April fuel duty rise to bring fuel tax to 71%

"this town is 'comin like a ghost town"

Talking of "cycle"
The government have again had a whip round to bail out another bumbling bank. The cost to the tax payer is £1 billion to pay off 'risky debt'.
Guess who is going to find the money in the future? Yes, you and me.
Where does this extra revenue come from? Is it perhaps a bit more tax on fuel? Increase the VAT to 20%? Increase national insurance contributions by 0.5%? Increase top rate tax to 45%? A combination of everything?
It really is time to have a look at your lifestyle. If the car can manage to stay on the drive then try to leave it there and "cycle" to work where possible or even "walk". Who knows, you may even enjoy it. You will also be doing your bit to save the planet. Or yourself.

re 123
My responce was in no way attempting to undermine your views or stance.
It was simply a reply to the article. As Dr Williams is a holy man his use of the line in telling "fellow believers that God is not going to intervene and protect the human race as we have a "terrible freedom" to decide our own destiny." IS bringing God into the equation.
Is he a modern day Moses? I think not.
Is he using his position of power to support the government? I would say yes.
As I said before, the evidence of previous global warmings during the course of the earths life is undisputable. However the human factor is doing little to help slow down the inevitable. Even if we act now the climate changes will still happen and would have happened anyway.
Its just a cycle the planet goes through. Nothing more nothing less.

hi,

I have noticed the price of diesel creeping up ever so slightly in the Birmingham/Midlands area.

I recently said over 15 stations were selling diesel at 96.9ppl.

This has now dropped to just 8 stations.

Prices are starting to rise already and there are still 4 days to go until the mass April fools day charade.

122

Appreciate there are differing views. I only posted the article as it seemed interesting and relevant - not as a supporter. My own views, on both the article and global warming are different to yours inasmuch as:-

I don't see where Dr Williams is bringing God into the argument. As a religious man, surely he is perfectly entitled to speak? Where does he say that it is anything other than his view? Surely this is the type of issue that our church leaders should speak about?

Regarding the causes of global warming, I tend to find the weight of scientific evidence fairly convincing that man does contribute to it. Furthermore, the arguments against seem, in my opinion, often more at the 'Looney Tunes' level of debate. Put them together and I know which side of the 'fence' I am on. Others will choose the other side. I am certainly not a believer in the kind of conspiracy theory you outline. There just isn't the evidence to give a yes answer to your question "Is it just another case of leaders keeping the population scared as a means of control. As a means of ludicrously high taxation in the knowledge that enough people will willingly part with their cash to aid the cause of saving humanity?", nor can I think of a logical answer to the question that arises:- "why would they do that?"

Perhaps my answer to your first line would be "better safe than sorry"!

re 121
Although the prospect of global warming is a fearful prospect just how much is actually accountable to man?
There have been many occasions during the lifetime of earth that greenhouse gasses have caused the planet to heat which has eventually bought on an ice age.
Where were the cars and lorries then?
Just as it is true regarding various 'doomsday' situations which must include the super volcano which is predicted to be long overdue, it is as much mans fault as a meteorite striking Terra firma.
Is it just another case of leaders keeping the population scared as a means of control. As a means of ludicrously high taxation in the knowledge that enough people will willingly part with their cash to aid the cause of saving humanity?
I am not an atheist but to bring God into the argument is ridiculous. The Almighty is seen as an idol in many religions and the Good Book tells a story which is perceived in many ways. God is not here to give His appraisal, so the second guessing of Dr Rowan William is merely his own view.
He should know better than use the Lords name in vain.

From today's Telegraph:

"In his most apocalyptic predictions in recent years, Dr Rowan Williams claimed that the Earth is now facing a "whole range of 'doomsday' prospects" from climate change to the destruction of delicate ecosystems and even attack from "bio-terror" weapons.
He brushed aside the views of those who are sceptical about global warming or deny mankind is to blame, saying that it is impossible to deny that entire countries are in peril from rising sea levels.
And he told fellow believers that God is not going to intervene and protect the human race as we have a "terrible freedom" to decide our own destiny.
The Church of England has been at the forefront of efforts to encourage "green" behaviour in recent years, even suggesting recently that people should post fewer Christmas cards.
But in a lecture on responsibility delivered at York Minster , the most senior cleric in the Church used unusually direct language to spell out the scale of the threat facing the planet if "unintelligent and ungodly" attitudes to the environment prevail.
He said: "We discover too late that we have turned a blind eye to the extinction of a species that is essential to the balance of life in a particular context. Or we discover too late that the importation of a foreign life-form, animal or vegetable, has upset local ecosystems, damaging soil or neighbouring life-forms.
"We discover that we have come near the end of supplies – of fossil-fuels for example – on which we have built immense structures of routine expectation.
"Increasingly, we have to face the possibility not only of the now familiar problems of climate change, bad enough as these are, but of a whole range of 'doomsday' prospects."
He said that "bio-terror" attacks using germ warfare were the "ultimate reversal" of the harmony between humanity and the environment envisaged by religion, but added: "It is only a projection of the existing history of military technology."
Dr Williams said ecological questions are a matter of "justice" and that it is up to humans to decide what the consequences of economic and manufacturing activity will be for future generations.
He warned: "We are capable of doing immeasurable damage to ourselves as individuals, and it seems clear that we have the same terrible freedom as a human race."
He dismissed the theory that the Old Testament book of Genesis implies humans are allowed to exploit the Earth.
On the claims of climate change sceptics, the archbishop observed: "Rhetoric (as King Canute demonstrated) does not turn back rising waters."
Dr Williams said that although the environment had been changed "appallingly for the worse", it could also be made better.
However he warned that this would require a "radical change of heart" as well as practical developments such as a form of "carbon taxation" and a new type of economics in which sustainability is rewarded.
The archbishop went on: "In the doomsday scenarios we are so often invited to contemplate, the ultimate tragedy is that a material world capable of being a manifestation in human hands of divine love is left to itself, as humanity is gradually choked, drowned or starved by its own stupidity.""

"We discover that we have come near the end of supplies – of fossil-fuels for example – on which we have built immense structures of routine expectation" I believe it is fear of the collapse of these "structures" that motivates, for example, the writers of articles such as that quoted in 118.

119

Reading that makes my sore back worthwhile!

Don't smoke - so not bothered about not being able to grow tobacco. Shame about the alcohol though. Previous attempts at home brew beer and wine haven't been great. Might need to try again though........

postings 107 110 Brian Paskin.
Excuse the copy paste.
Households are facing the twin threats of a surprise surge in the cost of living coupled with a near 50-year low for the measure of inflation used in wage settlements. Skip related content
Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) stunned experts by revealing a shock rise in official Consumer Prices Index (CPI) inflation last month to 3.2% as the weak pound sent food prices higher.
The rise from 3% in January came as retailers looked to offset rising import costs and confounded expectations for a sharp fall.
The ONS figures revealed vegetable prices were the main culprit - in particular cucumbers, carrots and courgettes, as a poor harvest in Spain also saw price inflation hit a near eight-year high.
Vegetables prices increased by nearly 19% year-on-year in February, while the average price of petrol lifted by 3.2p to 89.5p a litre. Alcohol and tobacco was another steep rising sector, with annual inflation running at its highest since March 2001, at 5.7%.
Source Press Association 17:55 March 23 2009.

Hi,

Taken from "World Prout Assembly"

Before I copy and paste the article can I say that Dr Hubbert made his predictions in the Nineteen Fifties and are still adhered to today and used as a yardstick. His predictions are the nucleus of peak oil followers beliefs.

So bearing in mind his report was over fifty years ago, then I have no reservations regarding this report which is very young in comparison.

Report May 11 2007
"The mystery of Eugene Island 330 and self-renewing oil supplies"

Eugene Island is an oil field in the gulf of Mexico, 80 miles off the coast of Louisiana. It was discovered in 1973 and began producing 15,000 barrels of oil a day which then slowed to about 4,000 barrels in 1989.

But then for no logical reason whatsoever, production spiked back up to 13,000 barrels a day.

What the researchers found when they analyzed the oil field with time lapse 3-D seismic imaging is that there was an unexplained deep fault in the bottom corner of the computer scan, which showed oil gushing in from a previously unknown deep source and migrating up through the rock to replenish the existing supply.

Furthermore, the analysis of the oil now being produced at Eugene Island shows that its age is geologically different from the oil produced there after the refinery first opened. Suggesting strongly that it is now emerging from a different, unexplained source.

The last estimates of probable reserves shot up from 60 million barrels to 400 million barrels.

Both the scientists and geologists from the big oil companies have seen the evidence and admitted that the Eugene Island oil field is refilling itself.

This completely contradicts peak oil theory and with technology improving at an accelerating pace it seems obvious that there are more Eugene Islands out there waiting to be discovered. So the scientific community needs to embrace these possibilities and lobby for funding into finding more of these deep source replenishing oilfields.

The existence of self-renewing oil fields shatters the peak oil myth. If oil is a naturally replenishing inorganic substance then how can it possibly run out?

"The future of oil"
In the 1980s OPEC decided to switch to a quota production system based on the size of reserves. The larger the reserves a country said it had the more it could pump.

Earlier this year Saudi Arabia reportedly increased its crude reserves by around 200 billion barrels. Saudi oil Is secure and plentiful, say officials.

“These huge reserves enable the Kingdom to remain a major oil producer for between 70 and 100 years, even if it raises its production capacity to 15 million barrels per day, which may well happen during the next 15 years,”


Is this the normal course of behavior if we are currently at the peak for oil production? The answer is no, it's the normal course of action for increasing production.

There have also been reports that Russia has vastly increased its reserves even beyond those of Saudi Arabia. Why would they do this if they believed there would be no more oil to get hold of? It seems clear that Russia is ready for unlimited future production of oil.

There is a clear contradiction between the peak oil theory and the continual increase in oil reserves and production.

Richard Branson has even stated his intention to set up his own refinery because the price of oil is artificially being kept high whilst new sources are not being explored and new refineries not being built.

"OPEC is effectively an illegal cartel that can meet happily, nobody takes them to court," Branson has said. "They collude to keep prices high."

The Chancellor justified the December 2008 duty rise by insisting it 'offset' his reduction in VAT and the falling price of oil and pump prices. But Mr Darling
ALSO BROKE A PLEDGE that there would be no increase in fuel duty before April 2009, having insisted he would only 'look at the matter again in the Budget.'

So Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown are guilty of pledge braking together.
Thick as thieves the pair of them.

Hi,

There are now over 15 garages selling diesel at 96.9ppl in Birmingham.

After the rise on April fool's day the diesel should still be under a pound. (I am beside myself with anticipation)

RE 115 Capri,
You are right saying any protests will be in vain anyway as the people do not stick together.

An interesting question by a bloke in the pub the other night. Why is there never an outcry of these proportions when, say, the ciggies go up? no-one seems to kick up much of a fuss.
(f.ags was classed as a bad word. Incredible)

Even though there is evidence (proof?) of it being harmful.

Yet when the fuel goes up there are a lot of comments and calls for demonstrations even though there is evidence (proof?) of planet damage that could kill millions.

Even if we stop using fossil fuel today the rest of the world would make up the difference in no time. A one country crusade will save diddly-squat.

So we have a situation where, if we use the oil, we die. If we run out of oil, we die. (no flowers please)

Adrian, how are you? I hope the test results are good. Praying for you.

Almost 9800 postings on the fuel duty rise blog pages.
I would estimate around 8500 are bitter towards the government and the impending rise. Will that amount of complaints given the population of Great Britain make any difference what-so-ever?
It is like removing a handful of sand from a beach and hoping someone will notice.
All the grumbling and groaning in the world will not change a thing in this country. As far back as the memory goes the government always win.
One day someone with a backbone will make a stand. We must be prepared to follow, have our marches and chanting, wave our flags and sing anti Gordon Brown songs in the city centres. Then tomorrow we can all get back to normal paying over the odds and thinking how we gave it right back to the establishment.

Well in absence of the cold war, the government has worked hard to keep us scared and as a result, in-line. When the war on terror failed to do the job they upped the ante to the fear of impending global disaster. The environmet... I'm sick of hearing about the sodding environment, global warming, carbon emissions and carbon taxes. More, I'm sick of political environmental obsession.

I would reckon that most of us are not 'soft-left', tree hugging, green weenies. We're just average folks who want to do a fair days work for a fair days pay, come home, kiss our partners, play with our kids, relax and perhaps have a holiday or two. We're not thick; we know the environment and global warming are important. We also know that scientists cannot agree on the cause and know that America and the emerging countries like China can undo, in a fraction of the time, any good this country can do in the next fifty years.

So why does the government insist on trying to cure global warming on its own? Why don't they just come clean and admit that it's just another cause to tax the average Joe, while spouting rhetoric that it's trying to save the world. If they were really so committed to reducing omissions we would see real financial incentives and real determination to find alternative fuel source, competitions and grants to entrepreneurs for example, mammoth investments in hydrogen or bio-fuels, reduced tax incentives for oil companies.

No, instead we see a government taking the same approach it does to say smokers. Tax them to the hilt; make the practice as uncomfortable and the user's social pariahs, while milking the tax revenue for all it's worth. It could after all simply ban all sales of tobacco. We see the same pattern with fuel; tax the dirty motorists everywhere and then retrospectively penalise them. It's blatantly obvious to even the dimmest of us, that our older cars will be made economically worthless. Just as increasing the taxes I pay on tobacco won't suddenly make me stop tomorrow (I'll just pay more tax and the government will receive more revenue), increasing the taxes I pay to use my car won't suddenly make me run out tomorrow and by a new super-dooper, tree loving, environmentally friendly one (I'll just pay more tax and the government will receive more revenue).

So, what can I do? I can't buy my new car because my credit is so crunched its anorexic. I need to keep smoking just to subsidise the financially mismanaged NHS I'll need to use as a result; though given that the same crunch is causing beds to close at my local hospital I may need to smoke and drive more. I need to subsidise great auntie Joyce's heating bill because all her pension goes on paying for the increased tax on her cottages oil heating and she'll now never be able to replace it with the solar panels and wind turbine she would like. Never mind, she'll probably starve before she freezes because of the increased price on her food shopping, that's if she can get to the shops because the increased fuel prices and tax will probably cause the only bus in her rural area to be scrapped.

Does any of this hit you where it matters? If so then I say it's time to stop putting our collective heads up our collective backsides. A society can only be as responsible as it can afford, which is why the developing countries are telling the rest of us to shove off, with our "we've made it but you can't" attitude. We too are trapped by our circumstances and we just can't afford (at this time) to play sole hero to the environment. It's time for some common sense to prevail; we can do our bit for sure [after all we're all forced by fascist like fanatical councils to recycle and ensure our wheelie bin lids are tightly shut], but we should be sending the politicians of this country a clear message that we won't do it at the expense of our lives now. We won't be terrorised and subjugated by the environmental whipping stick just so they can sound green, all the while chasing the next oil-revenue and creating a society where the well-off will make a token effort and the rest of us can walk, freeze and starve.

By: ScottsView (weekly gripe) 21 March 2009

Brian
I am not an expert in growing vegetables. Common sense should do with a dollop of forethought. The ability to read a book on the subject also helps.
Carrots are fairly easy to grow and you can add sand to heavy soil. Now is as good a time as any but perhaps three or four weeks ago for the first crop in about three months. You can plant right through till the late summer and maybe a bit beyond for a continuous crop. There are several varieties you could try. Just remember to mark the beds well or you could risk accidentally disturbing them I know I have in the past.
We survived by depending on each other without asking for favours nor receiving any. A community was just that, a community. Each helping the next neighbour. Could you imagine today popping next door for a cup of sugar or asking if the 'old lady could mend your shirt for tomorrow mornings sermon. Could you see this generation of children wearing hand me downs. Doubtful. They only wear clothes with fancy names or an insignia sewn in to them. Poor money for rich clothing.
Today its every man woman and child for themselves. The age of community spirit has passed. I do feel sorry for today's young parents. It must be hard to receive demands for the best clothing so their darling little rug-rats can dress as well as the next kid. A firm -NO- would be a start.

"I was an avid allotment holder in my youth"

I might ask you for some tips. Trying to get serious about veg growing this year - I've only dabbled in a mildly interested way in the past. Checked the greenhouse today and some seedlings are starting to come up nicely - salad (easy) mainly. Will be planting out potatoes, onions and garlic tomorrow. Bit early for carrots?

Summarising my view - no question this recession will hurt many, but perhaps a step back to reassess what is really important and get a grip of priorities might actually be worthwhile. Comparing the way we live now with only 20, 30, 40 years ago is incredible. How did we survive?
Brian

Brian, apologies if I came across as opposing or rash.
When I read your words it is hard to interpret the feeling you are putting across. I think we basically agree on most quarters but I do find most people are unwilling or unable to save for that rainy day that is sure to come. We are only having light showers at the moment. I mean to say it will become harder for many before any signs of recovery.
Losing a job or not having any money to spare will become more and more widespread and people do not need to be told they should have been more prudent as they could feel suicidal anyway.
Your invitation to plant some vegetables is welcoming. I was an avid allotment holder in my youth and the staff at this residential hell hole will probably stick me in any troughs I dig in the flower beds.

Capri

"A small percent of 2% is a good enough reason the put up the price of anything. 1p on beans 5p on milk 8p on 5kg potatoes. The list could go on. For an average of 200 items at the weekly shopping escapade this could easily equate to £3 or £4 extra.
Add on the £1 for extra fuel costs and that's around a fiver."

That is your perception rather than fact. Retailers aren't stupid - they know people aren't prepared, or unable, to spend so much. Hence the rise of value lines and movement of trade to discount marketeers. Retailers are absorbing extra costs rather than taking the opportunity to gouge. Anyway, why not take the opportunity to dig up part of the garden and grow your own? - beats buying from shops on all fronts.

"Now if you had a glorious job at roughly £700nett per week suddenly taken away and told to live on £84 per fortnight income support I would really say that was something to get overheated about."

And how many people on the other blog does that apply to? You don't know - but it won't be many.

"Adding in your post the public should not spend money but save it instead and indicating they are basically foolish for buying a house and car without thought while enjoying a holiday was sheer madness.
Do you suggest we all go to work, live in a hovel, eat only what is necessary and have no pastimes. Do you suggest spending is a fault?"

You should read what I wrote rather than make up your own version. Of course spending CAN be a fault - buying unnecessary goods and services without saving for a rainy day is rash. Borrowing and risking being unable to repay those borrowings is rash. Why you have polarised the argument the other way I don't know. Most people are able to manage their affairs perfectly adequately and enjoy life - unlike the majority on the other blog who prefer to be 'victims' of G Brown, the Labour Party, immigrants, oil companies etc etc. The words selfish and greedy could well be aimed at them - wanting to keep on consuming and polluting with no thought for anyone else.
Brian.

post 107 Brian Paskin
The extra pound in the tank is nothing to get overheated about. I agree.
I do not agree with the rest of your post though. A small percent of 2% is a good enough reason the put up the price of anything. 1p on beans 5p on milk 8p on 5kg potatoes. The list could go on. For an average of 200 items at the weekly shopping escapade this could easily equate to £3 or £4 extra.
Add on the £1 for extra fuel costs and that's around a fiver.
Now if you had a glorious job at roughly £700nett per week suddenly taken away and told to live on £84 per fortnight income support I would really say that was something to get overheated about.
Adding in your post the public should not spend money but save it instead and indicating they are basically foolish for buying a house and car without thought while enjoying a holiday was sheer madness.
Do you suggest we all go to work, live in a hovel, eat only what is necessary and have no pastimes. Do you suggest spending is a fault?
There are no pockets in shrouds.

Is it legal to tax cash paid as tax ? Fuel duty [tax] is then subject to VAT, can this be right ?
Our current Government only serves to continue to fleece the population to pay for it's benighted policies of swelling our population, and being Americas lap dog. [Special relationship be blowed, we have only just finnished paying for the 'aid' supplied during the last World war].

"Consider, if fuel goes up, everything goes up"

In round numbers, lets say this is a 2% rise in fuel costs. What percentage of a hauliers costs is fuel? What percentage of the cost of products in the shops is transport costs? It will be a fraction of a fraction of 2%. Is that something to get overheated about? No-one wants to pay more for anything - but it's hardly a big deal.

The vast majority of the hot air being generated on the other blog has nothing to do with people having to pay an extra pound per week to fill up (they shouldn't have a car if money is that tight), it's about very real frustrations that people have about their OVERALL position in life. Some will be in this position through no fault of their own, but I suspect many will be the ones who have borrowed inadvisably for unnecessary consumer goods and houses they can't afford. Instead of saving, they spent - rather like the dismal Government of the last 12 years.

Much as one feels sympathy for anyone in genuine hardship, a return to old fashioned self-reliance wouldn't go amiss. The common thread in all the rhetoric is blaming someone else - Government, Gordon Brown, oil companies, immigrants - you name it. Couple that with an apparently woeful understanding of how the world works and it's easy to see where the tone of those posts come from.

Feelings are running a little high with most of the replies to the fuel duty rise.
One or two are still unsure why there is a reaction of this proportion. Perhaps it is time for a change in direction. Are the masses angry at the fuel rise or is it more deep seated. Is the anger towards the whole picture, unemployment, fewer jobs for local workers, higher cost of living with less wages to cover the shortfall along with the reality of hardship starting to bite at not only working class people but munching into the middle classes too.
Only the rich can genuinely feel no pain or notice the difficulties facing millions. Gordon Brown and his fellow cohorts are firmly in this bracket.
I have a hunch the hatred aimed at the government is a combination of everything. This is an easy site to spit your feelings out with others who share your views.
It's not just about the extra pound per tank full.
Consider, if fuel goes up, everything goes up

What can I say, it's disgusting. It's not as if fuel has even properly come down in relation to how the price of oil has dropped. Last time the price of oil was where it is now, the price of diesel was around 80p. Why is it the oil companies have not dropped it back to this? Instead it hovers around the £1 mark. The Government should do something about enforcing the right price drops when oil decreases too. It is letting the oil companies extort money, just like the banks have and now look at the mess the world is in with that one.

I have just come back from Australia where unleaded, taking into account the exchange rate was about 50 - 55p a litre. Diesel was even cheaper than unleaded whereas in the UK it is at least 11-12p more. I would like the Government and oil companies to tell me why this is. Just why do you think you can RIP OFF BRITAIN??

you shouldnt complain about the increase we have all got to do ou bit to help out the poor bankers and poloticians. if they dont rip off the poor motorist how are they all going to be able to afford their summer holidays in the sun. You know it makes sense you must pity the rich they have to maintain their lifestiles somehow. Remember its only the poor motorist that can keep the country going !

No 2 has said it all so succintly. I cannot think of any other way of describing it. We cannot allow this to happen and Gawd will be roling in it again. grrrrrrrrr

I have noticed prices going up on fuel but never seen anything in papers telling us why keeps going up,havent heard anything to say price barrel oil is going up so why increase.
Mr Brown enough is enough either get it sorted or resign as general public do not trust you and don't have guts to apologise for all your errors.