|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 7152 | ![](images/sitelogos/fullsize/28.png) |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Dec 2020 | Jun 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
12389.gif :12389.gif |
|
| I'll be interested in hearing what this 'Flashman' has to say. In the meantime, I'll give my view.
All the government has done is defer payment of Flybe's APD bill, which was the crux of the issue in the first place. They're not throwing cash at them, though as part of the agreement Flybe's owners (including Virgin) will provide a relieving cash injection. Seems a reasonable outcome for a mostly viable airline - which many other the others lost recently weren't.
Sally - I can tell you now, "execs who see 'frequent travel' as a perk of the job" are few and far between. A cycle of airports, flights, taxis, hotels, meetings, conference, airports, flights, taxis, hotels gets VERY tiresome VERY quickly. Most of the time travel is a necessary evil. Those flying Business Class, taking limos and staying at top hotels might enjoy some of the perks, but the vast majority are in economy, taking taxis and staying in the cheapest reasonable standard hotel they can find, all the time counting the hours until they get home.
I do agree with you that people taking multiple flights a year is an issue. A 2-week holiday, a stag do, a weekend city break, Lapland at Xmas, and the rest. Some youngsters I know will 'do Ibiza' twice a summer. Of course some business flyers are equally guilty - I couldn't tell you how many flights I've taken for conferences and training courses across Europe and North America, most of which were not necessary at all. Some conferences can be useful, however I would certainly question the need for many.
And it's not just corporations. The volume of travel at universities and other academic institutions might surprise you. The biggest UK universities EACH spend between £10-14m a year on travel, of which approx £6-8m is on flights. Mid-sized universities are each spending £6-10m a year of which approx £3-6m is flights. There are a lot of universities. Is all of that 'necessary'?
The problem for businesses is that while Skype and the like have their place, in reality they deliver blo0dy awful and awkward meetings and there's a reason face-to-face remains the preferred option by a country mile.
Anyway back to Flybe. I'd have to check but I believe the nature of Flybe's smaller aircraft means they emit fewer GHGs per seat km than most commercial aircraft, certainly than older legacy aircraft. Airlines are working and investing as quickly as possible to decrease their carbon footprint, from using biofuels to hybrid or fully electric engines, electric airport vehicles, carbon offsetting programmes, carbon-neutral HQs and other initiatives, they know they need to improve enormously or face a backlash - which has already been seen in low numbers in some Scandi countries.
But there's a very long way to go and in the meantime if we're serious about emissions we need to ask whether the perpetual drive for economic growth is a positive, as it means more aircraft, more routes, ever expanding airports and all their associated emissions. Similarly, do we simply allow more and more leisure routes? My belief is airline routes must at some point be limited and schemes to limit and punish frequent flyers introduced. An steeply increasing FF tax for each flight taken in a year, for example.
Flybe are a pretty small airline but for those who use them, they are essential. They fly to and between destinations not available with most other carriers. For a short period I had to travel to Southampton a couple of times a month. Flybe were a godsend. I've also used them to overseas destinations not available by air from my departure point with anyone else. For those who rely on Flybe, they are more important than Thomas Cook. TUI and Jet2 and the rest are filling Thomas Cook's shoes (just as they did with Monarch) whereas the loss of Flybe would leave a damaging void in many areas.
And it's not just flying between small destinations - they also provide connectivity into some key international hubs, with onward codeshare agreements on some major international scheduled carriers. Other regional airlines have been lost in recent years, it makes sense to retain Flybe if possible.
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 17944 | ![](images/sitelogos/fullsize/33.png) |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2024 | Jul 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
simpsons/simp006.gif :simpsons/simp006.gif |
|
| Quote: Alchemist1 "What annoys me about most of this is as a nation britain is responsible for about 1.8% of carbon emissions what about the big boys producing the other 98% unless you get us china india indonesia and brazil round the table to do anything about it the amount we contribute is virtually negligible its just another way they can find to provide a form of taxation to the masses and justify it as a green tax. That said as a scientist we do have to encourage some kind of change in the future to alter things. Dont even get me started on volcanoes that produce over 70% of carbon emissions!!'"
You're right about the UK "only" being responsible for a very small percentage of the planets carbon emissions and you are also right that other larger nations need to take some action, some more than others. However, the point is that EYERONE can and should do their bit.
I do have one real big gripe with Britain claiming to have done more than other nations though.
Having effectively "exported" much of our "dirty" manufacture to China and some of the Asian nations, we are trying to claim that we have cleaned up our act. However, if consuming products that are causing the biggest issues, it doesn't really matter where they have been produced, as the carbon effect will be the same and possibly worse.
Certain politicians will always put their own position above that of the wider population
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1269 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2023 | Aug 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
19648.gif :19648.gif |
|
| I fly long haul return every month, sometimes twice, and have done for the past 12 years or so. Mainly China / Asia but also the States and south America. I conference when I can, but as I project lead I really need to be on the ground. I have no problems paying an extra tax, though like many of my colleagues who also fly often, I contribute to carbon offset schemes and conservation schemes. I would hate families who go on holiday once a year to see a price hike because of people like me flying as often as I do. A staggered taxation of frequent flyers taking into account aircraft type, miles covered etc would be pretty fair I think, with a certain number of miles exempt for those that travel only once.
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 17944 | ![](images/sitelogos/fullsize/33.png) |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2024 | Jul 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
simpsons/simp006.gif :simpsons/simp006.gif |
|
| Quote: easthullwesty "I fly long haul return every month, sometimes twice, and have done for the past 12 years or so. Mainly China / Asia but also the States and south America. I conference when I can, but as I project lead I really need to be on the ground. I have no problems paying an extra tax, though like many of my colleagues who also fly often, I contribute to carbon offset schemes and conservation schemes. I would hate families who go on holiday once a year to see a price hike because of people like me flying as often as I do. A staggered taxation of frequent flyers taking into account aircraft type, miles covered etc would be pretty fair I think, with a certain number of miles exempt for those that travel only once.'"
The only way to tax flights "fairly" would be to lift the price accross the board.
I agree that this would be tough on families going on holiday once a year but, apart from offering "family tickets", any other frequent flier tax would most likely be abused, unless a levy could be linked to passports.
|