Talk about hypocrisy!!!!!
Discussion
Hi!
Take a look at this letter printed in yesterday's Times from "Volvo Estate Specialist" Phil Whitaker (www.pwcars.co.uk, email: sales@pwcars.co.uk
He wants us all to PAY MORE FOR OUR FUEL (and yes he makes his living from SELLING CARS!) Anyway, over to Phil:
Answers on offer for road congestion
FROM MR PHILIP WHITAKER
Sir, Mr David Tipping (letter, July 17) proposes a meter to monitor vehicle usage and regulate it, with the usual complicated adjustments for rural users, penalties for non-compliance and yet more bureaucracy.
There already exists an elegant solution to the problem. A tamper-proof and unavoidable meter records with wonderful precision every litre of fuel you purchase. The amount you buy reflects with great accuracy the impact you have on the roads and the environment.
Thus all that needs to be done is to charge a price for fuel that reflects its cost to society. The fuel shortage of last year clearly showed that people modify their activities substantially when obliged to. If fuel were dearer non-essential journeys would be avoided, the fitness and health of the population would improve, and the roads would be less congested to everyone’s benefit. In addition people would be discouraged from owning those ludicrously thirsty off-roaders.
It would also make sense to roll the road fund licence into petrol tax, instantly producing an equitable system, 100 per cent compliance and a greatly reduced cost of collection. The market mechanism is already in place — it just needs the political will to make it function properly.
Yours,
PHILIP WHITAKER,
Phil Whitaker Cars,
Beaconsfield Road,
Farnham Common,
Buckinghamshire
SL2 3NE.
July 17.
WHAT A HYPOCRITE! He wants to sell cars and then discourage people from using them by essentially pricing them off the road!
I must admit, I thought at first someone had used his name and address as a wind-up. So I sent him an email to check. This was his reply:
Yes, Roger, I did!
Just because I am in cars for a living doesn't mean that I cannot see the
benefits of billing people for their impact on the environment. We all
complain that the congestion is vile - it would diminish to viable levels if
people were persuaded to use their feet, or to avoid unnecessary journeys.
I have an American client who is going back to the States and preparing to
indulge his wife in a Ford Expedition which does 13mpg on the grounds that
it's only $30,000 or so and fuel is cheap. She will apparently trash it in
4 years.
We are not as profligate as that, but by the standards of the third world we
are still wasting a phenomenal amount of resources.
Best Regards,
Philip Whitaker
He talks of the true cost to society of the car and impacts on the environment. Can you imagine the cost to society if we didn't have cars (or they were made too expensive to run)?! As for the environmental impacts, air quality is the best on record and despite the best attempts of the more extreme environmentalists to blame cars for climate change and all other sorts of ills THERE IS NO HARD EVIDENCE AT ALL. So how can you charge a price for fuel to reflect unproven and oft distorted 'facts'?
What does everyone else think?
Best Wishes
Roger
Take a look at this letter printed in yesterday's Times from "Volvo Estate Specialist" Phil Whitaker (www.pwcars.co.uk, email: sales@pwcars.co.uk
He wants us all to PAY MORE FOR OUR FUEL (and yes he makes his living from SELLING CARS!) Anyway, over to Phil:
Answers on offer for road congestion
FROM MR PHILIP WHITAKER
Sir, Mr David Tipping (letter, July 17) proposes a meter to monitor vehicle usage and regulate it, with the usual complicated adjustments for rural users, penalties for non-compliance and yet more bureaucracy.
There already exists an elegant solution to the problem. A tamper-proof and unavoidable meter records with wonderful precision every litre of fuel you purchase. The amount you buy reflects with great accuracy the impact you have on the roads and the environment.
Thus all that needs to be done is to charge a price for fuel that reflects its cost to society. The fuel shortage of last year clearly showed that people modify their activities substantially when obliged to. If fuel were dearer non-essential journeys would be avoided, the fitness and health of the population would improve, and the roads would be less congested to everyone’s benefit. In addition people would be discouraged from owning those ludicrously thirsty off-roaders.
It would also make sense to roll the road fund licence into petrol tax, instantly producing an equitable system, 100 per cent compliance and a greatly reduced cost of collection. The market mechanism is already in place — it just needs the political will to make it function properly.
Yours,
PHILIP WHITAKER,
Phil Whitaker Cars,
Beaconsfield Road,
Farnham Common,
Buckinghamshire
SL2 3NE.
July 17.
WHAT A HYPOCRITE! He wants to sell cars and then discourage people from using them by essentially pricing them off the road!
I must admit, I thought at first someone had used his name and address as a wind-up. So I sent him an email to check. This was his reply:
Yes, Roger, I did!
Just because I am in cars for a living doesn't mean that I cannot see the
benefits of billing people for their impact on the environment. We all
complain that the congestion is vile - it would diminish to viable levels if
people were persuaded to use their feet, or to avoid unnecessary journeys.
I have an American client who is going back to the States and preparing to
indulge his wife in a Ford Expedition which does 13mpg on the grounds that
it's only $30,000 or so and fuel is cheap. She will apparently trash it in
4 years.
We are not as profligate as that, but by the standards of the third world we
are still wasting a phenomenal amount of resources.
Best Regards,
Philip Whitaker
He talks of the true cost to society of the car and impacts on the environment. Can you imagine the cost to society if we didn't have cars (or they were made too expensive to run)?! As for the environmental impacts, air quality is the best on record and despite the best attempts of the more extreme environmentalists to blame cars for climate change and all other sorts of ills THERE IS NO HARD EVIDENCE AT ALL. So how can you charge a price for fuel to reflect unproven and oft distorted 'facts'?
What does everyone else think?
Best Wishes
Roger
I've long been in favour of abolishing Road Tax and putting the duty on fuel - the only argument is as to what the reasonable break-even point is - 10K miles/year? 15k? 20k?
Every other means of transport you pay per journey, not per year so why not cars?
Insurance too - I used to have this on my classic MG where I bought mileage in 1500 mile chunks as I needed them. Norwich Union are trialling pay-as-you-drive at the moment.
Taking it to the end conclusion, cars would be free to own but expensive to drive. So, I'd pay a tenner a mile to drive my free McLaren F1, just not very often that's all.
AdrianR
Every other means of transport you pay per journey, not per year so why not cars?
Insurance too - I used to have this on my classic MG where I bought mileage in 1500 mile chunks as I needed them. Norwich Union are trialling pay-as-you-drive at the moment.
Taking it to the end conclusion, cars would be free to own but expensive to drive. So, I'd pay a tenner a mile to drive my free McLaren F1, just not very often that's all.
AdrianR
But we do all 'pay as we go' !
It's called FUEL DUTY. The more you drive, the more you pay. The fuel duty is added to the basic cost of the fuel and then VAT is added onto the fuel AND the fuel duty. Tax on top of tax...
Without fuel duty and VAT on the fuel duty, petrol would be VERY CHEAP (around 20% of the current cost per litre.)
The 'advantage' with having the current system of road tax is that it enables a quick document check (MOT & insurance.)
It's called FUEL DUTY. The more you drive, the more you pay. The fuel duty is added to the basic cost of the fuel and then VAT is added onto the fuel AND the fuel duty. Tax on top of tax...
Without fuel duty and VAT on the fuel duty, petrol would be VERY CHEAP (around 20% of the current cost per litre.)
The 'advantage' with having the current system of road tax is that it enables a quick document check (MOT & insurance.)
quote:
The 'advantage' with having the current system of road tax is that it enables a quick document check (MOT & insurance.)
Here in Hungary we have a 'green-card' which is the MOT equivalent, this comes with a sticker which is fixed to the rear number plate. Car papers must be carried at all times and include the compulsory insurance payment receipt, registration document and the green card. These are liable to spot check at any time, also you must carry your driving license and ID card which will be asked for at a spot check.
Before you ask, I have no problem with these requirements as a mostly law abiding citizen (speeding in NSL excluded)
I agree with adrianr
I own 4 vehicles and do about 10,000 miles a year, Why should I pay £400 more in road tax than if I had one car ?? I can only drive one at a time.
50p a mile to drive my TVR or "ludicrously thirsty off roader" 20p for the Jap thing, sounds fair to me
Don't get me started on insurance
I own 4 vehicles and do about 10,000 miles a year, Why should I pay £400 more in road tax than if I had one car ?? I can only drive one at a time.
50p a mile to drive my TVR or "ludicrously thirsty off roader" 20p for the Jap thing, sounds fair to me
Don't get me started on insurance
I don't think he was being hypocritical at all, and most of his points were valid ones.
Amalgamating car tax and fuel duty would be an excellent idea, and there are far better ways of ensuring a car is MOT'd and insured than the current system that checks on the day the car is taxed only.
Amalgamating car tax and fuel duty would be an excellent idea, and there are far better ways of ensuring a car is MOT'd and insured than the current system that checks on the day the car is taxed only.
Yet again it boils down to the factors of Europe against the rest of the world (well mainly the US). It is a good thing that we take the moral high ground and push for further reducing emmissions and CO2. There are many ways of tackling this and a simple and easy, one way is fuel duty.
However, what puzzles me is the fact that we in Europe are doing something (actually includes Japan too). However, the USA refuses to do anything. Deadlines for zero emmission vehicles in California have past, fuel is still cheaper than milk and for the last few years the average fuel consumption is dropping for US cars. It now stands at less than 20MPG - Ok so their gallon is slightly different to ours (but that figure is AFTER the correction). Even companies such as Merc and BMW are introducing fuel efficient cars - the lastest 318i's do nearly 40MPG for gods sake.....
And we produce around 20% of the polution in Europe - the majority (something like 60%) comes from the US. Arguments for increasing fuel duty are well known and well grounded. But while the discrepancy exists to this magnitude, I am afraid that the UK public just wont accept it....
So sorry - think of a new idea. Or alternatively the USA needs to think green. Though the chances of that are pretty slim while there is a Texan in office.
Cheers,
Paul
However, what puzzles me is the fact that we in Europe are doing something (actually includes Japan too). However, the USA refuses to do anything. Deadlines for zero emmission vehicles in California have past, fuel is still cheaper than milk and for the last few years the average fuel consumption is dropping for US cars. It now stands at less than 20MPG - Ok so their gallon is slightly different to ours (but that figure is AFTER the correction). Even companies such as Merc and BMW are introducing fuel efficient cars - the lastest 318i's do nearly 40MPG for gods sake.....
And we produce around 20% of the polution in Europe - the majority (something like 60%) comes from the US. Arguments for increasing fuel duty are well known and well grounded. But while the discrepancy exists to this magnitude, I am afraid that the UK public just wont accept it....
So sorry - think of a new idea. Or alternatively the USA needs to think green. Though the chances of that are pretty slim while there is a Texan in office.
Cheers,
Paul
Why dont you suggest to Mr Whitaker that the government tax the production of cars to drive the price up. That way people wont be able to afford to buy them in the first place let alone run them. I would love to hear his response.
I am in favor of puting road tax on petrol. I only do around 3,000 miles a year, why should I pay the same as a rep who may cover 20,000.
I am in favor of puting road tax on petrol. I only do around 3,000 miles a year, why should I pay the same as a rep who may cover 20,000.
If Road Tax were abolished then I too would be in favour of an increased tax on fuel, so long as the duty was actually used on this country's infrastructure.
If you really think about it, it would be a very fair tax. High mileage drivers would pay more, occasional drivers would pay less, and as has been pinted out, multiple car owners would probably end up paying less.
However, moving swiftly back to the real world, the government would much rather charge Road Tax AND increased duty on fuel AND road tolls AND speeding fines.
In theory though, I don't see what you're getting so riled up about. As I said, I think its quite a fair idea and would be very cheap to implement. No bloody smart cards, GPS systems, privacy infingement, or anything.
And if people were educated to the fact that the high price of fuel was an alternative to road tax, or included the road tax, or whatever then perhaps the public might even accept it.
The one fly in the ointment would be the increase in fuel smuggling. It already takes place between Eire and N. Ireland.
If you really think about it, it would be a very fair tax. High mileage drivers would pay more, occasional drivers would pay less, and as has been pinted out, multiple car owners would probably end up paying less.
However, moving swiftly back to the real world, the government would much rather charge Road Tax AND increased duty on fuel AND road tolls AND speeding fines.
In theory though, I don't see what you're getting so riled up about. As I said, I think its quite a fair idea and would be very cheap to implement. No bloody smart cards, GPS systems, privacy infingement, or anything.
And if people were educated to the fact that the high price of fuel was an alternative to road tax, or included the road tax, or whatever then perhaps the public might even accept it.
The one fly in the ointment would be the increase in fuel smuggling. It already takes place between Eire and N. Ireland.
I can see benefits in what's been said for sure, I'm a firm believer in paying tax for what you use - not arbitary taxes in general.
I don't mind losing road tax and increasing petrol prices which gives me the choice of using my car (and obviously paying for that too) or not AS LONG as there was a reduction in income tax etc to reflect this.
If you smoke, you pay heavily - that's your chosen option. Same for drinking and other taxable pleasures. Everyone will always have to pay taxes, that's life and I won't waste my energy moaning about it, but it would be great to have more choice.
1. If you want to save money on taxes don't smoke, don't drink, try to dress yourself in kids clothes and drive a one litre Nissan Micra.
2. If you're me (and most other PHers probably) you'll continue drinking, and thrash the sh1t out of your car cos you love paying tax so much!!
I don't mind losing road tax and increasing petrol prices which gives me the choice of using my car (and obviously paying for that too) or not AS LONG as there was a reduction in income tax etc to reflect this.
If you smoke, you pay heavily - that's your chosen option. Same for drinking and other taxable pleasures. Everyone will always have to pay taxes, that's life and I won't waste my energy moaning about it, but it would be great to have more choice.
1. If you want to save money on taxes don't smoke, don't drink, try to dress yourself in kids clothes and drive a one litre Nissan Micra.
2. If you're me (and most other PHers probably) you'll continue drinking, and thrash the sh1t out of your car cos you love paying tax so much!!
)What about those of us living in rural areas, I don't have a station nearby, the bus comes through the village once a day and only goes to and from the local town (where there is no railway station either) so I have to drive just about everywhere outside of cycling distance. Which includes work.
Fine for those of you in towns where you only use the car for leisure and the odd trip to the out-of-town megaplex, but some of us genuinely have no alternative (and don't live in the cramped, polluted SE either).
For me, the argument falls down once again due to a lack of alternative modes of transport.
you can't tax driving like drinking and smoking until you can prove that for everyone, the only reason to drive anywhere is for reasons of pleasure, not neccesity.
>> Edited by Mark Benson on Wednesday 24th July 11:17
Fine for those of you in towns where you only use the car for leisure and the odd trip to the out-of-town megaplex, but some of us genuinely have no alternative (and don't live in the cramped, polluted SE either).
For me, the argument falls down once again due to a lack of alternative modes of transport.
you can't tax driving like drinking and smoking until you can prove that for everyone, the only reason to drive anywhere is for reasons of pleasure, not neccesity.
>> Edited by Mark Benson on Wednesday 24th July 11:17
I don't see your point, Mark. You pay your Road Tax now, presumably, what would be the difference? We're not talking about pricing people off the roads here, we're talking about a proportional tax based on the number of miles per year that you do.
High mileage drivers use the road more (wear the road out more, contribute to polution more, etc.) so get taxed more. Seems quite fair to me.
I'm not sure how you arrive at your conclusion that its "fine for those of you in towns where you only use the car for leisure and the odd trip to the out-of-town megaplex". Bit of a sweeping generalisation, isn't it? Maybe I should do the same and suggest you drive into town in your tractor?
High mileage drivers use the road more (wear the road out more, contribute to polution more, etc.) so get taxed more. Seems quite fair to me.
I'm not sure how you arrive at your conclusion that its "fine for those of you in towns where you only use the car for leisure and the odd trip to the out-of-town megaplex". Bit of a sweeping generalisation, isn't it? Maybe I should do the same and suggest you drive into town in your tractor?
I think removal of the Road Fund Licence (RFL) and replacement with a little extra tax on fuel is eminently fair. I would 'massage' Manek's figures to base it on 12,000 m.p.a. and 30 m.p.g. to give a figure of 8.3 p.p.l. extra (plus VAT?). I suppose this should include the VAT value as well because the RFL does not have VAT on it. However, most countries do not have a road fund licence and UK fuel is at least as expensive therefore we could say the current price of fuel must include the contribution to the road maintenance already therefore we should just abolish the RFL with no increase in petrol prices
In Hungary we pay a small sum to the local council dependent on vehicle size and engine, an average car would cost around $50 p.a.
In Hungary we pay a small sum to the local council dependent on vehicle size and engine, an average car would cost around $50 p.a.
Sod the B
y taxes! Scrap the lot - no more road fund (it gets spend on other things anyway so its a complete misnomer - in fact isn't it called vehicle excise tax now? wasn'aware that I imported/exported my car once a year...).
Abolish fuel tax - it only goes to the NHS black hole and that "green" levy was a pile of sh**e. Theiving bs - its MY money, not theirs. I pay enuff tax to cover building roads and council tax for upkeep of them.
Why cant they just be honest, scrap all these back-door taxes and have the 75% rate that we actually pay....... then work on reducing "inefficiencies" in the public sector and try and get back to a sensible level.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!
y taxes! Scrap the lot - no more road fund (it gets spend on other things anyway so its a complete misnomer - in fact isn't it called vehicle excise tax now? wasn'aware that I imported/exported my car once a year...). Abolish fuel tax - it only goes to the NHS black hole and that "green" levy was a pile of sh**e. Theiving b
s - its MY money, not theirs. I pay enuff tax to cover building roads and council tax for upkeep of them. Why cant they just be honest, scrap all these back-door taxes and have the 75% rate that we actually pay....... then work on reducing "inefficiencies" in the public sector and try and get back to a sensible level.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff