Thanks, Rhuben for your comprehensive and logical reply, much of which I have to accept. But what is much more difficult to accept is that, if the government has to pay for everything out of its central taxation "pot" - which of course it does - why is the motorist singled out to make an extra contribution to that pot, over and above the contribution made by the non-motoring citizen.
Of course everything has to be paid for and we must as a nation get our financial house in order (a difficult and frightening prospect) but why should one section of the population have to pay more than the rest just because they use the roads. Cyclists use the roads, so do pedestrians, and if the motorist is contributing annually seven times what is actually spent on the roads, then it can fairly be said that those other users are getting a free ride at the motorist's expense. And so are all those other citizens who would otherwise have to contribute more to policing, health, education and so on.
I entirely agree that the books have to be balanced (and the sooner the better) but doing so should involve everybody, which while it would almost certainly involve a small rise in income tax, would actually be very much fairer.
As to your personal solution to reducing motoring costs, this is not available to every motorist, primarily because of the cost of making the change you suggest. In many people's cases such a change would involve laying out a sum of money which, even if they could afford it in the first place, would pay for their fuel for several years to come. I run a medium/large 4x4 for reasons which I can justify, but won't trouble you with here, and I estimate it would cost me at least £15K to make the sort of change you suggest - money which will instead buy fuel to keep me going, and which I won't have to lay out all at once.
To conclude: of course the Chancellor has to balance the books, and roads and everything else have to be paid for. But to pick on the motorist to make up a significant part of central funds is grossly unfair, particularly when so many in rural areas are dependent on their wheels both for work and for other legitimate purposes.
Tony (who wouldn't mind paying an extra penny on income tax if necessary, having in the past - as already said elsewhere on the site - paid 83% on the top slice. 50% or 45% - peanuts!).
|