August's fuel duty rise scrapped (From Daily Echo)

More U turns than a driving instructor.

Good old Tories, lying to us saying we can't afford not to increase duty on fuel, then they do this.

Maybe the Labour opposition should call for a vote of no confidence in the current leadership.

Does this sound familiar George4th?

Over the Edge wrote:
More U turns than a driving instructor. Good old Tories, lying to us saying we can't afford not to increase duty on fuel, then they do this. Maybe the Labour opposition should call for a vote of no confidence in the current leadership. Does this sound familiar George4th?

not U-turns but adapting to conditions. Still cheaper than labour. Would you rather pay £1.50?

Hardly a 'U-turn,' more an ease on 'ordinary hard working people' as Labour likes to refer to us!

I'd rather see a 'U-turn' in our
favour! That's twice they've scrapped a fuel rise. Labour NEVER did.

Solomon's Boot wrote:
Hardly a 'U-turn,' more an ease on 'ordinary hard working people' as Labour likes to refer to us!

I'd rather see a 'U-turn' in our
favour! That's twice they've scrapped a fuel rise. Labour NEVER did.

I'm not complaining one iota, I will wait to see what the political commentators say what it is.

U turn or not, we will benefit from it so happy days, my jibe was more at George4th then a proper go at the Tories.

Quote "The £500 million boost to motorists can be paid as a result of departmental savings across Whitehall, the Treasury said."

Making 400,000 people unemployed is not making savings its a case of robbing peter to pay paul. Its going to chatch up soon when they will have to starting out in Unemployment Benefits because there is less that 60,000 jobs to had each year, and when benefits are paid out other things will need to be taken into account like the reduction revenue from Council Tax, and having to pay out Housing Benefits. its going to end up costing the Governement a lot more than £500 million that they think they have saved

southy wrote:
Quote "The £500 million boost to motorists can be paid as a result of departmental savings across Whitehall, the Treasury said."

Making 400,000 people unemployed is not making savings its a case of robbing peter to pay paul. Its going to chatch up soon when they will have to starting out in Unemployment Benefits because there is less that 60,000 jobs to had each year, and when benefits are paid out other things will need to be taken into account like the reduction revenue from Council Tax, and having to pay out Housing Benefits. its going to end up costing the Governement a lot more than £500 million that they think they have saved

It must be a major source of angst when you alone know all of the answers but no-one else realises it.

Go against the will of the people and your same old tories, respond to public by changing direction and you are u-turning. Pathetic labour supporters who want get back in power so they can **** down our backs and tell us its raining. You had your chance and you ruined this country.

Well done to the chancellor for listening to the public!!

southy wrote:
Quote "The £500 million boost to motorists can be paid as a result of departmental savings across Whitehall, the Treasury said."

Making 400,000 people unemployed is not making savings its a case of robbing peter to pay paul. Its going to chatch up soon when they will have to starting out in Unemployment Benefits because there is less that 60,000 jobs to had each year, and when benefits are paid out other things will need to be taken into account like the reduction revenue from Council Tax, and having to pay out Housing Benefits. its going to end up costing the Governement a lot more than £500 million that they think they have saved

Your constructing a picture with guesses & extreme political bias as per usual.

I'm not seeing anything about fuel prices on the 'Policies' section the TUSC website. Do they even have one?

If we cannot get the money off of the motorists we will have to take it from the vulnerable instead.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
If we cannot get the money off of the motorists we will have to take it from the vulnerable instead.

Isn't that what Labour did? They kept pumping up taxes to fund their irresponsible spending plans!
What did they achieve? Bankruptcy and a country where the poor are poorer - great job!!!
>
UK Plc is like any business and you make decisions according to changing circumstances. John Giddings is a good example.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Quote "The £500 million boost to motorists can be paid as a result of departmental savings across Whitehall, the Treasury said."

Making 400,000 people unemployed is not making savings its a case of robbing peter to pay paul. Its going to chatch up soon when they will have to starting out in Unemployment Benefits because there is less that 60,000 jobs to had each year, and when benefits are paid out other things will need to be taken into account like the reduction revenue from Council Tax, and having to pay out Housing Benefits. its going to end up costing the Governement a lot more than £500 million that they think they have saved

Your constructing a picture with guesses & extreme political bias as per usual.

I'm not seeing anything about fuel prices on the 'Policies' section the TUSC website. Do they even have one?

.. hackers have removed it.

George4th wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
If we cannot get the money off of the motorists we will have to take it from the vulnerable instead.

Isn't that what Labour did? They kept pumping up taxes to fund their irresponsible spending plans!
What did they achieve? Bankruptcy and a country where the poor are poorer - great job!!!
>
UK Plc is like any business and you make decisions according to changing circumstances. John Giddings is a good example.

John Giddings appears to be the exception to the rule, he is taking a lot of blame for something that he had no control over, i.e. the weather.

George4th wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
If we cannot get the money off of the motorists we will have to take it from the vulnerable instead.

Isn't that what Labour did? They kept pumping up taxes to fund their irresponsible spending plans!
What did they achieve? Bankruptcy and a country where the poor are poorer - great job!!!
>
UK Plc is like any business and you make decisions according to changing circumstances. John Giddings is a good example.

That is your take on it, I look at it from a different perspective, I blame the Banks for the mess, however I agree Labour didn't stand up to them and failed to address the problem sensibly.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Quote "The £500 million boost to motorists can be paid as a result of departmental savings across Whitehall, the Treasury said."

Making 400,000 people unemployed is not making savings its a case of robbing peter to pay paul. Its going to chatch up soon when they will have to starting out in Unemployment Benefits because there is less that 60,000 jobs to had each year, and when benefits are paid out other things will need to be taken into account like the reduction revenue from Council Tax, and having to pay out Housing Benefits. its going to end up costing the Governement a lot more than £500 million that they think they have saved

Your constructing a picture with guesses & extreme political bias as per usual.

I'm not seeing anything about fuel prices on the 'Policies' section the TUSC website. Do they even have one?

Even if the TUSC had policies how could they make them work?

I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Yes I knew it, ITV News announces Government U turn on fuel duty.

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Precisely what I was getting at, his move on this occasion was the correct one, I like to give credit where it is due. Now he must stand up to the Oil Giants and make sure that they do their bit to aid the economy rather than lining their pockets with obscene profits.

Portswoodfoke wrote:
Go against the will of the people and your same old tories, respond to public by changing direction and you are u-turning. Pathetic labour supporters who want get back in power so they can **** down our backs and tell us its raining. You had your chance and you ruined this country. Well done to the chancellor for listening to the public!!

The only thing the chancellor and his millionaire buddies listen to are the opinion polls.
They along with every previous government will do what they think will keep them in power. Although this particular chancellor does seem to stand out as a man with absolutely no concept of how an ordinary family functions financially.

No, not a U-turn. More like a right turn.

Well done useless George and the Tories ... thanks for "listening to public opinion on" ............. Fuel Tax, Selloing off the forests, School Milk, Bookstart, Coastguard clodures, Cuts for our disabled, Automatic jail for having a knife, Child benefit cuts, Granny Tax, Secret Courts, Caravan tax, Pasty Tax, Church repair VAT, oh and Goves 2 tier education idea .
.
Is that listening to the public ... ..... Or is it possible that they have not got a clue and rely on their policies written on a fag packet.
.
All U-TURNS

No doubt to be doubled early in 2013

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Precisely what I was getting at, his move on this occasion was the correct one, I like to give credit where it is due. Now he must stand up to the Oil Giants and make sure that they do their bit to aid the economy rather than lining their pockets with obscene profits.

When a company turnover is measured in the billions, not surprisingly the profits are seen as extremely high. When turnover is that high so are costs and there's a massive workforce that make a living from the success. Try looking at profits in terms of percentage and that's what the shareholders are attracted to. Oil companies are high cost, high risk and as seen in the Gulf of Mexico last year, high loss ventures. Try buying shares in any of the majors and the 'obscene profits' make for attractive dividends and good long-term growth.

Sensible decision.

What about that Treasury Labour twit Liam Byrne who left a message for the incoming government.
"Sorry, no money left"
Priceless. You couldn't make it up.

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Precisely what I was getting at, his move on this occasion was the correct one, I like to give credit where it is due. Now he must stand up to the Oil Giants and make sure that they do their bit to aid the economy rather than lining their pockets with obscene profits.

When a company turnover is measured in the billions, not surprisingly the profits are seen as extremely high. When turnover is that high so are costs and there's a massive workforce that make a living from the success. Try looking at profits in terms of percentage and that's what the shareholders are attracted to. Oil companies are high cost, high risk and as seen in the Gulf of Mexico last year, high loss ventures. Try buying shares in any of the majors and the 'obscene profits' make for attractive dividends and good long-term growth.

I would love to be able to buy shares but I am not well enough off to do so, and the high risks could mostly be avoided by using the right amount of money to prevent accidents!

opera phantom wrote:
What about that Treasury Labour twit Liam Byrne who left a message for the incoming government.
"Sorry, no money left"
Priceless. You couldn't make it up.

Unusual for an MP to be telling the truth.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote: I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Precisely what I was getting at, his move on this occasion was the correct one, I like to give credit where it is due. Now he must stand up to the Oil Giants and make sure that they do their bit to aid the economy rather than lining their pockets with obscene profits.

The Chancellor is a sneaky, typical politician. Cancelling an increase and fooling the public that he is giving something away. Claptrap! The reason that fuel is so expensive is solely down to the Government. Fuel duty and VAT on the duty amounts to 70 pence per litre! Add to that road licence fund and it is a huge rip off. Oil companies make very little profit, if not a loss from gasoline. It's the greedy Government who make the money for doing to$$ all. It's not even that they plough the money back into the road infrastructure. It goes in the big pot to subsidise benefit scroungers to the tune of 200 billion pounds per year and rising.

Great move Tories. Keep it up and you'll be in for a decade of clear majorities. Then we can kill off Labour's debts for ever, save a trillion or two in the coffers and have riches for everything.

bazzeroz wrote:
No doubt to be doubled early in 2013

............ yep bazzeroz..... not scrapped...merely postponed.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

opera phantom wrote:
What about that Treasury Labour twit Liam Byrne who left a message for the incoming government.
"Sorry, no money left"
Priceless. You couldn't make it up.

Unusual for an MP to be telling the truth.

opera phantom are you a propagandist or is it a case you really don't know, every treasury for the last 140 years all gave little joking messages left in the same draw, some are real classics, that one theres no money left has been used 8 times before. Lawson message was I had to pay for the Wedding.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

opera phantom wrote:
What about that Treasury Labour twit Liam Byrne who left a message for the incoming government.
"Sorry, no money left"
Priceless. You couldn't make it up.

Unusual for an MP to be telling the truth.

opera phantom are you a propagandist or is it a case you really don't know, every treasury for the last 140 years all gave little joking messages left in the same draw, some are real classics, that one theres no money left has been used 8 times before. Lawson message was I had to pay for the Wedding.

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Quote "The £500 million boost to motorists can be paid as a result of departmental savings across Whitehall, the Treasury said."

Making 400,000 people unemployed is not making savings its a case of robbing peter to pay paul. Its going to chatch up soon when they will have to starting out in Unemployment Benefits because there is less that 60,000 jobs to had each year, and when benefits are paid out other things will need to be taken into account like the reduction revenue from Council Tax, and having to pay out Housing Benefits. its going to end up costing the Governement a lot more than £500 million that they think they have saved

Your constructing a picture with guesses & extreme political bias as per usual.

I'm not seeing anything about fuel prices on the 'Policies' section the TUSC website. Do they even have one?

No I am not, try talking to people who will or have lost there jobs, its not guesses & extreme i leave sort of thing to you.
You tell me where they going to find the money from when they are going to make another 400,000 people unemployed on top off the ones that gave all ready lost there jobs, and the first lot of cuts are far from being finished they go more than 60% od this government cut back yet to be compleated. when all the cuts are done with there will be around 800,000 jobs gone in the uk and thats not counting the jobs that will be lost in the private sector because of lost orders from the public sector.
Trouule with people you Shoong You do not take into account the effect that cuts will make.
You think great government is making savings so my tax will go down, but in the long run it ends up costing the country 3 times as much.
there are not real jobs out there. in 2010 there was 56,000 jobs on the market for 1 year turn over, 2011 there was 49,000 jobs on the market for that 1 year turn around, this year so far looks like its going to be lower.

Georgie Porgie pasty and pie robbed the grannies and made them cry, when the girls and boys came out to play Georgie said ere, wanna buy some cheap petrol?

forest hump wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote: I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Precisely what I was getting at, his move on this occasion was the correct one, I like to give credit where it is due. Now he must stand up to the Oil Giants and make sure that they do their bit to aid the economy rather than lining their pockets with obscene profits.

The Chancellor is a sneaky, typical politician. Cancelling an increase and fooling the public that he is giving something away. Claptrap! The reason that fuel is so expensive is solely down to the Government. Fuel duty and VAT on the duty amounts to 70 pence per litre! Add to that road licence fund and it is a huge rip off. Oil companies make very little profit, if not a loss from gasoline. It's the greedy Government who make the money for doing to$$ all. It's not even that they plough the money back into the road infrastructure. It goes in the big pot to subsidise benefit scroungers to the tune of 200 billion pounds per year and rising.

No oil company makes a lost or they would end up like that refinery thats just gone bust.
To get oil out of the ground and to refine it to fuel for the car at the pumps cost and this is with profit 61p per gallon, 34p of that is shear profit that the oil companys add on top off all cost. and like you I do wonder where all this tax on top of the 61p go's to, theres enough tax money made on fuel in a year to pay off the national debt in one hit.

southy wrote:

forest hump wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote: I have no problem with Osbornes move, it was the only sensible thing to do, I don't drive, but appreciate how difficult it was becoming to afford fuel and that affects every walk of life one way or another.

You may not drive but your food amongst other things is delivered by people who do. When the fuel bills for these deliveries go up, where do you think they'll look to make up the difference? The cost of motoring fuel has far reaching tentacles whether you get behind the wheel or not.

Precisely what I was getting at, his move on this occasion was the correct one, I like to give credit where it is due. Now he must stand up to the Oil Giants and make sure that they do their bit to aid the economy rather than lining their pockets with obscene profits.

The Chancellor is a sneaky, typical politician. Cancelling an increase and fooling the public that he is giving something away. Claptrap! The reason that fuel is so expensive is solely down to the Government. Fuel duty and VAT on the duty amounts to 70 pence per litre! Add to that road licence fund and it is a huge rip off. Oil companies make very little profit, if not a loss from gasoline. It's the greedy Government who make the money for doing to$$ all. It's not even that they plough the money back into the road infrastructure. It goes in the big pot to subsidise benefit scroungers to the tune of 200 billion pounds per year and rising.

No oil company makes a lost or they would end up like that refinery thats just gone bust.
To get oil out of the ground and to refine it to fuel for the car at the pumps cost and this is with profit 61p per gallon, 34p of that is shear profit that the oil companys add on top off all cost. and like you I do wonder where all this tax on top of the 61p go's to, theres enough tax money made on fuel in a year to pay off the national debt in one hit.

Unfortunately the gap between your imagination and the reality that has to be dealt with grows larger every time you post drivel like this.

dopplershift wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
More U turns than a driving instructor. Good old Tories, lying to us saying we can't afford not to increase duty on fuel, then they do this. Maybe the Labour opposition should call for a vote of no confidence in the current leadership. Does this sound familiar George4th?

not U-turns but adapting to conditions. Still cheaper than labour. Would you rather pay £1.50?

What dramatic changes have there been since Osborne presented his budget, that has caused this U-Turn?

Only the day before this announcement, Justine Greening, the Transport Secretary stated that she was not prepared to stand in the way of the planned rise in fuel duty.

Does anyone in government know what is going on?

There have been so many U-Turns by this government that the question has to be asked as to whether there is any planning before decisions are taken.

Does anyone ever consider what the effects of their decisions will be?

Personally, I very much doubt it.

Good decision to postpone this Labour tax.