Gludy
Active member
Re: aha envy......
You
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
You
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
MBY & Appeasement
- Thread starter Gludy
- Start date
- Status
Andrew_Fanner
New member
Re: aha envy......
In passing I note from today's Times that HMG is discovering that if it bans hunting it may be made to pay compensation to all those whose livelihoods will be adversely affected by loss of job/income etc. The potential amount is giving the Treasury collywobbles, as it equates to, in emotive New Labour terminology, fifteen new secondary schools. This ignores the potential claims from ancilliary businesses who are not totally dependant on the availability of a local hunt, such as livery stables, hotels in hunting areas etc, which could amount to many millions more.
Has anyone done any similar analysis for our own problem?
<hr width=100% size=1>Two beers please, my friend is paying.
In passing I note from today's Times that HMG is discovering that if it bans hunting it may be made to pay compensation to all those whose livelihoods will be adversely affected by loss of job/income etc. The potential amount is giving the Treasury collywobbles, as it equates to, in emotive New Labour terminology, fifteen new secondary schools. This ignores the potential claims from ancilliary businesses who are not totally dependant on the availability of a local hunt, such as livery stables, hotels in hunting areas etc, which could amount to many millions more.
Has anyone done any similar analysis for our own problem?
<hr width=100% size=1>Two beers please, my friend is paying.
Gludy
Active member
Re: aha envy......
MBM says that HMG collect £1billion from the UK boating industry - they onlt collect a pittance from fuel tax. A 2% drop in the UK marine business amounts to £20 million - this figure dwarfs the tax collected - even if evryone bough tthe same quantity. In practice, I think, there will be a much greater drop in the UK marine business than 2% but there only has to be 1% drop before the potential gain has gone and the net situation is less tax for HMG.
There are many practical problems and any campaign should focus on those problems.
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
MBM says that HMG collect £1billion from the UK boating industry - they onlt collect a pittance from fuel tax. A 2% drop in the UK marine business amounts to £20 million - this figure dwarfs the tax collected - even if evryone bough tthe same quantity. In practice, I think, there will be a much greater drop in the UK marine business than 2% but there only has to be 1% drop before the potential gain has gone and the net situation is less tax for HMG.
There are many practical problems and any campaign should focus on those problems.
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
Planty
New member
Re: aha envy......
I'm with you on this but in the same article in MBY it states " the Government lose more than £4000million a year through the illegal use of Red Diesel". Now whilst I accept that is a complete load of B*******ks as far as we are concerned, ie like most other land based users, we don't use it illegaly, they are actually just taking the amount of red diesel sold from refineries and saying if we got all the "Road Duty" on that amount it would add up to "£4000million". However that is the figure they will always use, which dwarfs your more reasonably calculated "£20million".
As usual Kate Brunel Cohen who wrote the piece has not got the speed of foot to challenge this figure or its calculation, thus there it is, bold as brass in print and beats your figure any day. I imagine this figure will appear more and more, its like the often presented extra £xxxmillion spent on schools, hospitals, etc. never effectively challenged by any journo. Thus it gets believed. Mist and clouds I think you call it!!
<hr width=100% size=1>
I'm with you on this but in the same article in MBY it states " the Government lose more than £4000million a year through the illegal use of Red Diesel". Now whilst I accept that is a complete load of B*******ks as far as we are concerned, ie like most other land based users, we don't use it illegaly, they are actually just taking the amount of red diesel sold from refineries and saying if we got all the "Road Duty" on that amount it would add up to "£4000million". However that is the figure they will always use, which dwarfs your more reasonably calculated "£20million".
As usual Kate Brunel Cohen who wrote the piece has not got the speed of foot to challenge this figure or its calculation, thus there it is, bold as brass in print and beats your figure any day. I imagine this figure will appear more and more, its like the often presented extra £xxxmillion spent on schools, hospitals, etc. never effectively challenged by any journo. Thus it gets believed. Mist and clouds I think you call it!!
<hr width=100% size=1>
KevB
Active member
Re: Peace and love Gludy
Sorry - I've been reading this thread and now you have confused me. What you on about??
<hr width=100% size=1>
Sorry - I've been reading this thread and now you have confused me. What you on about??
<hr width=100% size=1>
hlb
RIP
Re: aha envy......
No. I'm not reading the thread. I skip through it and just read the comments by others.../forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1> Get Yer Flags ear</font color=red>
Haydn
No. I'm not reading the thread. I skip through it and just read the comments by others.../forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1> Get Yer Flags ear</font color=red>
Haydn
Gludy
Active member
Re: aha envy......
Planty - id we lose red diesel for boats red will still exist for farmers etc and so if anything there will be even more red diesel fraud not less. Taking into account the policing difficulties for boats - it would be easy.
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
Planty - id we lose red diesel for boats red will still exist for farmers etc and so if anything there will be even more red diesel fraud not less. Taking into account the policing difficulties for boats - it would be easy.
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
Gludy
Active member
Re: aha envy......
Well in that case Hadyn, because you are only partially reading it and then only reading one side, you must agree that you cannot really judge it
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
Well in that case Hadyn, because you are only partially reading it and then only reading one side, you must agree that you cannot really judge it
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
hlb
RIP
Re: aha envy......
There you go again. I just asked if anyone else was reading it. Said nothing about judgement. Anyway I think it's crap.../forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1> Get Yer Flags ear</font color=red>
Haydn
There you go again. I just asked if anyone else was reading it. Said nothing about judgement. Anyway I think it's crap.../forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1> Get Yer Flags ear</font color=red>
Haydn
Gludy
Active member
Re: aha envy......
Hadyn - lighten up, I was not judging just joking with you ...
"Anyway I think it's crap..."
Thank you for your positive contribution
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
Hadyn - lighten up, I was not judging just joking with you ...
"Anyway I think it's crap..."
Thank you for your positive contribution
<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
steverow
New member
Re: aha envy......
Come on now ladies put your handbags away.
A couple of points:
In defence of Paul, whom I know very well, he is not a T*at as some have suggested but someone who enjoys his boat and cares deeply about the hobby.
He and I have spent many hours discussing the Red Diesel issue and looking at all the angles we can think of.
A couple of points on the issue perhaps not covered as yet:
If we lose Red Diesel and have a third class of diesel introduced then all bets are off. Successive administrations wil be free to raise tax on it at will. Imagine in thirty years you have the green Party in power, what would be the cost of a gallon of Marine Derv then?
The only thing that protects us is being in the Red diesel collective.
Whether or not we have to pay more VAT or not or whatever, we should at least be fighting to retain the use of Red.
For mobo's not on Rivers or on the South or East coasts, the arguments are the same as for Rural Derv users. It affects us disproportionately more because of the greater distances between cruising destinations often in heavier seas, so it is not
a level playing field, by any means.
I am quite frankly suprised by the response of some of the respected forumites and the level of acrimony this subject is causing. Please, although you may not agree, (although quite why you would want to pay more escapes me) can we at least be civil to one another. We are all in the same situation after all.
We need a concencus on this. If we remain divided then the worst will happen.
So come on Editors, RYA, BMF, MCA etc etc. agree a common policy a common strategy and lets move forward.
Perhaps a conference to agree a common strategy is the way to go?
Steve.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Come on now ladies put your handbags away.
A couple of points:
In defence of Paul, whom I know very well, he is not a T*at as some have suggested but someone who enjoys his boat and cares deeply about the hobby.
He and I have spent many hours discussing the Red Diesel issue and looking at all the angles we can think of.
A couple of points on the issue perhaps not covered as yet:
If we lose Red Diesel and have a third class of diesel introduced then all bets are off. Successive administrations wil be free to raise tax on it at will. Imagine in thirty years you have the green Party in power, what would be the cost of a gallon of Marine Derv then?
The only thing that protects us is being in the Red diesel collective.
Whether or not we have to pay more VAT or not or whatever, we should at least be fighting to retain the use of Red.
For mobo's not on Rivers or on the South or East coasts, the arguments are the same as for Rural Derv users. It affects us disproportionately more because of the greater distances between cruising destinations often in heavier seas, so it is not
a level playing field, by any means.
I am quite frankly suprised by the response of some of the respected forumites and the level of acrimony this subject is causing. Please, although you may not agree, (although quite why you would want to pay more escapes me) can we at least be civil to one another. We are all in the same situation after all.
We need a concencus on this. If we remain divided then the worst will happen.
So come on Editors, RYA, BMF, MCA etc etc. agree a common policy a common strategy and lets move forward.
Perhaps a conference to agree a common strategy is the way to go?
Steve.
<hr width=100% size=1>
hlb
RIP
Re: aha envy......
/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1> Get Yer Flags ear</font color=red>
Haydn
/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1> Get Yer Flags ear</font color=red>
Haydn
steverow
New member
Re:Choice of fuel.
Fred,
The view from Paul's boat is firstly on to my Birchwood 35 a 23 year old boat that had been let go and we are painstakingly restoring as funds allow. Behind me, and directly next to Paul is a 47 foot Trawler yacht built from scratch by a retired fireman, work still very much in progress. Behind Paul is an old Hardy 20.
You get the Picture....
There are only half a dozen boats of around Pauls size in the whole marina here in Swansea out of 350+
This is a very mixed environment with all sorts of vessels, and we all muck in together and help each other out with our respective skills. A good community.
No matter what you may think of Paul on the forum (and sure, by standards he is well off) but he is a good freind and a very generous and likeable bloke, not at all as you paint him.
Please lets try and put our differences away and stop tearing strips off one another
over red diesel..which lets be honest, is going to affect us all to some degree.
Steve.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Fred,
The view from Paul's boat is firstly on to my Birchwood 35 a 23 year old boat that had been let go and we are painstakingly restoring as funds allow. Behind me, and directly next to Paul is a 47 foot Trawler yacht built from scratch by a retired fireman, work still very much in progress. Behind Paul is an old Hardy 20.
You get the Picture....
There are only half a dozen boats of around Pauls size in the whole marina here in Swansea out of 350+
This is a very mixed environment with all sorts of vessels, and we all muck in together and help each other out with our respective skills. A good community.
No matter what you may think of Paul on the forum (and sure, by standards he is well off) but he is a good freind and a very generous and likeable bloke, not at all as you paint him.
Please lets try and put our differences away and stop tearing strips off one another
over red diesel..which lets be honest, is going to affect us all to some degree.
Steve.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Planty
New member
Re: aha envy......
Agree entirely, should we turn our thoughts as to how we achieve this, or leave it to those who seem to want to pay more and then want part of our little enterprise when its imposed and they decide they don't like it? Could be a money spinner??
<hr width=100% size=1>
Agree entirely, should we turn our thoughts as to how we achieve this, or leave it to those who seem to want to pay more and then want part of our little enterprise when its imposed and they decide they don't like it? Could be a money spinner??
<hr width=100% size=1>
oldgit
Well-known member
Re.More heat than light as usual.
Well Teacher he started it.Honest /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1>If it aint broke fix it till it is.
Well Teacher he started it.Honest /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
<hr width=100% size=1>If it aint broke fix it till it is.
apollo
...
Re: aha envy......
"Inland Boaters"......er no, if you read my reply i mentioned Holland and Belgium....er there is the English Channel in between.
Where do you get the term from? Oldgit is Medway based as are we part of the year.
Have you ever been near the Medway or Thames estuary?
Perhaps we should "assume" that you keep your ship in the Carribean, false but equally wrong.
But no, we are a bit more grown up than that.
<hr width=100% size=1>
"Inland Boaters"......er no, if you read my reply i mentioned Holland and Belgium....er there is the English Channel in between.
Where do you get the term from? Oldgit is Medway based as are we part of the year.
Have you ever been near the Medway or Thames estuary?
Perhaps we should "assume" that you keep your ship in the Carribean, false but equally wrong.
But no, we are a bit more grown up than that.
<hr width=100% size=1>
BrendanS
Well-known member
Re: aha envy......
If they are, they are not admitting to it!
<hr width=100% size=1>Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabris, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam.
If they are, they are not admitting to it!
<hr width=100% size=1>Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabris, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam.
BrendanS
Well-known member
Re: aha envy......
>>I do understand them, just disagree with them. Part of the problem is getting them to clarify what they mean - it turns out that some do not wish to clarify what they mean, they refuse to answer questions and so it becomes impossible to further a debate.<<
Not sure you do. Everytime someone disagrees, you dive in with a selfishness type arguement. Those that you accuse of refusing to answer your questions..ever thought that you are trying to dictate terms, and that people don't want to get drawn into arguements of that type with you, as you have something of a history on this forum of dictating how the arguement should go, and you've been told before it's not everyones cup of tea.
oh yeah /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif just in case anyone thinks it's getting a bit serious /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
ever wonder why Happy and Noah used to wind people up, even though well intentioned, and what they had in common???
<hr width=100% size=1>Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabris, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam.
>>I do understand them, just disagree with them. Part of the problem is getting them to clarify what they mean - it turns out that some do not wish to clarify what they mean, they refuse to answer questions and so it becomes impossible to further a debate.<<
Not sure you do. Everytime someone disagrees, you dive in with a selfishness type arguement. Those that you accuse of refusing to answer your questions..ever thought that you are trying to dictate terms, and that people don't want to get drawn into arguements of that type with you, as you have something of a history on this forum of dictating how the arguement should go, and you've been told before it's not everyones cup of tea.
oh yeah /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif just in case anyone thinks it's getting a bit serious /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
ever wonder why Happy and Noah used to wind people up, even though well intentioned, and what they had in common???
<hr width=100% size=1>Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabris, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam.
TomIsitt
N/A
Re: Spot-on......
Nail hit firmly on the head
<hr width=100% size=1>
Nail hit firmly on the head
<hr width=100% size=1>
Doffy
New member
Lets strike , hold the country to ransom It works in Nigeria every time, N38 a ltr, 15p a ltr.
AT exactly 6.25 p.m. yesterday, the Federal High Court gave a ruling that was meant to halt the strike action slated for today. Justice Roseline Ukeje dismissed a fresh application by the Federal Government seeking to stop the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) from making good its threat to embark on a nation-wide strike today over increases in fuel prices.
Justice Ukeje, who sat over the matter which started around 10.00 a.m., also ordered the Federal Government to immediately revert the pump price of fuel to the former rate of N38 per litre of petrol.
For the Nigeria Labour Congress, the Federal High Court ordered it to also maintain the status quo ante bellum and not go on strike pending the determination of the first suit filed by government on the matter before her.
Promptly, the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) issued a statement acknowledging the ruling of the Federal High Court, Abuja, "whereby petroleum products marketers and the NNPC are to revert to the prevailing pump price prior to the recent increases.
"In pursuance of PPPRA's respect for the judicial process and in obedience to the rule of law and the tenets of democracy, the PPPRA is complying with the ruling with immediate effect," the statement said.
However, NLC's President, Adams Oshiomhole, insisted last night that the strike would begin today as proposed. This, according to him, is because Labour was yet to receive the court order restraining it from carrying out the strike action.
He said: "The strike would go on tomorrow (today) as planned for a number of reasons: Firstly, Labour is yet to be served the court order. We cannot therefore be doing business on hear-say or to depend on what we read on the pages of newspapers.
"Secondly, government has a character of not fulfilling its promises. We would therefore not allow ourselves to be fooled this time around.
The strike will continue until we see the practical implementation of this reversal. And the reversal we are talking about is the pre-fuel tax fuel price regime," Oshiomhole further told reporters.
<hr width=100% size=1>
AT exactly 6.25 p.m. yesterday, the Federal High Court gave a ruling that was meant to halt the strike action slated for today. Justice Roseline Ukeje dismissed a fresh application by the Federal Government seeking to stop the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) from making good its threat to embark on a nation-wide strike today over increases in fuel prices.
Justice Ukeje, who sat over the matter which started around 10.00 a.m., also ordered the Federal Government to immediately revert the pump price of fuel to the former rate of N38 per litre of petrol.
For the Nigeria Labour Congress, the Federal High Court ordered it to also maintain the status quo ante bellum and not go on strike pending the determination of the first suit filed by government on the matter before her.
Promptly, the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) issued a statement acknowledging the ruling of the Federal High Court, Abuja, "whereby petroleum products marketers and the NNPC are to revert to the prevailing pump price prior to the recent increases.
"In pursuance of PPPRA's respect for the judicial process and in obedience to the rule of law and the tenets of democracy, the PPPRA is complying with the ruling with immediate effect," the statement said.
However, NLC's President, Adams Oshiomhole, insisted last night that the strike would begin today as proposed. This, according to him, is because Labour was yet to receive the court order restraining it from carrying out the strike action.
He said: "The strike would go on tomorrow (today) as planned for a number of reasons: Firstly, Labour is yet to be served the court order. We cannot therefore be doing business on hear-say or to depend on what we read on the pages of newspapers.
"Secondly, government has a character of not fulfilling its promises. We would therefore not allow ourselves to be fooled this time around.
The strike will continue until we see the practical implementation of this reversal. And the reversal we are talking about is the pre-fuel tax fuel price regime," Oshiomhole further told reporters.
<hr width=100% size=1>
- Status
