» Friday, May 14, 2004Oil Prices
Asked to confirm the report in today’s Times suggesting that troops could be used to protect fuel supplies in the event of protests against oil prices, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that contingency plans had been drawn up for all sorts of things. It wasn’t our policy to brief on them unless we had to use them. At the moment, the possibility of future fuel protests was purely hypothetical. Put to him that the publication today of contingency plans to evacuate London in the event of a disaster showed that we did in fact brief on contingency plans, the PMOS congratulated journalists on their observation skills but said that said he was simply making the point that it was sensible not to talk about contingency plans in certain areas because it could lead to unhelpful speculation. Asked if the Government was concerned about the rise in oil prices, the PMOS said that the position had been made clear by both the Prime Minister and the Treasury. We acknowledged the current short term volatility. However, we believed that the medium to long term picture was relatively stable. Briefing took place at 11:00 | Search for related news Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says. |
The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...
Search
Supported byRecent Briefings
Archives
LinksSyndicate (RSS/XML)CreditsEnquiriesContact Sam Smith. |
Ok, I’m clearly the only one thinking that drivers, as of late, have a bug up their butts. (Language changed to prevent the innocent)
First they complain that three million of them are predicted to get fined for speeding offenses, and their reaction is to demand removal of the fines, instead of having the lead removed from their foot.
Now they’re going to protest a gasoline price at the pumps the rise of which is entirely caused by volatility and perception of increased risk of delivery problems in that government-free market-regulated world of oil futures.
Someone tell me when it was that drivers suddenly decided that they had a God Given Right to drive their cars for 80 p a litre at speeds over the speed limit.
Comment by Gregory Block — 17 May 2004 on 9:55 am | LinkYeah, well, its not living driving a car ever hurt anyone and had a general negative on health is it? its not as though asthma and respiratory diseases are on the increase, and with oil so cheap and plentiful, and with sourcing it so unproblematic, i am sure that car drivers shouldn’t have to sacrifice their way of life in order to safeguard our future.
also, roads are aesthetically pleasing and traffic isn’t noisy.
Comment by lodjer — 18 May 2004 on 11:42 am | LinkSo many of these problem`s are a direct result of past government`s total failure to plan for the future.Our transport system is a mess,our inability to spread the population over the whole country instead of concentrating it in the south east of England is just one of the symptom`s of BAD transport planning over the year`s.It is more then possible to get from Edinburgh to London by train in under an hour,we have the technology we have had for a long time but we make up excuse`s all the time,it would cost too much or some other lame excuse to use our car`s.We will pay a heavy price in the year`s ahead for our past mistake`s we are paying a heavy price NOW.
Comment by george dutton — 26 Aug 2004 on 1:34 am | Link"So many of these problem`s are a direct result of past government`s total failure to plan for the future."
What, people complaining about being caught for speeding fines should have been planned for better? Maybe you meant that the government should have planned for UK drivers being so addicted to their cars that they’d be willing to foul the air and their future by saving up all of their tuppence for a national Air Scrubber campaign.
Government doesn’t get to take the blame for this one: We do. Our air is poisoned; our freshwater is vanishing. It is the fault of each and every one of us at home. Don’t pretend Government didn’t do enough to warn you; they’ve done everything short of making it illegal.
You can’t ask Government to save you from your own stupidity.
Comment by Gregory Block — 26 Aug 2004 on 3:09 pm | LinkYou mean what get`s them elected!!!.Car manufacture`s strong lobby`s had nothing to do with it,political funding had nothing to do with it.Welcome to Gregory`s world.
Comment by george dutton — 26 Aug 2004 on 7:29 pm | Link