Oil Prices

There are several reasons why the proposed transport reform is both acceptable and welcomed…

1. Most countries with a net surplus of oil are inept, corrupt, and in many cases suppressing the freedoms of their citizens (or subjects).

Take Saudi Arabia; years of religious oppression, a justice system where torture is rife, and almost no democratic freedoms (and I include the very limited recent elections). The Saudi Monarchy is legitimised by the religious clerics, who in return for this endorsement are given spheres of influence in areas like Education, and Justice.

Islam within the Kingdom is practiced using strict Wahabbiism teaching, which represent some of the strictest and most fundamental aspects of the Muslim faith. Saudi money is then funnelled to countries such as Pakistan, and Indonesia where Wahabbiest teachings are taught to some of the poorest people on earth. Wahabbi textbooks write of the evils of the west, and refer to US citizens as infidels.

The very terrorism that Mr Bush is said to fighting is propagated by some of his closest friends (members of the Saudi Royals were frequent visitors to Texas as personal guests of Bush pre-9/11, as were more frighteningly members of the Taliban).

Without Oil revenue the country would be unable to sustain these religious exports, and maintain its hold on its people. As former oil states such as Bahrain have proved, that without the guaranteed oil revenues the monarchies and dictators must-up open their economies to trade and begin to give freedoms and representation to their people. As investment slowly takes hold in the country, the need for knowledge and skills would necessitate the overhaul of the education system. By propping up these regimes with our thirst of oil we are supporting both terrorism, and holding back the Islamic renaissance that many progressive Muslims around the world desperately welcome.

2. As fuel becomes more expensive the British people would be more receptive to alternative fuel supplies such as fuel cell technology and in the short-term hybrid technologies. Why do they not buy these technologies now? Because choice is limited as investment is not in place. Why should struggling carmakers like Ford invest in new engines when people are lapping up conventionally powered automobiles?

The scientific consensus is that the global warming is a far bigger threat to humanity than terrorism, and our love affair with the automobile must be broken.

3. There are quite simply too many cars on our roads. Anyone with experience of the M25, M1, M6, and many of inner cities would acknowledge that the current levels of traffic are unsustainable.

Higher duties and re-nationalisation of the rail system are the progressive and obvious choices. This is the real issue – will the government now make the tough choices this country needs? However whether any of the current group of political parties has the bravery to make these decisions is still in question. Equally suspect is whether the increased taxes will lead to real investment in the transport infrastructure and technology?
It is also of very little significance if such a measures are exclusive to the UK. Developed countries must take the lead of this issue. This includes helping developing countries also achieve high levels environmental governance. The global community must also demand that the US toes the line on Kyoto. Other countries have economies and workers too. Other signatories to the protocol have will take the hit, so why not the US? The US claims to be the leader of the free world, leaders take tough decisions, leaders lead by example, leaders understand fairness and equality. I beg and implore the US to live up to its ideas of grandeur.

Current signatories should equally be held to account; this is the greatest threat to our way of life. This is an issue we the global community cannot hide from. The US maybe the world biggest polluter (25% of global air pollutants) but we cannot ignore our own responsibilities just because someone else does.

Taxes are not the anathema that the right claim. They can lead to real social good, improved infrastructure, and in the case of cigarettes, alcohol, and fuel; they can control consumption. We don’t like being told what to do, however sometimes we need it. Just ask your mother?