These are my personal opinions that I've formulated over the last few weeks - whilst trying to understand what's going on behind the biased opinions and government spin. Sorry if you've heard this before.

1) The cost of delivering 1 litre of petrol to the forcourt is the lowest in Europe

2) Taxation takes this up to the hightest cost to the consumer in Europe.

3) Taxation is around 350% (ish) this means that as OPEC rises prices the government gets three times the increasse in tax. Unless they have budgetted for this increase, the government is already receiving more taxes than they initially thought they'd get.

4) In fact it's a double win for the government. Britain is an oil producing country - and our oil prices have gone up too.

5) Personally I don't mind having high petrol costs. I do strongely believe it provides the incentive to get off the road and think about the journey or use public transport.

6) I don't mind that Britain is carrying the torch on this - someone has to go first. Oil is a limited resource and the last few days have shown what could happen when it runs out. Or when prices rises because we really are running out of fuel

7) However I draw a line when the costs impact peoples quality of life, as it has done. I think the government should put a cap on the fuel tax to reduce the effect the tax has on rising prices.

8) However, and I think this is a biggy. Mr Blair is stuck between a rock and a hard place. He can't cave in for a number of reasons. The conservatives would have a field day (this is a minor issue but the media majors on it), but more importantly it sends the message to OPEC that they can increase oil prices because the government will reduce there tax to keep joe public happy.

I think Blair is being clever - he has minimal options, so is playing hardball. There is no middle ground in the present situation, so I think he is buying himself some time.

9) Some 'blame' must lie at the petrol companies, we're the first to see rises on the forecourt but the last to see falls in the cost of oil.

10) I don't think there is a quick fix - but I do think the protest will give some momentum to re-evaluating the whole situation onhow we get each litre of petrol in to our tanks.

Anybody want to add to this??

James

 

The thing that annoys me is we have no choice but to buy petrol so we are bent over a barrel. Double the tax on Alcohol, Tabbacco, Make drugs legal and tax them. We should have a choice.

 

Mr Leigh.

Good point. Are 'soft' drugs any more damaging than alcohol/cigarettes?

Are they safe in moderation? (like most things, I guess)

Craig.

 

James

its not a tax of x% on the crude price, its just that % at the moment, most of it is fixed (excluding VAT obviously)

As far as I can tell, OPEC do not set the price, the international exchanges do this as a result of supply and demand (like share prices). OPEC can influence it by producing more or less crude, but do not set the exact price (they have a target)

What REALLY scares me is that if I was a crack pot dictator (no not Tony) from for example a third world country that Britain has pissed off, I would be sitting there planning.
A few well placed bombs at refineries, and this country would be ****ed.
I am honestly so surprised that we are that dependant on forcourt fuel supplies.
Im from Ipswich and the local busses had 2 days derv available! Bearing in mind that they are supposed to have their own supplies where has it gone?
But heres the real point. They have cancelled all the "non essential" services (read: non profit making services)

Why have some health services gone on record saying that they have enough fuel for a month? when others are claiming they have none?
its political, tonys cronys are spinning away
trying to scare monger, and the sad point is the typical labour voter is falling for it

robski

 

The problem is that fuel duty is sky high for allegedly "environmental" reasons. Fine, I wouldn't mind being taxed out of my car and taking public transport to work, but there isn't a viable alternative. It takes me about between 35 and 50 minutes to drive to work and and hour and twenty to go by train. No contest at this stage.
As far as I have seen from documentaries on the problem, even if a large number of people did ditch their cars and were able to get the train to work, the rail system is already overloaded (especially in the Midlands and London) and couldn't cope with the extra passengers.
The government must be prepared to bite the bullet and commit to some long term investment in this country's public transport infrastructure, as the Victorians did 150 years ago.
The current government wasted a golden opportunity 3 years ago when they were voted in. They had massive public support, which would have enabled them to make sweeping changes and think long-term (10+ years). Instead they have procrastinated for 3 years, not made enough changes, and are stuck in a mode of short-termism, only concerned that their policy enables them to win the next election. They should be worrying about what is good for the country for the next 15 years instead of what will be good for them for the next 18 months.
But what is the alternative?
William Vague?
Charles Kennedy (who?)?
I despair.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by James Neill:
<B>5) Personally I don't mind having high petrol costs. I do strongely believe it provides the incentive to get off the road and think about the journey or use public transport.[/quote]

Unfortunately this isn't backed up by reality. I haven't see people abandoning their cars and switching to public transport despite a huge rise in fuel costs over the past few years.

Punative levels of fuel taxation won't make people stop using it any more than punative taxation has cut down smoking or alcohol consumption.

 

As the whole railway infrastructure in this country has been privatised, how much can the government do to modernize it?

I always thought the one of the main benefits of privatisaiotn (from a government's point of view) was that subsidies would [eventually] cease.

How can the money be spent without lettnig the train companies off the hook in terms of their own investment in the upgrade process?

Craig.

 

I agree on the drugs issue. The lesson from history is Prohibition in the USA. Criminals got involved and the standard of what you bought could not be trusted.

This is the same with drugs. No doubt there will be a howl of protest from the people who can only see these issues as black and white. A free for all, or criminal underground.

No I don't want either. I want sensible adults to know what they are buying, at what strength, and the price can reflect that, like it does with alcohol. If the criminal is taken out of the equation there is no need to get onto really addcitive hard drugs, which would still be outlawed. When was the last time the landlord of your pub offered you a "bit of top grade meths". He has a vested interested in continued sales of watered down booze, not dead people.

Furthermore, why are we the only grown ups in Europe who can't decide whether we want to pay for and watch blue movies?

It would be much easier to police the real core of vile crime relating to drugs and sex if we were'nt pushed into a corner by the po faced zealots who keep this nonsense going.

Get it legal, standardised, policed and TAXED.