Its so much dearer than petrol because most other European countries tax petrol and diesel at different rates. The UK is the only place stupid enough to have the same duty rate on both.

Why is it stupid to have the same rate on both? I would argue its stupid to do anything but.

I thought the "worst carcinogens known to man" thing was either a myth or was produced by freight trains weighing several hundred tons and absolutely not a bus weighing 10 tons or so. As diesel engines go, a bus engine cannot possibly be rated as large.

I think to tax the fuel that we all depend on for every single thing we own or eat to be delivered as the same as a fuel that we don't really depend upon is ridiculous.

Benzene is very injurious to health and the petrol station is where you are ingesting it, so why you're worrying about diesel on pumps (when the filling stations give you gloves for free) god only knows, 'cos it ain't doing you any harm at all in comparison.

At the end of the day they can tax diesel as much as they like, but just remember - you're paying for it.

Not if it encourages consumers and businesses to reduce our dependence on road haulage (which would be an excellent thing).

Touche

Eating locally grown food is good. Supermarkets not trucking food any further than they have to is good.

Subsidising lower diesel tax with higher petrol tax would be bad.

Well most other countries tax them at different rates, its only us which thinks its stupid to do otherwise. Germany taxes diesel at 38p and petrol at 52p.

Yeah like thats gonna happen The Government will tax locally grown strawberries if it did, they want us to maintain dependence on it. Anyway, the bonkers cost of fuel has already encouraged consumers and businesses to cut their dependence on it, so businesses fly in foreign food/goods instead because its still cheaper than driving it round the UK, which in itself is incredible.

Only the UK is pathetic enough to think you can engineer positive change by ratcheting tax up on something. The green campaigners say 'it'll encourage people to drive less!!!' Yay!!! Even further destroy the economy, brilliant!! Why didn't we think of it earlier?!!?

Just because you declare it to be entirely correct does not mean it is.

Look around the rest of Europe. The price of petrol here is pretty much the same as in most European countries, ok the likes of Spain are quite a bit less but generally we're about average. Now look at our diesel price where - the last time I looked - we were the second most expensive and 20p a litre more than just over the water in France. Other countries don't depend on tax from fuel as much as the UK does, so its not a matter of subsidising it with something else, the fact is they're taking in too much.

There's plenty of reasons why diesel should be taxed lower. You get less diesel from a barrel of oil than you do petrol for a start, so theres always less of it. Its used for multiple purposes like heating oil, which further drives up demand and prices in winter months so a lower tax rate to keep diesel roughly the same price as petrol is a good idea.

The Government defended cutting the 50p tax rate by saying it makes us more competative with other countries with a lower tax rate, shouldn't they apply the same logic to fuel tax when they see French diesel is 20p less?

Really if I had it my way there'd be no fuel duty at all and it'd just have VAT on it like everything else.

I'm not sure what bearing that has on what I said.

Only because of the comparative weakness of sterling. Using say 2007 exchange rates - which historically are far more 'normal' than the current exchange rates - and you'll see our fuel is noticeably more expensive.

There is price parity because our currency has shed value not because British fuel costs British people about what French fuel costs French people because it doesn't, if that makes sense.

Most European countries tax diesel at a lower rate because diesels are more economical, and since these European countries largely do not have their own oil supplies, they wish to reduce their oil imports to assist their own balance of payments. That's the reason why - nothing to do with fairness or emissions. It's all about money.

IIRC the story about diesel creating the worst carcinogens known to man was based only on emissions produced by very heavy locomotive engines pulling tonnage measured in hundreds, and definitely not from a vehicle carrying a few passengers. But I also seem to recall that the story had not one basis in fact anyway and was just yet another scare story.

It's interesting that you talk in terms of parts per million. The WHO has repeatedly said that benzene has no known safe limit, but recommends usage of 5 parts per million. When benzene was first introduced (or I should say, when first increased significantly to replace TEL which was another very, very harmful substance which had to be added to petrol to make petrol burn properly in IC engines) it was being added at the level of thousands of parts per million but reduced to hundreds of parts per million.

There are no heavy locomotives operating in town centres but there are countless petrol stations, all emitting benzene.

I don't know how benzene compares to "the most harmful carcinogens known to man" but it is still a very deadly substance and is known to cause forms of leukaemia.