General Election..whats in it for the motorist?

G Luxel

What '' promises '' are any candidates making as regards the rights of the Motorist? Will VRT and road tax be abolished? Will the tax on petrol and car parts decrease? Will there be more Smart cars on the Road or more Rolls Royce Phantoms?:D ???

Owen

Well, if Dan Boyle from the Green Party has anything to do with it, he'll keep enthusiasts off the road. He called to my house the other day, I had a Ducati 916, 2 MINI Cooper S' and a Honda CBR600 on the drive, and he proceeded to tell me all about how bad cars are for the environment and how we should all be driving small cars/hybrid cars and not performance machines. I'll drive what I want, when I want - thank you Dan, I hope you're not elected so you can place even further taxes on the things I love.

I wouldn't hold my breath on VRT, or Road Tax either OP, and even if they are phased out/reduced, the price of Petrol will go up accordingly. They have to make the money from somewhere.

Tipsy Mac

The Greens seemed to be the only ones with any policy, they proposed an abolishen of VRT and road tax and instead add 10 or 20c to a litre of petrol, much better than the current system in that the polluter pays. I think it's also good for the enthusiast as you could have 4 or 5 cars and use them all abit but not be strangled with road taxes and VRT.

Hotwheels

More Tax!! :mad:
At this stage no matter who goes in, they won't want to tamper with this cash cow!

Don't know about the rest of ye, but Tayto is yer only Man...Vote No1 Tayto:)

dbtd

Dan Boyle here. I don't remember calling to anyone with the three cars described in the previous post in their driveway, and I certainly wouldn't lecture anyone on what they should or shouldn't drive. I would encourage people to drive environmentally sustainable vehicles, and I do believe that the cost of motoring should reflect its environmental effect. I'm not and the Green Party isn't talking about any additional taxes on motoring which already are substantial. We merely want to reallocate how they are collected through use rather than through ownership. We are also talking about inroducing such changes over a ten year period as most people have little or no public transport alternative.

I.S.T.

Motorists could be a very powerful group with a lot of infulence over an election, if only they had someone to lead them. Imagine if there was a motorists organisation, run by everyday motorists with no vested interests, just interested in getting the best deal for motorists. There must be over a million motorists in the country, imagine the politicial infulence an organisation representing them would have.

maidhc

dbtd wrote:

Dan Boyle here. I don't remember calling to anyone with the three cars described in the previous post in their driveway, and I certainly wouldn't lecture anyone on what they should or shouldn't drive. I would encourage people to drive environmentally sustainable vehicles, and I do believe that the cost of motoring should reflect its environmental effect. I'm not and the Green Party isn't talking about any additional taxes on motoring which already are substantial. We merely want to reallocate how they are collected through use rather than through ownership. We are also talking about inroducing such changes over a ten year period as most people have little or no public transport alternative.

I have a sneaking suspicion 2 of them are bikes.

Either way, it is grand to speak how "We merely want to reallocate how they are collected through use rather than through ownership. ". It is a laudable aim. BUT it fails to take cognisance of the fact that many people (myself included) live in the countryside where it will NEVER make sense to run public transport.

Now maybe, if 20 years ago a decision was made to ban one off housing this wouldn't be such an issue, but it wasn't, and you can be sure no government would have done so and survived another general election.

Speaking personally I farm part time, and I suspect if was to calculate things the farm more than cancels out the "carbon footprint" created by my rather efficient 1.8 Ford diesel. I am not willing to pay more than I do on driving the 20k miles I must drive per year.

I don't think you will be getting my vote Dan, even though you are on my ballot paper. I'll have a pint with you in the Gables any day after work though!

unkel

dbtd wrote:

the Green Party isn't talking about any additional taxes on motoring which already are substantial. We merely want to reallocate how they are collected through use rather than through ownership

Hi Dan. I gather this is your first post on the motors section of boards.ie. You're welcome here and and I'd encourage you, just like any other person, to share your views with us

I assume your point above is that the Green Party supports the principle of "the polluter pays"?

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

Motorists could be a very powerful group with a lot of infulence over an election, if only they had someone to lead them. Imagine if there was a motorists organisation, run by everyday motorists with no vested interests, just interested in getting the best deal for motorists. There must be over a million motorists in the country, imagine the politicial infulence an organisation representing them would have.

The weakness in this argument is that motorists are also citizens, with many other interests besides the taxation of motorists. I drive a big car, and am quite happy to pay the associated taxes. I would, though, like to see much more money being spent on health, education and public transport. Getting the best deal for motorists is therefore not something I would support.

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

The weakness in this argument is that motorists are also citizens, with many other interests besides the taxation of motorists. I drive a big car, and am quite happy to pay the associated taxes. I would, though, like to see much more money being spent on health, education and public transport. Getting the best deal for motorists is therefore not something I would support.

Well, I wonder what % of motorists would have opposed the introduction of VRT when the Government were thinking of bringing it in. Or if the Government planned to double motor tax tomorrow. A majority I think. Now if all those motorists were organised with a voice to represent them, it would be much more difficult for the Government to make decisions like that.

The tax man

Welcome to Boards,nice to see someone here that is willing to reply to some of our questions.

I'm not and the Green Party isn't talking about any additional taxes on motoring which already are substantial. We merely want to reallocate how they are collected through use rather than through ownership.

I'd love to know what your thoughts(and your party) are on the VRT situation in this country. You know and all here know it doesn't comply with fair trade within the EU. Why is the car owner taxed so much when,in most cases,the car is the only means of transport in Ireland.Great if you live near a Dart or Luas line, but most of us don't. Public transport only serves a small percentage in Dublin alone not to mention people outside the capital.
The way I see it is that the car in Ireland is one of the biggest revenue collectors for anyone in power,so I think it will never change,no matter who runs the country.
If I wish to drive some huge v8 monster well fair enough I ought to pay heavily for my choice but do you and the Green Party agree with the current situation that every car owner is been screwed no matter what they drive or how much they drive.

BTW I drive a 1.4,five years old only 25k on the clock. Yet I get screwed on all fronts for 5k a year.:mad: :mad:

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

Well, I wonder what % of motorists would have opposed the introduction of VRT when the Government were thinking of bringing it in. Or if the Government planned to double motor tax tomorrow. A majority I think.

With respect, I think you're dreaming. Most motorists are far more concerned with issues such as income tax, health, education, the environment, stamp duty, infrastructure, etc etc.

astraboy

The media are'nt telling you exactly what the issues are at all are they? Lets be honest, most people(or a majority) in this country are motorists, so issues like VRT, road tax and road infrastructure affect far more people collectively then a single issue like health. If your young and healthy, the health service is not a major issue with you personally, though it still remains an issue. Paying VRT and VAT on safety devices on new cars however directly effects you.

Wossack

did I hear mention about SF introducing a state run insurance scheme?

blastman

Yeah, someone hits your car, they'll "sort" them out for you.

cavanmaniac

I agree about an organised lobby group to represent motorists. Is this not what the SIMI purport to do, they're always wittering on about abolishing VRT without ever actually doing anything about it.

All I know is that the Irish motorist is taxed in the following ways that I'm aware of:

Extremely punitive VRT on purchase contrary to EU law
Car tax
Car insurance
Tax on fuel, almost 50% of the price is tax
NCT stealth tax
Toll roads
VAT at various junctures and on servicing and so on

Then of course we pay our PRSI, PAYE, TV licences, dog licences, VAT on phone bills, DIRT taxes, tax on credit cards, tax on laser cards, tax on ATM cards, bin charges....it's a take take government lads and we get very basic returns on all that we cough up.

There's probably others. All's I know is that for all the above you'd expect a world class transport system but instead we get years of delays with any major project like the M50 or Luas or port tunnel and any time we do get a decent road built they expect us to pay more for it in the shape of tolls!

Consecutive governments ride the motorist rock-solid and don't even buy them flowers afterwards and we as the consumer are worse for passively accepting it, myself included. An organised lobby group that we can all row in behind would be great.

cavanmaniac

cavanmaniac wrote:

Tax on fuel, almost 50% of the price is tax

You are not going to get anywhere with this as our tax on fuel is one of the lowest in europe. VRT should be scrapped.

I would be in favour of the greans plan to abolish VRT + roadtax in favour of increasing fuel tax. Let the poluters pay.
It works out better for car entusiasts who can to buy an economical car for work and something for the weekend.

seamus

ronoc wrote:

You are not going to get anywhere with this as our tax on fuel is one of the lowest in europe. VRT should be scrapped.

I would be in favour of the greans plan to abolish VRT + roadtax in favour of increasing fuel tax. Let the poluters pay.
It works out better for car entusiasts who can to buy an economical car for work and something for the weekend.

Scrap VRT, yes. Scrap road tax, meh not so much.

I would like to see road tax calculated based on polluting factors - i.e. your road tax is worked out every time you take an NCT based on how much pollutant your vehicle spews out. Better cared for, and more economic vehicles keep your road tax low.
I'm a relatively light user (< 5000 miles/year), but increasing fuel tax in lieu of road tax would be of little benefit even to me.
My car costs €251 to tax, €60 to fill the tank, and I'd say I fill it 15 times a year.
If it cost nothing to tax, but €80 to fill the tank, then I lose €50 a year in fuel taxes

Anan1

ronoc wrote:

You are not going to get anywhere with this as our tax on fuel is one of the lowest in europe. VRT should be scrapped.

I would be in favour of the greans plan to abolish VRT + roadtax in favour of increasing fuel tax. Let the poluters pay.

I remember reading somewhere that roughly half of the CO2 produced over the lifetime of the average car comes from the manufacture of said car. VRT is therefore as much a mechanism to make the polluters pay as is tax on fuel.

stovelid

Anan1 wrote:

The weakness in this argument is that motorists are also citizens, with many other interests besides the taxation of motorists. I drive a big car, and am quite happy to pay the associated taxes. I would, though, like to see much more money being spent on health, education and public transport. Getting the best deal for motorists is therefore not something I would support.

++

seamus

seamus wrote:

Scrap VRT, yes. Scrap road tax, meh not so much.

I would like to see road tax calculated based on polluting factors - i.e. your road tax is worked out every time you take an NCT based on how much pollutant your vehicle spews out. Better cared for, and more economic vehicles keep your road tax low.
I'm a relatively light user (< 5000 miles/year), but increasing fuel tax in lieu of road tax would be of little benefit even to me.
My car costs €251 to tax, €60 to fill the tank, and I'd say I fill it 15 times a year.
If it cost nothing to tax, but €80 to fill the tank, then I lose €50 a year in fuel taxes

True but penalising a large engined car for just sitting in your garage for the year doesn't make any sense. If people can afford to pay the tax they can they have no incentive to drive it less. Increase fuel costs (which are still way behind the UK) decrease the other flatrate taxes and you have a system that rewards those that decrease their fuel usage.

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

With respect, I think you're dreaming. Most motorists are far more concerned with issues such as income tax, health, education, the environment, stamp duty, infrastructure, etc etc.

Look, we have ISME who represent small & medium enterprise, IBEC who represent employers, IFA who represent farmers, all the various unions who represent workers, MAG who represent motorcyclists, Consumer Association of Ireland who represent consumers, Dublin Cycling Campaign who represent cyclists, the list goes on and on. You name a group and there is someone who represents them and gives them a voice and some kind of infulence when decisions are being made that affect them. So why then do you think it is so absurd that there could be a group who represent the interests of motorists?

I.S.T.

cavanmaniac wrote:

I agree about an organised lobby group to represent motorists. Is this not what the SIMI purport to do

SIMI represent the people who sell cars and make money from motorists, they do not represent the interests of motorists.

Henry Ford III

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

SIMI represent the people who sell cars and make money from motorists, they do not represent the interests of motorists.

Right on. For them to even claim they might do is a clear conflict of interests.

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

Look, we have ISME who represent small & medium enterprise, IBEC who represent employers, IFA who represent farmers, all the various unions who represent workers, MAG who represent motorcyclists, Consumer Association of Ireland who represent consumers, Dublin Cycling Campaign who represent cyclists, the list goes on and on. You name a group and there is someone who represents them and gives them a voice and some kind of infulence when decisions are being made that affect them. So why then do you think it is so absurd that there could be a group who represent the interests of motorists?

Because the interests of motorists are not necessarily cheaper motoring. I'm a motorist, and I don't want to see VRT reduced. This is because there is more to my life than driving. I really don't see what part of this you don't get?

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

Because the interests of motorists are not necessarily cheaper motoring.

I am not necessarly talking about cheaper motoring. There are many other issues motorists are concerned with.

Anan1 wrote:

I'm a motorist, and I don't want to see VRT reduced. This is because there is more to my life than driving.

I think you are in the minority. If you put up a poll here and ask motorists if they want VRT reduced or abolished I guarantee you a large majority will be in favour.

Anan1 wrote:

I really don't see what part of this you don't get?

I get that you don't really care about how much your fuel, tax and car costs. I get that your car could be missing enhanced safety features that are available in other countries due to the impact of VRT. I get that you have more important things in your life to worry about. I get that not all motorists (the majority I reckon) don't have the same opinion as you. Am I missing anything else?

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

I get that you don't really care about how much your fuel, tax and car costs.

Of course I care, but it is a price I am happy to pay.

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

I get that your car could be missing enhanced safety features that are available in other countries due to the impact of VRT.

My car has 8 airbags, ESP, and a big strong body. I have no sympathy for anyone (and there are lots of them) who elect to get metallic and a sunroof, but not ESP.

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

I get that you have more important things in your life to worry about.

True.

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

I get that not all motorists (the majority I reckon) don't have the same opinion as you.

You don't get that, you guess it.

astraboy

ronoc wrote:

You are not going to get anywhere with this as our tax on fuel is one of the lowest in europe. VRT should be scrapped.

I would be in favour of the greans plan to abolish VRT + roadtax in favour of increasing fuel tax. Let the poluters pay.
It works out better for car entusiasts who can to buy an economical car for work and something for the weekend.

Well said. I know of lots of people that drive a van for work(not big vans either) and then keep a car like an evo or even a golf GTi for the weekends. However they still pay tax as if they drove the second car every day. By taxing fuel, every car in the country will be putting revenue towards the roads, there would be no need for the cops to stop people to check tax, plus, if you buy an economical car you are automatically rewarded. Drive economically, you are rewarded further! If you wish to buy a powerful car that does 19MPG for the weekend, brilliant, you just pay a fair amount for the driving you do in this car.

Simple really, in comparsion to the stupid VRT system that lets you take out the back seats of your 4x4 and get 50 euro VRT. :mad: :rolleyes:

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

You don't get that, you guess it.

Stick up a poll asking people if they want VRT reduced, to remain the same or increased then and prove me wrong.

In any case, you disagree with me, I disagree with you. End of discussion really.

Tipsy Mac

Cheaper car costs mean safer cars on the road as people have more money to spend on a better spec'd car, safer cars mean less people killed each year. Newer cars are less polluting than old and are more recyclable. It makes no sense to tax new cars so heavily with VRT, they should simply abolish it and add 10 or 20 cent to a litre of petrol, those doing mad milage will pay most, ie the polluter pays, those doing little milage wont pay as much.

From the last 10 fatal crashes I have seen in the media all those killed where in 5+ year old vehicles with little or no safety features as they were stripped to the bare legal EU requirements to make them affordable to the fool of an Irish motorist. The Gardai and NRA keep zero statistics on the age and safety features of cars crashed, such data would be useful in presenting a case for an end to VRT to the EU.

nastysimon

Tipsy Mac wrote:

Cheaper car costs mean safer cars on the road as people have more money to spend on a better spec'd car, safer cars mean less people killed each year. Newer cars are less polluting than old and are more recyclable. It makes no sense to tax new cars so heavily with VRT, they should simply abolish it and add 10 or 20 cent to a litre of petrol, those doing mad milage will pay most, ie the polluter pays, those doing little milage wont pay as much.

From the last 10 fatal crashes I have seen in the media all those killed where in 5+ year old vehicles with little or no safety features as they were stripped to the bare legal EU requirements to make them affordable to the fool of an Irish motorist. The Gardai and NRA keep zero statistics on the age and safety features of cars crashed, such data would be useful in presenting a case for an end to VRT to the EU.

I agree with replacing VRT and road tax with a petrol tax, but I think that your latter points miss an issue a little. Modern cars are stronger and heavier than before, which means they do more damage when they hit another. This is particularly true with SUVs. We need to focus and legislate for having cars which are safer for others when we hit them and not which are safer for ourselves. If we force people to drive lighter, more pedestrian and motorcycle friendly cars which are safer for others in an accident, we will have a greater impact on reducing road deaths than if we keep going with the current "arms race".
Also, if safety is the primary concern, the best solution is better drivers (less accidents will be much better than safer ones). Just raise the standard of the test to that of the IAM one (not the silly ignition one), only allow people with that licence to drive in Ireland and I guarantee that you will at least halve the number of road deaths.
BTW, while newer cars are more recyclable, just moving to a newer car just for that produces more waste than reusing, improving and repairing an older car. Recycling is only one step better than refuse. Remember, reduce, reuse, recycle and then refuse.

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

Stick up a poll asking people if they want VRT reduced, to remain the same or increased then and prove me wrong.

Surely you've noticed that people posting here are hardly representative of the average Irish car owner?

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

In any case, you disagree with me, I disagree with you. End of discussion really.

The point I have been making all along is that just because someone owns a car does not mean that they are in favour of getting the best deal for motorists. You appear curiously resistant to this notion. Why don't you set up a motorists organisation, see how much support you get?

Anan1

I've noticed that many people here are in favour of taxing fuel on the basis that it's a tax on pollution, but are opposed to VRT on the basis that 'it's a tax on ownership, not pollution'. I hate to break it to you all, but VRT IS A TAX ON POLLUTION TOO. Brand new cars don't just grow on trees, you know.;)

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

The point I have been making all along is that just because someone owns a car does not mean that they are in favour of getting the best deal for motorists.

And you keep making it, and I acknowledge it is true. Some people couldnt give a toss about motoring issues, including the cost of petrol and VRT.

Anan1 wrote:

You appear curiously resistant to this notion.

No I'm not. I do think they are in the minority though.

Anan1 wrote:

Why don't you set up a motorists organisation, see how much support you get?

I'm way too busy for that.

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

I've noticed that many people here are in favour of taxing fuel on the basis that it's a tax on pollution, but are opposed to VRT on the basis that 'it's a tax on ownership, not pollution'. I hate to break it to you all, but VRT IS A TAX ON POLLUTION TOO. Brand new cars don't just grow on trees, you know.;)

An ILLEGAL tax at that, as far as the EU are concerned.

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

An ILLEGAL tax at that, as far as the EU are concerned.

Coming from someone whose website endorses breaking the speed limit this really is a bit rich, don't you think?

astraboy

Anan1 wrote:

I've noticed that many people here are in favour of taxing fuel on the basis that it's a tax on pollution, but are opposed to VRT on the basis that 'it's a tax on ownership, not pollution'. I hate to break it to you all, but VRT IS A TAX ON POLLUTION TOO. Brand new cars don't just grow on trees, you know.;)

RIIIIIIIIIIIGH, keep believing its a tax on "pollution". If so, why is a regular family car, say 1.8L engine, taxed at something like 20% of the price, and this has little to do with emissions. A person can then go away and buy a "commercial" landcruiser, a regular land cruiser with the seats ripped from the back pointlessly to avoid VRT. VRT on this "commercial" is 50 euro. So keep believing its a tax on pollution ya muppet. Its a money making scam to fla the motorist, plain and simple. And leave Irishspeedtraps alone, he does good work.

The tax man

Anan1 wrote:

Coming from someone whose website endorses breaking the speed limit this really is a bit rich, don't you think?

Eh where on that site does it endorse breaking the speed limit. It's a helpful site to warn motorists of what's out there. Nothing illegal just information.
VRT is a load of crap in this country. You know it and so does everyone else.
It's blown apart with the commercial vehicle issue.

Hotblack Desiato

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

An ILLEGAL tax at that, as far as the EU are concerned.

That's a myth often repeated, but still a myth.

The tax man

Anan1 wrote:

Coming from someone whose website endorses breaking the speed limit this really is a bit rich, don't you think?

So do you also think the AA in the UK also endorse speeding by printing the locations of speed cameras in their UK road atlas?? I don't think so.
I got done for doing 8km over the limit in a 60km zone. 3 lanes but still 60km, go figure,limits in this country are laughable.No problem taking my points but I'll do my best to make sure others know about these sly speed check points so they don't get done on cash making roads like I did.

The tax man

ninja900 wrote:

That's a myth often repeated, but still a myth.

Well then how come I can buy anything(apart from a car) from the likes of the UK or Germany and not get taxed on my purchase. It's the only item that we in Ireland are punished for when buying outside of this country. Anyone else has a field day when it comes to buying car outside their own country.
Forget about safety items and just look at the different specs on cars between Ireland and the UK. We get screwed plan and simple. It even affects the manufactures and what they offer us here. And yet we're one of the cheapest countries to import a car from if you live within the EU.

dbtd

This is an interesting debate. I'm glad to see it's not being conducted on simplistic terms. The Greens proposals on VRT would see the abolishing of the tax and its replacement with an environmental charge base on emission standards, fuel efficiency and size and weight of a vehicle, rather than the current crude system of engine capacity. We believe that most new cars would be exempt from this new charge.
While it is true that other countries do not have VRT they do have higher taxes on fuel and this is a choice3 we would have to make as well.
I'd have that pint anytime in The Gables but I think you are wrong about rural transport and rural areas. It can and it should be done.

Anan1

astraboy wrote:

RIIIIIIIIIIIGH, keep believing its a tax on "pollution". If so, why is a regular family car, say 1.8L engine, taxed at something like 20% of the price, and this has little to do with emissions. A person can then go away and buy a "commercial" landcruiser, a regular land cruiser with the seats ripped from the back pointlessly to avoid VRT. VRT on this "commercial" is 50 euro. So keep believing its a tax on pollution ya muppet. Its a money making scam to fla the motorist, plain and simple. And leave Irishspeedtraps alone, he does good work.

Any chance you could translate (or maybe have your teacher translate) the above into English for me?

The tax man wrote:

Eh where on that site does it endorse breaking the speed limit. It's a helpful site to warn motorists of what's out there. Nothing illegal just information.

Surely I don't have to explain to you that nobody would look at the site if they didn't intend on breaking the speed limit?

The tax man wrote:

VRT is a load of crap in this country. You know it and so does everyone else.

I don't know it. I've already said why I am in favour of VRT. Would you care to address that?

The tax man wrote:

It's blown apart with the commercial vehicle issue.

How?

I.S.T.

Anan1 wrote:

Coming from someone whose website endorses breaking the speed limit this really is a bit rich, don't you think?

irishspeedtraps.com does not endorse breaking the speed limit. The site's focus is on highlighting how the current speed trap locations are based on generating revenue for the Government and have very little to do with improving road safety. There is nothing on irishspeedtraps.com that is illegal, as was confirmed by the Gardaí themselves. As one previous poster mentioned, the AA publish speed trap locations in the UK. Some of the UK police forces also publish the locations themselves on their own web sites.

Higgsy

There is not a snowball in hells chance that any of the partties will reduce motor related taxes, why? MONEY, plus they can justify it on the EU Carbon Emmissions directive.

We are getting ripped off in this country, the Irish government is being fined by the EU for the VRT?

I am Irish myself but I do think that we are great people for talking about things and not so great at actually living up to what we talk about. I have jarred customs men and local politicians about the issue of VRT to get the same old standard line.

This country leaves me disillussioned sometimes

Higgsy

Check this thread out:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=53296979#post53296979

Mc-BigE

dbtd wrote:

This is an interesting debate. I'm glad to see it's not being conducted on simplistic terms. The Greens proposals on VRT would see the abolishing of the tax and its replacement with an environmental charge base on emission standards, fuel efficiency and size and weight of a vehicle, rather than the current crude system of engine capacity. We believe that most new cars would be exempt from this new charge.
While it is true that other countries do not have VRT they do have higher taxes on fuel and this is a choice3 we would have to make as well.
I'd have that pint anytime in The Gables but I think you are wrong about rural transport and rural areas. It can and it should be done.

This all sounds wonderful Dan, but if your party is a minority member of an alternative Government (if elected) i.e. F.G/Labour/Green, how are you going to convince the other 2 parties to give up the "Golden VRT goose" ? After all it’s a lot of money for the incoming government to turn down, it’s going to be needed to pay for all the election promises like free healthcare for the young, and for all those hospital beds and Gardai promised? I don't see in F.G contract any mention of VRT? Actually the only discussion I’ve seen/heard about VRT in this election is this thread.

Edited: OK F.G. do mention reducing taxes on Bio-fuel and low CO2 cars, but it doesn't say scrap VRT. Building new cars and scrapping perfectly good 2nd hand cars is adding to the carbon footprint. Maybe in the long term there will be benefits due to cars technology which will produce 0% emissions, but until then the car, new and old is a polluter.

AlanD

dbtd wrote:

This is an interesting debate. I'm glad to see it's not being conducted on simplistic terms. The Greens proposals on VRT would see the abolishing of the tax and its replacement with an environmental charge base on emission standards, fuel efficiency and size and weight of a vehicle, rather than the current crude system of engine capacity. We believe that most new cars would be exempt from this new charge.
While it is true that other countries do not have VRT they do have higher taxes on fuel and this is a choice3 we would have to make as well.
I'd have that pint anytime in The Gables but I think you are wrong about rural transport and rural areas. It can and it should be done.

Dan, although I would applaud the Green Party's intention on dropping VRT and replacing it over a period of time with a more use-appropriate tax, I could not ever condone your plans to scrap certain road schemes. As Brian Cowen said on Cooper/Hobbs last night, "it's just nuts". There isn't a government anyone could put together who would condone that. There isn't a majority mandate from the public who would condone it.

My circumstances, and I'm very much not alone, mean that every now and then I drive from Limerick to Letterkenny. I am a teleworker, so I don't burden the system in the same way most other people do. I don't drive to work. But about once a month I do. I leave Limerick after work to drive the 220 miles to Letterkenny. There's isn't a hope in hell I would ever consider using public transport to get there. No bus would make it to Letterkenny from Limerick in 4.5 or 5 hours. There will never be a direct train route and my only choice, short of hiring a helicoptor is to drive. If the Green's stop certain road projects, the people will not be happy. Roads are paramount to Ireland's success. Once built, then fill them with buses but don't scrap the roads first and fill our creaking infrastructure with buses.

Remember, business is what drives our economy and businesses need roads, not buses. Public transport will not take the huge numbers of reps and trucks off the roads.

And don't get me started on the ill conceived anti-capitalist idea of CO2 emmissions being the cause of global warming. The sun is the cause and always has been.

astraboy

Since you clearly entered the debate knowing **** all about VRT, and failing to understand my previous post with your sarcastic comment, let me spell it out for you.

VRT is placed on what is known as the "open market selling price" OMSP of the car. This is the car price plus vat. So you are in effect paying VRT on the VAT of 21% you already paid! Thats problem no. 1.

VRT is put on the car in 3 catogeries. 22.5% of OMSP for cars under 1.4L

25% for cars 1.4-1.9L and 30% for cars over 1.9L. Now a family car of 1.8 liters has a tax of 25% put on it, ie approx 5K on a 20,000 euro car!:mad:

Someone else goes away and buys a vehicle classed as commercial. This can be a van or a 4x4 with the back seats taken out. They pay, wait for it, E50 in VRT. Thats it! So people with commercial land cruisers, with 3.0L engines pay 50 euro VRT while the family car has 5,000 euro placed on it. Problem no 2.

Problem number 3, and this is related to the one above, is that if someone decides to buy a passenger version of the land cruiser, ie one they can take their family around in, the 3.0L vehicle will have VRT placed on it of 30% of OMSP. This vehicle pollutes the same amount as the "commercial" version, so why the two tax bands? VRT is stupid, and its also illegal as the government are fined a certain amount each year by the EU. However, the fine is so small that it makes plenty sense to keep raping the irish motorist to the tune of nearly 2 Billion a year. Nice one.:rolleyes:

Now Alan, was that clear enough for you? I got to say though I agree with your point above^^^^^^. Certain rural transport will never be totally viable, being from west cork I know people in certain areas will always need a car for transport.

AlanD

astraboy wrote:

Since you clearly entered the debate knowing **** all about VRT, and failing to understand my previous post with your sarcastic comment, let me spell it out for you. .

who is that comment aimed at?

astraboy

Anan1. He did'nt understand the commercial tax issue regarding VRT when more then one person bought it up. He you made a silly statement about not understanding my original post. While I admit it could have been clearer I think it got my point across.

Edited cos I was stupid!