Police ordered to keep the fuel flowing

#1
The government have decided they will come down hard on the fuel protestors. Hands up all those who think all the new powers that were created on the back of the war on terror are about to abused once again?

With three days of fuel protests due to start this morning, police chiefs have been instructed by the Government to keep roads leading to oil refineries open and take firm action against any attempt to prevent tankers leaving the terminals.
Fuel queue at a Poplar filling station

After oil companies admitted yesterday that they were struggling to cope because of widespread panic buying by motorists, ministers reviewed contingency plans to prevent a repeat of the disruption caused by the fuel blockades five years ago.


Ministers believe that they will have public backing for a tough stance against the protesters, including action to keep supplies moving. The Chancellor said people wanted "stability, not disorder".

After the Cabinet meeting, officials stressed the Government's determination to avoid a repetition of the widespread disruption caused by the fuel blockades in September 2000 when the country was brought to the brink of a standstill.

Officials said the authorities were much better prepared for the protests and the police would come down hard on any refinery blockades.

"Every preparation has been taken. We have learnt all the lessons from last time," a spokesman said....
Telegraph
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#2
Not here. The powers that the Police are using/will use have been in place for longer than the war on terror.

This is just an opportunistic attack on the government by organisations that don't particularly like New labour. Just bear in mind that when the Tories were in power, they instituted the "Fuel Duty Escalator" which pushed duty rates up at higher than the rate of inflation.

The duty rates which the fuel protestors are attacking have been in place since 30/09/03. (£0.4710 ppl for both ULSD and ULSP). The VAT element that they are complaining about is still 7/47ths of the retail price.

Excise duty on mineral oils, not just road fuels, equates to about 1/8th of total government revenue. If you want well equiped hospitals and schools, as well as a reasonably well equiped army then you will have to get used to high oil prices.
 
#3
I had noticed yesterday they the communi...sorry, Labour Party voice boxes have started to bleat that people knew they were voting for a high tax party at the last election. I must have missed that particular poster.
 
#4
Mr_Fingerz said:
Not here. The powers that the Police are using/will use have been in place for longer than the war on terror.

This is just an opportunistic attack on the government by organisations that don't particularly like New labour. Just bear in mind that when the Tories were in power, they instituted the "Fuel Duty Escalator" which pushed duty rates up at higher than the rate of inflation.

The duty rates which the fuel protestors are attacking have been in place since 30/09/03. (£0.4710 ppl for both ULSD and ULSP). The VAT element that they are complaining about is still 7/47ths of the retail price.

Excise duty on mineral oils, not just road fuels, equates to about 1/8th of total government revenue. If you want well equiped hospitals and schools, as well as a reasonably well equiped army then you will have to get used to high oil prices.
The point is fingers, that the government's elevated fuel tax(es) are pushing a lot of companies out of business. it's all very well for multinationals like tesco and asda/walmart can afford to take the hit, smaller companies cannot and as such either have to swallow the increase by eating into any profit or by passing on the increase to customers, leading to inflation.

These people have every right to fight for their livelihood and it's in our interests to back them, otherwise a lot of people will have to seriously have to contemplate getting rid of their cars in the next few years.
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
AS

The companies that take the hit for Excise Duty are the refiners and importers of finished product (the duty point is either the refinery gate, or removal from the import warehouse). That means that Shell UK, ChevronTexaco, BPAmoco, Petrofina, Esso and the other two pay the Excise Duty.

They choose to pass the Excise Duty element on to their customers. This happens to be good business practice as it means that they at least get to cover their costs. There is, however no real requirement for them to do this. They could for example absorb the Excise Duty (or an element of it) and undercut their competitors (they have all made substantial profits in the very recent past).

As for those hauliers who are hard pressed to make a profit, why don't they try ustilising biofuels. Legal Biodiesel (not SVO) can be had for about £0.85ppl (and that includes the duty element of £0.2710 ppl).

As for substantial numbers of people having to get rid of their cars in the next five years, (a) that's never going to happen - unless public transport rapidly improves, and (b) you say that like it's a bad thing
 
#6
I think the fuel argument has been round in circles, on more than one thread.

protesters: oh arr, I need cheap fuel for my combine, it's 65% tax, I can't afford it, my small transport company is going out of business, I need to bazz round to impress the laydeez in my Nova innit.

Anti-protester. If you don't pay it in fuel, you get an increase in income tax which is the lowest in Europe.

Anyone got anything new to add?
 
#7
Many Economists believe that the next major conflict between nations will be caused by the slow spiral into anarchy as fuel shortages start to develop in the next ten years.

I’m quite looking forward to dressing up as Mad Max and racing around the country side looking for the s**t!
 
#8
Mr_Fingerz said:
............ If you want well equiped hospitals and schools, as well as a reasonably well equiped army then you will have to get used to high oil prices.
Sorry, just wiping the tears from my eyes.......you joker you! Well equipped hospitals and schools! Well equipped army! When you next appearing at Jongleurs then???
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#9
D-L, I just couldn't find the irony button on this keyboard....
 
#10
Mr_Fingerz said:
AS

The companies that take the hit for Excise Duty are the refiners and importers of finished product (the duty point is either the refinery gate, or removal from the import warehouse). That means that Shell UK, ChevronTexaco, BPAmoco, Petrofina, Esso and the other two pay the Excise Duty.

They choose to pass the Excise Duty element on to their customers. This happens to be good business practice as it means that they at least get to cover their costs. There is, however no real requirement for them to do this. They could for example absorb the Excise Duty (or an element of it) and undercut their competitors (they have all made substantial profits in the very recent past).

As for those hauliers who are hard pressed to make a profit, why don't they try ustilising biofuels. Legal Biodiesel (not SVO) can be had for about £0.85ppl (and that includes the duty element of £0.2710 ppl).

As for substantial numbers of people having to get rid of their cars in the next five years, (a) that's never going to happen - unless public transport rapidly improves, and (b) you say that like it's a bad thing
Thing is though fingerz, yes the oil companies pay the duty and make us pay for it at the pump, but as can verified by a few on here, the companies only actually make 1-3p profit per litre of petrol they sell. Thats hardly a great profit margin is it? The reason they make so much money in annual profits is not from the petrol sales in the UK. It's all the other branches of their business (drilling oil, refininig it, selling it's constituent compontents) that make them their billions.

So it's not them that is to blame for the high price. It's the treasury (headed by greedy gordon) that are responsible. In case you hadn't noticed they take 65p for every litre sold. If the oil companies were to absorb the excise duty, they would quickly fold or leave this country, leading to a drastic loss in jobs and input into the tax system.

In relation to your point to the hauliers changing over to biofuels, it's a good idea but has it's downsides . Yes it would be easy to switch, but you just know that as soon as gordon brown smells a chance to take more money he would tax biodiesel to the hilt and would make it illegal to produce your own (for HSE reasons of course, not to monopolise :wink: )

If prices continue to rise faster than inflation then yes it will happen, people will be forced out of their cars, but thats exactly what the green lobby want.
 
#11
BUT YOU HAVE CHEAP INCOME TAX!!!!!!!

If you want to pay less on fuel, then you have to pay it elsewhere.
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#12
Agent_Smith said:
In relation to your point to the hauliers changing over to biofuels, it's a good idea but has it's downsides . Yes it would be easy to switch, but you just know that as soon as gordon brown smells a chance to take more money he would tax biodiesel to the hilt and would make it illegal to produce your own (for HSE reasons of course, not to monopolise :wink: )

If prices continue to rise faster than inflation then yes it will happen, people will be forced out of their cars, but thats exactly what the green lobby want.
In point of fact AS, Groovy Gordy has done exactly the opposite of that. In order to incentivise the production of biodiesel (and bioblend) Gordon has put in place a duty rate of £0.2710 ppl, he has made the fiscal definition of biodiesel relatively straight forward, and the rules and regulations about biodiesl production are so simple you could make the stuff in your garage.

Many people do.

Bioethanol to replace Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (an additive in ULSP) is also to be given a duty incentive to boost production.

BTW, I have worked with the Oils Industry in the area of indirect taxation for just over 15 years so I am perfectly aware that Upstream Operations is where they make their money, and that Downstream is not as profitable as they would like (but with prices reaching £1.00ppl it is becoming more so). The total tax take on a litre priced at £0.969ppl, which is what I paid yesterday, is £0.635ppl

As with all indirect taxation, you, the consumer, have an element of choice. If you don't consume, then you don't pay. Yes indirect taxation disproportionately affects the poor, the elderly, and those living in rural areas. But, as StabTiffy2b says, if you don't pay through Excise Duty, you will pay through Income Tax.
 
#13
Apart from being bloody embarrasing, the public's pathetic response - fighting each other on the forecourts for the last drop when there is'nt even a crisis - will give insperation to any potential Tangos.
Can you imagine what would happen if the next group of suicide bombers decide to hit refineries? The public s""t itself when even the protestors themselves said there would be no disruption of deliveries and no shortage of fuel. So how will they react if Tangos manage to blow up a few refineries?
Mad Max, anyone?
 
#14
StabTiffy2B said:
BUT YOU HAVE CHEAP INCOME TAX!!!!!!!

If you want to pay less on fuel, then you have to pay it elsewhere.
Again for those that haven't read it yet :

Brown mad his fiscal projections at the start of the financial year.

It predicted that he would make X amount from fuel duty if the price of fuel ($41+ per barrel) stayed raltively stable

Since then the price has rocketed. The average price this year has been $51. At that price he has pocketed an EXTRA £1Billion Fuel tax

At the current price he will make an EXTRA £3Billion in tax revenues just due to the increase in fuel prices.

Therefore he has the ability to give us a £3Billion rebate on fuel by dropping the tax he charges on fuel and the VAT he charges on top of that fuel tax.

Dont let him fool you that if he had to drop fuel taxes, he would have to raise something else. Don't get me wrong, hoe WOULD, but thats only because he is a greedy cnut!!!
 
#15
Mr_Fingerz said:
Agent_Smith said:
In relation to your point to the hauliers changing over to biofuels, it's a good idea but has it's downsides . Yes it would be easy to switch, but you just know that as soon as gordon brown smells a chance to take more money he would tax biodiesel to the hilt and would make it illegal to produce your own (for HSE reasons of course, not to monopolise :wink: )

If prices continue to rise faster than inflation then yes it will happen, people will be forced out of their cars, but thats exactly what the green lobby want.
In point of fact AS, Groovy Gordy has done exactly the opposite of that. In order to incentivise the production of biodiesel (and bioblend) Gordon has put in place a duty rate of £0.2710 ppl, he has made the fiscal definition of biodiesel relatively straight forward, and the rules and regulations about biodiesl production are so simple you could make the stuff in your garage.

Many people do.

Bioethanol to replace Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (an additive in ULSP) is also to be given a duty incentive to boost production.

BTW, I have worked with the Oils Industry in the area of indirect taxation for just over 15 years so I am perfectly aware that Upstream Operations is where they make their money, and that Downstream is not as profitable as they would like (but with prices reaching £1.00ppl it is becoming more so). The total tax take on a litre priced at £0.969ppl, which is what I paid yesterday, is £0.635ppl

As with all indirect taxation, you, the consumer, have an element of choice. If you don't consume, then you don't pay. Yes indirect taxation disproportionately affects the poor, the elderly, and those living in rural areas. But, as StabTiffy2b says, if you don't pay through Excise Duty, you will pay through Income Tax.
All fair points, and yes i know that more and more people are looking into biodiesel and it's production at home. And yes Brown has so far been very lenient on (at least in contrast to petrol and diesel) taxing biodiesel. Going by his record how long will that last though?

Your right about indirect taxation affecting certain sections of community disproportionately, but as explained by my poist above, he wouldn't have to raise income tax to accomodate a drop in fuel tax.
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
But if, as the right say, Gordon's sums don't add up and that there's a black hole in his accounts. £3Bn will go a long way to plugging it.

As I said before. You do have a choice. Don't drive and you won't have to pay fuel duty.
 
#17
countdokku said:
Apart from being bloody embarrasing, the public's pathetic response - fighting each other on the forecourts for the last drop when there is'nt even a crisis - will give insperation to any potential Tangos.
Can you imagine what would happen if the next group of suicide bombers decide to hit refineries? The public s""t itself when even the protestors themselves said there would be no disruption of deliveries and no shortage of fuel. So how will they react if Tangos manage to blow up a few refineries?
Mad Max, anyone?
They wouldn't even have to attack the refineries, just start a few protests outside the refineries or start urban rumours. You've seen what is happening with a few truckers and farmers threatening to block a small number of refineries.
 
#18
Mr_Fingerz said:
But if, as the right say, Gordon's sums don't add up and that there's a black hole in his accounts. £3Bn will go a long way to plugging it.

As I said before. You do have a choice. Don't drive and you won't have to pay fuel duty.
Realy? I don't drive, but nearly everything I buy is shipped (at some point) by truck. A higher Fuel price effects that, no?
 
#19
Regardless of how culpable Gordon is, almost every other European country has offered duty cuts and rebates to it's hauliers/consumers to mitigate the effects of the post-Katrina price increases.

We of course, don't need such things, what with the cheapest (before tax) fuel in Europe.
 
#20
StabTiffy2B said:
I think the fuel argument has been round in circles, on more than one thread.

protesters: oh arr, I need cheap fuel for my combine, it's 65% tax, I can't afford it, my small transport company is going out of business, I need to bazz round to impress the laydeez in my Nova innit.

Anti-protester. If you don't pay it in fuel, you get an increase in income tax which is the lowest in Europe.

Anyone got anything new to add?
I doubt any other nation's overrall tax burden is as high as ours, if someone does pay more I suspect they are enjoying modern health-care facilities, decent road and rail infrastructure; whilst not frittering away their tax receipts on immigration, feckless welfare cases and the kind of crap European and ROW agreements which seem to cost us dearly...

StabTiffy2B, not picking on you personally, but if business is so good, why has Eddie Stobart registered most of his trucks abroad and why is a French company called Norbert Dentressangle able to undercut British transport companies?

Actually if you pay it in fuel, everything gets more expensive (inflation); prices increase as do VAT receipts and your wages do not buy so much. Income tax is not a very efficient way of collecting tax, why do you think Labour have abandoned it and focussed on sneakier methods?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top