On Monday, December 11, 2006 6:34 AM [GMT+1=CET], Will Chapman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John and Ann wrote: >> Has anyone else tied two topics together to reach the conclusion >> that there seems to be an iniquity in the fact that boaters will now >> have to pay more (for diesel) and will get less (from BW) - not that >> it's BW's fault of course. >> John > > Interesting point. Anyone have any idea how much additional revenue > the switch to white diesel will yield? Does 29,000 boats x 500 > litres/pa * .50p = £7.25 million sound right? If so, its a pretty > paltry amount in Govt revenue terms and would just cover the amount > cut from BW's budget this year. > > If we could get a reliable figure we could use it in the next stage of > the SOW campaign. I see a number of problems with this. (a) the total relucatance of Governments (of any political colour we've tried in the last fifty years) to earmark taxation for a particular purpose. (b) the cost of enforcement, which will probably swallow up most of the revenue gained (c) I doubt whether the tax people will want to make a special count of the amount of diesel sold for pleasure boats on BW waters. I don't know whether there are more or fewer of these than big-river and sea-going pleasure boats, but I bet the latter group use by far the majority of the red diesel that is sold for boating, as so many of them are real gas-guzzlers. Mike Stevens narrowboat Felis Catus III web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk Defend the waterways. Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk
