Two-faced coalition makes motorists dread the Budget

I THINK most of us are dreading the Budget, and especially those of us who own and run a car.

The coalition Government seems two faced when it comes to fairness, with David Cameron giving us all the spin on supporting the motor industry while on the other hand punishing the motorist with an excessively over-greedy fuel tax.

What they fail to realise is that running a car for most people is essential and as a result most families are spending well over 12 per cent of their income in keeping a car on the road.

This has several ramifications in that a majority of families do actually need a car for work because public transport is not only inconvenient but getting too expensive, so what choice do they have but to pay up.

Another point is that most of us cannot afford a nice shiny “green” electric car and struggle to run the “grubby” ones we do have, and that means for some that safety is put at the bottom of the list when the cars needs servicing or repairs, putting other road users at risk.

Statistics show that teenagers are giving up the idea of owning a car because of too high insurance and running costs, hence we have more uninsured drivers as a result. The theft of fuel is also on the increase because as we all know in the real world, a full tank of diesel now costs nearly £80 – that’s all right if you run a company car or work for the Government with expenses, but most of us do not.

I honestly cannot see the logic in pricing us off the road – will that help the motor industry if most of us stop buying new cars because we can’t afford to run them? Older cars might not be green, but they keep the vehicle spares industry going and create jobs.

Finally, the high fuel costs are causing havoc for the tourist industry and that, thanks to a lack of a decent manufacturing industry, is the only area that might provide jobs – unless we build thousands of Tesco’s everywhere.

From: John GK Wilde, Briar Grove, Sandal, Wakefield.

READING in your newspaper (Yorkshire Post, March 8) it states “MPs to receive an extra £15m to pay for staff”.

The annual staffing expenditure limit of £115,000 will rise to £137,200 for non-London MPs and £144,000 for those representing constituencies in the capital.

It was announced by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority that this could cost the taxpayer £15m.

This is ridiculous, when the Government is making cuts in all departments, we the people have to tighten our belts, and suffer. Businesses are closing down, the latest are the disabled factories, more than 1,752 people are to lose their jobs, and David Cameron says there are more black days to come, before things get better.

From: JW Smith, Sutton-on-Sea.

SPOT the difference: public services having funding reduced, leading to cuts in the numbers of “skilled and professional” people from health services, teaching, police and local authorities, all affecting front line services.

Compare this to a report showing annual staffing expenditure for MPs is to rise from £115,000 to £137,200 for non-London MPs, an increase of 19.2 per cent and to £144,000 for London ones.

The chairman of the review board says this is to help MPs to staff their offices more effectively and it will help them in the service they provide to their constituents. He also said that during the consultations he had seen some great examples of the “skill and professionalism” MPs’ staff offered.

Comparing these comments with what the Government keeps telling us about reductions in funding for the public services, does anyone believe we are also in this together?