, please ring 020 7467 7117.
For more on the Energy Institute, see:
3. For coverage of that peak, see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3777413.stm
4. April 2008 figures from the Royal Bank of Scotland. See:
http://www.rbs.com/content/economic/downloads/uk/oil_gas_may_08.pdf
Hate Crime – the background
Posted on May 6, 2008Way back in the first session of the Scottish Parliament, Robin Harper proposed bringing all forms of hate crime under the same system, known as ‘aggravated offences’, meaning that courts have to take account of the motivation of the offender and explain whether the sentence needs to be changed. Robin’s amendment didn’t pass on that occasion, but Ministers agreed to create a working group to look at the issue.
In due course the working group consulted, reported, and we all expected that the Sentencing Bill in the second session would be used to bring in the legislation. It wasn’t.
So by the third session I was simply tired of waiting and decided to launch this as a Member’s Bill. It’s a very simple little bill, and will hopefully get support from across the political spectrum. Indeed when it was introduced at Westminster to cover England and Wales, it passed without opposition.
I’d rather we had got the thing done by now, and the process of getting legislation passed can be frustratingly slow. But I’m very hopeful that by this time next year we’ll see the Bill pass through Parliament.
Recent updates
Latest tweets