UK Government Rejects Calls For A 'Meat Tax' To Fight Against Carbon Emissions 'We will not be imposing a meat tax on the great British banger or anything else' - Media Credit: Adobe. Do not use without permission.

UK Government Rejects Calls For A ‘Meat Tax’ To Fight Against Carbon Emissions

A senior No10. official has said the meat tax is 'not going to happen' - despite the UK's 'ambitious' climate targets...

By

2 Minutes Read

The UK government has rejected calls for a ‘meat tax’ as a way to fight against carbon emissions. 

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been under increasing pressure to up the price of meat due to its environmental impact.

The government has also been told meat and dairy should ‘take their place alongside tobacco, alcohol, sugar, and fuel. All of which are taxed because of their negative impact on human health or the environment’.

‘Not going to happen’

However, according to the Evening Standard, a senior No10. official recently said: “This is categorically not going to happen.

“We will not be imposing a meat tax on the great British banger or anything else.”

UK Meat tax

Last year, vegan charity PETA urged the UK to implement a meat and dairy tax to ‘lessen the economic fallout after COVID-19 and combat the climate crisis’.

The organization wrote a letter to Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak. It suggests revenue from such a tax could ease the burden on the NHS. Moreover, the letter says the move will help farmers transition away from meat and dairy to more climate-friendly arable ventures.

Dawn Carr is PETA ‘sdirector of vegan corporate projects. She said: “We must heed the Committee on Climate Change’s call for meat and dairy consumption to be cut down and act on the United Nations’ recommendation that national governments introduce a tax on meat.

“The resulting tax revenue could be used to help meat and dairy farmers make the transition into healthier, more sustainable crop farming at a time when the plant-based food market is booming.”

UK climate targets

The push for a meat tax comes shortly after Johnson’s pledge to slash greenhouse gas emissions by more than two-thirds in the next decade.

The politician described the targets as ‘ambitious’. However, he says they are necessary to set the country ‘on course o hit net zero by 2050’.

He said, in comparison with 1990, there will be a decrease of 68 percent in annual carbon emissions by 2030.

Millions around the world trust Plant Based News for content about navigating our changing planet & our role in it.

Our independent team of journalists and experts are committed to making an impact through a wide range of content—and you can help by supporting our work today.

heading/author

The Author

Liam Gilliver

Liam is the former Deputy Editor of Plant Based News. He has written for The Independent, Huffington Post, Attitude Magazine, and more. He is also the author of 'We're Worried About Him'.

More by Liam Gilliver iconography/arrow-right

heading/comments

Leave a Comment

Plant Based News Comment Policy

In short:- If you act with maturity and consideration for other users, you should have no problems. Please read our Comment policy before commenting.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rowland Ross
Rowland Ross
1 year ago

Typical simplistic animal rights answer to everything, tax meat and dairy and promote plants. So more dead insects, less wildlife, more depleted soils, more chemicals. Do these people not understand anything about agriculture? Here in the UK since WW2 we have lost 50% of semi-natural ancient woodland and thousands of miles hedgerows, all to grow crops like oilseed rape and winter wheat. Much of it on soils that were unsuitable in the first place ( as is most grazing land ). We don’t need a tax on anything, What we need is a return to traditional farming both arable and livestock.

Gina Hall
Gina Hall
1 year ago
Reply to  Rowland Ross

Most land under crops is for the feeding of beef and dairy cattle, NOT grazing. How blinkered are you? Pictures of Daisy and Buttercup frolicking in meadows is an illusion.

Darrell Sawczuk
Darrell Sawczuk
1 year ago
Reply to  Gina Hall

We are not blinkered 🙂

Jed maple
Jed maple
1 year ago
Reply to  Rowland Ross

And you give a typical grade school answer. Even a casual search shows me that 90 percent or more of animal operations are CAFOs and that the fantasy of the good old days is just that, a fantasy.

If you don’t want to be plant based, who cares, but at least know what you are talking about.
Try watching Cowspiracy on Netflix, if you are able to.

Rowland Ross
Rowland Ross
1 year ago
Reply to  Jed maple

Can’t remember saying I supported CAFOs, ( which would be strange since I’ve campaigned against it since the 1970s ). Like most indoctrinated vegans you seem to think that everyone else is in favour of the status quo. You also make the mistake of thinking that anything to do with the use of ASFs ( animal sourced foods ) is bad, and that all things “plant based” are good. As I said “simplistic thinking”. I have watched Cowspiracy and would classify it as a clever piece of vegan propaganda that uses the worst cases of animal Ag, ie. CAFOs, to vilify all ASFs, without offering any solutions to the massive problems associated with growing crops, ie. soil erosion, topsoil depletion, carbon release, nitrous oxide 75% of which comes from arable Ag, deforestation, and much more. The film also has some serious statistical errors. Just to recap I’ll leave you in no doubt, CAFOs and supplementary feeding in all its forms HAS TO GO, I’m a hard nosed biocentrist, NO BIOSPHERE NO LIFE, It’s not a meat v no meat argument, and I don’t get involved with sentiments or ethics, that’s a matter for the individual

Rowland Ross
Rowland Ross
1 year ago

PS to previous post. 5/6 ths of UK farms are classified as hill farms. Nearly all are unsuitable for crops!

Jed maple
Jed maple
1 year ago
Reply to  Rowland Ross

Then let them return to the wild. Plant based living requires many times less land to feed even more people and so we get back our wildlife and our health. Win win.

Jed maple
Jed maple
1 year ago

As a work around, lets not add a tax, how about we just start scaling back some of the subsidies. Next to oil companies, I think dairy and meat take a huge amount of government dollars, all the while, whining and pleading about their woes. We take away the subsidies, then only the consumer of these unhealthy products will have to pay the real price and we don’t have to subsidize their destruction of our health care and environmental systems.

Rowland Ross
Rowland Ross
1 year ago
Reply to  Jed maple

Excellent Idea! I’ve been advocating the same for the last 50yrs.

buttons/scroll-to-top/scroll-to-top-small-active