And the government is prepared to break the law on your behalf. I
guess you won't mind being scabs will you, motorists? Seeing as how
you all loathe public protests and protesters.

"...He confirmed that contingency plans were being put in place in
preparation for the strike. Government sources say that if a strike
affected other fuel companies or there were the merest hint of copycat
action, it will invoke emergency powers which could order soldiers to
drive tankers for oil companies.

The Government has already activated a memorandum of understanding
allowing the oil companies to co-operate with one another, exchanging
information about their stock levels, without being accused of acting
as a cartel.

Under normal circumstances such collaboration would be illegal and in
breach of competition law. The deal was struck with officials and oil
company representatives last Friday to allow companies to move fuel
around the country to the areas and petrol stations where it is most
needed, effectively sanctioning the fuel industry jointly to solve any
distribution and logistical challenges...."

More:

On 10 Jun, 14:34, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

We wouldn't be scabs, would we Gollum, as we wouldn't be crossing
picket lines. Christ, you are thick.

On 10 Jun, 14:34, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

It sounds quite Stalinist, I would have thought that you would like
that.

It is what the government did in the fire brigade strikes a few years
ago, and I think they have done similar with ambulance strikes.

Of course if they don't do this, then you would not be able to have
your fruit and veg flown in from New Zealand, and then transported
around the country for you.

On 10 Jun, 15:07, BrianW hotmail.com> wrote:

Doug, what we hate is *your* type of protests. i.e. the ones where you
turn up with baseball bats, bricks, throwing paint, guns, explosives
etc. I have been on many peaceful protests myself and also gone on
strike..

Will Doug, by his own definition, be a scab when he goes into his
local shop to buy his food?

In article 79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>, Doug says...

Won't/Can't happen. Not enough of them are Hazchem trained and/or
trained in using fuel tankers. The only thing putting untrained
soldiers in tankers would achieve is a high accident rate, massive
pollution when the stupid twats don't hook up the hoses properly and
send 30,000 litres of fuel down the nearest drains and the wrong fuel
being put in the wrong tanks. It's not a job just anyone with a licence
can do.

Having driven in the Army and seen plenty of ex-Forces drivers in their
first year out of the Army etc, the last place I'd want any of them is
in a tanker.

In article <45aac4de-33ab-4c85-9675-7ee0f5600aa7@
56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, NotMe says...

And we all know how well that turned out. Can you imagine untrained
squaddies let loose with 30,000 litres of fuel?

"Conor" hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6b7lbhF38bkrgU1@mid.individual.net...

Not least because four days, the planned duration of the strike, is about
the reserve held by any petrol station and because around 90%% of stations
ought to receive deliveries as normal.

Colin Bignell

NotMe wrote:

I can just see it: the master scab on "pick it" duty.

"Doug" riseup.net> wrote

Yet again, you blew it before you even got going.

Why don't you learn to debate in an adult way? You might win somebody over.

Knight Of The Road wrote:

Up to a point I agree with you. It's just a shame that dominates this NG and
makes discussion on anything other than cars difficult.