Red Diesel - response from Minister

[Talbot]

I Faxed my MP abt Red Diesel and he fwd this to the appropriate Minister (David Jamieson (david.jamieson@dft.gsi.gov.uk)) The following is his response:

"A comparison between petrol and diesel in marine use inevitably revolves around power/weight ratios of engines, and the safety issues of fuel stored onboard and unintentional ignition. Petrol is used most commonly for high speed applications. The use of petrol outboards for high speed boating and the associated sports of water skiing, paragliding, and petrol inboard motors for jet ski are particularly well known. Where lower power/weight ratios are acceptable and where greater reliability is necessary, diesel engines are preferred, and indeed are the only practical option.
Particular requirements in the EU Directive on Recreational Craft acknowledge difficulties in the stowage of fuels having a flash point below 55 deg C, requiring that tanks are not part of the hull, are insulated from the engine compartment, and are protected from all other sources of ignition. As you will appreciate, this places petrol at a disadvantage, limiting its use significantly. <font color=blue>Petrol engines are also inherently ill-equipped for anything more than use in relatively calm conditions due to the limitation of the ignition system.</font color=blue>

Despite the removal of the "Red" status of diesel, the relative benefits of diesel as a marine fuel are considered to outweigh the increase in basic cost. Diesel remains cheaper than petrol; is less volatile; can be stored in integral hull tanks; and the vapour, although pungent, is much less dangerous than that of petrol. <font color=blue>Diesel is also relatively more environmentally friendly than petrol.</font color=blue>"

<font color=red>Hands up all those like me who consider that this response is:

a. Fundamentally flawed as far as leisure craft are concerned.
b. Ignoring the real issues.</font color=red>


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Will_M]

B, I think....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mike21]

A & B

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

Isn't what's being said (badly) that petrol is almost exclusively used at sea for leisure purposes (and therefore can be taxed without consideration being given to protecting livelihoods) whereas diesel is used far more by commercial craft and therefore liveilihood considerations need to be taken into account.

Which is of course pretty much bollox because a commercial user will recover the cost of fuel, whether cheap or expensive, from pre-tax earnings.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Guest]

He missed the point totally

Total b.......s

Typical Govt guy who knows nothing more than his desk.


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ... and of course Yahoo groups :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gps-navigator/

 

[Aardee]

It's a beautifully crafted answer...but not to the question asked.

<hr width=100% size=1>"I am a bear of very little brain and long words bother me..."

 

[Nick_Pam]

Typical politicians response then!!!!

Nick & Pam

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BlueSkyNick]

It seems to be a complete smoke screen to me. I understand the point about the disadvantages of petrol. However, I don't see what that has to do with the taxation on red diesel - it is a different argument altogether.

<hr width=100% size=1>I'm average size, Its just that everybody else is short.

 

[Newbieknownowt]

Obvious garbage, even to a novice like me - however, he seems to suggest that upping the duty is a foregone conclusion - quote - "Despite the removal of the "Red" status of diesel" - has it got this far?

Interesting that he seems to think taxed diesel is cheaper than petrol (not on most UK forecourts it isn't) and that diesel is more environmentally friendly (the new company car tax regime is based on the opposite premise). I suspect this chap's voice becomes muffled whenever he sits down.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Heckler]

have sent a copy of the page to hs nibs and asked for further comments and invited him to join the debate.
bet he doesnt
stu

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk</A>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Did you

ask the man to compare the virtues of fuel types? Or did you ask him what he's doing increasing tax on red diesel?

If the former, I find the answer a remarkable piece of politics. He's clearly got many answers but is not addressing them to the right questions.

If the later, he's run out of steam before getting to the answer at all.

I presume we're all emailing him to ask questions are we.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Heckler]

Re: Did you

look what i got back

Please note that your email entitled "Emailing: showflat"
of Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:40:26 +0100 addressed to: -

david.jamieson@dft.gsi.gov.uk

Has been blocked by the ODPM/DfT firewall because it contains Active HTML.

It is the policy of ODPM/DfT to reject emails containing Active HTML, as we cannot adequately check the HTML code for malicious content. If the content of the email is intended for ODPM/DfT business purposes, and the Active HTML content cannot be removed, you may wish to contact the intended recipient and discuss alternative means of delivery

Enquiries about this matter should be addressed to: -

ditso@odpm-dft.gsi.gov.uk

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________stu

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk</A>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: I thought I\'d email him as follows

Sir
A response from your office, regarding the change of status to red diesel, is circulating on the net.

It appears to address many questions that were not asked, without giving an answer as to why more tax is being levied on this fuel sector at this time.

The response contains much apparent technical fact that is deeply flawed. The RNLI would be surprised to hear that petrol engines are only suitable for calm conditions. They seem to take theirs out in some shocking weather.

The idea that petrol is at a disadvantage smacks of some sort of equal opportunities for fuels. Is this part of HMG's policy? Equal opportunity for inanimate objects.

In fact the petrol engine is often much cheaper than the diesel equivalent and this offsets the slightly more complex fuel storage problem. Many people prefer the petrol engine for it's lightness, smoothness & quietness, regardless of the size of leisure craft, as the light usage most of these craft experience mitigates the cost premium for a diesel engine.

The burden of the tax you have increased will fall squarely on the heavier usage boat owner, who values the longevity and frugality of diesel engines. Those using their craft in trade for example. I don't know of many of them that can absorb the cost out of profit so clearly that will be passed on into the broader economy.

So from here it looks like your not keen on answering the question "why more tax is being levied on this fuel sector at this time?" and it appears the decision was made on a rather tenuous grasp of the facts.

Is that the case?



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Heckler]

Re: I thought I\'d email him as follows

well done that man, a command of the english language is a joy to behold.
i took the liberty of cut and pasting from the 2 posts and also have emailed him again, we shall wait and see what transpires
stu

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk</A>

 

[BlueSkyNick]

Re: I thought I\'d email him as follows

I know we live in a democratic country with freedom of speech, etc etc. However, being a devils advocate for a moment, do we genuinely believe that individual mails to ministers can have a positive impact or are they just an irritation which makes matters worse.

From our own experience locally, it seems to depend on the individual MP/minister in question. SWMBO has taken up a business concern with our local MP (Sir George Young) who has taken a genuine interest and tried to resolve the matter.

But when it comes to a multitude of people lobbying one person, who is told what to do from more senior dictators above him, I'm not convinced that personal contact is really of benefit.

Please prove me wrong - (without getting too political, Stu!)



<hr width=100% size=1>I'm average size, Its just that everybody else is short.

 

[Heckler]

Re: I thought I\'d email him as follows

hmmm
my experience is that if enough people make enough noise then notice is taken, it certainly concentrates the mind of the politician, speaking from personal experience!!
if only a few complaints come in then you say stuff em, but if a lot come in hmm have to think a bit more about this.
only trouble with this shower we have now is that their majority is such that they dont give a stuff, they are also , i am conviced, going to change as much as they can while they can and also make it irreversable. making it more political than i usually do i am convinced that there is a concerted effort to make it more impossible for us as a nation to vote in another party.
stu

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk>http://www.beneteau-owners-association.org.uk</A>

 

[Keith]

Re: I thought I\'d email him as follows

this lot won't be happy until we're a republic........keith

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gunfleet]

a commercial user will recover the cost of fuel, whether cheap or expensive, from pre-tax earnings. >>
presuming he's got any Ken. The same government seems to have negotiated for most of them to spend five days a week tied up to the quayside!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

The same government seems to have negotiated for most of them to spend five days a week tied up to the quayside!

In which case they won't be burning much diesel, as long as they remember to turn the engine off (ask Boatman for details).

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Birdseye]

As I understand it, the derogation system on red diesel has now been changed by the EC, Instead of the old arrangement where the derogation would continue unless HMG asked for it not to, HMG has now to apply to the council of ministers and convince them that the derogation should continue. Given that the large majority of the EC do not themselves apply such favourable treatment to diesel for pleasure boats, HMG will have some difficulty in doing so. And playing devils advocate, why should leisure sailors get cheap diesel when the haulage industry on which we all rely for our everyday need does not?

And do you really think that the above e mail to a minister about petrol engines will (assuming it gets past the first deputy PA) actually do anything to change minds about anything? Or is it just letting off steam?

<hr width=100% size=1>this post is a personal opinion, and you should not base your actions on it.