IN 2007, Jersey States asked its people what they thought of the idea of an emissions tax on cars. The answer, according to its Environment minister, was a resounding ‘no thanks’.

Two years on, the island’s Council of Ministers put it in the business plan anyway.

Consultation by government often seems to be an exercise in ticking boxes, not a genuine desire to let its people have an influence.

Of course, paying more in tax is never going to be popular. And it is always at a time when people are least able to pay that government dips its fingers further into wallets and purses.

Nevertheless, no matter how unpopular such a move might be, it would be foolish to bet against some form of green tax being introduced. Prime minister Gordon Brown, whose own ‘showroom tax’ was introduced in the spring, calls it part of a ‘long-term trend’ worldwide.

The aim, of course, is laudable: to cut carbon emissions by forcing people out of polluting gas-guzzlers and into smaller, cleaner, more efficient cars.

And, even without carbon-related climate change, that sounds like a good idea.

Reserves of oil are dwindling – a recent report indicated that peak oil (when the world has less oil remaining than it has used) will occur within a decade.

And, given the width of Guernsey’s roads, fewer outsized monsters would make driving easier and safer.

But, as the consultation paper released today by the Environment Department makes clear, none of this is simple.

For a start, how should the tax be levied? As a one-off fee payable on purchase of a new car? That might encourage islanders to drive their cars into the ground, belching smoke as they go, rather than pay an extra £2,000 on top of the new car price.

Another 50p a litre on fuel tax? It would be simply too expensive to run the gas-guzzler. Except, some people could afford it and would run a big car regardless, while other poorer islanders would be badly hit and unable to upgrade to a new car.

The aim is clear, the solution less so.