Tranona
Well-known member
I really cannot imagine that the few measly sheckles that british yachtsmen spend in belgium would have any sway whatsoever on the grand scheme of things which goes beyond just our use of red fuel. It also has a bearing on fuel used by the fishing industry which i believe is the main point of disagreement
That is right. The two main issues are availability of fuel - that is fuel berths would have to install extra tanks to supply white in many areas where the majority of the demand for fuel is commercial, and the large number of boats on our inland waterways which are residential or semi, so the fuel used for propulsion is tiny compared with that for heating. The UK government's solution was to have the split between propulsion (where red is not allowed) and other uses such as power generation (where it is). This of course can be seen as fudge and open to abuse, but it was a pragmatic solution when derogation ended. The government stance is that it complies with the Directive which was always about removing tax concessions for particular specific uses. The Belgians believe it is marking of the fuel that is key and their law is written in such a way that use of marked fuel is illegal, not the differential duty. Hence going to the European court to resolve - very slowly!