The price of a litre of petrol at the pumps looks like reaching £1 a litre within weeks, according to newspaper reports. Fuel costs for hauliers will also rise. Indeed petrol is being kept down in price by supermakets, while diesel, even for cars, is now much higher than petrol.
As I wrote in Motor Transport last week that the rising price of fuel is about to become a major issue. and operators will see big increases in costs.
The problem is what to do about it. Gordon Brown should cancel the 2p increase in fuel duty, as the RHA is demaning. But the real question is what can the industry do about both the high fuel tax for truck operators and the increasing underlying cost of fuel?

Will the haulage fuel protests return? Probably not but the issues of high fuel prices and the high number of overseas trucks doing UK work is starting get people thinking Mike Presneill, who was very closely involved in the 2000 protests, has written an article for Motor Transport calling for an essential user rebate and has been visiting Motor Transport and the RHA.. He wants the trade associations to push harder on the issues. The increase in fuel duty in October will mean hauliers will pay 50.35 p duty on every litre. And while there has been talk about charging overseas vehicles, there is still no action.
The issue of high fuel tax has not gone away. Indeed it is starting to take greater prominence. The Burns inquiry has been dismissed by Government, and was a failure.
Mike Presneill is pressing the RHA to do more but it is difficult to see what more the RHA can do. But it is just possible that rising fuel prices and overseas trucks using our roads for free could lead to new protests.
Motor Transport has also published an article looking at the issue of fuel tax and prices.
Mike Presneill can be contacted at mike@presneillgroup.co.uk

There could be another fuel series of fuel protests as prices soar and Gordon Brown puts up the fuel duty. I first warned about this on this blog a couple of weeks ago. Then Motor Transport disclosed that major companies are planning a protest, possibly a go-slow. Now the trade associations have finally caught up.

Roger King of the RHA says:"This record breaking price for crude oil will inevitably mean that we will see a dramatic rise in the price for petrol and diesel.” He adds:” it is vital that the Chancellor places a freeze on the 2 pence per litre fuel duty increase scheduled for the beginning of October. There can now be no argument that the imposition of this increase is completely unjustifiable.”
That sounds good but what are they going to do? Many hauliers suspect that they will do nothing. The group behind the original fuel protesters is now putting pressure on the RHA to do something. The RHA has to be careful. There is talk of protesters forming a break-away group, splitting the association.
Fuel costs and the return to fuel tax increases are going to fuel more renewed protests.

The Freight Transport Assocaiton (FTA) has a guide to fuel price increases.

See Comments from the Glasgow Herald

Pressure is building against the 2p increase in fuel duty on Monday, and particularly active is the newly reformed Transaction, now called Transaction 2007. Tomorrow – Friday- at 9am the RHA visits the Treasury and Transaction 2007 members will be there supporting them.
One Transaction member wrote yesterday to Roger King of the RHA saying “to maximise impact I therefore urge you to put a summary into a punchy advert in the leading newspapers on Friday.
“Such is the strength of opinion on the issue that I'm confident masses of RHA members would voluntarily club together to meet the cost of the ad. (and of a follow-up advert also, should HMG turn a deaf ear to the RHA's case) Hit them - and hit them very hard !
The supporters of Transaction 2007 are not a few hot heads. Motor Transport has seen a list of supporters and it contains some of the leading tuck operators in the country.
The Treasury should not underestimate the strength of feeling in the industry on this issue.
Tell Transaction 2007 what you think of the fuel situation and what should be done about it by e-mailing them.

Also tell Motor Transport what you think by sending an e-mail.

The FTA is also opposed to Mondays 2p increase It also has a useful guide to fuel prices.

Is the Government really actually going to charge overseas hauliers coming into the country? It looks as if it may as the Government gave a big hint this week that it might finally happen.
Ruth Kelly, transport secretary said in a statement: “One option under strong consideration is a 'vignette' - a time-based charge for the use of UK roads designed to ensure foreign hauliers help pay for the wear and tear inflicted by their vehicles.”
But what does “strong consideration” actually mean? The implication is that they are going to do it. If so, why don’t they just announce it?
Could it be that this is really about trying to win over hauliers who are angry over the fuel duty increase? It is hardly a coincidence that the press release came out the same day as the hike in fuel duty.
Actually I suspect that they will bring in a vignette (toll) into the UK although one reason for that is that it will enable VOSA to register the details of all overseas trucks entering the UK, so that they can chase any fines. One question is how much this will raise (not much I think) and how the Government will ensure that UK hauliers do not have to pay more (probably through reduced VED).
The press release also says that £200 million will be allocated by VOSA to enforce the road safety laws. This is the amount it reckons it is going to receive from the new fixed penalty on-the-spot fines being introduced next year.

See also: Overseas trucks involved in 1,000 accidents a year

So forget all about charging overseas hauliers to use our roads. Forget Brit Discs and forget level playing fields for UK hauliers. Overseas hauliers using cheap fuel will continue to be able to come here and not pay a penny towards using our roads (unless they are foolish enough to buy our fuel.

That is the clear message from the Freight Data Feasibility Study: Progress Report, published today at the same time as the budget. What on earth is that, you may well ask?

Well is clear that the aim of the Government was never to charge overseas trucks using our roads. No, it was in reality just a way to getting a database of overseas vehicles, so they knew where to send the fine if they left the country without paying a fine or penalty.
Unfortunately it reckons that charging overseas hauliers is not a good way to do that.
The report says:”Of all the options considered, a vignette scheme would have the potential to generate a database with the highest percentage of relevant vehicles recorded. But the project team observe that financial revenue to Government would be relatively limited, due to the restrictions imposed by the Eurovignette Directive.
“They estimate that (because of the need to adjust maximum levels to sit alongside UK VED rates) the average cost of a daily UK vignette would be £7.45 and the average cost of an annual UK vignette would be £671.48, with the exact charge varying depending on the type and size of vehicle.
“The average charge per vehicle per day will be considerably lower than the estimated £7.45 average for a daily vignette (because some hauliers will opt to purchase monthly or annual permits).”
What is bizarre is that the rate of this vignette is set by Brussels, and set very low. It ends up with us having to pay the highest fuel duty in Europe set by the UK and re then forced by the EU to only charge a pitiful amount for overseas vehicles to use our roads.
Surely we must have the power in the UK to set not a vignette but an environmental tax on overseas vehicles.

Theo de Pencier, chief executive of the FTA commented "Mr de Pencier also referred to lorry operating costs. ‘Following last weeks 2p increase in fuel duty, which put UK lorries at an even worse competitive situation against foreign visitors, it seems increasingly clear that the vignette option will make no real impact on levelling the competitive playing field which has been so distorted by the increasing operation of foreign vehicles in the UK working on cheap continental fuel together with other cost savings. This conclusion makes the increase in fuel duty even more exasperating for the domestic transport market and once again points to the need for a fundamental change in the way goods vehicles are taxed."

When I wrote yesterday about the failure to introduce a Brit Disc, or charge for overseas trucks to use our roads, I overlooked the fact that it is even worse than I thought.

Yesterday I explained how the Government reckons that it would be too expensive to introduce this tax, sometimes called a vignette tag because the tolls are set by Brussels and are set at a very low level – see below.

The main aim of the Government was not chaging trucks but building a database of overseas vehicles so they can track down and charge overseas trucks that have not paid their fines in the UK.

But not only did the Department for Transport virtually condemn trucks but it could not find an effective way to build a database of overseas vehicles.

So overseas trucks can use our roads without paying a penny, and the DFT has not found a way to build a database so that we can charge them for any misdemeanours. What a mess. So much for helping the hauliers.

You can see the report at the Department for Transport’s web site

See the FTA’s comment

See the RHA’s views

See the maximum charges possible under EU Rules

xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

href="Maximum%20charge%20levels%20under%20Eurovignette%20Directive_files/filelist.xml">

We have been “cushioned” from the increase in fuel prices because of the high level of fuel duty. That was the remarkable claim by John Roberts of Platts, which reports on and forecasts oil prices.He was talking on Radio 4’s Today programme. He said that because fuel duty makes up such a high proportion of the cost of fuel, and fuel duty has been frozen since the fuel dispute, the rise in fuel prices has been lower than the increase in oil prices.
In real terms, he said, the fuel price is about the same as it was six years ago.
Currently it is about $86 a barrel, but it may rise to $100. Roberts was uncertain whether it would reach this level; it all depends on events.
Who would have thought that the high fuel duty would actually cushion us!

But of course the fuel duty is still far too high and fuel duty is now being increased

The soaring price of fuel is good news – but only if you are the Prime Minister or Chancellor. According to an analysis by accountants Grant Thornton (reported in the Daily Telegraph), the increase in fuel prices will generate an extra £3 billion this year. This windfall would be enough to fund a 6p cut in fuel duty. But our Prime Minister plans to increase duty by another 2p in April and another in 2009.
With world prices rising so sharply, instead of increasing fuel duty, the Government should use some of the windfall reduce fuel duty, if only temporarily.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor will not listen to hauliers – we don’t have many votes.
But they will listen to voters who have the power to throw them out of office (when there is an election.) Maybe we should start a petition on the 10 Downing Street web site. That cooled the Government’s enthusiasm for road charging last year and it might help us as well. But it will need a huge number of people to sign up if it is to have any impact.

Why is pressure group Transaction 2007 so against the RHA? When they came to see me in the summer, I was struck by the fact that they spent most of the time criticising the RHA and only a short time talking about persuading the Government to reduce fuel duty.
They spoke about taking legal action against the UK over the unfair duty increase..
But my overwhelming impression was that they were focusing their anger on the RHA. I repeatedly suggested that they focus on the real problem. That is not the RHA but the Government.
I was sad therefore sad to read in this week’s Motor Transport that Transaction 2007 is again criticising the RHA. I understand their frustration but forget it guys. It is not the fault of the RHA (or any other trade association), that the Government has increased not decreased fuel duty. You need the trade associations to continue to talk to them.
They will undoubtedly hate me for saying this, but I believe that any protests will not be successful.
The only thing the Government will listen to is mass protests by motorists, similar to the votes against road tolling on the 10 Downing Street web site. Motorists have votes, trucks have none.

Soaring fuel prices became an issue over the weekend with the Sunday Times coming up with a complicated story about how a group of city dealers are pushing up the price even further to make huge profits. While they may have had some effect, it seems unlikely that they that much effect.
The paper also reported that in the run-up to Christmas, farmers and hauliers are planning rolling snail-pace convoys to slow traffic and put pressure on Gordon Brown to scrap the 2p fuel duty rise in the spring. It is interesting to note the comments made by Sunday Times readers – they were not exactly supportive Will slowing the traffic just before Christmas persuade Gordon to change his mind? I doubt it. Will they anger Christmas shoppers? I think they will.

The BBC is also reporting on the issue and quotes my former colleague, Jack Semple, now director of Policy at the RHA

If you had hopes that Prime Minister Gordon Brown would reduce fuel duty, forget it. With the Northern Rock fiasco he is likely to have a huge hole on the Government finances. According to the BBC reports, Northern Rock could cost us £40 billion or the equivalent of £1,300 a year or put another way more than the annual defence budget of £33 billion.
That might well reduce if he manages to sell the Rock but even still it looks as if taxpayers money will have to be used. In such a situation, he is more likely to raise taxes to fill the gap rather than reduce them. he isnot exactly likely to reduce fuel duty.
Meanwhile Transaction 2007 is sounding out its members about a day of demonstrations. This will probably be held on a Saturday and involve members driving into selected towns a cities to show their concern over fuel prices.
It says “Although there is a strong desire to stage the event before Christmas the Authorities might not permit this given the seasonal shopping traffic. Whether a delay until the New Year will blunt any impact remains to be seen.”

If you had hopes that Prime Minister Gordon Brown would reduce fuel duty, forget it. With the Northern Rock fiasco he is likely to have a huge hole on the Government finances. According to the BBC reports, Northern Rock could cost us £40 billion or the equivalent of £1,300 a year or put another way more than the annual defence budget of £33 billion.
That might well reduce if he manages to sell the Rock but even still it looks as if taxpayers money will have to be used. In such a situation, he is more likely to raise taxes to fill the gap rather than reduce them. he isnot exactly likely to reduce fuel duty.
Meanwhile Transaction 2007 is sounding out its members about a day of demonstrations. This will probably be held on a Saturday and involve members driving into selected towns a cities to show their concern over fuel prices.
It says “Although there is a strong desire to stage the event before Christmas the Authorities might not permit this given the seasonal shopping traffic. Whether a delay until the New Year will blunt any impact remains to be seen.”

Wyvern Cargo has doubled its pre-tax profits and puts its success down to it being able to pass the cost of fuel increases onto its customers. According to chairman John Probert, customers don’t like it, but pay up.
Wyvern is not alone. An increasing number of operators are charging the extra cost of fuel on to its customers. They have to. If they don’t they will go bust.
Many in the industry argue that they can’t pass on the price because their customer cannot afford it .The argument goes that if they have to pay more their customer will go bust and leave the operator with no work.
But this argument gets us nowhere. The fact is that if you have sharply rising costs caused by factors outside your control, you have to pass them onto the customer. And your customer has to pass them on in turn.
That is why food prices are soaring, partly because of shortages and partly because of increased fuel costs in moving goods.
The good thing is that everyone knows fuel prices are soaring; people know that a litre of fuel now costs more than a pound. So your customers are not going to be surprised if you want to charge them more.
What is certain is if you don’t put up prices to reflect your increased costs, you will not be in business for much longer. It is not easy but since when has the haulage business been an easy option?
Frankly you will do better putting up your prices than protesting against the Government, however much better than may make you feel.

Information on fuel prices from the FTA

With fuel prices so high, it is worth considering anything that would reduce your fuel consumption and your fuel bill. Glynn Davies, director of Hanbury Davies, and one of the most successful people in the industry, made an excellent suggestion at the recent Motor Transport fuel efficiency debate, sponsored by Bunkercard. He has limited his trucks to travel at 52mh rather than 56%. This, he says, has made significant fuel saving. Yes it is true that drivers are not keen. “We had a bit of churn but people have got over it now,” he says. It is now company policy. He has also banned agecy drivers, instead using a pool of relief drivers and the cost of using them is considerable lower than using agencies. And not using agency drivers can also reduce fuel consumption as agency drivers are unlikely to bet the best out of your vehicles.
Yesterday I wrote about passing fuel prices onto customers and said that that is a better tactic than protesting. But I can quite understand the reader who came back and said pass on to customers and protest. The only problem is that protesting is not going to work. It is up to you to overcome the probelm of soaring fuel prices - Gordon is not going to help.

Haulier Bernard Howard was at the CBI conference yesterday and told Gordon Brown exactly what he thought of the Government’s policies on fuel duty and farming. It is strong stuff.

The video is from the Daily Telegraph which has a full report

It is well worth watching the video

The RHA is right in stating that its poll of members showed no enthusiasm for a nationwide campaign of demonstrations against the high level of fuel duty. It sent questionnaires to by e-mail and fax to 8,000 members. Only about 5% replied. That suggest that only about 400 companies thought it even worth giving a view, the other 7,600 said nothing. But the majority of those 400 did reply supported action but not all were prepared to commit vehicles.
Given this lukewarm support, it is not surprising that the RHA has decided against a campaign of protests but instead agreed to support any group of members who wish to exercise public protest in a locality of their choosing.
But protesters need to be careful. It is one thing to go to shopping centres and high streets across the country to explain the issues.
But it is another to attempt o disrupt traffic by going slow or trying to block town roads with a large number of heavy vehicles. That would only antagonise people.
Transaction 2007 held meetings last week about taking action. The outcome is not yet known but it would not be surprising if some protests take place.
Incidentally this issue highlights once more the problem in merging the FTA and the RHA, as has been suggested. The FTA is strongly against protest action. The RHA has been more sympathetic, and supported some protests during the last fuel dispute. If every there was a merger, a number of RHA members would break away.

Fuel protest group Transaction 2007 has decided on this coming Saturday for its demonstration. Below is its statement.
This will hardly be popular with the public as it is one of the most important shopping days before Christmas. It is also interesting to note that it is to start at a refinery or or fuel storage depot. This could lead to motorists rushing to fill up with fuel, which will annoy many motorists.

I understand that people feel strongly about fuel tax but times have changed. In 2001 the industry was faced by annual increases in fuel tax of 6% in real terms (ie inflation plus 6%) That was a huge burden on the industry. Now the increase is due to world prices which is outside our control. It is true that the Chancellor could help us by using some of the massive windfall from the higher price of fuel. But he will be looking to use that to help pay for things such as the Northern Rock debacle.

Some newspapers have said that thousands of trucks will be involved in protests. I doubt it. It will be interesting to see just how many take part.

The following statement is released on 10th December 2007 at 10:15Hrs by Transaction:

Transaction2007 have decided to release the date and time of protest action earlier than scheduled. This is to enable the motorist and public to better prepare themselves for the coming action.

A date of Saturday 15th December 2007 at 10:00am has been decided for protest action. This date was decided by members as the best possible to enable those who would normally be working during the week to attend. This action will be initiated at a refinery or storage depot somewhere near you. Anyone wishing to support action is requested to make your way there at the allotted time. Transaction again wish to emphasise the importance of legal protesting.

"TransAction 2007"
Telephone: 07717 075917

Read more as it happens at Roadtransport.com's fuel protests news page.

So what is Transaction 2007 planning for Saturday? All its web site says is “This action will be initiated at a refinery or storage depot somewhere near you.”
But the web site also contains a list of refineries asking for people who want to attend Purfleet, Fawley, Stanlow, Grangemouth, Avonmouth, Kingsbury , Immingham and Humberside, Milford Haven and Cardiff.
This does not mean that there will be demonstrations there; just that these places are named on the web site asking if anyone wants to attend these places. According to the Financial Times, a map of the 11 UK refineries was placed on the protesters web site, although I cannot find it. The Financial Times also reported a forum where. One wrote: “Let’s hit them hard with this one and bring the country to a standstill. Make it impossible for people to get to work.” This sort of comment just stupid.
The fact is that these protests will just make it less likely that fuel tax will be reduced. Gordon Brown would like nothing more than crippling protests that would alienate the public allow him to take the credit for lifting blockades.
We have a first class haulage and distribution industry, but the public often regard us as cowboys. Trying to blockade refineries just confirms that. Take your protest to Downing Street; don’t attempt to blockade fuel terminals

It is not just the UK haulage industy that is being hit by the high fuel prices. The Italian haulers are now protesting and having a devestating effect on the country's economomy. Fuel is running short and the protesters have refused to back down.

This news should worry the Government, as the UK haulers protests are scheduled for Saturday. The news from Italy will give them new hope.

The UK Government is unlikely to want to make any concessions to the protester. In the unlikely event that it did want to help the industry, there are a number of measurs they could take.

It could, for example, decide not to increase fuel duty next year. That would not help us much. It could introducing a leveling system where fuel duty goes down when world fuel prices are high, and up when fuel prices are low. This would not hit the Government finances as it gets huge amounts of windfall money when fuel prices are high. But it is a complicted system to run.

The real problem is the failure of the Government to charge overseas vehicles to use the UK roads.Our hauliers have to pay to use French Motorways or the German Autobahn, but overseas hauliers coming in the UK have to pay nothing to pay for the damage to our raoads. Minister claim that the European Vignette system means that only tiny amount can be charged.

While I don't support the protests, the Government does need to talk with the protesters and the trade associations and to take the issues serioulsly.

The Italian example shows what can happen if they don't

The latest news is that the Italian protests have been suspended after the Italian Government has agreed to address their worries about fuel prices and long hours.

You can see a video of the effects of the Italian protests from the BBC

The RHA forecast that there was only limited support for fuel protests, and it seems to have been more than proven right. The BBC reports very few protesters turning out. It reports 25 protesters in Southampton, 15 at Fawley and 8 at Chester Services. In Cardiff the BBC reports eight protesters in Cardiff and the same in Jarrow This is a long way form the thousands that some forecast.

More interestingly was the reported 45 truck convoy in Scotland organised by the RHA.

Depsite the criticism of the RHA byTransaction 07, the Association actually got 45 vehicles vehicles on the roads in central Scotland, organised locally.

Taking to the roads protesting is clearly not the answer. We need to think carefully now about where we go from here. The trade associations will no doubt make a strong case, but there is little we can do if the Government does not want to listen.

If any of these figures are wrong or you would like to give your view, click on the comment section below or e-mail me at andrew.brown@rbi.co.uk

The FTA and the RHA met Chancellor Alistair Darling today to try to persuade him to scrap the planned 2p/lit rise in fuel duty due in April.
The message that's come back to CM is that Darling was sympathetic to the problems and understands why hauliers see fuel duty as such an issue.
However sympathy is not going to help the honest operator make ends meet in the face of tough competition from a foreign haulier able to cut prices because their fuel bill isn't so big.
The government's budget is clearly already allocated and it will be a tough call to make, but there is no reason why operators that are working hard to make a living and keep this country moving should subsidise inefficiencies in the health service or in education or anywhere else for that matter. It wouldn't be so bad if there was evidence that the cash was being invested in the transport infrastructure in the UK, but this isn't happening either.
So come on, be the Darling of the road haulage industry and make the decision that could be the difference between making ends meet and going to the wall for many operators.

Today's prize for patronising codswallop is headed to Weybridge, and the RHA's trophy case.

In its press release titled Fuel Duty: Now it's Time for Real Action, the Association asserts that:

"Earlier this week protesters certainly captured the media's attention for what is an absolutely just cause, but handing yet another letter to No. 10 does not move us any further forward," said RHA Chief Executive Roger King.  "To have an impact we need to get directly involved with a parliamentary process that will confront government face to face so that they have to answer publicly as to what they propose to do.  Fortunately this amendment promises to do just that".

The RHA will be putting in motion what is intended to be one of the biggest parliamentary lobby's of recent times.  "Once we have the date on which the Scottish National Party amendment is to be debated we will advise members accordingly and urge them to attend to lobby their MP's.  In addition to the amendment we will also be campaigning for the October 2ppl fuel duty increase to be abandoned," concluded Mr King.

I'm intrigued by the notion that direct involvement is necessary now, not least because the RHA claims to do have been doing just this anyway. To the website we go, and to this claim:

"The RHA continually negotiates on behalf of Members. Not just in the high profile discussions that go on with the government over the national issues, but every day of the week, every week of the year with everyone from local planning committees and regional transport groups to the European Commission.

Their discussions take in everything from Fuel and VED rates to the Working Time Directive and changes in EC regulations on the transport of goods. There is no administrative or legislative area that concerns the industry that is not carefully scrutinised and actively pursued on behalf of Members."

Which implies some degree of active as opposed to passive involvement to me. And much good has it achieved.

The simple, stark fact remains that the RHA got this wrong, and it should be thus called to account. That it now seeks to climb on board a protest organized by others, and appears to be claiming leadership of the same is both duplicitous and disingenuous.

Yesterday, we heard news that a US Senator is to bring a bill before the Senate that will raise GVW on Federal Highways after diesel reaches an agreed trigger point; $3.50 per gallon. That is real action; the work of the fuel protestors over the last few weeks has been real action. The words of the RHA are mere platitudinous drivel.

Chris Flynn, MD of CFT Services, and Colin Keegan from Great Bear Distribution

TransAction organiser Peter Carroll speaking at the event

Peter Harding, owner of Peter Harding Freight International; Peter Cullum, the RHA's international affairs director; and Maurice Smith, director of MJ Smith Haulage

Protest trucks crossing Westminster Bridge

Protest get as close to the Houses of Parliament as they can

  Roger King speaks to protestors outside Parliament

  Sandy McCracken gets his message across

Stewart Hosie of the SNP spoke to MPs about proposed amendments to the Finance Bill