12:30 Mr. Roger Godsiff (Birmingham, Sparkbrook and Small Heath) (Lab)

I acknowledge that aviation could account for 21 per cent. of total UK greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and I totally support the Government’s desire to address the problem as part of their commendable action to combat the effects of climate change. I am sure that the Minister will elaborate on that when she responds, but I repeat that I am not challenging the concept of air passenger duty or the way in which the Government chose to increase the number of distance-based bands. However, I cannot accept that it is fair or equitable for someone visiting family in one of the poor countries of the Caribbean to pay a higher rate of air passenger duty than someone visiting America, the richest country in the world, purely and simply because the capital of America, Washington, is on the east coast rather than the west coast of the USA.

[Source]

12:41 The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Sarah McCarthy-Fry)

Compared with the previous system, the reform of APD raises revenue and strengthens the tax’s environmental signal. Although the externalities arising from air travel are hard to calculate precisely, APD was not designed to be an exact match for this cost, but as a revenue-raising instrument. However, where possible and appropriate, it is right for the structure of revenue-raising taxes to reflect environmental benefits, as in the case of the reformed APD, which it is estimated will save an additional 0.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2011-12, contributing to reducing the risk of dangerous climate change.

[Source]