In an interview with the Parliamentary Monitor magazine, Ryanair's boss has claimed that Gordon Brown's air passenger duty (APD) rise was simply "a bloody tax grab".

The chancellor used his pre-Budget report last year to double the levy in an apparent bid to help tackle climate change.

But Michael O'Leary said the tax increase was not an environmental measure.

"Gordon Brown has lied," he said. "It's just a bloody tax grab. He says it will go into Treasury pockets and be used for environmental measures."

"Taxing cheap air travel is Brown's contribution to the environment. That is £1bn in taxes, and not one cent of it will be spent on the environment.

In the responses below, ePolitix.com's readers and Stakeholders comment on the issue along with MPs and political parties.

If you would like to comment on the issues raised by this consultation please click here

Government response: Treasury

A Treasury spokesman said: "The Treasury took all relevant factors into account before deciding increase air passenger duty to better reflect the environmental costs of air travel.

"The increase in APD will save the equivalent of three quarters of a million tonnes of carbon every year by 2011.

"As the chancellor has said, the revenues raised from the increase will secure extra resources in the coming spending round for our priorities such as public transport and the environment.

"The Treasury continues to believe that the inclusion of aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme is the most efficient and cost-effective way to aid this sector in meeting its external costs and playing its part in tackling climate change, and we continue to work with our European partners to achieve this."

Party response: Conservative Party

Shadow Treasury minister Paul Goodman said: "The doubling of this tax has been badly thought out and incompetently handled. 

"There's no evidence that the chancellor's main aim is to help the environment rather than raise revenue.

"Gordon Brown's too busy measuring the curtains for Downing Street to do his day job properly."

Party response: Liberal Democrats

Liberal Democrat environment spokesman Chris Huhne said: "Gordon Brown certainly risks giving green taxes a bad name because of his failure to guarantee that he will hand back every penny piece of revenue in tax cuts on work, risk and effort.

"But Michael O’Leary is in denial if he thinks that aviation does not contribute to global warming.

"His comments prove that it is difficult to persuade anybody of a case if their salary depends on thinking the opposite."

Industry response: British Airways

A spokesman said: "We believe this extra tax on our customers is unjustified and the government is treating aviation like a cash cow.

"We are also disappointed that the chancellor has imposed this tax on all customers departing from the UK after 1 February 2007, even if they had already booked and paid their tickets way before his announcement on December 6, 2006.

"His decision to collect the tax has cost British Airways £11m in backdated APD payments.

"Unlike most other UK airlines we have decided not to retrospectively collect the additional APD payments from our customers before they fly and we will instead absorb the full cost of this £11m bill from the Treasury."

Industry response: EasyJet

A spokesman said: "EasyJet takes the issue of aviation and the environment very seriously and we are already making huge efforts to ensure we are as environmentally-efficient as is possible, but APD is the wrong tax for the economy and the wrong tax for the environment.

"It penalises all airlines and aircraft equally, when clearly some airlines are much more environmentally efficient than others.
 
"This tax will will do nothing for the environment and instead will boost the coffers of the chancellor while he penalises the travelling public."

MP response: Greg Knight

"I do not agree, exactly, with what Michael O'Leary has said because I have never been 'sucked in' into believing that air passenger duty was an environmental measure. 

"It was a tax grab as Mr O'Leary has rightly said and therefore I agree with his sentiments although, as a matter of Parliamentary procedure, I would be obliged to say that the Chancellor has been 'economical with the truth' rather than calling him a 'liar'.

"In my view, the duty should be suspended forthwith as it is nothing more than yet another stealth tax from this high taxing Chancellor."

MP response: Labour MP Elliot Morley

Elliot Morley told ePolitix.com: "Michael O'Leary's hobby is winding up environmentalists and his main interest in life in maximising profits and minimising costs.

"My heart bleeds for a man so interested in the welfare of travellers that he made the disabled pay for the privilege of using wheelchairs on his planes.

"The issue is fairly simple, departure tax has not been put up for some years and it is a recognition of the negative impact of aviation on the environment which is increasing as a faster rate than many other sectors.

"There are many who claim it didn't go up enough - ask Friends of the Earth.

"The chancellor has also stated the money will be used to boost environmental and transport projects.

"I agree it should be put in perspective. People want to travel and simply pricing people off planes is not the most socially equitable approach.

"Aviation must, however, acknowledge the impact it has on climate change. Ideally we need a global cap on emissions and carbon trading.

"I'm glad the UK led the way during its EU presidency to get political agreement on this.

"There are also issues of fuel efficiency of planes, and efficient use and traffic management.

"Richard Branson has some sensible ideas about this.

"Towing planes to the runways saves two tonnes of fuel, reducing stacking and idling on the ground and the development of cleaner fuels all contributes.

"Ryanair shouldn't have passed the tax on to pre-booked passengers in my view.

"Other airlines didn't and that was a matter entirely under Mr O'Leary's control so whining about it is pretty unimpressive.

"If he wants to be taken seriously he ought to be suggesting some alternatives which he does support, or embracing carbon trading as all the main UK airlines have.

"He also has to recognise that providing a cheap opportunity for a stag night in Prague isn't doing much for the planet, and probably not Prague either!

"And if he and indeed the people concerned want to do this then I don't think it unreasonable they reflect the costs of the environmental impact one way or another.

"He is welcome to contribute to that debate but it will take place with or without him."

MP response: Labour MP Dan Norris

Dan Norris told ePolitix.com: Ryanair's boss failed to do his homework.

"The chancellor has been concerned about the environment long before it became fashionable.

"Michael O'Leary has had this outburst because he did not see this change coming, he did not make it his business to notice that Gordon Brown has been leading from the front rather than following public opinion this vital issue.

"If Mr O'Leary had been on top of his game and more professional he would not have been caught out by this predictable and necessary environmental measure."

MP response: Labour MP David Taylor

David Taylor told ePolitix.com: "Michael O'Leary sounds like the Al Capone of the aviation industry, in defending its utterly unacceptable (virtually) tax-free status
 
"If he is arrogant enough to believe that Ryanair and its competitors should not pay for the pollution and emissions they generate, they are all flying into serious trouble."

MP response: Conservative MP Philip Davies

Philip Davies told ePolitix.com: "I completely agree with Michael O'Leary, who I think is a great man!"

MP response: Labour MP Sharon Hodgson

Sharon Hodgson told ePolitix.com: "This bluster from Ryanair will be seen as astonishing to many people who understand that air flights contribute so much to climate change.

"Ryanair may not fly to Egypt but the boss seems to be in denial about this.

"And whilst I'm on, wouldn't it be a good idea, Michael, to allow your customers who can buy flights online to be able to complain in the same way - what have you got to lose?"

MP response: Labour MP Fiona Mactaggart

Fiona Mactaggart said: "Michael O'Leary would say that wouldn't he?"

MP response: Liberal Democrat MP Martin Horwood

Martin Horwood told ePolitix.com: "I don't have much sympathy for Michael O'Leary - what was the last environmental initiative he suggested? 

"Calling the other airlines 'lemmings' for a modest attempt at co-ordinating action on climate change, as I remember. 

"But Gordon Brown did play into the hands of the anti lobby by simply increasing the flat rate aircraft passenger tax. 

"It's not at all clear how that incentivises more environmentally-friendly behaviour by either airlines or passengers. 

"What he should have done was to switch the tax from the passengers to the aircraft and link its rate to the plane's energy efficiency, thereby encouraging airlines to carry more passengers per flight in the most fuel-efficient planes."

MP response: Labour MP Nick Palmer

Nick Palmer said: "Mr O'Leary is factually mistaken: the money is reserved for the Department of Transport.

"And his self-interest is so glaringly obvious that it's hard to treat with anything other than contempt.

"If Ryanair spent less money on political advertising and ego-boosts for the chairman, perhaps they'd be able to give a better deal to their customers."

MP response: Labour MP Paul Flynn

Paul Flynn said: "Anyone who resorts to cheap abuse of this kind proves the emptiness of his self-serving claim.

"This is not serious debate. If politicians do not act against the selfish mobility gluttons, we will continue to steal a sustainable habitat from our grandchildren."

Stakeholder response: Bingo Association

To comment to the Bingo Association click here

A spokesman said: "This is just one of a number of sectors in which the chancellor is creating an increasingly intolerable burden of taxation, for both consumers and businesses. 

"A continued 'spend and tax approach'  will not help yield the growth that many UK businesses could be capable of and both voters and government need."