Labour must adopt a climate income – it would enrich us all

The last government cheapened promises beyond satire.

In its wake, Rachel Reeves is brave to have pledged not to raise rates on national insurance, VAT, income tax or council tax. It suggests she is to unveil some bold thinking on the desperate need to get the public finances back on track while giving Britain a boost.

An excellent move in this direction would be a climate income (aka carbon fee and dividend). This scheme runs in Canada and Switzerland but has yet to gather the momentum it deserves.

It’s a simple plan: corporations who import or extract fossil fuels pay a price per tonne, a price that is set to increase over time. Crucially, the proceeds don’t go to the Treasury. Instead, they are distributed to all adults in the form of a monthly dividend.

As businesses recognise the new direction of travel, the whole economy will be shifted away from carbon while people will have the money to cope with any knock-on price increases. In fact, 70 per cent of us will be better off, with only the wealthiest overconsumers forced to change their habits if they want to avoid more expense. Good news for our Paris Agreement commitments; good news for society, the economy, and energy security.

Nobody knows what the chancellor has up her sleeve. If climate income is on the menu, however, she’ll be letting the public know she can do some real good and even rehabilitate the reputation of the politician’s promise.

Gareth Ackland

Tolworth

Boris Johnson has launched a “scathing attack” against Keir Starmer over his handling of immigration and the far-right riots. That’s rich coming from a member of a Tory government that had 14 years to sort things out.

Regarding the riots over the past couple of weeks, I would say that the prime minister and the government have got to grips with the problem remarkably quickly.

As usual, Boris Johnson has conveniently forgotten the lies and everything that was covered up by him and the Tory party.

Diane Graham

Watford

According to James Cleverly, Labour has sent the wrong signal by ditching Rishi Sunak’s botched Rwanda plan.

Does Mr Cleverly not realise the amount of public money wasted on this scheme without a single asylum seeker being deported against their will?

Is he not also aware that even the former defence secretary Grant Shapps recently admitted that he never thought Sunak would stop the boats?

Yet again, more time is being wasted by the Conservatives on a problem they helped to create.

Geoffrey Brooking

Havant

The Independent in its recent editorial looked forward to the “Hollywood Olympics“ in Los Angeles in 2028, but “without Mr Trump presiding over a running commentary”.

Of more concern is not a Trump running commentary, but his threat – made in October– that should he become president, he will expand his first-term travel ban imposed on citizens from Muslim-majority countries.

This would be contrary to the spirit of the Olympic Games that in Paris saw athletes (and spectators) from all over the world come together “in a supremely multicultural, multi-ethnic environment”.

Let’s hope that Kamala Harris leaves Trump trailing in the race for the White House.

Roger Hinds

Surrey

I must admit that I found Rosamund Hall’s piece about medal-winning wine most gratifying. As I have always believed, these accolades really mean nothing.

For the many years I have enjoyed drinking wine, I have one guiding rule for wine buying. Buy a bottle, whatever the price; try it, and if you enjoy it, buy it again. If not, don’t. This rule has led me to discover some really nice wines at unbelievably low prices from both supermarkets and off-licenses.

Enjoy being influenced by medals if you want.

Cheers – here’s to the world’s winemakers!

Bob Sampson

West Sussex