[Daphne – They can try putting their prices down to what they are in the rest of Europe. Our second-hand cars are almost the price of new cars elsewhere. Ridiculous. Just as the market fixed their prices high in the past, so now the market is going to bring them down to what they should be.]

you asked: but what about who already owns the car?
That is where the “beauty” of the new fees lies, in my opinion.
Till now, everybody “maxed out” on engine capacity. If I afford a car with a 20cc engine that’s what I’ll buy. Little thought went to whether or not I really need that power. Even less thought went into the environmental impact of such engines.
Now we have the ridiculous situation where people want to pollute but they can’t pay. A colleague plans on selling his car and buying a smaller one next year. I would imagine that that is the “intended” goal of the new taxes… but then again, it might be a simplistic view.
I went one better, though. I sold my car and bought a bike instead. I have been biking to work since March. Pity the 15% “refund” or whatever it is wasn’t around then :)

@ All

As Corinne pointed out, tugs tow ships. I meant thugs with an ‘h’… those thugs which gave us all a lot of problems back in July 2008.

I own a normal car (Ford Focus), nothing posh…. anyway, my car registration has gone up from Euro 104.8 to Euro 167 with the new measures. Ok nothing that exorbitant but still it is not even close to Mr. Tonio Fenech’s statement that licenses increased by LM10 only at maximum. Can you explain why the same measures were not used with regards to buses, taxis, mini buses and lorries? Is the Government afraid of another strike from these tugs?

I agree in part with the removal of the subsidy on W&E but do you really think that the ‘extra money’ will go in improving roads? That was the case with the increase in licenses a few years back but I still had to fix my rims about 5 times (in a couple of years) because of potholes emerging after minor rainfall (potholes were filled with rainwater that is why I didn’t notice the hole).

It’s not the ownership – of the car – per se that is a luxury. It’s people with an average income aiming for a “flashy car” or a “boat” or a “villeggjatura” just because they know someone who has one just like it.
Nothing wrong with ambition, mind you, but one has to live within one’s means. But bear in mind that when one speaks of “affording” this or that, one should think in terms of total cost of ownership – i.e. including running costs.

Removal of the subsidy on water and electricity bills is a good thing. I’d rather see the taxes I pay go towards improving roads or education or whatever needs improving than sponsoring a team of five men to sit in an Enemalta van watching the 6th member actually doing something.

An old car is hardly a luxury for some and the new taxes announced in this budget and the already existing steep fuel bills are hardly the only increases the ordinary man in the street has had to contend with of late.

I wouldn’t put the removal of subsidies on W&E on the same plane as (using your same words) ‘hearing people complain about the increased costs of fuel, licences, etc of their car / boat / whatever’.

If the water and electricity rates are subsidised, then the money will clearly come out of our taxes. I would rather pay for what I consume than having to foot the bill for others.

As for their “protesting against the budget” (in general), I’m sick of hearing people complain about the increased costs of fuel, licences, etc of their car / boat / whatever.

It’s quite simple, really: they should look beyond the initial cost of their luxury (whether bought or “donated”) and see whether or not they can afford its running expenses.

Put plainly, if you can afford the running costs of the car / boat / whatever it is you wish to have, then buy it/ “accept” it; if not, then don’t.

People have got to realise that the world does not consist solely of freebies – which usually come at somebody else’s expense.