"when you include the policy to raise the income tax threshold, you realise that the family of four flying short haul would still be an average of £1200 a year better off, while the family flying long haul would still be better off by about £400 a year.
"And anybody that flies more than that won't be better off, which means they'll be paying for the massive environmental damage caused by planes. Or they might even consider using the train (probably not to America, though)."
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
I see that Iain Dale is taking the line that the Liberal Democrats per-plane duty (PPD) is going to be a tax on holiday makers.
Here are some facts some facts currently the per-passenger Air Passenger Duty does not cover Air Freight, the Lib Dem proposals do. Second the reason the PPD on domestic flights is going to rise sharply is because alternative and less polluting alternatives are often readily available. Thirdly as we said in raising the personal tax allowance threshold to £10,000 the more you pollute the more you'll be taxed.
Whereas Iain strikes out that the average family will pay for their holiday, the average business traveller flies (apart from this week) far more often. They will be paying a higher proportion of PPD per year than most average families, even those that do have the ability to fly away for a holiday. As Nick Thornsby so astutely points out in the comments:
Looks like another attempt of the Tories throwing an air punch into Lib Dem sensible policy making once again to me, picking out a specific area and missing the whole impact. Too bad Iain, but please keep set these things up so we can keep on explaining fairness to the population at large.
This post has been sent via email therefore spacing and fonts may not appear at my usual standard. Also there may be links to other relevant blog entries or other content added later today along with adding the correct tagging.
Posted by Stephen Glenn at 4:25 pm