I don’t think a day goes by where there isn’t an article from BBC news without an error, whether it be, poor grammar leaving sentences ambiguous and confusing, or just cherry picking information to suit the headline. There are a few journalists who do more than just ‘plonk’ some information and a page and press submit, some even go as far to critically analyse their sources. But not today.
Reading this BBC article, it seems that it is not just the children of today that cannot add up and multiply.
The start of the article is fine, and yes the chancellor should drop the 3p rate, but will he hell. He’s only robbing the working people of the country. Another tax on employment so to speak.
Then we get onto an interesting quote from an MP and not just any MP. He’s on the ‘Commons business commitee’ (oooooooh).
Lindsay Hoyle, Labour MP on the Commons business committee, told the Daily Telegraph: “Crude oil has gone up this year, but nothing like the rise in petrol prices. Motorists are being legally mugged at the forecourt by petrol companies.”
I have a question for Lindsay. Would he think that petrol prices in Zimbabwe would remain the same every year? I hope he would, although this is reliant on him understanding something even more complex than exchange rate, inflation. Also crude has had a range of $30-$147 while petrol never went below 80p/l and above 120p/l, so in fact using his simplistic thinking, petrol has not risen as much as crude.
Anyway, let’s see how much motorists are really being ‘mugged’ this year.
First of Mr. Hoyle MP, we take the price of oil at the peak in 2008 and divide it by the GBPUSD exchange rate of that time. The exchange rate was approximately 2.00. We’ll then divide the average petrol price at that time by the exchange rate, for a rough approximation in £Pounds. We should then also include the TAX that her government have added to petrol in that period of time but we’ll get onto that after.
Although crude hit $147 per barrel, the closing price for contracts that month (July 2008) was $128, so I’m using that figure. The petrol price was around £1.20 then, it’s £1.10ish now. The end figure shows how many litres you would get if you spent the cost of a barrel at the pump. Higher is obviously better but if oil companies are keeping their profits per litre equal this number should remain the same no matter what the cost of oil is.
July 2008: $128 / 2.00 = £64.00 / 1.20/l = 53.33
February 2010: $80 / 1.50 = £53.33 / 1.10/l = 48.48
As we can see, we are being mugged to the tune of about 10%, I wouldn’t really call that being mugged, but these calculations are also a quick approximation. Remember the oil company will have fixed costs that they have to cover. With such a weak pound, any international cost will have soared. Then let us not forget that 50p of every litre is taken by the government and VAT is added too. So if we look at the entire picture we arrive at the following.
Our actual petrol prices:
@ 1.20/l is 1.20/1.175 – 0.50 = 52.13p (67.9p tax)
@ 1.10/l is 1.10/1.175 – 0.50 = 43.62p (66.4p tax)
If we feed these numbers into our previous calculations we’ll find that we are actually getting pretty much the same deal we were in July 2008.
$128 / 2.00 = 64 / 0.5213 = 123
$80 / 1.50 = 53.33 / 0.4362 = 122
So Mr. Hoyle, there you have it, next time maybe you can put your own “business” brain to work before you speak.
And to the journalist, do the public some justice and stop the spreading of ignorance and FUD.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8569525.stm