Brown goes green?

Best to own your own machine and charge the company for the use of it. We saw many of these things coming a long time ago, starting in 1986 when carphones began to be popular, we bought our own and the company paid the service charges etc.

Company cars went in 1990, when we all changed to vans and so on.

I haven't seen Norman Lamont's £25 mobile phone surcharge for a while, did that get dropped in the end?

Peter

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

Before we all get too righteous about people in large cars etc etc., don't forget that this is a free country, they have paid their car tax, road tax etc etc and in many cases will also be on higher income tax as well.

Loading up larger cars with taxes is not a good signal to send out as it is the politics of envy and creates a very poor atmosphere between road users.

If someone has the means to fund a large house, large car etc etc then good luck to them, they have earned the money, paid taxes on it and IMO are fully entitled to use what they have bought.

I fully support initiatives to cut emissions etc., but most of these large cars are already at the top end of the efficiency range so on a pro-rata basis are less polluting than the guy with a 30 years old Austin Cambridge who pays no road tax at all.

Congestion is another matter entirely.

Peter

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

There's a bit more detail here, also mentioning mobiles:

Peter

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

Dont disagree with your thoughts with one exception, because its 30 + years old it has to be maintained well and kept in good tune to keep it going as spares are scarce. Also as it is most likely the guys hobby it wont do the miles so does not pollute anywhere near as much. And wont be used for short runs either.

Martin P

Er, well no actually it's far from being free, but that's a whole different issue.

I'm on higher rate income tax, but I still drive a Polo 1.4TD, my income doesn't make it Ok for me to harm the environment any more than I reasonably have to.

Like it or not big cars ARE the politics of envy, "look at me I'm better than you 'cos I've loads-a-money to burn" is what they say.

Hmm, not exactly a common place situation, how about a mum doing the school run in either a damn great 4x4 or a sensible small car, the former burns a lot more fuel AND used a lot more energy and oil in the making, something often overlooked, yet they both achieve exactly the same thing.

I had a good laugh a few weeks ago, went to the farm machinery auction at York, by the way does anyone know about the trailer full or engines sold from someones estate?, anyway, a sorry muddy place it is at this time of year and I got the Transit and Ifor stuck in the mud but was greatly cheered to watch the steady stream of these poser 4x4s that got just as stuck as me and had to be towed out. You could just see them all cocky as they saw the mud ahead thinking "at last, I can say I've been off road", only to see them despair as they get stuck, then sink up to their axles as they stamp on the throttle. It fair made my day 8-)

Greg

PA> Before we all get too righteous about people in large cars etc etc., PA> don't forget that this is a free country, they have paid their car PA> tax, road tax etc etc and in many cases will also be on higher income PA> tax as well.

PA> Loading up larger cars with taxes is not a good signal to send out as PA> it is the politics of envy and creates a very poor atmosphere between PA> road users.

PA> If someone has the means to fund a large house, large car etc etc then PA> good luck to them, they have earned the money, paid taxes on it and PA> IMO are fully entitled to use what they have bought.

PA> I fully support initiatives to cut emissions etc., but most of these PA> large cars are already at the top end of the efficiency range so on a PA> pro- rata basis are less polluting than the guy with a 30 years old PA> Austin Cambridge who pays no road tax at all.

PA> Congestion is another matter entirely.

Quite right, everyone should be free to enjoy the fruits of their labours in whatever way thet see fit. But they (we) should expect to pay for our indulgences, and that includes an environmental element (the biggest current 'evader' is probably the aviation industry).

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe politicians of whatever colour have, or are ever liklely to, get it right - the drive to get re-elected will see to that.

Can't agree about the "30 year old Austin" though - most 'hobby' vehicles cover negligable mileages. But of course if VED were replaced by additional fuel duty, they would still be paying their way ;-)

I understand from the Daily Mail this morning that a whole 400 vehicles fall into the zero band.

Whoopee.

So I'll have to find another forty odd quid to tax my 535 iSE BMW? OK, fair enough, it's well worth it for the sybaritic pleasure of charging about the place in it!

After all, it costs me £65 to fill the tank every 350 odd miles & as I do some 20,000 a year, it isn't worth worrying about.

If I meet the penny-pinching old fart, I'll buy him a pint!

Regards,

Kim Siddorn

Strangely enough I don't see why a significant minority should be allowed to pollute the world far more per head than the rest just because they're better off, we all breath the same air don't we. If you follow this attitude then it's OK for the US to generate the majority of the world's pollution even though they are only about 4% of the population.

Greg

Well they seem to think it's OK :-(

Cheers Tim

Dutton Dry-Dock Traditional & Modern canal craft repairs Vintage diesel engine service

As long as the USA acts as the major engine of world trade, I'm happy to let them.

Don't forget also that California had the most stringent laws on emissions on the planet, many years before anyone else did.

They need to get their engine efficiencies and cleanliness up to European levels, then they will reduce their CO2 levels, but as Nick also said quite correctly, aviation and other forms of transport are far more polluting now than most cars. Just watch an Intercity 125 pulling away!

Peter

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

They think anything is OK so long as it benefits them at the expense of someone else 8-(

Greg

Blimey thats worse than my Disco! That costs about that much when I fill= up (at about 1/4 of tank left) but at 450 miles... "Running on air" rang= e is pretty close to 600 miles.

I only do about 15,000/year, I got the Disco in Dec 04 and it's taken over =A32,500 from my wallet for fuel in 15 months.

Its just another stealth tax. Its absolutely ridicolous. Seems that Brown has not really thought this one through.

Mike M

miley snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com

Virtually my only real indulgence, abstemious by nature and a non-smoker for ten years now, I am still a petrol head at heart. The BMW is 1988 on an "F" & cost me whole £550. It's nice to drive a car I find it dangerous to thrash 'cos it's so bloody quick!

Unlike so many I speak to, I still very much enjoy driving & accept with equanimity the occasional traffic jam.

Regards,

Kim Siddorn

Diplomacy done, plates spun, fires fought, maidens eaten - well, three out of four ain't bad

Blimey thats worse than my Disco! That costs about that much when I fill up (at about 1/4 of tank left) but at 450 miles... "Running on air" range is pretty close to 600 miles.

I only do about 15,000/year, I got the Disco in Dec 04 and it's taken over £2,500 from my wallet for fuel in 15 months.

"Nick H" wrote (snip):-

Talking to a few sellers of such things the consensus seemed to be that the cost of a 12 month tax disc is £110 which I thought odd for a 500cc vehicle. Digging a bit deeper, a guy at the DVLA opined that this probably indicated they had not been submitted for testing and were therefore treated as though manufactured before March 2001 (when graduated VED based on CO2 emissions was introduced) where there are only two tax bands - not over 1549cc at £110 and over 1549cc at £175. The same would apparently apply to amateur constructed vehicles, so no strapping that lawn-mower engine to a pram and hoping to sneak under the wire - shame!

An interesting and impressive project, quite a challenge I should imagine.

As long as I can do 0-60 in less than 10 seconds and tow a few stationary engines I'm happy. When I'm in 'driving' mode half the figures and bugger the stationary engines. One day we'll get there but that day hasn't come yet.

Mark

Overall, I think it is a cynical ploy!

£210 for the most polluting vehicles is not likely to put many people off. If you're going to spend £40K-£50K on a Chelsea tractor to drop the kids off, the extra few quid per year will make absolutely no difference. I suspect that the figure was set low enough to raise some extra revenue and not high enough to make an ounce of difference to the typical buyer of your average 4X4.

I do believe that adding the tax to the fuel is in most cases the fairest way of doing things but I cant help thinking that there needs to be allowances for those who really must use buckets of fuel. Taxing fuel will seriously increase haulage costs, taxi costs and other essential facilities so I guess there needs to be an exemption scheme which would undoubtedly be over bureaucratic and subject to abuse. There is no easy answer.

Maybe something radical (like taxing fuel with no concessions) would push the oil companies and vehicle manufacturers to spend their ill gotten gains on alternative technologies at a faster rate than currently. What does the panel think?

Mark

The oil companies are very actively slowing the advancement of alternatives as it's in their financial interests to do so, for example they've bought the patents on a lot of inventions that would help and are sitting on them. They are also very influential i.e. they own a lot of our supposedly democratic representatives in parliament so are able to limit the government funds that go to alternatives that they see as threats, and get support for things such as LPG which of course is just another of their products and every bit as bad as any non-renewable. In short, we get what we're given whether we like it or not.

Greg