lord of the blog

« Climate change | Main | Parliament and Iraq »

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Responses

I suspect that most of the young and very articulate woman appearing on TV wearing the veil will not be wearing it in a few years time. I say that because I think this is currently a political statement and when you look at where Muslim woman have come from (historically) on this issue they will not want to be identified with that period of history.

Time will tell.

The question of "half empty" flights and extra taxes on aviation is interesting. Cheap flights have partly come from a clever marketing strategy where airlines like Easyjet and Ryan Air work out the expected vacancy rates and then sell that proportion of seats very cheaply. As they fill up the price goes up so the total revenue from such flights is not very different from more conventional flights.

The tax issue is a bit of a red herring. But let me be quite clear I have no objection to increased taxes on airlines but it has to be negotiated in the normal way and to take account of foreign competition. The reason I think taxes are a red herring on climate change is this; if you are to reduce demand significantly then the tax would have to be in excess of at least £50 per ticket and I would guess much more. Ask yourself at what price you would cancel a planned trip.

The public have already spotted this contradiction. A recent poll showed they favoured putting aviation into emissions trading and they also seemed to want more "clever" solutions to climate change. I think they are broadly right although there is always a case for some tax changes.

The future of this blog.

Many thanks for your comments on this. I have always wanted to use politics as a way of opening discussion up on difficult issues. I am less interested in agreement versus disagreement then I am in the facts and assumptions underlying the arguments - which is one of the reasons I find newspapers less then helpful in addressing difficult issues.

So many thanks for the comments. I may take Andrew Price up on his offer of technical help but the idea that attracts me most is to get other Peers/MP's to join a "Lords of the Blog" or "Politico's of the Blog"!

Watch this space - and if you see steam coming out of this blog it's me thinking! (Essay question: Is it possible to have a steaming Blog?)

"I suspect that most of the young and very articulate woman appearing on TV wearing the veil will not be wearing it in a few years time."

But that's their choice. I'm of the opinion that you should be able to wear what you want. It is ludricous that some sections of the media are campaigning for a ban on the veil. It is also mad that hunt supporters are being arrested for public order offences for wearing t-shirts saying "B*llocks to Blair", when a similarly worded album by the Sex Pistols has been in record stores for years. This nonsense about the veil - which is worn by a small minority of Muslim women - has to stop.

The veil is worn by many Muslim women in Kolkata in India and there is no such debate. Yes, there are anti-Muslim prejudices among Hindus, but the overall tolerance and respect for religious and ethnic diversity means that the city's Muslim population is secular and moderate, if traditionalist, in its outlook. Perhaps British politicians should learn from this example of relative communal harmony.

"I have no objection to increased taxes on airlines but it has to be negotiated in the normal way and to take account of foreign competition."

Absolutely, or you will have the situation where airlines will simply refuel outside the country. International air transport should be brought into the debate on climate change and, at the very least, fuel taxes should be imposed EU-wide so that countries that do not impose pollutions charges are not rewarded with increased air transportation.

"The reason I think taxes are a red herring on climate change is this; if you are to reduce demand significantly then the tax would have to be in excess of at least £50 per ticket and I would guess much more. Ask yourself at what price you would cancel a planned trip."

You could say the same about passenger cars. You have to look at the cross price elasticity of demand - how much does the increase of price in travel by one mode of transport lead to substitution with another. When I visit my uncle in Belgium, I can look at the price and convenience of a low cost airline with Eurostar. If the airline costs more and flies from an airport that is difficult to get to, it makes sense to go by train. If a tax increased the price of short-haul, more people will choose to travel by train to nearby countries. The same cannot be said of long-haul. The only time that I would cancel a ticket to visit family further away, in India or South Africa, is if it was prohibitively expensive and in my mind, the price would have to rise by around 50 per cent. For me, long-haul travel means visiting family, so I'd probably bear a higher cost than those planning holidays. But for some a smaller rise in taxes would probably make them choose a holiday nearer home, eg Egypt instead of Australia.

"A recent poll showed they favoured putting aviation into emissions trading and they also seemed to want more "clever" solutions to climate change."

Are you convinced that emissions trading works? Frankly, I don't think trading emission quotas with countries such as China is workable as it relies on their ability and willingness to enforce quotas. China is in constant breach of virtually every treaty related to intellectual property and trade and as such cannot be trusted. Look at the blatant breach of WTO regulations in the trade of textiles and clothing, which has required corrective action by the EU to counter price dumping. I also doubt China's ability to monitor effectively its emissions due to endemic corruption - a polluting industry can simply bribe an official to file false reports. Yet, China's level of pollution is rising rapidly.

I agree with you that it is up to Muslim women to liberate themselves. I also believe they will do so, but the climate or superstructure is also necessary. A relativist moral approach must have its limits. Action against practices such as genital mutilation or forced marriage is absolutely necessary, and it is a consequence of the 21st Century globalised world.

I take your point about airline taxes needing to reflect competition from airlines unaffected, but if implemented across the 25 EU states on an equal basis it shouldn't be impossible (people would still travel) and would not necesarily do more damage to Heathrow than any other European airport.

I'm one of the several 'essay' commentators on this site. It's a bit different in tone (now that you have learn't to delete the obsessive cretins) to most and guest posts from fellow peers could generate useful discussion.