Please note that the post below was published more than ten year ago on 21st November 2009 Nick Herbert MP, shadow cabinet member for the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, was in Cumbria this morning to see the areas affected by the flooding. He writes on Conservative Home about his visit. Here is an extract. I’ve been in Cumbria today to see the areas affected by the floods. I arrived early in Keswick where I met officials from the Environment Agency. Although the river levels had fallen considerably and homes were no longer flooded, the damage to homes had been done. And the water which had got into houses wasn’t just from the river – it was foul water which had risen from the drains. I talked to fire crews who were pumping flood water back into the river, and discovered that they were from Tyne & Wear and Lancashire. They had been called in at an hours’ notice and had been working on the scene ever since, staying at a local hotel. You cannot fail to be impressed by the
Comments
to say we froze it means nothing, it would have been more expensive means nothing, the fact is that fuel duty needed to be significantly cut in 2010 which would have been a net gain not loss to the exchequer, and was not and still has not been
but lets look at that:
41 p thats the price of the fuel (including profit for the fuel station and the fuel company 41p, which of course is agian subject to government taxes)
58p that was added by the government per litre as fuel duty
8p that was added by the government at VAT on the fuel
12p that was added by the government as "VAT on the blooming FUEL DUTY"
so we see that 34.59% of the price was the price including all profits to all parties (which are again subject to tax)
its just the government thought it would help itself to the other 65.41% of the price I paid, out out wages which have already been taxed.
so we see that not only is the conservative attitute of "our long term plan is helping" not holding much (the bottom falling out of the oil market is the real answer)
for the conservative party to try and take credit for low fuel prices is not only shot and incinerated, its been hanged by the neck until nearly dead, boiled in tar and featherd, crucified upside down for 3 hours, broken on the wheel, and then incinerated.
If there was an Olympic prize for setting up and knocking down straw men, Jim, you would have an excellent chance of a bronze medal. (Don't think you would beat Ed Miliband or Ed Balls.)
Where in my post did I claim that the present government should be credited with the fall in the world price of oil?
I've not heard George Osborne or David Cameron make that claim either.
I did argue was that price stability is good for Britain, and I stand by that.
I also argued that zero inflation makes one of Labour's previous attack lines out of date and irrelevant. I stand by that.
The part of your post which is accurate is that the government takes an awful lot of tax revenue from fuel.
It would be even worse had not George Osborne has cancelled a number of further fuel tax rises scheduled by the previous government.
something that could have been done back in 2010 and was not, simply by significantly cutting fuel duty. It would have been a net gain to the exchequer not a loss and the current government did not do it.
Its a mute point to say it would have been worse under labour, its like saying "here is an old leather boot for your dinner Jim, and don't complain because if we had the other chef you would have had cow poo on your plate"