We've been out and about today, having been invited to lunch with Kath and Martin (see 9 May blog) at their place near Midhurst. They are such good company, and regaled us with a fine lunch. The drive there was pleasant in the autumn colours, though a bit more sunshine would have helped. I'd forgotten how charming the countryside is in parts of Surrey and West Sussex. We tend to become a bit complacent about the surroundings in our county, and it's refreshing to be reminded that we don't enjoy a monopoly of scenery.
On Thursday, among many other things, I should go and vote in the election of our police commissioner. I cannot understand the logic for this initiative, other than to show the editors of the red tops that the government is Doing Something. But at what cost? If I vote at all, I shall ignore the party line and vote for the outgoing (Independent) chair of the police authority.
Oh, and while I'm on a rant, why is it that diesel costs more here than in France, where the vehicle tax has been factored into fuel taxes? Well, the answer is clear: if they up the diesel price, the republican highways will grind to a halt behind opérations escargot in which all that's needed is a truck in each lane and on the shoulder running parallel at 30 kph. Successive governments, I've heard it said, have thus been blackmailed into keeping the diesel taxes low, which is why I drive a heavy oil burner. But the principle is impeccable. Taxation is based on consumption, and rewards fuel efficiency and low mileage. The heaviest taxes are paid by those who do the most damage to the roads and to air quality. By adopting this approach, the government could close down the vehicle excise duty industry at the DVLA at a stroke, and save police enforcement effort and court time.
No comments:
Post a Comment