It's hard to complain about the fuel tax rise not happening but on a broader note it's worrying when only nine or ten weeks ago our chancellor stated that he had no plans to shelve the increase and that when the pump price was some pence per litre more that is currently is. Either he really is a "listening" politician or stumbles from one policy change to the next without much thought or plan. I know which I suspect is the right one.
So true, why even bother with a budget any more? Why not just get Sun readers to take part in a poll to set all fiscal policy? Who would even notice the difference?
I am not after a running commentary. was it before or after lunch today....... In May you said it was not certain in cutting fuel duty would have a positive effect on families or business's. What has happened beetween the 23rd of may and the 25th of June. I note she did not reply to the question in regard to the transport minister. And the 500 million from 1,5 billion was very evasive, when asked about the departments this would come from , but would 'evolve' We are using underspends........ 'Is this a joke' was the gem...... asked why the 3 billion extra borrowing from May, she replied they are 'interesting' The cost of living is pretty tight at the moment she informed us..... phew! that's alright then thank god you have your finger on the pulse of public opinion then.........
It could be argued that the Government is listening to the will of the voters, and modifying unpopular policies.
Seriously? Do you really believe that to be the case?
If you haven't already have a look at Paxmans interview above of the coalition’s fall girl on this one. She was poorly briefed and ill prepared but clearly had been told thatwhatever she did, donot admit when this latest u-turn had been decided upon i.e. after the cabinet meeting yesterday.
Even though they've all been pushing the line that this was an essential part of their economic strategy since they got in. They are making policy on the hoof and that's a highly inappropriate way to manage our economy at the moment.
This government is a shambles frankly and is staggering from one disastrous decision to another.
I thought the decision was a good one? A postponement of extra duty?
No a good one would have been to re-introduce some form of retail price maintenance on fuel to ensure that when the wholesale price of the stuff goes down by 25%, as it has done since March, this is reflected properly in what we pay. I suppose there's no incentive for the govt to stop the fuel suppliers ripping consumers off though when they are getting such a big slice of the action is there?
I thought the decision was a good one? A postponement of extra duty?
In isolation FM it is good for joe public but one thing we do need is strong government that in the present difficulties we can feel confident is doing what it thinks is right for the ecconomy whether we individually agree with it or not. I have no confidence that this current government can satisfy that requirement.
I disagree with it. They should have kept the increase. Where are they going to find the extra £55bn that would have been raised through this increase in fuel duty ?
I disagree with it. They should have kept the increase. Where are they going to find the extra £55bn that would have been raised through this increase in fuel duty ?
It could be argued that the Government is listening to the will of the voters, and modifying unpopular policies.
Nobody will ever do a worse job than Gordon Brown - be thankful he has gone. Whatever replaced him is an improvement.
When Gordon Brown left Downing Street the economy was growing at 1.1%. We are now in a recession (two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth) and the government via its own Office of Budgetary Responsibility is forecasting about 1% for the year. Clearly austerity economics do not work and Osborne is out of his depth as chancellor. We won't get what we need - someone competent as Chancellor because they might just outshine Call-Me-Dave and he won't allow that.
In the last few weeks we've had u-turns on the pasty tax, caravans, charities and now fuel duty.
Tory MP Tim Yeo was excellent on this on Channel 4 News last night - basically said if we are going to spend £500m (I think rather than £55bn above!) it should be used to lift low earners out of tax, not on a fuel tax reduction when fuel prices are falling.
It could be argued that the Government is listening to the will of the voters, and modifying unpopular policies.
Nobody will ever do a worse job than Gordon Brown - be thankful he has gone. Whatever replaced him is an improvement.
and the government via its own Office of Budgetary Responsibility is forecasting about 1% for the year.
It's good that we now have an Office of Budgetary Responsibility, though isnt it? Might have been useful in the previous decade, whatever its imperfections.
I'm suprised the Brown supporters dont ever feel the need to mention his support of two wars currently having blown nearly £30 BILLION (and far more importantly the effect Enduring Freedom has on the 419 servicemen killed, and 179 in Iraq, the hundreds injured and their families) That would fill a hole or two , eh?
Filled up my car for $40 yesterday (about £26)......just don't understand why there is such a massive difference between here and UK.
(Not gloating, it makes me angry)
Because the US (if that's where you are) haven't increased fuel duty for about 30 years. I saw a very interesting video rant recently from an American bemoaning the fact that he can't get the same fuel-efficient car in the US as he was driving about in when on holiday in Europe.
And the US is massive, so they travel further on average.
The cons are always going to look favourably at the driver as country folk are their voters. They'll probably get the money back from benefits, and public transport no doubt.
Yes, she got stuffed by Paxman and that was entertaining. But - and this is the sad thing - in typical Paxman style, his ego was more important than anything meaningful. He spent virtually the whole interview wasting all our time asking stupid questions about trivial matters and missed the opportunity of getting a Treasury Minister to inform the viewers on stuff that actually matters. Like what is the deficit forecast to be in the coming years; how much is it going to be increasing year-on-year; when it will actually start reducing; and when will they start cutting back the extra 1mn public sector jobs created under the last regime. And while on about cutting costs - whatever happened to the promised bonfire of the quangos? Believe it or not there are 45,000 people working for, sorry I meant employed by, 63 different quangos under the general heading of "culture, media and sport" .
Yes, she got stuffed by Paxman and that was entertaining. But - and this is the sad thing - in typical Paxman style, his ego was more important than anything meaningful. He spent virtually the whole interview wasting all our time asking stupid questions about trivial matters and missed the opportunity of getting a Treasury Minister to inform the viewers on stuff that actually matters/blockquote>
Sorry but that's a load of cobblers cafcfan. The story was about yet another in a long line of u-turns made on the hoof, on the basis of a headline in the popular press and seemingly without the knowledge of ministers directly effected by it. What is he supposed to do, give them a free pass?
Trivial? I'm sorry there wasn't more 'good' news for you about public sector workers losing their jobs, but if you think that our government changing it's mind more often than Boris changes his pants and £500m having to be found elsewhere is a trivial matter I'd suggest your priorities are a bit out a whack.
Poor girl destroyed by labour tv, sorry BBC,, in typical bully boy Paxman style.
Of course he would be exactly the same with a young labour lady.
My local supermarket which put its price up by 2p a litre last Friday, have now taken 3p off a litre today. I mean whats that all about? Sod all to do with supply, demand, crude prices or anything tangible I can fathom.
Poor girl destroyed by labour tv, sorry BBC,, in typical bully boy Paxman style.
Of course he would be exactly the same with a young labour lady.
A litre of petrol was 61.7p in 1997.....
Alternatively she could have just answered his reasonable enough and relevant question...
...and you've clearly never seen Paxman nail to the wall interview many, many Labour MP's then. Ridiculous critism to make IMO and be interesting to see who the govt have offered up tonight on QT.
Sorry...had typed this up yesterday and then had problems posting it on work computer.
Ormiston/Bournemouth...thought you were having a go at me then! ;-)
Sorry Valiant Phil, but I do disagree.
You can say that a government can listen to the people in developing policies. That's fine, that's the way it should be. They often forget it, but they are there at our behest.
What you cannot do is be seen to be weak and have no faith at all in the measures that you put forward in a budget, reversing decision after decision within the space of a few days. This is something that is (should be) meticulously planned...not something you would expect to throw out the window within a few weeks because of some bad press.
We were allegedly meant to be in this together. At the moment we are spending/borrowing more than planned and the cuts have hardly begun (that also explains why unemployment figures haven't hit the expected lows yet), yet if you shout loud enough and your newspaper/tv company decide to trumpet your "cause", it has now been shown that this government will bow down to you.
The U-turns in full
Fuel duty: Jun 26 (Cost to Government: £500m-£600m) The Treasury bowed to pressure from motorists by postponing a 3p rise from August to January
Charitable donations: May 31 (£50m-£100m) Tax relief on charitable donations was to be capped at £50,000 or 25 per cent of income, but charities claimed they would be out of pocket
Pasty tax: May 28 (£40m) The so-called “pasty tax” was meant to charge VAT on all hot takeaway items, but the Chancellor eventually decided to apply the levy only to food being kept in heated cabinets
Caravan tax: May 28 (£30m) VAT, which was to be applied to static caravans as it is for mobile ones, was scrapped after complaints
Heritage tax: May 17 (£30m) Churches and heritage groups welcomed a reversal of plans to charge VAT for improvements and alterations to listed buildings
At any time, but even more so now, we need our government to be strong enough to deliver. This government is anything but strong and for all their blustering about not needing a Plan B. Well, what exactly is Plan A these days??
I do wonder if the pasty tax, which was modified, and the fuel tax, which is simply delayed, can be seen as U turns. I know its fun to jump on the Thatcher sound bite but even so....
Comments
was it before or after lunch today.......
In May you said it was not certain in cutting fuel duty would have a positive effect on families or business's.
What has happened beetween the 23rd of may and the 25th of June.
I note she did not reply to the question in regard to the transport minister.
And the 500 million from 1,5 billion was very evasive, when asked about the departments this would come from , but would 'evolve'
We are using underspends........ 'Is this a joke' was the gem......
asked why the 3 billion extra borrowing from May, she replied they are 'interesting'
The cost of living is pretty tight at the moment she informed us.....
phew! that's alright then thank god you have your finger on the pulse of public opinion then.........
If you haven't already have a look at Paxmans interview above of the coalition’s fall girl on this one. She was poorly briefed and ill prepared but clearly had been told thatwhatever she did, donot admit when this latest u-turn had been decided upon i.e. after the cabinet meeting yesterday.
Even though they've all been pushing the line that this was an essential part of their economic strategy since they got in. They are making policy on the hoof and that's a highly inappropriate way to manage our economy at the moment.
This government is a shambles frankly and is staggering from one disastrous decision to another.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165381/Newsnight-Jeremy-Paxman-sacrifices-junior-minister-Chloe-Smith-coward-Osbornes-Budget-U-turn.html?ITO=1490
I almost felt sorry for her tbh.
(Not gloating, it makes me angry)
In the last few weeks we've had u-turns on the pasty tax, caravans, charities and now fuel duty.
I'm suprised the Brown supporters dont ever feel the need to mention his support of two wars currently having blown nearly £30 BILLION (and far more importantly the effect Enduring Freedom has on the 419 servicemen killed, and 179 in Iraq, the hundreds injured and their families) That would fill a hole or two , eh?
She was like a fish out of water last night.
Almost felt sorry for her.
No sign of Osborne facing the music, naturally.
The cons are always going to look favourably at the driver as country folk are their voters. They'll probably get the money back from benefits, and public transport no doubt.
But - and this is the sad thing - in typical Paxman style, his ego was more important than anything meaningful. He spent virtually the whole interview wasting all our time asking stupid questions about trivial matters and missed the opportunity of getting a Treasury Minister to inform the viewers on stuff that actually matters. Like what is the deficit forecast to be in the coming years; how much is it going to be increasing year-on-year; when it will actually start reducing; and when will they start cutting back the extra 1mn public sector jobs created under the last regime.
And while on about cutting costs - whatever happened to the promised bonfire of the quangos? Believe it or not there are 45,000 people
working for, sorry I meant employed by, 63 different quangos under the general heading of "culture, media and sport" .Of course he would be exactly the same with a young labour lady.
A litre of petrol was 61.7p in 1997.....
I mean whats that all about? Sod all to do with supply, demand, crude prices or anything tangible I can fathom.
...and you've clearly never seen Paxman
nail to the wallinterview many, many Labour MP's then. Ridiculous critism to make IMO and be interesting to see who the govt have offered up tonight on QT.Ormiston/Bournemouth...thought you were having a go at me then! ;-)
Sorry Valiant Phil, but I do disagree.
You can say that a government can listen to the people in developing policies. That's fine, that's the way it should be. They often forget it, but they are there at our behest.
What you cannot do is be seen to be weak and have no faith at all in the measures that you put forward in a budget, reversing decision after decision within the space of a few days. This is something that is (should be) meticulously planned...not something you would expect to throw out the window within a few weeks because of some bad press.
We were allegedly meant to be in this together. At the moment we are spending/borrowing more than planned and the cuts have hardly begun (that also explains why unemployment figures haven't hit the expected lows yet), yet if you shout loud enough and your newspaper/tv company decide to trumpet your "cause", it has now been shown that this government will bow down to you.
The U-turns in full
Fuel duty: Jun 26 (Cost to Government: £500m-£600m) The Treasury bowed to pressure from motorists by postponing a 3p rise from August to January
Charitable donations: May 31 (£50m-£100m) Tax relief on charitable donations was to be capped at £50,000 or 25 per cent of income, but charities claimed they would be out of pocket
Pasty tax: May 28 (£40m) The so-called “pasty tax” was meant to charge VAT on all hot takeaway items, but the Chancellor eventually decided to apply the levy only to food being kept in heated cabinets
Caravan tax: May 28 (£30m) VAT, which was to be applied to static caravans as it is for mobile ones, was scrapped after complaints
Heritage tax: May 17 (£30m) Churches and heritage groups welcomed a reversal of plans to charge VAT for improvements and alterations to listed buildings
At any time, but even more so now, we need our government to be strong enough to deliver. This government is anything but strong and for all their blustering about not needing a Plan B. Well, what exactly is Plan A these days??
I don't think for one minute that they know.
I know its fun to jump on the Thatcher sound bite but even so....