A better idea, I would suggest, is to rebate some of the extra tax earned (or all of it) off the road tax.

This would not prevent people complaining about the levels of duty but would allow a rare opportunity for the government to be seen to be acting fairly.

The government are stifling growth so there is less to invest so tax revenues will continue to decline in future as well.

And all of this cash squeeze means less investment by people in pensions so storing up more poverty and benefits payouts in future.

Bad news for a bad government

I can't see a new Conservative government taking such a radical policy as removing VAT on petrol (even if the EU would allow)- it would lose out billions of pounds of revenue, destroy its green credentials, all whilst bolstering oil company profits and foreign oil suppliers, and (given the oil price is bound to fall) all for very little gain.

I recognise, however, that the current government's strategy of covert and massive taxation of motorists, has made this a politically impossible approach to adopt.

On second thoughts, when the government mandates all those extra features (don't forget the beacon to be used in conjunction with the Galileo EU tracking system) that add weight to the vehicle, or use up energy for situations that should be left to the discretion of the driver (mandating lights during the day). One realises, we are already getting vastly better fuel efficiency that we were in the '80s, it is just that because of all the baggage the government forces us to carry around in the vehicle, the extra fuel efficiency we do recieve – thanks to the massive R&D put into this area by the vehicle manafacturers, the end user doesn't actually see an improvement.

Indeed. Especially when those cheques to HMRC comprise an interest free advance on next year's predicted tax bill (which of course if you miscalculate you have to pay interest on!)

If you really want the public to understand how much tax they pay, then abolish PAYE and make them sign a cheque to the Inland Revenue (as all self-employed currently do) twice a year.

That would concentrate the mind, and tighten the sphincter to, I can tell you!

The solution to the increased cost from the consumer is to look for ways around the problem. There are many avenues that need to be explored. I will still keep my conspiracy theory though!

Simple physical constraints, actually. No reason to look for a conspiricy. There is only so much energy in a given quantity of fuel.

On the one hand, there are increasing demands for more features in a vehicle, air bags, side impact barriers, anti role, etc, these type of things add weight. The requirement to run with the side lights on all the time – soon, thanks to the EU a requirement to run with the headlights dipped all the time, both lead to increased fuel consumption.

To ask for dramatically increased fuel efficient is unrealistic (in my opinion) when you consider the conflicting requirements imposed on vehicle manufacturers by government.

Physics and chemistry dictate you can only move a given mass a given distance with a given amount of fuel.

JR: "I do wish the oil companies would put, on the pump or on the receipt, the split between the price of the fuel and the take of the govenment. "

I agree, and I think something similar has been discussed on your blog in the past. Then, if I recall correctly, the consensus was that while it wasn't outright illegal to do so, companies don't to keep on the right side of the labarynthine trading standards regulations.

One area where the US has this right. Sales tax is clearly marked on just about everything you buy, also it is added at the point of sale, which brings it much more directly to the customers attention.