PantsUK

iTrader: (1)

Regarding the current price hike of fuel + the re classification of tax brackets I for one sent an email to the PM (see the no10 website). IT wont be answered by him of course but I'm sure he gets feedback over the "hot topics". Signing a petition just makes it easy for them to read !!!

I for one put in the email that I will not be voting labour next time (life long labour supporter I might add) and will instead be voting LibD much to my dismay !!! This is their biggest fear losing current labour supporters and swing voters (although more worried about the move to tories I couldn't bring myself to do that !! )

PantsUK

iTrader: (1)

link if you feel like a bitch

Email the PM

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

It's worth writing to your MP and the DfT directly as well. It may take a bit longer than writing on a car forum on the internet, but there's a much better chance it'll actually achieve something.

stevie1982

iTrader: (16)

i agree with most things that have been said so i wont go over it all again but this is to people who suggest adding the tax onto the fuel price

think that is stupid as they will end up doing that anyway on top of the road tax.

few years back when i got the first scoob it was 97-98pence a litre of optimax i am now paying £1.14, 16pence in 3 years, if it keeps going it will be near on £1.50 a litre in 4 more so i would rather not add the road tax to this too as it cost near on 60quid to fill up from empty now if it hits 1.50 that will be near on 75 quid plus the extra for the road tax that could have it near on 100 quid to fill up etc etc, defo up for making a stand count me in

steve

steve

bugsti

I've sent a message to him too.

lordharding

iTrader: (1)

Ive sent mine too and probably spoke on behalf of 99% of people on this forum

rigga

iTrader: (4)

Yep had a rant to his office about every thing that is wrong with this country........

PantsUK

iTrader: (1)

I'm waiting for someone to tell me when the "march" is going to be .... I'm up for a trip to london....

chocolate_o_brian

iTrader: (22)

oooh suit you, yo mamma too, and yo dadday

CavT

My message to Brown:

Well Mr.Brown, you've finally added the straw that broke the camels
back!

You've simply gone too far now. You seem to class 'motorists' as some
nasty minority who you can squeeze and squeeze. Problem with that is,
'motorists' also go by the alias of 'voters', and I like many other
people will remember what you've done come election day. You can't put
off that fateful day forever, and when it does come, you will be
reminded!

Quite how you think that people actually believe you and Alastair
Darling about 'being green' is a mystery. You seem hellbent on punishing
the 'motorists' as some kind of evil minority that are flagrantly
avoiding alternatives to motor cars! There is no alternatives, 'public'
transport is a joke, its more expensive than owning a car if you have to use
it everyday, its also could mean as many as 5 separate transport
changes to get within walking distance of your workplace, and thats partly
because many many people cannot afford to live in the place they work so
have to travel further!

I notice with 'humoured' interest, that whilst you bang on about 'Co2',
'emissions', 'green credentials', i've yet to see you drive around in
anything smaller than a Jaguar or a Rover 75!!!

When can we expect to see you being driven around in a Kia Picanto,
seeing as you are so climate driven?

You've gone too far this time. 'Enjoy' what little time you have left
in office, cling on for as long as you can, because come election day,
you will be consigned to history.

No-one voted for you Mr.Brown, no-one gave you a mandate to tax us as
much as you have, and no-one believes your 'green rhetoric'.

Too much stick, not enough carrot!

Oh no, thats a lie, I can always get my family of 6 into a Kia Picanto
couldn't I, only to be killed as it gets crushed by a Vauxhall Omega.

Brilliant, do I go 'green' or do I compromise the safety of my family.

Thanks for the choice!

RB5SCOTT

Lib dems!!!! Are you serious????

They are more green and looney than the green party, You will be completey fcuked if you want to drive a car under a lib dem government!

PantsUK

iTrader: (1)

I'm hoping labour sort it out ...

.
.
.
.

Welloilbeefhooked

iTrader: (3)

There are other fuels available to you........

MarkBT52

Durr, the Lib Dems were critical that the tax increases were NOT ENOUGH!!!

PantsUK

iTrader: (1)

Just to clarify I did say in my letter that my main issue was a. not being listned to and b. there being no subsidy for rural communtities where there is no choice but to use a car.

The point about voting lib dem was purely to put my vote somewhere else rather than just spoiling my vote.

GREGGYG

iTrader: (2)

A revolution is what is now required in this country, an uprising and mass protestation from the people of the land. Hundreds of thousands of people gathering outside Parliament to say loud & clear, ''enough is enough''.

lordharding

iTrader: (1)

Oh yes

lets all the subarus after the Colin mcrae run drive into the capital and drive nice and slow !!!

Paul3446

Everyone keeps talking about it, but I don't see anyone actually organising anything.

R McGeddon

There is always UKIP to vote for. They would pull us out of the EU which costs the country about 15 BILLION POUNDS per year, or another way to look at it, over 1 BILLION POUNDS per month. That could reduce the tax burden massively. Plus a lot of environmentalist legislation comes from the EU, if we're not members they can't dictate to us.

You might want to click this link as regards global warming.

Global warming con

scooby-tc

iTrader: (2)

Every voting form should have a none of the above box to tick at election times as i dont think any of the 3 main parties have the people of the countrys interests at heart,its all about what best suits the politicians

PantsUK

iTrader: (1)

....sorry ... you are joking aren't you ....

flat4 to the floor

how about all the mad **** scooby drivers bringing london to a stand still with dare i say it a go slow.imagine the sound of all those engines burbling through the streets and we would all save on fuel for once by going slow.lol

Mal K

Not to mention his team of Protection Officers that will have upto 4 large high powered vehicles. But then Police vehicles pay no vehicle excise duty!

That would be a sight, an armed convoy of Daewoo Matiz's.

CavT

G-Wiz FTW!

R McGeddon

I'm not with you

RB5SCOTT

I've been thinking about this for a while. But not just scooby's i want every performance car there is and to do it on the first £25 congestion charge day.

I was thinking on the lines of you pay to go in so lets make a cruise of it and get our money's worth. Start outside **** kens office at 7am reving the nuts of the cars just to release a bit of 225g/c02+ into the environment (just to get our £25 moneys worth) and then drive around London up until about 6pm finishing at **** kens offices

I was thinking about starting a thread and putting the word about. Just imagine the sight of all those gas guzzlers and hyper cars

Midnight Runner

To Mr. Gordon Brown - in the words of a certain A-team member -
"You gonna meet my friend PAIN!!!!"

Probably in the form of voting come election time..........

WRX-DAN

"Well Mr.Brown, you've finally added the straw that broke the camels
back!"

i enjoyed reading that! very well put

antera309

Dear Sir

I would like to express my distress, dismay and anger at the decision made in the “small print” of the 2008 Budget to apply the new, higher Vehicle Excise Duty bands retrospectively to all vehicles registered after March 2001, rather than applying them only to new cars purchased after the date of the budget, as was the case with the VED re-banding in 2007.

I would first like to say that I fully appreciate the UK’s obligation to reduce its usage of oil and cut CO2 emissions.

However, I fail to see how the retroactive application of the new VED bands (which result in a higher annual VED bill for 90% of vehicles) to 2001-2006 cars will help to achieve these goals.

In his budget speech, the Chancellor said, and I quote:

“Firstly, from April 2009, I am proposing a major reform to Vehicle Excise Duty to encourage manufacturers to produce cleaner cars and by introducing new bands, there will be an incentive to encourage drivers to choose the least polluting car.”

Application of the new VED bands to new cars only would have been sufficient to incentivise manufacturers to produce cleaner cars.

Purchasers of new cars have a choice as to whether to purchase a low-consumption car or a high-consumption one. If they choose a high-consumption car, they do so accepting the higher yearly taxation. This is fair.

A financially pressured, low income family, who own an older car because they cannot afford to buy a new one, do not have a choice. Faced with an increase in VED of up to 110%, they have no choice but to pay.

Perhaps the Chancellor expects those in this situation to sell their trusty family car in and buy an equivalent, lower-consumption, model of the same age?

If this was indeed his expectation, then he is grossly ignorant of the way the second-hand car market works.

In the new car market, supply meets demand. Cars that people want are built in greater numbers. Cars that no-one wants aren’t built at all.

In the second-hand car market, supply is fixed. The only variables are demand and value. Cars that people want (i.e. the small handful of pre-2006 cars that qualify for low VED banding) go up in value. Cars that people don’t want come down in value.

This effect is already being seen on car forecourts and in the classifieds.

Our example low-income family will invariably find that the value of their car has decreased dramatically whereas the value of the equivalent low-emission model has increased beyond their reach.

Even if the family is willing to get itself into crippling debt to buy a new car, their old one will not be taken out of circulation. The buyer of their old car will continue using it as much as ever, happily paying the higher road tax because he or she obtained the car so cheaply. Meanwhile, the Planet has suffered the CO2 cost of the manufacture of a new car that was not necessary.

So where is the environmental benefit?

Obviously, none of this is an problem for the rich, who will continue buying high-consumption luxury cars. Another £200 a year on VED is simply not enough to change their behaviour.

It is simply unfair to take VED banding designed around the CO2 emissions of today’s new cars and apply it retrospectively. Seven years ago, engine technology was not as advanced and manufacturers did not have today’s incentives to produce low-CO2 cars.

I have spoken to many people about this issue and I have yet to find anyone that agrees with the Chancellor’s approach here. At best it is considered an ill-thought-out environmental initiative and at worst a grubby tax grab from hard working people on low-to-medium incomes.

Several of the people I have spoken to are lifelong Labour voters who are considering voting for the Liberal Democrats at the next General Election, as they are seen to be a party that will deliver genuine environmental policies rather than callous and spiteful stealth taxes in an environmental disguise.

Many more, including myself, are undecided voters who are left wondering whether a man who does not even understand the second-hand car market can be trusted with the National economy.

I call on the Chancellor to provide an honest explanation as to why the new VED bands were retrospectively applied to all cars registered after March 2001 and, if he is unable to do so, reverse the decision with immediate effect.

Yours faithfully
...

stilover

A vote for the Lib dems, is a vote for Labour.

The only way to get Gordon and his buddies out is to vote Tories.