Red diesel safe for 2007

H

Hugo_Andreae

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 Mar 2003
Messages
321
Visit site
The BMF reckon red diesel is likely to stay for the whole of 2007. I have posted a news story on the MBY.com website giving the full details but essentially thay have had a letter from John Healey confirming the process. It will involve consultation with the industry, leading to a transition period and finally legislation. They reckon this pretty much guarantees that red diesel will be with us for at least another 12 months.

Hugo
 
Thats great news.

A friend (ahem ) has asked me how long will Red diesel keep and do temperature swings make a difference when stored in Jerry Cans in

The garage
The garden shed
Daughter's Wendy house
False roof
under the bed /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
 
Yes, you can read the letter from Healey to the BMF here. (If you can't get it work, right-click on the link and select 'download').

It's worth mentioning, though, that the "no price rises in 2007" is only the BMF's opinion - we haven't seen anything official to that effect yet. Also, the transitional period is subject to the agreement of the Commission.

But fingers crossed /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
ah that's easy - just copy the relevant threads from the the last few months, and regurgitate them this time next year - keep the moaning going all year !


- or we could just look forward to summer because yesterday was the shortest day of the year - YIPPEEEE !!


Adrian
www.clenandshiny.co.uk
 
Who are They, and what does the transition involve, we are still in the dark. PS who saw the electric truck on the BBC London news,, 7 tonner with acceleration to match a Porsche 911, but derated to give 130 miles duration, could this be the way to go?
 
Good news.....

Now what if one was to buy one of these, runs on Jet A1 at round 30p a litre, where do you stand with Mr Brown if you are using it in a boat (albeit a very, very fast one).

Nortechprofile.jpg



Turbine.jpg
 
I some how don't think so. a life time ago I was a RN Submariner and back then a O class conventional boat had a top speed submerged at about 21 knots, sounds impressive?
the problem was for only about 6 Min's before the batteries went flat, the other factor was the two battery groups weighed in at a portly 240 tons 480 cells 10cwts each 2.2 volts, 1760 amps per cell, and to do an equalising charge took up to 4/5 days to complete.

and a look at the submarine fleet today tells you they didn't get it licked, we only have nuke boats now. diesel electric just didn't have the goods.

I think the future could be based on miniature nuclear reactors turning steam turbines,
with the slogan if you **** up;-

the future bright, the futures orange

Atomic20Explosion.jpg


well it made me laugh, and I wrote it!

must be over excitement Santa's coming.
 
I think what will be really interesting over the coming months will be to see how the Marinas react. Will we see the price of Diesel creep up anyway (ie profiteering)?
 
so, instead of just about everyone sticking their heads in the sand saying it wont happen, what will they do now?OK, its another season, but who wants to buy a 5 year old twin engined guzzler?We are all still in the poopsy crapsy. Rather have the event up front than this salami solution. Lets hope its a truly glorious summer!!
 
I'm confused as to where MBY get information from. Is there any more than the Healey letter? On what do you base the statement "transitional period is subject to agreement of Commission"?

Hugo's post says the Healey letter confirms the process. Does it? I don't see that. I agree that it is likely (for reasons related to current parliamentary rules on changing legislation) that "the process will involve consultation with the industry" and then "finally legislation" but I don't see that Healey confirms that, as Hugo's post suggests and I dont see that a transition period following the consultation is a necessary or promised-by-Healey outcome.

So, is there more "official" material than the Healey letter?

I'd bet on 24 months not 12, by the way.
 
If only that mushroom cloud were over Brussels.

Reading the Healey letter to the BMF, you have to ask 'who's running this bl**dy country, the chicken liver lot in Whitehall, or the bar stewards in Brussels.

I don't know why don't we stick up two fingures at the EU. The French and Germans would, as they did with the banning of beef imports.

It's not just the end of derogation, I still think there is very little moral case, but everyone in the whole country should be worried about how Brussels can dictate taxation, oh all right duty. I still see duty as a tax.
 
[ QUOTE ]
but everyone in the whole country should be worried about how Brussels can dictate taxation, oh all right duty. I still see duty as a tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wasn't it our Great (not) TB who said some time ago something to the effect that we'll go along with a lot of EU legislation but our tax system is not for discussion?. I think it was about the time of the Constitution farrago; I wish I could put my hand on where that came from.....


The whole issue of fuel duty is supposed to be about harmonisation of road fuel duties so that distortions in the cost of fuel between one country and another could be kept to a minimum.

'Twas the French -AFAIK - who added pleasure boating into the equation, and possibly jiggling around by other members who in the end forced a minimum level of duty rather than something more practical.

In the end we seem to be forced into a penal situation because our fuel duty rate is high because it stated to be a road fuel duty 'cos that's the way we want to do it here. Anything that's not for use on the roads is currently taxed at another rate. Again that's the way the Treasury wants to do it.

Back to the point, TB said Taxation and how we apply it is for the UK govt: to design and apply; so why doesn't he say to BXL "blow you we'll follow the spirit of what you want by applying the minimum rate but we'll create a new class of uses to whom that applies"

Sorry guys, I haven't put the argument very cogently, but do you get my drift?

Discuss.
 
The big problem with UKIP is that (IMO) they dont have any other policies.
My solution would be to form a political party that simply copies one of the other parties policies and adds another big one "Out of Europe Whatever The Cost".
It might even be possible to form a type of coalition that sort of "sub contracts" government to one of the major parties as long as they action the main policy of "Out of Europe Whatever The Cost".
For example, this new political party could be an organisation that would force (say) a tory government to get us out of Europe.
IMO the majority of the country would be in favour and might be able to capture a serious number of votes at the next general election.

I know that financially we would probably be worse off but IMHO thats the price we would be paying to return to governing ourselves.

Out at any Cost - thats what I say.

Sorry, I've been rambling on a bit - but do I have a point?
 
True - but on that theme, doncha think Dynamic Dave would romp home if his manifesto said re. the EU, "I'm a celebrity - get me out of here" ?

Considering the fact that there are hardly any differences twixt Blues and Reds, that would give many people the impetus to stick their little cross right where "call me Dave" wanted it. Even I'd vote for him if he stood on that ticket.
 
The Mexican, American, Canadian trading group (they have a name but I cant remember it) have an open invitation for us to join them. I think we could take our £12b and leave EU rule and join them instead, they dont want to impose government. EEC trade could remain if they want to still trade with us.

Anyone see Coast last night. Queen Elizabeth I had a statement our Government could adopt.

[ QUOTE ]
I know that I have the body of a weak and feeble woman. But I have the heart and stomach of a king - and a king of England, too. And I think foul scorn that Spain or any prince of Europe should dare to invade the borders of my realm. To which, rather than face that dishonour, I will myself take up arms beside you. I will be your general and your rewarder for your virtues in the field. We know that you already deserve rewards and crowns, and we do assure you in the word of a prince, this shall be paid to you. And take heed too of my Lieutenant General. For no prince ever commanded a more worthy or noble subject as he. By your obedience to him, by your valour in battle, we shall yet win a famous victory over these enemies of God. Of my kingdom. And of my people.

[/ QUOTE ]

No disrespect intended to our European friends, its just the ruling us bit we dont like. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top