Forum Topics

Consultation on Aviation Duty

Thanks to the Chancellor for reminding me that there is another consultation open at the moment considering the changes to Aviation Passenger Duty. Instead of charging per passenger, the government is minded to charge by the plane load . Thus operators flying out of Heathrow with half empty planes will be penalised relative to those who manage to fill them up."This reform will take place on 1 November 2009, and has the objective of sending betterenvironmental signals, and ensuring that aviation makes a greater contribution tocovering its environmental costs, while ensuring that a fair level of revenue continues tobe raised from the sector in order to support public services."Unfortunately, from my point of view, the environmental costs in the consultation are only associated with climate change emissions and not with other environmental disbenefits of aviation (e.g. waking up Chiswick / Richmond at 4.30am each morning). The informal discussions that have lead to the proposal appear to have mainly involved organisations cosily attached to airport use (e.g the European  Low Fares Airline Association and the Popular Flying Association) and not to those suffering the environmental disbenefits. I wouldn't have thought it was beyond the wit of a database to bump up the plane charge by a suitable factor depending on how unsocial the hour it landed or took off.People may also like to express their views as to whether passengers using an airport as a hub should be able to claim exemption from the duty (the government is minded to charge them/ their flights - but is welcoming discussion on the matter).I don't suspect that it will have much effect, but those who have got into the habit of responding to consultations may want to drop a line to the Treasury.The consultation is athttp://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/E/2/consult_aviation310108.pdfClosing date is 24th April

Tim Henderson ● 6814d0 Comments ● 6814d

Consultation on Aviation Duty

Thanks to the Chancellor for reminding me that there is another consultation open at the moment considering the changes to Aviation Passenger Duty. Instead of charging per passenger, the government is minded to charge by the plane load . Thus operators flying out of Heathrow with half empty planes will be penalised relative to those who manage to fill them up."This reform will take place on 1 November 2009, and has the objective of sending betterenvironmental signals, and ensuring that aviation makes a greater contribution tocovering its environmental costs, while ensuring that a fair level of revenue continues tobe raised from the sector in order to support public services."Unfortunately, from my point of view, the environmental costs in the consultation are only associated with climate change emissions and not with other environmental disbenefits of aviation (e.g. waking up Chiswick/ Richmond at 4.30am each morning). The informal discussions that have lead to the proposal appear to have mainly involved organisations cosily attached to airport use (e.g the European  Low Fares Airline Association and the Popular Flying Association) and not to those suffering the environmental disbenefits. I wouldn't have thought it was beyond the wit of a database to bump up the plane charge by a suitable factor depending on how unsocial the hour it landed or took off.People may also like to express their views as to whether passengers using an airport as a hub should be able to claim exemption from the duty (the government is minded to charge them/ their flights - but is welcoming discussion on the matter).I don't suspect that it will have much effect, but those who have got into the habit of responding to consultations may want to drop a line to the Treasury.The consultation is athttp://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/E/2/consult_aviation310108.pdfClosing date is 24th April

Tim Henderson ● 6814d1 Comments ● 6814d

Take it outside please

Having been away from the forum for a few weeks (more like 3 months really) I couldn't believe what I read today.I thought this was a site for residents of Brentford to use, the aim to communicate, perhaps educate and maybe even get problems resolved with the help of others. I know that a couple of issues have been resolved for me through this site-thank you residents of Brentford.But why are people using this site to vent what seems like either personal or political venom on others?I can't tell you how fed up I am with certain people that seem to always post nasty little attacks on individuals and repeatedly, as an outsider to this little club it looks easily like eitehr sour grapes or bitter personal resentment driving these people and you know who you are.Has it occured to anyone involved in these little shows that people that act out of spite or jealousy or whatever is the motivation, only make things worse for all. That is a generalisation but isn't this country a miserable enough place to live now without you people adding your measure of personal and unpleasant rantings?Try proposing solutions rather than simply venting your spleen on others, I admit that there may be some people in government, both national and local that perhaps should come clean about some things or stop lining their pockets with public money but do something about it don't just spit hate at them.As someone that works very hard and supports a family that I love dearly I used to be quite upbeat about living in Brentford, mainly thanks to my wife and her family that are long-time residents and living somewhere reasonably nice in London was a small consolation for being away from my family during the week owing to work but reading the forum regularly now makes me pretty depressed as it seems Brentford is populated by some pretty unhappy people these days.

Niel Gavin ● 6822d9 Comments ● 6815d

deep recession feared in America

Free trade theory never intended economies to be in a permanent trade disequilibrium.The United states of America has a trade deficit of $50/$60 trillion which means  each household would have to pay $500,000,if this debt was shared with the people of America.Only 2percent of US economy households could afford this to pay this sum if they were asked. So how will it affect everybody in todays society???????????? I WONDER?Since the Iraq war we have seen everything oil related increase in value to such a vast extent,the war itself has cost AMERICA financially more than vietnam ,so far.Yet not quite as much financially as the second world war.(Not quite sure how close the financial comparison is.)If anyone knows please would you enlighten me.So what is my point?Well it seems the largest community on Earth has built the largest building on Earth WHICH JUST SO HAPPENS TO BE AN AIRPORT.So much for co2 emissions being reduced,the amount of heat,energy and pollution will without doubt create a climate so hostile to nature we will all be wearing lovely oxygen masks and playing i spy to see any green bits on the Earth FROM GOOGLE EARTH.Biofuels may not be the answer as they require alot of Earth to grow and as population increases we will need all the land mass we can muster to feed our ever increasing mouths.We have the technology to do pretty much anything we please and yet we are still not acting as professionally as we should regarding being guardians of this Earth.So whats the answer. What i propose for Brentford is a new direction and objective that will utilise the derelict but not vacant lots ait as a project for enviromental change. Would it be possible for some kind philanthropist to lend me shed loads of cash so that i can with the help of local community and cool organisations develop lots ait into a power house.This would involve raising the existing structure and then covering it in effective solar non reflective panels.Installing wind turbines of the same style as you see outside petrol garages.Maybe we can throw in a few tidal turbines for good measure that can create reverse osmosis to help clean the Thames.Anyone interested???????????????????????????????????? 

Markus Mason ● 6828d2 Comments ● 6825d