Mary Riddell

I'm not entirely certain that Ms. Riddell has grasped the essentials of logic here. Commenting upon the likely impositions upon the provision of free plastic bags she states:

It is a credit to consumer power that our swans will not be choked and our landfill clogged with 17 billion discarded bits of polythene.

Erm, no. Consumer power would be when we consumers voluntarily stop using such bags, deciding instead to use other means to carry the groceries home. Being forced, either by law or by taxation, to do so means that consumer power has failed to bring about the change that some desire: indeed, that consumers do not in fact desire the change, for if they did they would already have done so, would they not?

Matters don't really improve:

Britain isn't being aggressive enough at piloting carbon capture and storage, the techniques vital to cleaner coal.

Actually, the big carbon capture project was the Peterhead one proposed by BP, the one killed by Gordon Brown because he wouldn't offer a lower oil royalty on the marginal oil that it would pump up.

But the real test for the Darling/Brown "green" Budget is what it will do for those enduring the worst unfairness. Darling has signalled that he will use the Budget to help poorer people meet rising fuel costs. His plan had better be good. As Age Concern announced yesterday, 2.25 million pensioner households spend more than 10 per cent of their income on heat and light. An extra 250,000 have been pushed into fuel poverty this year by rising prices.

This is to laugh. Higher fuel prices constrain consumption, which is of course what we want to see happening. Subsidising the consumption of fossil fuels because the consumption limiting price rises have happened is simply insane.

But, in the months and years to come, the fight to slow down climate change will demand goodwill and generosity from citizens and governments alike.

Snigger. A rational understanding of economics would be the best start perhaps.