Responding to high fuel prices, in part a result of Russia’s murderous invasion of Ukraine, is a hot topic all around the world right now. In response, the International Energy Agency (IEA) are calling on countries to cut oil usage within four months, noting that measures such as just cutting fuel taxes “do not address the broader strains affecting the market“. As such, they’ve put out a great 10-point plan of ‘immediate actions‘ for how to reduce oil usage, and many of them are things we’ve long advocated for.

In the face of the emerging global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, practical actions by governments and citizens in advanced economies and beyond can achieve significant reductions in oil demand in a matter of months, reducing the risk of a major supply crunch, according to new analysis released by the International Energy Agency today.

These efforts would reduce the price pain being felt by consumers around the world, lessen the economic damage, shrink Russia’s hydrocarbon revenues, and help move oil demand towards a more sustainable pathway.

If fully carried out in advanced economies, the measures recommended by the IEA’s new 10-Point Plan to Cut Oil Use would lower oil demand by 2.7 million barrels a day within four months – equivalent to the oil demand of all the cars in China. This would significantly reduce potential strains at a time when a large amount of Russian supplies may no longer reach the market and the peak demand season of July and August is approaching. The measures would have an even greater effect if adopted in part or in full in emerging economies as well.

The new report also includes recommendations for decisions to be taken now by governments and citizens to transition from the short-term emergency actions included in the 10-Point Plan to sustained measures that would put countries’ oil demand into a structural decline consistent with a pathway towards net zero emissions by 2050.

Since the majority of oil demand comes from transport, the IEA’s 10-Point Plan focuses on how to use less oil getting people and goods from A to B, drawing on concrete measures that have already been put to use in a diverse range of countries and cities.

Some of those we’re already seeing here in New Zealand such as the government’s announcement to cut public transport fares in half. We also continue to see a lot of people working from home due to COVID but many of the other suggestions, like car-free Sundays, are things we should be looking to do even if fuel prices and emissions weren’t an issue.

The IEA have also put out this graph of the worldwide impact they expect these initiatives could have if enacted – note that the y-axis has been fixed so the reduction isn’t quite as dramatic as it appears on the graph.

While the IEA see these as short-term measures – the total reduction in usage is only around 6% – they also recognise that these are a path for the future too

Looking further ahead, this report also suggests a path for countries to put oil demand into structural decline in the medium term, building on measures already included in economic recovery packages introduced to deal with the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic. Adopting the immediate and longer-term recommendations would put the countries on track for a decline in oil demand consistent with what is required to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

Reducing our reliance on oil while simultaneously making our cities better places to be and improving our wider transport system is a big win-win situation. When does the government start on the points above not yet started?

Meanwhile here in NZ, yesterday the government confirmed the details of the public transport subsidy and drop in Road User Charges

In addition to the 25 cents a litre cut to Fuel Excise Duty for three months the Government can now confirm:

  • From 1 April to 30 June 2022, funding will be provided for local government to implement half price public transport fares covering core public transport services, Te Huia and Capital Connection train services, and Total Mobility services for those with long-term impairments who are unable to use public transport.
  • From Late April to late July 2022, Road User Charges will be cut by 36 percent across all legislated rates.

“The confirmation of the Road User Charges discount and full scope of the public transport fare reduction will support New Zealanders through the global energy crisis caused by the war in Ukraine,” Michael Wood said.

For public transport they also note:

  • Non-core public transport services not covered by the scheme are typically commercial services that operate outside of the Public Transport Operating Model without any funding from the National Land Transport Fund, such as the Waiheke, Devonport, and Rakino ferry services in Auckland, the Wellington Cable Car). It also excludes commercial services such as KiwiRail’s tourism services, Cook Strait ferry services, and inter-regional buses
  • The discount is estimated to cost approximately $36.5 million across three months.

It will be interesting to see how Auckland Transport deal with the Devonport and Waiheke fares given they’re now also integrated into HOP even though they’re run commercially – speaking of which, whatever happened to the review of their exclusion by the Ministry of Transport. That should have been a one-day job to say those services can no longer be exempt.

On the Road User Charges, it’s interesting that it will see a 36% drop while fuel taxes drop by 32%, is this another case of trucks not paying their fair share? The government also say this drop will cost approximately $170 million over the three months, depending on uptake.

Share this


    1. The night train Auckland to Wellington only stopped in 2014.
      Godzilla is awesome; a night train would be good.

      1. The Northerner was cancelled in 2004 (rather than 2014) but had lost it’s sleeping carriages back in 1987. Sleeping in chairs was always a fraught experience – I’d have happily paid $200-$225 (the price of a cheap hotel room) to have a basic sleeping cabin.

      2. Back in the day (’80s) we used to catch the train down from Auckland to National Park to go on a skiing weekend. Leave Auckland at around 7pm, arrive near Ruapehu at midnight, tumble out and sleep in a rented chalet – then up early next morning to catch the mountain goat up the maunga to go skiing.

        Ski Saturday and Sunday, catch the train again at midnight going north, and end up back in Auckland early on Monday morning. Far better than driving and trying to leave Auckland on a Friday night and driving through wintery conditions with poor roads.

        Trains are so much better than cars for long distance travel! Imagine if we had a rail operator who could offer that sort of service now! Day-time trains as well as night trains! Up the country on the same day as down the country! An actual rail service!

    2. You could argue that is mode bias considering buses are almost always cheaper and quicker. For example they could have built a pretty decent bus service between Hamilton and Papakura for $100 million, it would be much quicker and more frequent than Te Huia.

      1. There’s no point denying the difference in experience. Trains are a pleasure to travel on. Buses are lovely for shorter trips. Only die-hards like me take them for longer trips – and then I have my limits, which is somewhere considerably shorter than the Auckland to Wellington distance.

        The level of acceleration and deceleration is different. The ability to get up and move around is different. This means buses will only be comfortable for most people, for about 3 to 5 hours but you can travel on trains for multiple day journeys.

      2. A bus between Hamilton and Auckland at peak time would be a bit quicker than Te Huia but it is only going to get slower.

        Trains are the only things that are going to do the run reliably in less than 2 hours in the future. Te Huia isn’t great but we need to start somewhere.

        1. Yep, if the goal was to run a service as cheap as possible for the next 3 years and no view to the long term, then buses would be the obvious choice.

          But thats not the goal. We want to get a heavy lift, congestion free regional public transport route in the long term. And the way to get that is to start somewhere, and improve it quickly to make more day to day sense. (track speed upgrades, bi-mode trains, north Waikato stations….)

        2. Te Huia could do Frankton-The Strand now in 2 hours on the existing track alignment with the 40 year old loco. The reason it doesn’t is the never ending rail works and rail congestion in Auckland. The Silver Fern in 1981 could do it in about 1.45. Just using modern DMUs would probably cut 15 minutes off the trip time while using far less diesel. There is huge scope for improvement, whether the political will is there to do those improvements is another matter.

        3. Zippo – I think it is more than just the Auckland metro network causing the issues, it currently takes Te Huia 98 mins just to get to Papakura. I’m guessing the Silver Fern was knocking this off in 70 – 75 mins back in the day.

          The three obvious improvements that stand out to me are mutliple units, opening stations in the north Waikato and the Whangamarino deviation.

        4. For $100 million they could have built a lot of bus lanes. Most of the trip would be on the Wiakato expressway which will never get congested, its only the Hamilton and Papakura segments needing bus lanes. Or maybe even terminate at Pukekohe after AT rail gets there.
          And there are some big advantages of buses in terms of running costs (could probably triple the frequency for same cost) and environment (a diesel bus with 30 people on pollutes a lot less than a diesel train with 30 people on).

        5. If we improve Te huia services, to make it also work for Auckland based travellers for a day visit to Hamilton and back, it will be fantastic. Currently the morning service from Auckland (at 9:18am) to Hamilton arrives at 11:45am, then the return service leaves Hamilton at 2:07pm. So, this seems currently only fit for Aucklanders to travel to Hamilton for a quick lunch…
          If we have a service arrives at Hamilton around 9:30am, then leaves around 4pm, it may be more useful.

        6. Reply to Zippo. 90% of all the rail works in auckland is done on weekends so it shouldnt affect te huia during the week. Hopefully after easter works there may be some congestion relief

        7. A southern busway, running parallel to a heavy rail line seems pretty silly.
          There is plenty of ridership potential between two large cities to support the larger vehicle sizes that trains offer. We could also run trains at well over 100km/hr. Even a consistent 130 or 140 would put it all well faster than the waikato expressway as soon as there is a sniff of traffic. We already have the corridor and can leverage other investments made for metro services like electrification, extra tracks, CRL, station upgrades. Not to mention the better alignment and station potential in all the cities / towns on the way.
          I like busways, probably more than any rational person should, but a southern one? ….maybe give that a miss.

      3. If passenger rail is to be part of an low carbon low oil future then diesel locomotive hauled carriage trains are not the answer. The Govt needs to either step up and purchase a fleet of multiple unit trains or admit defeat and with the help of Intercity buses build a better long distant bus network in my view it should do both. But consider this Te Kauwhata, Mercer, Pokeno and Tuakau are best served by rail. So in setting up Te Huia they made two mistakes. As for Auckland Wellington well they need to use the overhead between Hamilton and Palmerston North. Again multiple units are the more sustainable option, batteries and diesel can be used to bridge non electrified sections.

        1. Te Huia should have started as an intra-Waikato service first, shuttling between Pokeno and Hamilton each day, multiple services. After that, extend a bit north to Puhinui.

          If people want to live in northern Waikato towns and work in Auckland that’s fine, but I dont know why they needed a long one seat ride from the start. A transfer to the Auckland metro at Puhinui would hardly be onerous.

        2. KLK – What on earth would be the point of terminating at Pokeno northbound? That would leave anyone trying to get to Auckland stranded.

        3. Robin Cole , The Te Huia only has one Locomotive turned on at a time , but the power van ex “SD” has an engine running all the time for power and air con . And if and when they allow the use of the drivers cab “SD” it may gain a few minutes more by removing the extra engine .

          This is the restarting of the Locomotive before the return to Hamilton ;-

        4. The thinking (and I think it’s still the plan) is that Auckland network will be extended to Pokémon. But really if you’re going there you might as well continue in to Auckland rather than forcing train changes.
          Te Huia all along should have been a DMU/EMU combination rather than loco hauled. The same train type should be used for regional services out of Wellington and if Chch ever gets passenger rail (Timaru etc).

        5. Realist as KR are buying new Siemans Locomotives for the South Island they should have thrown in say 1/2 Dual Mode for passenger services only which then could have been used on the Northern and Te Huia runs , Toll use to use the EF’s between Palmy and Hamilton after the drivers proved to management it didn’t take 30mins to change engines as they said but 5minutes as the drivers proved management knew squat .

        6. “What on earth would be the point of terminating at Pokeno northbound? That would leave anyone trying to get to Auckland stranded.”

          The clue was in my first line. The WRC – who are part funding this – should have focused Phase I on travel between Hamilton Central and the northern towns. I am fairly confident that there would be much more demand for this rail service than a slow 2hr ride into Auckland Central.

          If Te Huia falls over tomorrow, gets canned by National or is deemed a failure at the end of the 5yr trial, kiss Waikato regional rail goodbye for decades. The Waikato ratepayers would not allow it twice. But tacking on to an already successful service – much easier. Once you have Waikato up and running, the economics of going north into Auckland (or east to Tauranga/The Mount, for that matter) become a lot more compelling.

          You then would go North into Puhinui and potentially Newmarket, which would allow for changes to the Southern and Eastern Lines (CBD) or Western Line. Not everyone will be going to the CBD. Eventually you might have demand to go all the way into Aotea but until then, a seamless change to another line does not seem unreasonable.

        7. The government should of invested in the electrification between Pukekohe – Te Rapa while it had the chance, when there was less inflation to deal with! Only realistic way of bring a faster Auckland – Hamilton service is by doing a 3 phased approach and do phase by phase since we have inflation to deal with in the long run. It help enhance patronage, we should look towards building more affordable housing where the town are nearby the track and where the service would be. It would definitely help the patronage since there’s a guaranteed patronage that people would ride for multiple purposes such as work, airport or visiting Auckland or Hamilton. We should be aiming for full electrified rail service between Auckland – Hamilton done by 2032 – 2035. For now they should have a Kiwirail diesel run service between Pukekohe – Mercer, have ADL/ADC class railcar running. Once Phase 1 done bring service all the way to Huntly and once Phase 2 done replace ADL/ADC class railcar with the Te Huia locomotive and carriages.

          Phase 1 should be to invest in electrification between Pukekohe – Mercer and complete construction by 2025 – 2026, along with adding stations in Buckland, Tukrau, Pokeno and Mercer. Get investors to buy land in Tukarau, Pokeno and Mercer to build subdivision of houses and shopping centre. Get Aucklanders to move to these areas since lifestyle and cost of living would be cheaper there. At Mercer should construct temporary standings for the diesel units.

          Phase 2 should be to invest in electrification between Mercer – Huntly and complete construction by 2030, along with adding stations in Meremere and Te Kahuwhata. Get investors to buy land in Meremere , Te Kahuwhata and Huntly to build subdivision of houses and shopping centre. Get Aucklanders to move to these areas since lifestyle and cost of living would be cheaper there. At Huntly should construct temporary standings for the diesel units.

          Phase 3 should be to invest in electrification between Huntly – Hamilton/Frankton complete construction by 2032 – 2035, along with adding stations in Ngaruwahia and Horotiu. Get investors to buy land in Ngaruwahia, Horotiu and Rotokauri to build subdivision of houses and shopping centre. Get Aucklanders to move to these areas since lifestyle and cost of living would be cheaper there. At Frankton station should construct permanent standings for the EMU units.

          We need to get rid of the people who are currently situated in the inner Auckland main road corridors and own houses roads such as Dominion Rd, Sandringham Rd, Manukau Rd, Remuera Rd, Ponsonby Rd, Great North Rd, New North Rd and Great South Rd. The government should be looking towards ‘Land Acquisition’ while handing out ‘Compensation’ just like with CRL business compensation to make up their losses because the ‘Land Acquisition’ will do is take the land but not buy the current owners land since government don’t need to buy people’s land they have power to takeover without any hesitation and leave the owners with no money to move out of land since government takes their money along with ability of moving, so government needs to hand-out compensation so people can leave without being forced and left with no money at the end. We really need to get those people living on Auckland’s main road corridors and get them living in smaller towns in the Waikato, such as Tuakau, Pokeno, Mercer, Meremere, Te Kahuwhata, Huntly, Ngaruwahia and Hororitu.

          They also would have the money to leave also since the value of their houses are one of the highest in the country right now and if the government was to invest electrification on rail along with providing on phase 1 first which is creating subdivision of houses along with shopping centre in Buckland, Tuakau, Pokeno and Mercer for starters, once completed move to phase 2 the finally phase 3. There would be incentive to moving to these smaller towns since the houses would be more spacious, less city life feel, having the ability to afford living there, more country life style and have better lifestyle.

          In Auckland inner city corridors such as Dominion Rd, Sandringham Rd, Manukau Rd, Remuera Rd, Ponsonby Rd, Great North Rd, New North Rd and Great South Rd, we should be looking towards building 6 story high density apartments with 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units since it would be cheaper and affordable value, if you were to construct a 4 or 5 bedroom unit it would cost more in value. If you were to construct a 4 or 5 bedroom apartment right now it would cost $900,000 to $1.5 million which is really unaffordable for most kiwis right now and will be in the future.

        8. Tim K roughly agree with your plan of spreading new development along the railway between Hamilton and Auckland but I don’t expect you will get to much support from commenter on this site they are to busy trying to die in the ditch over cycle lanes. I to have thought of repurposing the ADL ADK,s for the Waikato. They still preform OK however there is that ever present diesel smell. I am not to sure that we need overhead given the development happening in battery powered trains. Anyway keep trying to think outside the box and avoid the the confrontational approach this sight likes to promote. The answer always lies in the middle never in the extremes.

  1. If those paying RUC’s can buy as much distance as they want at a reduced price April-June, that won’t be a 36% reduction in the charges they pay. It’ll be far more as many buy more distance in advance to maximise their savings.

    If the government was looking for an activity to benefit from a really big tax cut, I don’t understand why they picked burning diesel.

    1. Not super sure the legislation allows you to stockpile RUC before an increase, but that will depend on if the reversal of a temporary cut is considered an increase.

        1. I’m familiar with how RUC works. My comment is in regards to this provision for heavy vehicles:

          86 Licence for heavy RUC vehicle invalid 1 month after road user charges rate increased

          This section applies if a road user charges rate is increased by regulations made under section 85(1), unless the increase relates only to the GST payable on the rate.
          Despite any other provision of this Act, a licence for a heavy RUC vehicle that is issued before the increase comes into force is no longer valid after the expiry of 1 month from the date of the increase.

          Good news I guess for light diesel vehicles?

    2. Transformational is just a buzz word. There is no better proof that this government prefers the vote friendly status quo and that any noise about climate change is just noise.

        1. One of the problems with democracy without governments being forced to use social cost benefit assessment.

          Current voters get to determine the politics and the voice of future generations is discounted to zero.

        2. Simple rule: You can’t govern if you aren’t in power.
          Also if you enact legislation that is too progressive the other lot will remove it quick smart if they get in.

      1. They have tightened up the emissions trading scheme so that transport fuels are getting taxed at a considerably higher rate than the absolute token amount previously. You would never have got half price PT out of a National government either.

  2. Double used car incentives for EVs and perhaps work with AT to offer a pilot rebate scheme on E-Bikes? Seems like it would cover the spread pretty nicely.

      1. The argument was that a used import will stay in the fleet for less time, so less difference to emissions. Of course that’s not the only factor, and EV imports are younger than average, although it probably true that a 2014 Nissan Leaf imported now will not stay in the fleet as long as a new EV.
        The other factor is the interests of the MIA (importers of new vehicles). I seem to recall that the definition of “used” was tightened during revisions.

        1. Evs run for much much longer than an ICE car, only thing holding them back is battery which as tech progresses will be less of an issue, plus the added usage as home storage for energy with old batteries. Point is, there are lots of cars that don’t sell directly into NZ but are still new (aka 1000km on clock) which you can import yourself but only get the used discount. Would make it much more pallatable to go through the import process if you knew you were getting 8k off.

          Basically, its a subsidy for the rich and to appease major dealerships.

  3. Isn’t it economics 101 that the fuel price will be governed by supply and demand? With the government interfering in the price, the demand won’t go down as much as needed to meet the reduced supply, and all that will happen is that the raw price will have to go up more. If every country does the same then we will end up trading fuel tax for increased oil profits.

    1. +1000. These subsidies keep up our funding Kelptomaniacal regimes. We need help to be weaned off oil not help to prolong our addiction.

    1. Making it free would overwhelm the existing network. Currently it’s understaffed because of Covid, so this would be a net-negative.

      (Plus the fact that making PT free doesn’t really do much to get people out of cars; extending the network does, and you need some farebox recovery to help pay for that.)

      1. Agree with Logan. We need better PT access to pull people away from driving… making PT free only helps those who already have easy access (e.g. living close or along with bus routes and train stations). We need investment (or pull money away from building more highways and expanding arterial roads) to properly fund PT and urban roads to be serious about climate change adaptation.
        Also we need to demand AT and their contractors to do a better and efficient job with the renewal budget, not just put a layer of tarmac, rather than use the renewal projects to improve safety of non-car road users.

  4. Car free Sundays might raise some, er, ‘interesting’ discussion.

    Anyone that drives somewhere for the weekend has to come home Saturday night or Monday morning.

    Rightly or wrongly that seems a bridge too far.

        1. While I am not religious, I am fairly sure He was referring to Saturday, the sabbath and all that, being the day He rested. But one is as good as the other to me.

        2. Here in New Plymouth the good lord has given us free parking at the Centre City carpark on Sundays..

    1. How about identified roads are car free on Sundays. Tamaki Drive would be a good one to start with. Resident only access (very slowly of course). The Domain, bits of Takapuna, probably a heap of others as well.

    2. Just have it end at 10 pm on a Sunday if necessary, so people can nip home to beddie-byes.

      It’d be a way to give people the best bits of Lockdown just one day a week… since we failed to make any of the other steps forward from Covid that other places did.

  5. I can imagine how this went down. The boss said ‘Come up with a ten point plan’. But the staff could only come up with four points so they got sent away again and came up with some weak stuff that became 3 through 7.

  6. Well I suppose its all right as long as petrol only get dearer then its only a poor peoples problem. But what if there were physical shortages that would bring on the panic. There is no 11 th commandment that states we cant run out of oil.

  7. Much like climate action, it seems like the initiatives we see are all locked at the individual level. It’s the bigger systems that can have the most effect, and it feels like this is a specific method to maintain status quo for big business. What is the plan to reduce oil consumption in industry, for example.

  8. How about instead of the government cutting fuel excise tax (& also not raising it as per the governments currently policy) we “slowly” get rid of the huge subsisidies and cross-subsidies at a sustainable rate so that resources are allocated efficiently & allocated where they should be allocated.

    a) faster uptake of EVs, cycling, walking & micormobility
    b) reduced emissions – local air pollutants & GHGs
    c) higher demand for PT and reduced PT subsidy
    d) mode shift to rail
    e) motive power shift to electric & hydrogen buses & trucks
    f) higher demand for higher density land use & sites accessible to PT and jobs driving mixed use development.

  9. At the moment New Zealand is in a Inflationary crisis due to many factors such as economical factors, domestic policies, International policies and pursing climate change initiatives. Fuel prices at the pump are being driven by those factors stated above and we need to seek to driving the prices at the pump lower prices otherwise we’ll lose our security and crime is going to exacerbate like were seeing in USA in some states because their resistance to reducing or investing in public transport infrastructure as alternative for people to turn towards! There’s a wide difference between urban and rural people, which is that urban people do have alternative choices to look towards whereas rural people don’t have alternative cause rural people normally have to get place individually and public transport won’t cut it.

    With Z Energy, they buy fuel in United States dollars (USD). So, the price we pay for each barrel of oil also depends on the value of the New Zealand dollar (NZD) against the USD – sometimes it’s up, sometimes it’s down and that flows through to prices at the pump.This includes GST, excise tax, ACC and emissions trading levies for petrol, and monitoring and emissions trading levies for diesel. Almost 70 cents per litre is collected by the government in fixed excise and an additional 10 cents per litre in Auckland for the Auckland Regional Fuel tax. Customers pay 15% GST on top of everything. In general, there is about $1.05 of tax for every litre of fuel.

    The pump price moves based on many factors – the international barrel price, refined fuel prices in Asia and the strength of the NZ dollar. These costs can move a significant amount even within a single day. We review all our costs to determine whether we need to move the pump price. Sometimes there are movements in costs that we can absorb, other times there aren’t. We also must consider the costs of running our business, so staffing, site costs, freight and shipping and so on. All these factors influence the final price decision.

    There’s also the criticisms from people where they think where they see them as profiteering company and have too much profit which isn’t full story. They’ve made $200 million in the last financial year. That may sound like a lot, and in dollar terms it is a lot, but to put it in context that’s about 4c per litre profit after tax. They run a low margin business with high value infrastructure that provides an essential service to New Zealanders. There’s a fair bit of risk involved in getting a highly flammable substance around this up and down country at the end of the global supply chain! If they somehow brought our profits down, say halved them, that would still only show up as 2c per litre less at the pump. So, people get more benefit from being part of our Pumped programme (6c per litre everyday) than they would if we had to strip costs out of the business, including no longer investing in our assets, staff, communities, alternative fuels and other climate change initiatives.

    It’s a tricky one though as businesses do need to make a profit that allows them to operate (in their case, operate with world class safety precautions), otherwise they wouldn’t exist. They think it’s OK to make a profit as it allows us to invest back into New Zealand, which is something they are proud to do.

    An increase in car thefts is turning Pāpāmoa into “the wild west” at night, while thieves are also targeting fuel in Whangamatā, drilling directly into tanks to drain them of petrol. Whangamatā Police said they’ve experienced a run of recent thefts of petrol from vehicles around the popular holiday town in the Coromandel. “Our culprit appears to be using a drill to tap into the bottom of vehicle petrol tanks in order to drain the fuel, causing thousands of dollars in damage,” said a spokesperson. Petrol appears to have been the predominant target, with only one diesel vehicle reported to police. Whangamatā residents have been asked to stay vigilant, and to try and park under sensor lights.

    This is ongoing thing in the USA, where people are drilling below cars petrol tanks and stealing the fuel. We’ve got the second highest inflation rate in the world right now, USA is the highest, if its happening there, its definitely going to happen to us here in New Zealand and next thing will be car jacking and vandalism to peoples vehicles which also happening. All kinds of people are being targeted, poor, rich and famous. If this trend continues were going turn like the Wild West of USA where’s theres instability and chaos.

    Labour Party need to get rid of there religion of making every single thing environmentally friendly immediately (by this decade) where some people going be left behind from transition and impact people’s financial incomes heavily, they need to be targeting 2040 not 2030! They need to do the right thing by getting rid of the fuel taxes and levies which are driving the desperation, ever increasing crime rates, lastly less purchase of barrel of oil. This situation of stealing fuel is only going to exacerbate if we don’t see axe of fuel tax and levies because of rising fuel prices from overseas countries we purchase fuel, we must seek to reducing prices further!–spike-in-fuel-and-car-thefts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *