BY PETER BOYLE
Through militant action, with massive public support, truck drivers, farmers and fisherpeople have forced the French government to back down and reduce the price of fuel. This militant example has inspired protests throughout Europe.
The French example has disproved the argument of the Australian and British governments that fuel prices are dictated solely by the international oil market and that there is nothing that a government can do. Governments can do something. They can abolish or lower taxes on fuel, as the French government was forced to do.
The success of the French drivers has also inspired truck drivers in Australia to follow suit. There were blockades of the Fremantle wharves in early September, and owner-drivers blockaded fuel depots in Melbourne and Brisbane.
Australian truck drivers were prompted to take action because they have been squeezed by a combination of rising fuel prices, compliance and administration costs related to the GST and a reduction in freight rates. This has resulted in a 176% increase in the number of trucks being repossessed from owner-drivers between June 1999 and July 2000.
Although the petrol blockades have been called off in Melbourne and Brisbane, the increasing price of fuel is likely to provoke further protests.
The Democratic Socialist Party supports protests against the high price of fuel and calls on all progressive people to do likewise.
In a society which is dependent on road transport, increasing fuel prices have the same effect as wage cuts. The majority of working people in Australia are forced to rely on private cars for transport. Even those who do not own a car are affected by high fuel prices because of increased public transport and taxi fares, and higher prices for goods because of higher freight charges. Federal and state governments' policy of privatising public transport and rail freight services worsens this situation.
The responsibility for high fuel prices lies with governments, with their high taxes on fuel, and the big oil companies, which monopolise the production and distribution of fuel.
Measures can be taken to decrease fuel prices and reduce society's dependence on petrol.
Firstly, all federal and state fuel taxes should be abolished. Abolition of the 47.2% federal fuel excise tax and the 10% GST would provide immediate relief.
Federal and state governments argue that excise tax on fuel is necessary to fund social expenditure. This is a phoney argument.
Both Labor and Coalition governments have used the automatic indexation of fuel excise taxes as a method of shifting the tax burden from the rich to the majority.
Indirect taxes such as the GST and excise taxes should be abolished, with social expenditure by governments being funded from a direct taxation system in which people are taxed according to how much you earn or, in the case of companies, how large their profits are. Excise taxes are a regressive tax.
While the abolition of excise taxes could be a windfall for big oil, freight and mining companies, these companies' profits should taxed substantially and all tax subsidies abolished.
Many environmentalists question the wisdom of reducing the price of fuel, having been persuaded by arguments that claim high fuel taxes discourage car use. But there is no evidence that the 72% tax (including the 17.5% Value Added Tax) on fuel in Britain has had more than a marginal impact on private car usage by the majority of the population.
A major reduction in the use of cars will only occur if there is an alternative public transport system that is cheap, efficient and convenient. In the meantime, high fuel taxes penalise people on low incomes, without having a major positive effect on the environment.
Secondly, the fuel industry should be brought under public ownership. Throughout most of the 20th century, a small number of oil companies, with the support of Western governments, have been able to manipulate the price of oil.
Although the formation of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has prevented total control by the oil cartels, the big oil companies have still retained control over the transportation, refining and retail sale of oil, giving them far more influence over the oil prices than OPEC.
To prevent the manipulation of the supply and price of this essential and finite resource, the oil industry must be nationalised at each phase of the production process.
Thirdly, far more serious efforts should be made to develop renewable energy. Despite the obvious arguments for developing renewable energy to replace fossil fuels, investment and research into alternative energy is notoriously under-resourced.
This situation will not be reversed until the power and influence of the oil monopolies are removed by the nationalisation the oil industry. Only then will it be possible to allocate resources to prioritise renewable energy over non-renewable energy. To make up for the years of under-investment, an enormous infusion of funds will be needed. The profits of nationalised oil companies would be the best, and most appropriate, source of funds.
Fourthly, serious investment in public transport would remove cars from the road, reduce accidents and reduce pollution. The public transport network needs to be massively expanded, made free or extremely inexpensive to use and the frequency of services increased.
The first step in developing a such a public transport system would be to immediately halt privatisation of public transport and to renationalise privatised transport services.
[Peter Boyle is a national spokesperson of the Democratic Socialist Party.]