Tax fuel until the pips squeak - it's the only way we'll ever be saved (or something akin to salvation), writes Kilian Doyle
I HAVE an apology to make. You remember I recently reminisced about a conversation with an ecoworrier friend of mine, and quoted him as saying he thinks "global warming is great"?
I explained he felt this way because people only change their behaviour when they are smacked across the face with incontrovertible evidence that they're screwed if they don't.
But he tells me I misquoted him horribly. What he actually said, he assures me, is that "rising petrol prices are great". Which is a major difference. To suggest he was chuffed at the misery caused by global warming, he said, only fuels the flames of the naysayers who decry ecoworriers as told-you-so Luddite spoilsports who want us all to go back living under rocks and wearing clothes made of moss. "You twisted what I said to suit your snide little purposes," he said, barely holding back his fury. Lucky for me that we've been friends since we were both knee high to a Range Rover, or I daresay he would've happily twisted my little purposes himself.
Thing is, though, I agree with him about the fuel thing. In these times, where many people regard driving massive-motored cars as a right rather than a privilege, the only way to get people to use less fuel is to hit them where it hurts - in the pocket.
Which is why the current road tax system, based as it is on a car's potential to pollute rather than the pollution it actually causes, is bogus. Tax fuel, not the cars. If you really want to cut emissions, convince people to drive less. Motorists will only curtail their fuel use once it starts costing them more to fill a tank than refit their kitchens. Simple.
All of which brings me to that Green Party proposal to cut speed limits to save fuel. Green Party Senator Dan Boyle claimed that unless we cut our emissions drastically, we'll soon be up to our oxters in debt from buying carbon credits.
Fine Gael's Denis Naughten had a bit of a rant about Boyle's speed trap, claiming that it would mean thousands of road signs would have to be replaced at massive cost to the Exchequer. What is he complaining for? He should be all in favour of it. Can he not see the potential benefit to his party if this was introduced?
Indeed, FG, Labour and Sinn Féin should all welcome this with open arms. Had they half a brain, they'd volunteer the services of their armies of election drones to remove the signs, thus saving the Government millions in overtime for shovel-leaning council workers.
The Government, none the wiser, would let them do it, little realising that come the next election, the Opposition would triumphantly drag the old signs out of storage to wave them at the nation's two million motorists. These would be the only election posters they'd need. They'd be shoo-ins.
I also welcome Boyle's plan. It's a brilliant, brilliant idea. I wish I'd thought of it first. I'd be so proud.
In fact, I'd take it one step further. I reckon if the Government really wants to stop the carbon credit drain on the Exchequer, they should drop speed limits overnight to 10km/h on every road. And "forget" to tell anyone first.
It'd take people weeks or months to adapt, by which time Government coffers would be swelled to bursting point by all the fines they've raked in through the merciless use of speed traps.
So, what to do with all the filthy lucre? Why, buy carbon credits of course. Badaboom, badabing - the Exchequer isn't out one penny and we're economically carbon-neutral without slowing down an iota.
The Greens could then ponce around telling everyone they'd not only saved taxpayers a fortune, but the planet to boot.
And we'd all love them for it. Wouldn't we?