1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144 
Stuart Archbold's comments are always good value. However, his warning
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
that fuel duty harmonisation within the EU as advocated by the Commission is a major step towards a centrally-governed superstate is a bit over the top.
Presumably Stuart would have no problem if the UK government unilaterally taxed aviation fuel on the grounds of subsidiarity.
In a recent reply to a parliamentary question (30 July 2002) on this very issue Lord MacDonald of Tradeston said: "Unilateral action [to raise duty] would create market distortions, such as tankering of extra fuel from abroad to avoid tax..." This, of course, is exactly what is happening with diesel fuel for haulage operators.
This issue is not about a superstate but practical reality. The RHA seeks a clear unequivocal commitment from government that the new distance charge (which can be set at a UK subsidarity rate) will be balanced by a fuel duty rebate to leave us with the average price paid elsewhere in the EU, thus ending smuggling and cross border fuelling.
All seems reasonable to me. Roger King, Chief Executive, Road Haulage Association Weybndge, Surrey.