I’d like to see some kind of Tax on all the Foreign vehicles that use our roads. They fill up on the Continent and most don’t need to fill up again until they are back in Euroland. No ‘Tax’ from Fuel so what do they pay to drive over here?
Why shouldn’t they have to pay some kind of Road Tax to use our Roads, we do?
fly sheet:
Probably better for their ears not going with anyone off hereGood trip anyway.
Fixed that. 
newmercman:
Rob K:
newmercman:
I’m with you RobAny haulier that is moaning about high fuel prices is not seeing the bigger picture, if you work your rates out to include a fuel surcharge you’ll earn more money as fuel prices rise
e.g. You charge 1.50 per mile and have a fuel surcharge set that keeps your fuel at .70ppl nett cost at an MPG figure of 7mpg, yet you get 8mpg from your trucks, so as fuel prices continue to climb, the fuel surcharge will actually pay for a greater percentage of your fuel costs, eventually you’ll be getting paid to put fuel in your trucks
Anyone charging a fixed per mile or day rate for a long term contract is mad, how can you set a rate when you have no idea what your costs will be from one week to the next?
Because they know as soon as they start adding escalators that the phone will stop ringing and the competition down the road will be in like a shot doing the work for £1 profit instead of 2.
So we get people campaigning to rid of our industry of something that, if we run our businesses correctly, can make our industry more financially stable in the present economic times
Too many people are in this industry that clearly don’t belong there, undercutting rates can only go so far before it sends you out of business, so in my opinion we need 2 quid a litre diesel, get rid of all the bad businessmen and let the switched on hauliers reap the rewards, there’ll still be as many trucks on the road because the same amount of freight will be out there, so jobs will still be around, but instead of working for some rigger boot wearing chav and driving around in a truck that has more spent on lights than it does on improving its productivity, wondering if your wages will be in the bank this week, you’ll be working for a professional company and earning professional wages, as you bloody well should
How can the truck improve it’s productivety if your customers decide that they just can’t afford to pay for your price increases because the service that’s being offered just is’nt worth the price that’s being asked for it.In that scenario the only ‘rewards’ left will be those sections of the industry that don’t go anywhere like local supermarket distribution and oversized load haulage that can’t be put in a container and sent by rail cheaper.Although even the supermarkets won’t be immune from the type of inflationary recession that would be caused by a fuel price at that level.So you’ll probably be working for a professional company and earning professional wages at the going rate paid for security guards watching over all the closed down warehouses and firms that have decided to call in the reciever because it’s cheaper not to bother trying to stay in business. 
Rob K:
Terry T:
Rob K:
With income tax, everyone gets shafted.Good. Everyone should shoulder the burden, why is it up to motorists to bail everyone out ?
It isn’t. That’s entirely my point. No-one is forcing you to drive. Walk/cycle/work from home = no expense to you, unlike income tax which you can’t escape.
So you’re saying that everyone should walk instead of driving and/or leave their job if it involves commuting or travelling from home.At best all that will do is contradict your idea that the country is bankrupt and the money has to come from somewhere and your idea just means that they won’t be getting as much from fuel sales because we’re all walking remember because we’re all in this together. 
But if the place really is bankrupt then there is’nt actually a ‘somewhere’ to get the money from anyway regardless of wether you try to get blood out of a stone by making fuel impossible for anyone to afford.However there’s more chance of getting more money from those who are actually earning some than from those who are’nt,especially if that job working from home does’nt pay enough for the mortgage when interest rates have to rise because of the inflation which your fuel taxes have caused,in which case there won’t be a home to work from.
Economics does’nt seem to be your strong point. 
dessy:
Funding private enterprise!!! Now where have I seen that before? Tax credits for low wage earners!!! Maybe the haulage game has too many players and needs slashing back a bit?? Or maybe they should be more realistic about rates etc…
The haulage game has too many vehicles and ■■■■ poor planning and JIT just encourage this.
The true hauliers are the ones who did the transport out of their local mill, factory, port and groupage depot. Now we have millions of sq feet of JIT warehousing with vehicle running half empty to another JIT warehouse just so manufacturers and shoppers alike do not have to hold finished product.
Close the supermarkets on a Sunday, it works in France and Germany. Essential transport only on the weekend, fuel, milk, fresh etc. German Hypermarkets are open on a weekend once a month, local butchers and often bakers do not open Monday. People have to change their shopping habits, manufacturers have to change their sales & storage facility.
Huge logistic companies with agency drivers, bottomless money pits and spare capacity are the ones who have driven wages down. No one can manage on 2 or 3 days work a week. The haulage industry should revert to 5 day working and the occasional run in out on a weekend. It will free the roads up, the trucks become economical again, a full load of timber will pay a going rate rather than sending a few bundles out every day on 5 different vehicles.
We have all taken the ■■■■ out of Ady1 and the planning at ESL but some of his latest tales do not make economic sense, good luck to Andy and Bill if they are getting paid to run empty for 180 miles to discover the load has already gone, was not ready or has been cancelled.
Somehow I doubt Dennis Smith ran his transport operation like the modern behemoth. Let the haulier tell the customer how much he is paying, not the other way round
So what am I proposing? park half the fleet up and put drivers on the dole, drivers are already on the dole, and many more will be if the practice of road haulage does not take a few steps backwards and look at itself. Think road congestion, 3 or 4 supermarket lorries in the same high street together, we manufacture less, we harvest less, we have less fishing trawlers, yet the UK heavy vehicle parc is increasing to cater for the must have it now culture.
Cut the competition, make it harder to enter the transport game, let those that do it well reap their investment, let the others fail. Ban pre-packs, if you cannot get your costs right the first time round, why should you be allowed to take a smaller firm down with you, then start up in your daughters name 48 hours later with the same leased vehicles
Wheel Nut:
dessy:
Funding private enterprise!!! Now where have I seen that before? Tax credits for low wage earners!!! Maybe the haulage game has too many players and needs slashing back a bit?? Or maybe they should be more realistic about rates etc…The haulage game has too many vehicles and ■■■■ poor planning and JIT just encourage this.
The true hauliers are the ones who did the transport out of their local mill, factory, port and groupage depot. Now we have millions of sq feet of JIT warehousing with vehicle running half empty to another JIT warehouse just so manufacturers and shoppers alike do not have to hold finished product.
Close the supermarkets on a Sunday, it works in France and Germany. Essential transport only on the weekend, fuel, milk, fresh etc. German Hypermarkets are open on a weekend once a month, local butchers and often bakers do not open Monday. People have to change their shopping habits, manufacturers have to change their sales & storage facility.
Huge logistic companies with agency drivers, bottomless money pits and spare capacity are the ones who have driven wages down. No one can manage on 2 or 3 days work a week. The haulage industry should revert to 5 day working and the occasional run in out on a weekend. It will free the roads up, the trucks become economical again, a full load of timber will pay a going rate rather than sending a few bundles out every day on 5 different vehicles.
We have all taken the ■■■■ out of Ady1 and the planning at ESL but some of his latest tales do not make economic sense, good luck to Andy and Bill if they are getting paid to run empty for 180 miles to discover the load has already gone, was not ready or has been cancelled.
Somehow I doubt Dennis Smith ran his transport operation like the modern behemoth. Let the haulier tell the customer how much he is paying, not the other way round
So what am I proposing? park half the fleet up and put drivers on the dole, drivers are already on the dole, and many more will be if the practice of road haulage does not take a few steps backwards and look at itself. Think road congestion, 3 or 4 supermarket lorries in the same high street together, we manufacture less, we harvest less, we have less fishing trawlers, yet the UK heavy vehicle parc is increasing to cater for the must have it now culture.
Cut the competition, make it harder to enter the transport game, let those that do it well reap their investment, let the others fail. Ban pre-packs, if you cannot get your costs right the first time round, why should you be allowed to take a smaller firm down with you, then start up in your daughters name 48 hours later with the same leased vehicles
So let’s get rid of the big fleet operators and only issue O Licences to small owner driver sub contract operations all to be applied on an EU basis not just here.Then get rid of road fuel duty and lower the VAT rate on it to 5% so road transport can compete on a level playing field with other modes of transport.We also need some protection for the international fleet in which freight can only be transported by an operation based in the exporting country or the country of destination.That might then create some growth to re employ some of those drivers who you’re proposing to throw onto the dole.
But I think what you’re saying just shows the limitations of the free market economy and the realisation that protectionist policies are the answer to running a stable economy.In which case you hopefully would’nt want to apply double standards by not ‘also’ wishing to apply that type of thinking in respect of opting out of the free global market economy 
.
Carryfast:
So let’s get rid of the big fleet operators and only issue O Licences to small owner driver sub contract operations all to be applied on an EU basis not just here.Then get rid of road fuel duty and lower the VAT rate on it to 5% so road transport can compete on a level playing field with other modes of transport.We also need some protection for the international fleet in which freight can only be transported by an operation based in the exporting country or the country of destination.That might then create some growth to re employ some of those drivers who you’re proposing to throw onto the dole.But I think what you’re saying just shows the limitations of the free market economy and the realisation that protectionist policies are the answer to running a stable economy.In which case you hopefully would’nt want to apply double standards by not ‘also’ wishing to apply that type of thinking in respect of opting out of the free global market economy
Not sure I understand any of this, except the drivers on the dole bit, they are already being thrown on the dole, no one will need agency drivers to cover 24/7 operations and the drivers can be employed full time, the rest will move back into manufacturing or retail.
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but true
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
So let’s get rid of the big fleet operators and only issue O Licences to small owner driver sub contract operations all to be applied on an EU basis not just here.Then get rid of road fuel duty and lower the VAT rate on it to 5% so road transport can compete on a level playing field with other modes of transport.We also need some protection for the international fleet in which freight can only be transported by an operation based in the exporting country or the country of destination.That might then create some growth to re employ some of those drivers who you’re proposing to throw onto the dole.But I think what you’re saying just shows the limitations of the free market economy and the realisation that protectionist policies are the answer to running a stable economy.In which case you hopefully would’nt want to apply double standards by not ‘also’ wishing to apply that type of thinking in respect of opting out of the free global market economy
Not sure I understand any of this, except the drivers on the dole bit, they are already being thrown on the dole, no one will need agency drivers to cover 24/7 operations and the drivers can be employed full time, the rest will move back into manufacturing or retail.
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but true
The laws of numbers say that it’s the big fleets that cause overcapacity issues and it’s easier to balance a fleet,made up of mainly small owner driver operations,with demand for the industry’s services and it’s cheap competition by foreign haulage firms (Polish operators hauling British imports/exports from/to non Polish countries of origin/destinations for example) which adds to international work competition levels in the international haulage market).
But so far every time that the issue of harmonising taxes throughout the EU has been raised the British government’s position has always been that taxation policy remains the responsibility of the domestic government not the EU and therefore the EU has no powers over taxation rates and how tax is levied in each state which is why road diesel has always been cheaper in places like Luxembourg than here.
But I was just pointing out that the basis of your idea comes down to using a reduction in competition levels as being the answer to overcapacity in the market and using protectionist anti competition policies as being the best way to provide stability in the market for road transport services.If that’s right for the road transport industry then it must also be right for industry in general .
44 Tonne Ton:
fly sheet:
Probably better for their ears not going with anyone off hereGood trip anyway.
Fixed that.
Good Man 
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but true
I agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
mattcollin:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but trueI agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
I seem to think there is a train of thought that VAT, TVA whatever should be in the region of 20% and until the latest hike, we had one of the lowest rates in the EU. Probably unfair competition is the wrong word, but we are in Euro Central, IMO we are better off in than out, and I don’t see any way of splitting the fiscal policy from the bent banana policy. But then again I am not an economist, unlike Carryflower
Wheel Nut:
mattcollin:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but trueI agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
I seem to think there is a train of thought that VAT, TVA whatever should be in the region of 20% and until the latest hike, we had one of the lowest rates in the EU. Probably unfair competition is the wrong word, but we are in Euro Central, IMO we are better off in than out, and I don’t see any way of splitting the fiscal policy from the bent banana policy. But then again I am not an economist, unlike Carryflower
I’m no economist either but it does’nt take an economist to understand that the British government is ripping everyone off on road fuel taxation and then trying to put the blame on any other type of excuse it can think of.Luxembourg has always been in Euro Central since the EU was founded but exactly how many products,including road fuel,have ever been the subject of a 20% VAT rate and it’s not just VAT which adds to the government take on the pump price of fuel here.It’s Duty + VAT including VAT levied on the Duty in addition.
I also raised the issue,on a different topic,in which the massive rate of inflation which we were subject to during the 1970’s was mostly,if not totally,caused by the increase in the price of oil on world markets and that was then made worse by the excessive rate of tax on road fuel which the government here applied as usual.The result of all that was that we ended up paying as much for our own oil as the euro zone was paying for it.Although in real terms countries like Germany and Luxembourg were actually paying less at the pumps for it than we were,allowing for their higher wage rates and taxation policies.Then the government had the zb nerve to blame British workers for trying to get better wages and said that it was those wage claims,not their fuel pricing policies,which caused the rate of inflation we had then. 
It also does’nt take an economist to realise that it’s the rail industry which would be the ones complaining not the EU if road transport was ever given a level playing field on fuel prices with them and it seems confusing why you’re calling for a cutback in road transport capacity but you’re not at the same time calling for a cutback in rail freight capacity which is,in fact,being expanded not cut.
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
mattcollin:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but trueI agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
I seem to think there is a train of thought that VAT, TVA whatever should be in the region of 20% and until the latest hike, we had one of the lowest rates in the EU. Probably unfair competition is the wrong word, but we are in Euro Central, IMO we are better off in than out, and I don’t see any way of splitting the fiscal policy from the bent banana policy. But then again I am not an economist, unlike Carryflower
It also does’nt take an economist to realise that it’s the rail industry which would be the ones complaining not the EU if road transport was ever given a level playing field on fuel prices with them and it seems confusing why you’re calling for a cutback in road transport capacity but you’re not at the same time calling for a cutback in rail freight capacity which is,in fact,being expanded not cut.
I haven’t mentioned the railways because in this thread it is irrelevant, remember that word from before.
The fuel duty escalator affects road transport and the man travelling to work in his car. Both of which is very expensive. I said about road congestion. I said that there were too many vehicles on the road, many are running empty to service a JIT mentality.
You say the rail freight industry is expanding, that is strange as we are still using Victorian rail systems with little room to expand, trains are full at peak times, urgent freight is pushed off into sidings to allow the passenger traffic to use the lines.
Just as you go off on tangents to derail threads, try this for a thought. If you live in continental Europe, you will pay much more for a good shirt, a suit or a decent pair of strides then you will in the UK
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
mattcollin:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but trueI agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
I seem to think there is a train of thought that VAT, TVA whatever should be in the region of 20% and until the latest hike, we had one of the lowest rates in the EU. Probably unfair competition is the wrong word, but we are in Euro Central, IMO we are better off in than out, and I don’t see any way of splitting the fiscal policy from the bent banana policy. But then again I am not an economist, unlike Carryflower
It also does’nt take an economist to realise that it’s the rail industry which would be the ones complaining not the EU if road transport was ever given a level playing field on fuel prices with them and it seems confusing why you’re calling for a cutback in road transport capacity but you’re not at the same time calling for a cutback in rail freight capacity which is,in fact,being expanded not cut.
I haven’t mentioned the railways because in this thread it is irrelevant, remember that word from before.
The fuel duty escalator affects road transport and the man travelling to work in his car. Both of which is very expensive. I said about road congestion. I said that there were too many vehicles on the road, many are running empty to service a JIT mentality.
You say the rail freight industry is expanding, that is strange as we are still using Victorian rail systems with little room to expand, trains are full at peak times, urgent freight is pushed off into sidings to allow the passenger traffic to use the lines.
Just as you go off on tangents to derail threads, try this for a thought. If you live in continental Europe, you will pay much more for a good shirt, a suit or a decent pair of strides then you will in the UK
The proposed growth in rail freight seems to be relevant enough to me in the context of providing one of the main probable motives for why the government don’t intend to lower road fuel duty any time soon and there’s no reason why anyone should be calling on road transport operators to cut capacity and throw drivers onto the dole when rail freight seems to be intent on increasing it’s capacity.
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
mattcollin:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but trueI agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
I seem to think there is a train of thought that VAT, TVA whatever should be in the region of 20% and until the latest hike, we had one of the lowest rates in the EU. Probably unfair competition is the wrong word, but we are in Euro Central, IMO we are better off in than out, and I don’t see any way of splitting the fiscal policy from the bent banana policy. But then again I am not an economist, unlike Carryflower
It also does’nt take an economist to realise that it’s the rail industry which would be the ones complaining not the EU if road transport was ever given a level playing field on fuel prices with them and it seems confusing why you’re calling for a cutback in road transport capacity but you’re not at the same time calling for a cutback in rail freight capacity which is,in fact,being expanded not cut.
I haven’t mentioned the railways because in this thread it is irrelevant, remember that word from before.
The fuel duty escalator affects road transport and the man travelling to work in his car. Both of which is very expensive. I said about road congestion. I said that there were too many vehicles on the road, many are running empty to service a JIT mentality.
You say the rail freight industry is expanding, that is strange as we are still using Victorian rail systems with little room to expand, trains are full at peak times, urgent freight is pushed off into sidings to allow the passenger traffic to use the lines.
Just as you go off on tangents to derail threads, try this for a thought. If you live in continental Europe, you will pay much more for a good shirt, a suit or a decent pair of strides then you will in the UK
The proposed growth in rail freight seems to be relevant enough to me in the context of providing one of the main probable motives for why the government don’t intend to lower road fuel duty any time soon and there’s no reason why anyone should be calling on road transport operators to cut capacity and throw drivers onto the dole when rail freight seems to be intent on increasing it’s capacity.
I love projections and strategists, and a bloke with this many letters after his name must have a stutter.
Chris MacRae MA (Hons), CMILT, MIHT, MCMI, Tech IOSH
If you read the article, you will see that even in 19 years time the rail industry networks will still be disjointed and unfinished.
Felixstowe to Peterborough and Nuneaton. Southampton to Hams Hall. Lorries are still needed to move the Chinese imports from the railhead to the final destination, much like now!
Lets get to the point, what are you going to do about it?
Rikki-UK:
Good point Semtex, but we rarely intiate campiagns, but we have always said we we will support issues if approached and asked. in this case we were asked
From the forum guidelines…We don’t actively campaign as a general rule, although occasionally do support specific causes. If you would like our help in that regard, PM Rikki-UK, or e-mail him at UKAdmin@Truck.Net
.
From The article posted:
“The government will only listen if we can prove an enormous level of support. I know that many people are wearied by the battle on this subject. To them, I say that we have a unique window of opportunity to win concessions - the whole nation is feeling the pain and no less a person than the Prime Minister acknowledges that something must be done - we need every signature and every expression of support.”
Perhaps the last sentence would be a start…?
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
Carryfast:
Wheel Nut:
mattcollin:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately if the fuel duty and VAT was dropped, the EU would oppose it as unfair competition. Strange but trueI agree with some of your comments above Wheel Nut but are you sure they could oppose it as unfair competition? My understanding is that each member state is in charge of its own fiscal policies and as such the Money-Pit that is Euro-central couldnt do jack about it. Take some of the member states where fuel is significantely cheaper for example…unfair competition? Yeah, but what do we do as a member state who pays in pots of UK tax-payers money…nothing. Even though we are the ones at a disadvantage.
I seem to think there is a train of thought that VAT, TVA whatever should be in the region of 20% and until the latest hike, we had one of the lowest rates in the EU. Probably unfair competition is the wrong word, but we are in Euro Central, IMO we are better off in than out, and I don’t see any way of splitting the fiscal policy from the bent banana policy. But then again I am not an economist, unlike Carryflower
It also does’nt take an economist to realise that it’s the rail industry which would be the ones complaining not the EU if road transport was ever given a level playing field on fuel prices with them and it seems confusing why you’re calling for a cutback in road transport capacity but you’re not at the same time calling for a cutback in rail freight capacity which is,in fact,being expanded not cut.
I haven’t mentioned the railways because in this thread it is irrelevant, remember that word from before.
The fuel duty escalator affects road transport and the man travelling to work in his car. Both of which is very expensive. I said about road congestion. I said that there were too many vehicles on the road, many are running empty to service a JIT mentality.
You say the rail freight industry is expanding, that is strange as we are still using Victorian rail systems with little room to expand, trains are full at peak times, urgent freight is pushed off into sidings to allow the passenger traffic to use the lines.
Just as you go off on tangents to derail threads, try this for a thought. If you live in continental Europe, you will pay much more for a good shirt, a suit or a decent pair of strides then you will in the UK
The proposed growth in rail freight seems to be relevant enough to me in the context of providing one of the main probable motives for why the government don’t intend to lower road fuel duty any time soon and there’s no reason why anyone should be calling on road transport operators to cut capacity and throw drivers onto the dole when rail freight seems to be intent on increasing it’s capacity.
I love projections and strategists, and a bloke with this many letters after his name must have a stutter.
Chris MacRae MA (Hons), CMILT, MIHT, MCMI, Tech IOSH
If you read the article, you will see that even in 19 years time the rail industry networks will still be disjointed and unfinished.
Felixstowe to Peterborough and Nuneaton. Southampton to Hams Hall. Lorries are still needed to move the Chinese imports from the railhead to the final destination, much like now!
It seems to say that he’s just representing the situation as the FTA see it not himself personally and the proposals and forecasts seem to be saying clearly enough that the rail freight industry are increasing capacity,in the context of intermodal operations,by a large margin over the next 5 years not 19.The fact is that there’s no way that the rail freight sector can increase it’s tonne/mile share of the market without a large shift in that market from road to rail.
Which all seems to contradict the idea of cutting back freight transport capacity in the road transport sector in order to improve a so called situation,in which it’s overcapacity that is being blamed as the reason for the costs versus income revenues issues affecting the road transport industry and which all seems to explain,in large part,the main reason why there’s not a hope of getting road fuel taxation removed or lowered to a large degree if at all.
mattcollin:
Lets get to the point, what are you going to do about it?Rikki-UK:
Good point Semtex, but we rarely intiate campiagns, but we have always said we we will support issues if approached and asked. in this case we were asked
From the forum guidelines…We don’t actively campaign as a general rule, although occasionally do support specific causes. If you would like our help in that regard, PM Rikki-UK, or e-mail him at UKAdmin@Truck.Net
.
From The article posted:
“The government will only listen if we can prove an enormous level of support. I know that many people are wearied by the battle on this subject. To them, I say that we have a unique window of opportunity to win concessions - the whole nation is feeling the pain and no less a person than the Prime Minister acknowledges that something must be done - we need every signature and every expression of support.”
Perhaps the last sentence would be a start…?
Can’t say that I’ve heard any thing from the current PM which seems any different to the previous ones in regards to giving road transport fair fuel taxation in comparison to other modes and in regards to any statement saying ‘that something must be done’ in that context.If the prime minister is that genuine then we don’t need to waste our time sending in signatures telling him what he already ‘says’ that he knows.
I’m aware of that but the original post was supposed to be about what this forum is going to do about it.What moves are they going to do to get some response
mattcollin:
I’m aware of that but the original post was supposed to be about what this forum is going to do about it.What moves are they going to do to get some response
Peter Carroll has already started the petition thing. I signed it over a week ago. Quentin Willson has been on TV for a week.
twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23FairFuelUK
Sign it and don’t let Carryfarts randomness derail another thread, remember it was him who brought rail into this, as always.
If his Auntie had ■■■■■■■■, She would have been his uncle