logo
Force the 1% to cough up for their climate damage

Force the 1% to cough up for their climate damage

The National4 days ago
Land ownership in Scotland is incredibly concentrated in a small number of hands. Fewer than 500 people own more than half of our private land.
This motley group includes our own aristocrats, whose families have owned huge estates for centuries and whose wealth is often a result of their forebears' brutal actions during the Highland Clearances.
But in recent decades they've been joined by a new group, the elite of global capitalism. The biggest landowner in Scotland used to be the Duke of Buccleuch, but now it's Danish billionaire Anders Povlsen. And the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum isn't far behind.
READ MORE: More Scots need to benefit from Scotland's screen industry, John Swinney says
And he might not be in the same league as Povlsen or the Sheikh in terms of hectares, but Scotland's most infamous landowner is undoubtedly Donald Trump.
Thankfully, the US president has now returned home after a brief stint of shaking hands, being drowned out by bagpipes and teeing off at his Scottish golf courses.
Last year, I proposed a private jet tax which would see Trump and his cronies charged a 'super rate' of up to £250,000 every time they fly here for non-government business.
This is something which should be within the powers of the Scottish Government, but is now a decade overdue. In the aftermath of the independence referendum, all parties agreed to devolve air passenger duty to the Scottish Parliament. An Act was passed by MSPs to replace it with a new Scottish air departure tax.
But it can't start until the UK Government resolves an issue with the exemption for lifeline island flights – and neither they nor the [[Scottish Government]] seem to be in any rush to do that.
If this was resolved, the Scottish Government could immediately bring in a super-tax on private jets, reflecting the fact that they are about twenty times more polluting than regular flights.
Personally, I'd rather ban most private air travel. It is the perfect example of how the world's richest 1% are disproportionately responsible for the climate crisis. Unfortunately, full powers over air travel are still reserved to Westminster for now.
Trump doesn't care about the climate, but he would care about the £250,000 tax bill every time his huge private plane arrives here.
Some super-rich elites would undoubtedly take the financial hit and still fly here anyway, but the money raised could at least then be used to fund climate-friendly policies like cheaper buses and trains.
And private air travel is just one example of how the super-rich play by different rules to the rest of us, all whilst avoiding paying their fair share.
For too long, they have been allowed to avoid not just paying their fair share in tax, but also having their often deeply damaging activities scrutinised.
All while ordinary people suffer the consequences of budgets for schools, hospitals and social care being squeezed.
Tax is the price we pay for living in a civilised society, one with public services capable of meeting all of our needs throughout our lives.
But the richest among us do not pay nearly enough towards maintaining the services needed for that kind of society.
The Scottish Greens have long called for a wealth tax, one which would see the richest 10% of people who hold almost half the total wealth of the country taxed fairly.
Introducing just a 1% annual tax on all wealth and assets above £1 million would massively boost the efforts to create a fairer, better Scotland for everyone.
For context, the other 90% of Scots households hold nowhere near enough wealth to be considered for such a tax, with the average having about £214,000 in assets.
This would be an extremely well-targeted tax, raising billions from those who can more than afford to pay.
We are not the only people calling for a wealth tax. Just this week, leading economists from across the world have called on Labour to introduce a UK-wide wealth tax to tackle extreme levels of inequality and poverty.
They have warned the Government what the Greens have argued for years: that far too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of far too few people in the UK, and it is damaging society at large. Sadly, Labour seem determined to rule this out.
It is time for Keir Starmer to seriously rethink his approach and what he wants his legacy to be: a society where everyone has what they need to get by, or one where far too many children are left in desperate poverty whilst a tiny number of people hoard more wealth than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes.
The Scottish Greens are clear on what we need to do: tax the super-rich now, for the good of people and planet.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

John Curtice: SNP majority in 2026 ‘extremely unlikely'
John Curtice: SNP majority in 2026 ‘extremely unlikely'

The Herald Scotland

time38 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

John Curtice: SNP majority in 2026 ‘extremely unlikely'

"What is [[John Swinney]] doing? He is saying to people: if you want independence, vote [[SNP]]. Do not vote for Alba, do not vote for the Greens." READ MORE The First Minister's plan has proved controversial in the party, with rebels set to attempt to amend it at conference in October. One change that has the backing of 43 branches is to make a majority of list votes for pro-independence parties in 2026 a mandate for independence negotiations with the UK Government. "[[John Swinney]] does not want there to be a fragmented list vote," Prof Curtice told the audience in Edinburgh's Summerhall. "He wants people to vote for the SNP. The challenge facing the SNP — the thing that has not changed in Scottish politics despite the turbulence of the last two and a half years — is support for independence. We are still around 50/50 on the independence question. "Although you hear a lot of talk of people not being concerned about independence anymore, just tell that to most unionist voters. Most unionist voters are deeply concerned about independence. "Very few people now are willing to vote for the SNP if they are opposed to independence. That is in complete contrast to the position in 2011." Professor Sir John Curtice at The Herald's Unspun Live (Image: Colin Mearns/NQ) Then, he said, around 40% of people who supported devolution but not independence voted for the SNP. But now the party was not picking up any new No voters and was only winning around three-fifths of independence supporters. Even if the SNP were to win a majority of seats, the academic said it was unlikely the UK Government would agree to a referendum. Last week's comments from the First Minister marked a change in strategy. Previously, the party said a "democratic majority" of pro-independence MSPs after the 2026 election should pave the way to a new vote. Mr Swinney said: "The necessity of independence is absolutely paramount and we have got to make that case in the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections. "But there is a logjam and we have got to break that logjam. "We demonstrated how we break the logjam in the past, by electing a majority of SNP MSPs in 2011, and that led to an independence referendum in 2014." He invited supporters of independence to back his party in the constituency vote and to "demand independence" in the regional vote. Asked about how popular the First Minister is, Prof Curtice said Mr Swinney numbers had "been kind of steady since he became First Minister." "He is not as popular now as he was when he was Deputy First Minister," he added. "In an era of fragmented politics, that is still good enough to make him the least unpopular politician in Scotland." He added: "Anas Sarwar is still suffering from the shadow of Sir Keir Starmer. Kemi Badenoch — who is she? Nigel Farage is very strong and popular among a section of Scottish and British society." He said around 40% of Leave voters in Scotland were set to vote for Reform next year. Asked for predictions for next year's election, Prof Curtice said he thought it would be "child's play" for Reform to win at least 10 seats. Prof Curtice and Kevin McKenna and the Herald's Hannah Brown in conversation (Image: Colin Mearns/NQ) "I think Kemi Badenoch is becoming more effective, but it is very much a work in progress. The problem the Tories face is that Reform are not just taking voters, they are taking donors, they are taking people. "It is very difficult to see any outcome other than the SNP still providing government. What remains highly uncertain is how strong it will be. It could be as low as 45 seats. I think the maximum at the moment is 55 seats. "But 55 seats — you have only got to find one party to make a deal. With 45 you have got to find two, and that becomes much more difficult. "I think at the moment it is a race between Reform and Labour over who comes second, and unless the popularity of the Labour government improves, Labour may find themselves in much the same position as they are at the moment." "The lesson of the last Westminster parliament is not to presume that the outcome of the last election is going to determine what happens at the next one," he added. READ MORE Prof Curtice was also asked about Kate Forbes's decision to stand down at the next election. He described the outgoing Deputy First Minister as "one of the most talented politicians within the current parliament". "Some of us are old enough to remember those promises 25 years ago of a family-friendly parliament," he added. "She is not the only person who has found it difficult to combine parenthood with being an MSP. To that extent, I think the Parliament should reflect back on whether or not it is going to make it possible for people with young children, particularly those in rural constituencies, to be MSPs."

Brazil chooses local relief over retaliation for US tariffs, sources say
Brazil chooses local relief over retaliation for US tariffs, sources say

Reuters

time39 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Brazil chooses local relief over retaliation for US tariffs, sources say

BRASILIA, Aug 4 (Reuters) - Brazil's government has set aside for now plans for direct retaliation against steep U.S. tariffs taking effect this week, focusing instead on a relief package for industries hit hardest by the levies, sources familiar with the strategy said. Wide-ranging exemptions granted in U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order last week spared some of the most vulnerable sectors of Latin America's largest economy, to the relief of many investors and business leaders. That has left Brasilia cautious about responding to Trump with reciprocal tariffs or other retaliation that could escalate tensions, said government officials, who requested anonymity to discuss confidential deliberations. Talks with Washington are likely to be slow and complex, said one of the sources, so Brazil's government is prioritizing immediate relief for exporters, such as through public credit lines and other support for export finance. Another official said the government is studying potential responses to the tariffs that would affect U.S. companies, but sees them as a last resort if negotiations fail. Those potential countermeasures, now under review, could include suspension of royalty payments for pharmaceutical patents and media copyrights, two sources said. The government had also signaled last year that it was preparing a new tax that could affect big U.S. tech companies, but shelved the plan this year to avoid antagonizing Trump ahead of his April tariff announcement. At the time, Brazil was saddled with a 10% tariff, among the lowest in the world, which many credited to a longstanding U.S. trade surplus with Brazil. Trump then tied a steeper 50% tariff in July to what he called a political "witch hunt" against former President Jair Bolsonaro, a right-wing ally on trial for an alleged coup plot to overturn his 2022 election loss. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva initially said he would respond under the country's Economic Reciprocity Law, passed by Congress to provide legal grounds for countermeasures against trade sanctions, fueling speculation about retaliation. Talk of reciprocal action has since faded, even as Lula criticizes Trump's rationale for the tariff hike, defending the independence of Brazil's judiciary and insisting any negotiations should remain strictly focused on trade. U.S. tariff exemptions granted last week for Brazil's aviation, energy and mining industries were taken in Brasilia as evidence that patient diplomacy and lobbying by affected U.S. companies seeking relief was the best way to get results in Washington. Brazil also said it plans to file a formal complaint at the World Trade Organization over the tariffs, even though that dispute settlement system has been stalled since the first Trump administration. "You still need to go through the available channels," one Brazilian official said, while acknowledging that a resolution is unlikely under the current state of the WTO. More immediately, the government is fine-tuning measures to shield sectors most hurt by the U.S. tariffs set to take effect on Wednesday, extending financial relief to companies already facing canceled contracts. Officials have said the package will likely include credit lines and possible tweaks to the export credit insurance and export financing mechanisms, according to one of the sources. Finance Minister Fernando Haddad, who said relief measures could begin rolling out this week, on Friday said the government was never committed to retaliating against Washington. "We never used that verb to characterize the actions the Brazilian government will take," he said. "These are actions to protect sovereignty, to protect our industry, our agribusiness, our agriculture," he told reporters. "That word (retaliation) was not present in the president's speech, nor in any minister's."

Planned Palestine Action protest will not try to overwhelm police
Planned Palestine Action protest will not try to overwhelm police

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Planned Palestine Action protest will not try to overwhelm police

A campaign group has denied that its planned mass protest in support of Palestine Action will try to overwhelm the police and justice system. The Metropolitan Police and other forces nationwide have warned anyone found to be expressing support for Palestine Action will be arrested, following the Government's decision to ban the organisation last month. Defend Our Juries said it planned to bring together at least 500 people for its planned demonstration against the ban on Saturday with organisers 'very confident' they have recruited enough participants, a spokesperson for the campaign group said. A formal announcement will be made on Tuesday as to whether that figure has been reached and the demonstration will go ahead. More then 200 people were arrested at a wave of protests across the UK in response to the proscription last month, as part of the campaign co-ordinated by Defend Our Juries. Many of the protesters were detained after writing and holding up the message 'I oppose genocide I support Palestine Action' on placards or pieces of cardboard. A Defend Our Juries spokesperson told the PA news agency: 'It is wrong to characterise this (planned demonstration) as a plan to overwhelm the police and court systems. 'If we are allowed to protest peacefully and freely, then that is no bother to anyone.' In a further statement on its website, the campaign group said the Government had 'overreached itself' by banning Palestine Action and it was 'vital' that its campaign succeeded. 'Our groups and movements are coming together like never before, finding unity under repression,' it added. 'By refusing to give into fear and by standing together, we will face down this assault on us all.' No location for the protest has so far been shared, but it is understood that it will take place in London and will be the only demonstration that Defend Our Juries organises on Saturday. The Metropolitan Police said it would have 'the resources and processes in place to respond' to the planned large gathering. A force spokesperson said: 'We are aware that the organisers of Saturday's planned protest are encouraging hundreds of people turn out with the intention of placing a strain on the police and the wider criminal justice system. 'The Met is very experienced in dealing with large-scale protests, including where the protest activity crosses into criminality requiring arrests. 'While we will not go into the specific details of our plan, the public can be assured that we will have the resources and processes in place to respond to any eventuality. 'Our officers will continue to apply the law in relation to Palestine Action as we have done since its proscription. 'Anyone showing support for the group can expect to be arrested.' Those interested in joining the demonstration have been asked to come to briefing calls on Tuesday or Thursday, while some have had non-violence training arranged for them, Defend Our Juries said. The move to ban Palestine Action came after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident it subsequently claimed, which police said caused about £7 million worth of damage. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action three days later, saying that the vandalism of the planes was 'disgraceful' and the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. A High Court ruling on Wednesday decided that Palestine Action's co-founder Huda Ammori had several 'reasonably arguable' beliefs in her challenge over the group's ban that would be heard at a three-day hearing in November, but a bid to pause the ban temporarily was refused. The ban means that membership of, or support for, Palestine Action is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, under the Terrorism Act 2000.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store