Petrol protesters: Pests or patriots?

coggie2k

Guys,

This is making interesting reading, I agree boycotting one supplier of petrol will not work as the division of revenue per £30k of fuel is about £10k to the petro-chemical company. The Government take about £18k in duty and £6k in tax. I wonder where the best saving could be made.

I also agree that more should be done to increase development of alternative fuel choices, I work for the automotive industry and the ability to design these vehicles has been around for many many years, but guess what. The car can exist but if the fuel is not available it won’t happen. And whilst the government makes so much easy money from fuel tax why would they encourage green fuel alternatives? Same argument for banning smoking billions in tax is raised that outweighs the current costs to the NHS.

Also what do you think will be the first thing to happen with a new super green fuel? Tax. We currently have low tax on LPG, which interestingly took many years to really become available and is still not really readily available. However when the quantity of LPG cars stacks up so will the tax. Mr Brown or his replacement will not miss out on easy money.

We need an alternative to the high demand for petrol and not simply by replacing it with another fossil fuel (LPG) we need a true alternative that is readily and cost effectively available.

On the argument of big cars and increased duty. I too agree that the 4x4 taking little Johnny and Susan to school 3 doors away from home is ridiculous, there are far safer cars available to take the kids to school if you are too lazy to walk a small way. But remember not all of us are parent taking our kids to school, I have very large dogs, my fault I know, but they don’t fit into Corsa sized cars so I am reduced to a large vehicle. Also before comparing big and little engine sized cars please remember that not all big cars are thirsty polluting vehicles. The BMW M5 diesel averages 30 Mpg, my boss has a 1.6 petrol Focus that averages the same???? Also has anyone seen what exhaust gases from busses and taxis is like?? Most passenger cars and especially company cars are regularly serviced, not so for the PSV vehicles, normally the deal is run them till they stop then fix them.

Perhaps if we didn’t subsidise every bus company with tax payers money, especially when they are making profits, we could use that money for a better transport system and infrastructure? But maybe we should also ensure the PSV companies invest in fuel economic and green vehicles. As an aside on my route to work I regularly see large busses with about 4 passengers, is this the best use of our resources?

Just my thoughts

Neil

Monie_Derbrain

At last, thank you dazchief. :cool: I'm tired of hearing who's right and who's wrong in the great oil/revenue debate - the emphasis of this debate is all wrong. :mad: The government should be channelling oil revenue into research for other forms of renewable energy (and making it more readily available) in order to diversify the energy markets and take the ball out of the court that is currently well and truly in the control of oil producers. The revenue benefits would switch to these alternative forms of energy anyway. At the same time get everyone off their car seat bottoms because we've also been hearing how wide those are getting too! Not feasible for all I know but for the greater majority it is - like it or not. Had we not closed down a large percentage of our railway network, the greater part of the haulage industry could be on it, which would in turn keep down overall rail costs. It's imperative that alternatives are found and changes in lifestyle and industry considered, for the benefit of all of us, our pockets and the environment.

scottmartin

Whilst we all here are moneysavers, and therefore probably want our fuel as cheap as we can get it, it is unfair to compare the price we pay directly for our fuel with other european countries. Ok the cost of their fuel is cheaper, however, there are many many toll booths on their road networks, which when taken into consideration means we pay roughly the same for our transportation costs. If we want fuel duty reduced then we must expect to make up for the shortfall in other areas, such as tolls on our motorways. Who would prefer this?? Having to slow down and stop and pay is going to impact on our journey times, and cause more disruption than having the same tax on the pumps.

Our government cannot be blamed for the current rising fuel prices, and fuel duty increases in this country have been put on hold for some time now. People compain as if the tax on the fuel is going into Gordon Brown's back pocket, earning him a nice little bonus on top of his Chancellors salary, but it's not, it's going on paying for our schools, our hospitals, and other vital public services. Fuel is cheap in the USA as they don't have a national health service to pay for, they all have to pay for health insurance so it all balances in the end.

Yeah we all want it as cheap as we can get it, but when things like the hurricane disrupt supply, then price rises are inevitable. It's simple economics of supply and demand. Although I'm not our governments biggest fan, they are not to blame on this occasion.

Chloarch

I would have liked an option to vote for Fat Cat Pests.

The BBC website has an interesting analysis of the numbers behind the issue, http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4250832.stm ("Pumped Up At-a-glance" towards the end of the article).

Petrol prices are very opaque to the consumer, BBC say that for 90p petrol 23.2p is for the product and 6.3p for the retailer and distribution with the rest going in taxes. I suspect very few people actually know how much they are paying for their petrol and how much is tax. Given that the oil companies regularly report mammoth profits it would appear that they feel able to exploit this lack of transparency.

I tend to use a local Tesco for my petrol as they are consistently the cheapest for miles around. However, another Tesco filling station less than 15 miles away is normally 2p more expensive. Since the only difference between the 2 should be distribution costs, I find it hard to believe that it costs 2p to transport a litre of fuel 15 miles along major A-roads (A20 and A25).

I believe the protesters should focus on the sensitivity of petrol price to oil price, instead of tax. It is the way petrol prices will (and should) be reduced.

nemo183

Chloarch wrote:

I tend to use a local Tesco for my petrol as they are consistently the cheapest for miles around. However, another Tesco filling station less than 15 miles away is normally 2p more expensive. Since the only difference between the 2 should be distribution costs, I find it hard to believe that it costs 2p to transport a litre of fuel 15 miles along major A-roads (A20 and A25).

Whilst I hate to even attempt to defend Tesco in pricing policy, it's wrong to suggest that the only explanation is the increased distribution cost. I think it's probably reasonable to assume that it costs the same to deliver to each branch of Tesco's.

However, the cost of buying and building each site may have been radically different - a Tesco's site that's been around for a while will have probably been built cheaply, on land that was cheap to buy, and before the Government forced the big supermarkets to pay in whole for the extra infra-structure (new, wider roads, traffic junctions, a contribution towards the new leisure centre, etc).

So it's quite possible that the Tesco's selling more expensive fuel could well be seeing a poorer return on investment than the cheaper site.

On the other hand, I find it really strange that within about a five mile radius of my house, fuel prices are almost identical - and the same applies when I visit North of the river - except they are 4p/litre cheaper.

And finally, is there nothing Richard Branson won't do to gain publicity? I can't believe the media attention he has stolen with his idea to build his own oil refinery. Apart from the small facts that:

a)He doesn't have the £1 billion in capital
b)There's virtually no chance of getting planning permission anywhere in the UK for such a refinery
c)Even if he had both of the above, now, it would take 4 years to build

- is he really suggesting that he would sell a basic commodity at less than it's true market price? Even if he were to just supply his own airline, I suspect the taxman would view the concept with considerable interest. Apart from the fact that any refinery will produce vast quantities of distilled products other than aviation fuel - which I take it he intends to sell on at less than the market price?

And yet the media allow him to leap on the bandwagon of even further free self-promotion, without even making him explain how he's actually going to do it.

IvanOpinion

Another little thought-ette for discussion. Should the EU harmonise its petrol price and if so at what level?

Given that all the EU governments pay lip service to green and environmental issues surely this should be at the upper end of the price range. I would be quite in favour of this as long as the money was spent on an effective public transport system throughout the large cities (thereby leaving the roads clearer for rural population or those that can not benefit from public transport), R&D into environmentally friendly fuels and energy production, and maintaining the infrastructure.

Ivan

neilhew

In spite of what many people say, I support high carbon fuel prices. In real terms we are paying less than 30 years ago. And after 30 years we have not learnt the lessons of the early 1970s fuel shortgages.
Driving a car is still cheaper than using public transport.
It just seems to be fashionable to claim high prices.
Luckily this time around, there have been more people that have seen sense.
Also, notice how the protestors all seem to be big butch men who are used to throwing their weight around.
I would boycott any company that has supported the fuel protest.
To economise - choose a good car, and drive sensibly.

Former_MSE_Archna

Poll Title: Petrol protesters: Pests or patriots? There's a blockade of petrol possibly coming to argue against the increasing high price of fuel. Much of the rise is due to the Hurricane, but 70% of the price of petrol goes in tax. Which of these is nearest your opinion?

C. Patriots. Someone needs to tell the government to cut tax.
41.2% (1041 Votes)
D. Another way. Prices are too high, but blockades aren't the solution.
5.5% (645 Votes)
B. Environmental Pests. Driving hurts the environment, high prices are good. 12.7% (323 Votes)
A. Pests. It's inconvenient and the general public who suffer.
10.3% (260 Votes)
E. No option. Petrol tax cuts mean other tax rises, better motorists pay. 6.4% (162 Votes)
F. No-ones fault. High prices are hurricane driven, no one is to blame.
2% (51 Votes)
G. I've no idea.
1.7% (43 Votes)

Total Votes: 2524