So the Tories propose to add another GBP 29 tax on UK flights in an attempt to persuade people to take the "greener" train or road?
Train fares in the UK are notoriously expensive. A quick search for travel tomorrow between London and Glasgow shows return rail fares starting at GBP 98.20 to GBP 361.00, and flights (including taxes) from GBP 70.26 (FR) to GBP 408.00 (BA). Apart from the fact that the train takes longer (even allowing a journey to STN
and from PIK
), the railways could not possibly cope with the extra traffic if all air passengers were to transfer. It would require a massive investment to enable the railways to be improved to allow sufficient trains to cater for the additional demand, and in all probability such investment could only be privately funded and the cost recovered by private rail operating companies by even higher rail fares (just like Eurostar).
If the train is too expensive, and air fares taxed beyond economic sense, the alternative would be to drive there. Are the roads not already congested enough? The additional traffic would result in even more congestion and grid-lock, so even more cars stuck in the traffic jams would simply add to carbon emissions, not reduce them.
The Tories are simply spinning this to try and win votes. Likewise Cameron is trying to be portrayed as a film star, just like Blair, rather than a politician who is led by his beliefs, to persuade people to vote for him. What hope do we have of seeing another party other than Labour in power, but this is for non-aviation.
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."