|
|
 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Hull Friends of the Earth
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
GO TO THE HULL FRIENDS OF THE EARTH HOME PAGE:
SECOND DOWN ON THE LEFT-HAND MENU
http://www.hfoe.org.uk
|
|
|
 |
|
|
MPs dither and divide over car tax
|
|
|
Article courtesy of Policitcs.co.uk
The question of whether or not to impose green taxes on gas guzzling cars caused division in Westminster again today, with three members of an environmental commission launching a minority report calling the idea 'retrospective taxation' while the rest of the committee called for more radical proposals.
While the environmental audit commission said the move was a "step in the right direction," its Tory chairman called for greater changes than those now on the table.
Meanwhile, three of its members described the plans as a "new tax on old cars".
Liberal Democrat Jo Swinson, one of the authors of the minority report, said: "The public must have faith that green taxes are not about raising revenue for the Treasury, but in this case, their use is clearly more to do with filling Alistair Darling's coffers than cutting carbon emissions from our roads."
Most MPs on the committee disagreed, saying: "The only retrospective element in these changes is that the new rates will apply to cars that have already been bought. In itself there is nothing intrinsically unfair or unusual about this."
Friends of the Earth's transport campaigner Tony Bosworth said: "We're delighted the committee believes the government's car tax changes are right in principle.
"Ministers must stand firm on their road tax plans and do more to encourage greener travel and reduce transport’s contribution to climate change."
Official estimates predict a rise in vehicle excise duty (VED) for 43 per cent of cars made since 2001 but a reduction for 18 per cent, depending on how environmentally friendly they are.
The number of payment bands will increase from seven to 13 with those in the top bracket paying £455 for 2009/10 and those in the lowest, least polluting bracket paying nothing.
Article dated
August 2008
STANDARDISE RECYCLING, SAYS FOE
Article courtesy of MRW
By Liz Gyekye
The Government should be giving councils clearer guidance on the best systems to use for collecting recycling to reduce the scope for confusion, according to the Friends of the Earth.
The environmental campaign group said that local residents can be confused by recycling collection systems offered by their local authorities. It highlighted Southgate Road in London which straddled two local authority areas and had two different recycling systems in place, which had the potential to puzzle residents. On the Hackney Council side of the street collection staff segregate recyclable materials at the kerbside. But on the Islington Council side all recyclables are collected together.
Friends of the Earth said it preferred the source segregated method used by Hackney to collect recyclables as opposed to the Islington commingled collection.
Senior waste campaigner Michael Warhurst said: ?Rather than the current system we have we should go down to a handful of systems that can be standardised and have clearer policies.
?Residents need systems that are simple. We have a situation where people can become confused about different recycling systems. This is particularly prevalent in London where there are so many London boroughs offering so may different systems. We need clearer guidance on the best systems to use.?
The organisation also wants councils to provide clear information for residents on how to recycle their rubbish, and provide support to residents if they have problems.
Hackney Council cabinet member for neighbourhoods councillor Alan Laing said: ?In Hackney we?ve made recycling as simple as possible. All your dry recycling goes in a green box and all your food waste goes in a blue box. They are both collected on the same day each week. It isn't a complicated scheme which may be why our recycling levels have increased massively over the last few years. Our recycling crew sorts the materials collected at the kerb and by working in this way we can be sure of the quality of the recycling we collect and that it won?t end up dumped in the developing world.?
Article dated
July 2008
INCINERATOR PLANS TO GO AHEAD
Article courtesy of Politics.co.uk
The government is injecting £2 billion into a vast incinerator project which will install rubbish-burning sites in over 100 communities across the UK, campaigners have revealed.
In an effort to galvanise public opinion, the UK Without Incineration Network (UK WIN) has released a map showing where the planned incinerators would be located.
Activists say each incinerator would cost millions of pounds, burn thousands of tones of valuable resources and emit large quantities of greenhouse gases.
"It's insane for the government and local councils to waste taxpayers' money on expensive pollution-belching rubbish burners," said Michael Warhurst, senior resource use campaigner at Friends of the Earth.
"Incineration is a problem for climate change, not a solution, and will send valuable recyclable resources up in smoke."
But the government stands by its plans to invest £2 billion in the scheme despite cutting recycling budgets by 30 per cent.
The money will come in the form of private finance initiative credits offered to local councils to pay for part of the costs of new waste management facilities.
Councils claim they need to build incinerators in order to meet UK and EU targets to keep waste out of landfill.
A Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) spokesperson said: "Local authorities must determine which waste management solutions will best suit their communities, based on local needs.
"Our priority is reducing waste created, then where possible re-using, before recycling and composting. Landfill remains the least environmentally sound option for many types of waste."
Article dated
July 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
