Red Diesel-An Idea

A

asteven221

Well-Known Member
Joined
6 Jul 2003
Messages
1,414
Visit site
I know this subject is a big issue and been discussed many times is this forum. One of the issues seems to be making the suits at Westminster aware of our displeasure at seeing our pastime killed off. Why don't we (err, well not me as I am in sunny Scotland but you get my point) just to what the truckers do, except on the sea of course! Try getting a few hundred boats together and block off the Thames for a few days or Portsmouth or somewhere like that. They will soon become aware of our campaign then! My goodness I can't believe I suggested that. I must be becoming a liberal lefty in my middle age.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I remember the fishermen did this on the Clyde a number of years back. Stoped all river traffic up river of Greenock by lining up accross the channel. It was very effective and brought crowds of onlookers.

Jim.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You'd have to be careful to only blockade with manky old boats, a blockade by shiny gin palaces might give the wrong signals!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Jimi,

I think you have hit on the crux of the matter...

The whole purpose of the taxation system - especially in the eyes of a Labour Government (be it 'New' Labour or not) - is to redistribute income from the rich to the poor.

Taxation is raised to fund education, healthcare, police etc, all of which the rich (if there was no government provision) could afford to pay for, but the poor cannnot. So the rich pay a higher than proportionate share of their income towards these things things than the poor in order that the whole of society benefits, therefore making the country a better place to live for all. Well, that is the theory.

The core of the argument against the concession (which, lets face it, Red Deisel effectively is) on fuel duty for pleasure boaters is that it is a rich man's passtime. This will be the majority view, please don't think for a minute that I do not realise there are many for whom it is only affordable because of the concession.

However, the bulk of public opinion - and it is this opinion to which the Government panders, as we live in a democracy - is that boating, especially powerboating, is a rich man's sport. This is emphasised by the Boat shows and Boat magazines, where all the headline grabbers are big. shiny, new powerboats.

I am afraid that, be it right or wrong, there is nothing which can be done to stop the increase taking effect, as any argument you bring will be countereded in the minds of the majority of the public by images of big shiny Sunseekers transporting busty ladies accross crystal seas.

When I take non boaty types out, they are always amazed to hear that we get fuel so cheaply and more than a few have remarked that it almost seems unfairly cheap...this is the argument you are up against and there is little you will be able to do to counter it.

Sorry to be so negative, as I enjoy the cheap fuel as much as anyone. But there remains the age old phrase, which is more than true when discussing how much fuel a boat cunsumes - if you have to ask, you can't afford it.

If you take the above as your base, then you may be able to formulate some valid arguments against, but I am afraid that I at least am struggling to do so - and I am one of the ones who would dearly like the concession to continue.

After all, if you take other Northern European countries where they do not have Red Deisel and have fuel taxes not too far removed from our own, and consider that their boating industreis still do pretty well, the argument seems to fall flat.

I think I will now duck below the parepet...

Ben

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
If the rest of europe pays the same tax on their diesel, how come its almost 90 pence a litre in the UK and 70 euro cents a litre in spain, 90 cents in italy, 75 cents in Holland, similar in Belgium and 68 cents in portugal? dont know about France never bought diesel there. If they wish to remove the concession and bring us into line wioth europe, then fine, lets have european prices, for cars and trucks aswell. The whole point of this is TAX! Money to waste playing at world policemen and killing people!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Interesting comments from everyone. Benny1 seems to have talked himself into this being a fair tax. At the end of the day I certainly see a case for doing away with red diesel PROVIDING that the price becomes on par with all the rest of the Euro community, not the rip off Britain prices we have to put up with. Agree with the idea that gin palaces would send out the wrong message and also agree that non motor boat people regard us lot as rich. Even the yachties seem to think we are all loaded judging by the comments I get and I certainly wouldn't put me or my boat in the rich b£$£$%d catagory, although I guess it's all relative I suppose. Geezoh this is all getting very depressing. Might as well go down to the marina and spend time with my beloved boat whilst I can afford to buy fuel for it, whilst pondering how much I am going to lose of my hard earned cash as it's value nosedives.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I think you have missed the point that red diesel can be used for any purpose other than on the road, not just by yachts. For road use an extra tax was charged on the fuel supposedly to pay for roads (I know only a tiny percentage is now used for that purpose). I fail to see how you consider this a concession, what possible justification is there for a road duty on yachts? What about heating, generators. farmers and all other red diesel users, is that also a "concession" that should be ended by Europe? Incidentally other Northern European countries have road fuel taxes far removed from ours and do have red diesel which can be used for heating a boat (and I think generating electricity on board) but not for main engines. I am sure there must be rules about generating electricity used for electric propulsion somewhere and possibly partial exemption for fuel used by the main engines to generate electricity. What about heat from main engine cooling water used for domestic hot water, surely some complex rules are needed here? I think we need more euro regulators to sort this mess out for us.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You are right, if our fuel prices were equal to the rest of europe I would have no problem paying full whack for a tank of fuel. but lets be real, this government are a bunch of money grabbing egotistical megalomaniacs. Are the citizens of this country so gullible to think that we are living a democratic society. We are living under a dictatorship. They demand, we whinge then we pay.

Boating is not just a rich mans hobby it is a way of life. It will be cheaper for me to fill up four times a season in France than to fill up three times in this country.

Blockade, Blockade, Blockade!!!Not for one day but a whole week!

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://mysite.freeserve.com/leisure_marine_prep>http://mysite.freeserve.com/leisure_marine_prep</A>
 
Just another thought!

Change the Government / lobby friends and people, that you know, not to vote Liberal (the vote splitters)or any other party that will do the same and vote Conservative, having got them to agree that the diesel stays the same. Draw breath when successfull and re-think. Its basically a blockade but by vote, we may be able to shift the balance a lot by this action and hey ho! diesel stays the same???? How many votes could we go to the Cons with as a starter?

If life were that easy!


<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi,

No I have not talked myself into thinking that it is a fair tax. Believe you me I am not into paying a penny more in tax than I can get away with, and am certainly not a liberal or leftie.

What I was trying to do was play Devil's Advocate in pointing out that the big problem you are up against here is the fact that public opinion will be manipulated by the Government so that it looks as if it is a bunch of rich toff's complaining about the cost of fuel in thier million pound gin palaces. I am not saying this is right, but it is how your average Labour politician (and once they have woven their web, you average Labour voter too) will look at it. Unfortunately they are the ones who have the power at the moment.

However, all this argument is only valid if you can even get the Government to care - as let's face it the Motor Boating fraternity and it's suppliers are not big enough in number for the Governmant to be bothered about losing thier votes (and that's if they consider them to be Labour voters in the first place, which I doubt they do).

The consequence is, as I sad at the end of my last post, that I am not sure how you can come up with an argument of keeping the concession (and it is a concession from the EU that has allowed the UK government to keep red deisel for leisure marine use, it is the concession which expires in 2007 after which time they will have to come into line) which will not be soundly knocked into touch by the government saying that motor boating is a rich man's sport - be that true or untrue.

I appreciate that we have the most expensive road fuel in Europe and if anyone believes that tax on road fuel is for road use alone, then they need to register for disability benefit (paid for by in part by road fuel tax etc) as they are quite clearly mentally unsound.

I also think that getting a halfway house for marine leisure use, whilst a cracking idea and a fair one too, is never going to happen. It will just leave them wide open for flack from the moroting lobby as to why they cannot have fuel at the lower price too.

As I said before, sorry to be all doom and gloom, but if you look at it from a politican's point of view, the current arguements put forward by the motorboating lobby are all hopelessly easy to refute. If we are going to keep some form of reduced duty on Marine fuel then we need to put our thinking caps on sharpish.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: oh heck

damn you benny1, that sounds very sensible. BUT of course it starts from the standpoint of "fixed" high road fuel, which of course HM also controls. So that could be cheap as well, like in any other country that owns oilfields. They must be sniggering at us in the EU for our govt charging us so much duty.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Benny - I understand where you are coming from and agree about your remarks ref taxation and re-distribution.

Because of the nature of government the objective should be to place as many practical complications in the way and there are many - they do not like hassle or headaches.

"I also think that getting a halfway house for marine leisure use, whilst a cracking idea and a fair one too, is never going to happen. It will just leave them wide open for flack from the moroting lobby as to why they cannot have fuel at the lower price too."

What we cannot do is just give in or appease them with offering up doubling the price as the starting point, so I totally agree with you.

"As I said before, sorry to be all doom and gloom, but if you look at it from a politican's point of view, the current arguements put forward by the motorboating lobby are all hopelessly easy to refute. If we are going to keep some form of reduced duty on Marine fuel then we need to put our thinking caps on sharpish."

Its the headaches and complications that will do it.



<hr width=100% size=1>Paul
 
Tell every politician who canvasses you from now to the next election that your vote is conditional upon his written promise to fight for the continued rebate on red diesel, by Private Members Bill if need be. Failure to follow the request from a constituent will result at the very least adverse publicity.

If anti roads/anti hunt and what have you single issue groups can get their stuff through Parliament then why not us?

<hr width=100% size=1>Two beers please, my friend is paying.
 
Re: oh heck

TCM,

I know what you mean. The fact that we do have our own very sizeable oil industry makes the whole thing obscene...

A lot of the problem stems from Europe again - with metrification the Chancellor could say I am putting 3p on a litre of fuel and everyone went "Hey Ho, that's not too bad, last year he only put 3p on it" (but that was per GALLON!). However, if he had said I am putting 11.4p on a gallon of fuel, which is exactly the same thing, there would have been uproar.

The ignorance of the average UK punter to what a litre actually is in relation to a gallon gave the Chancellor a licence to print money as far as fuel duty was /is concerned. Moreover, in most if not all of Europe they were and are well aware of what a litre is and would not let their Governments get away with such massive increases.

This was the root of the problem and the fact we now have a typically high spending Labour regime in power means that there is little we can do to redress this - at least until the next General Election

It strikes me that one of the best ways to minimise the impact is to join the road fuel protests, as this is the best way of keeping the cost of post 2007 fuel down - although explaining your logic on this one now, when red deisel is still available, could be a difficcult one!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
"The whole purpose of the taxation system - especially in the eyes of a Labour Government (be it 'New' Labour or not) - is to redistribute income from the rich to the poor."

But look at the benefits created by the rich buying luxury boats to the "poor". Are they not already "redistributing" their wealth through buying large boats? Would the town of Poole (not suggesting they are poor!!) be quite as vibrant without Sunseeker? How about the sleepy town of Oundle without Fairline? Never mind the VAT paid on new boats, benefits in export sales and the like. There really is much more to this issue than diesel duty. Think of it this way, a 500k new boat sold in the UK will attract VAT of £87,500 pounds. On top of this the Gov't receives PAYE from those producing the boat, NI contributions and coorporation tax from the manufacturers (hopefully!!). You could also argue that public benefit payments are reduced through the whole process. For the increased revenue the gov't would receive through diesel excise they could very soon loose a lot more through falling boat sales. Think of the VAT loss alone!!!!!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>Andy M
 
Hi

I agree with what you are saying people who dont boat see boating as an elitest sport and therefore the governement will be able to convince the general non boating public that the concession is wrong and speaking to some non boaty people about whats happening i dont think we are going to get much sympathy! It would be so easy for the government to belittle the efforts of the boating fraternity in their attempts to hold on to RD

Dont get me started on this higher than proportionate share of income surely thats why its a percentage so that by the nature of that the higher paid contribute more without the need for that percentage also to be higher!! that bugs me no end!

The problem i see is that the government dont care really what a few boaters think it isnt going to lose them an election and much the same as other high priced items in the Uk we all seem to moan for a while then pay what they want anyway! and Im sure they know that.

IMHO I dont think that losing the concession on RD will affect boats sales in the UK I think it sounds a good argument to use that jobs may be lost etc etc but Im not convinced much will alter once the concession has gone.

I will be interested to see how the price of new diesel boats drop as Ive always thought that their over the top prices compared to petrol equvelents has much to do with knowing that people are often forced financially down that route in order to be able to afford to run their boats than actually the increased cost in producing them. When you look at manufacturing costs and manufacturers pricing this differential seems way out of whack! and it may be easier for buyers on a budget to finance the initial increased cost of a diesel boat than the week in week out costs of having to buy petrol. Or am i just be cynical?


Kevin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top