Green Smokescreen

Is it me, or is there a rather glaring contradiction in these two particular government moves?:

1. Criticising airlines for not trying hard enough on carbon offsetting, and
2. Giving its permission for a fifth terminal to open at Heathrow airport.

It seems that the British government will go to great lengths to demonstrate to its citizens that it is concerned about and doing something to combat climate change. In January it imposed higher APD (Air Passenger Duty) charges on all flights from and into the UK. It is currently attacking airlines for not offering their passengers enough opportunity to offset carbon emissions. Politics have never been so green. Even the Tories plan to introduce higher APD charges if they are elected.

Its policies, though, are more green PR than real action. Green has become the fashion, a fashionable lifestyle, a fashionable set of morals. This is why it is so important for the Labour government, a government in danger of being ousted from power at the next general election, to paint itself in the greenest possible light.

APD might seem like a good thing, but what does it actually do? Does it deter people from flying? I doubt it. At the following rates:

Economy class flights in Europe, internal UK flights - £10
Business and first class flights in Europe - £20
Economy class long-haul flights - £40
Business and first class long-haul flights - £80

I hardly think that an extra £10 per head is going to stop people going on holiday, or that even £80 extra per person is going to convince somebody able to pay for a long haul, first class flight to Japan, to spend a fortnight on the trans-Siberian railway or to nip across on a boat instead. So where do these government taxes go? At present, the Ministry of Transport is planning an extension to a 51-mile section of the M6, costing an estimated mindboggling £2.9billion. So you tell me.

What about offsetting carbon emissions? A tree planted in a forest for each weekend break. Trees die prematurely and are burned in forest fires, not only destroying the so-called "carbon offsets" but also pouring more smoke into the atmosphere. And anyway, is the opportunity to "offset our carbon emissions" really anything more than the opportunity to legitimise our destructive actions?

The attitude of most of the major political parties towards climate change is somewhat worrying. Given the gravity of the threat, surely raising awareness and cutting carbon emissions in as many ways as humanly possible should be the priority, not sacrificing the truth of the matter in favour of political power.