a proposal without regard for rural economies

[peter macdonald]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4992676.stm
As seen from the Orgs front page today!!!!
I think it shows a total misunderstanding of how rural econmies work by yet another set of politicians who think the world ends at Watford.
Some of the green policies set out by UK politicians including certain "green" politicians seem bent on the destruction of communities such as ours
If you look at the proposal re taxing the airlines per flight not by passenger then this can only have two outcomes 1 higher airfares 2 withdrawal of services
The proposal re car tax assumes that a car is NOT a neccessity and there exists good public transport..try telling that to someone in Westerdale Lyth Westfield etc
Illthought out is the best/kindest description I can give to this

(Perhaps hot air tax in Whitehall would be a better idea)

[Max]

Yes I totally agree with you Peter. I have a 4 x 4 not because I want to do the "school run" in a truck, because I live on a farm and in snowy weather it is often the only way I can get down my road. Once I had to get my son to hospital and if I hadn't had the truck I wouldn't of got down my road, an ambulance would have had no chance of getting up. In the Highlands our private transport is not a luxury but an essential.

[JAWS]

Most Politicians in this day and age think that the world ends where street-lights end. Outside such safe areas there is an unknown world populated by savages who are of little or no significance.

The whole thing is nothing more than a gimmick to satisfy artificially created public perceptions. The Zero Rate Excise Duty on vehicles producing the least pollution shows how Politicians think.
Just after the Zero Rate was announced in the Budget it was pointed out that the whole idea was nothing more than a "Sound Bite".
There were only two models of vehicle which fell into that category, one had never been on sale in Britain and the other had been removed from sale some three years prior to the announcement.
In other words, it sounded good but meant absolutely nothing. Further to that, it didn't cost the Government even one penny in lost revenue which was the main object of the excercise.

In other words, who cares if it makes sense? If it sounds good and gets votes then say it and never mind the consequences.