To return to this point... In an ideal world I would agree with this, but we don't have the luxury of time, and it is totally unrealistic to think that these private public transport companies will invest in infrastructure *before* there is demand. It's also, in my view, unrealistic to think renationalisation is a serious possibility, though in an ideal world I would support it wholeheartedly. What we need is real practical solutions fast, and given the situation is as it is, and is far from ideal, we need to start raising prices to make car transport the less attractive and easy option, and giving the transport companies the demand they need to kick start investment. If we wanted to make it an easy transition from cars to public transport we should have started investing in it decade ago, to provide the alternative before we had to bring out the stick. Now we don't have that luxury, so I totally support heavy taxation on road use. In practice, most commuters already have viable alternatives, it's just that cars are cheaper and easier. That needs to stop being the case.
Now here's a green transport petition worth signing http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NoVATonBikes/ Campaign to get rid of VAT on bicycles to encourage cycling
Definitely a worthy cause, though where I live the main problem is not so much encouraging people to cycle as providing a safe environment - Brighton's provision of cycle paths is a bit of a joke, especially if you compare it with Holland for instance where I lived for a few years.
You probably heard that 1 million petrol-heads have signed an electronic petition to scrap plans for road pricing. Hang on so lets get this straight shall we ? 1 million people have signed a petition that will have the effect of crippling government plans to tax carbon emissions? - so they have no empathy whatsoever with plans to introduce carbon emission taxes and therefore to save a couple of quid a year theyre prepared to wreck the planet? Are they off their f***ing heads ???????? ok I will sign the petition against that petition meanwhile another worthy petition along these lines that very much needs support is the government petition to tax jet fuel higher as the aviation industry is responsible for a great proportion of travel emmissions - please sign at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/carbontaxation these are all very worthy petitions and I would like to ask everyone to distribute the url's to other people and sites - that petition where 1 million dumb ass idiots signed is nothing but the tabloid press getting thick people to buy their papers and they portrayed the road pricing scheme as labours poll tax - but its not a poll tax because people can just get out of paying by not driving or by driving off peak .
Bollocks to it... you can't expect people to give up their cars to use over-priced public transport. It ain't gonna happen. Let the government sort out the public transports systems... make sure the railway systems are safe and not gonna cost you your life etc then people will possibly consider harbouring the ban.
Yep, that about sums it up, very well said. People's concern for their own convenience will always win the day, that's why we need compulsion in this area if we are to see any progress. It's also what makes it an incredibly unpopular policy and therefore something politicians will shy away from. We need a consensus across all the parties that something drastic needs to be done to stop any single party from making political capital out of something so important, but I fear nothing will be done, and people's selfishness will win out, while we sleepwalk into climate and economic catastrophe.
probably not, when they can use under-priced public roads. fact is, roads are built and maintained at public expense. doesn't it make sense that those who use roads should pay in proportion to the amount they use them, rather than all motorists paying a flat-rate annual tax as at present?
Privatise the roads! Make it a level playing field ... if the road companies have to make a profit like the train companies do that would soon balance things up in favour of mass transit...
Do you actually know what you're talking about? Drivers currently pay road tax yearly where most countries do it Biannually. Then we got M.O.T and insurance to pay on top of that. So if our road tax money isn't going into the roads already...then where the fuck is it going?
Anywhos, Blair is running scared from this one. In reply to the petition he said: Thank you for taking the time to register your views about road pricing on the Downing Street website. This petition was posted shortly before we published the Eddington Study, an independent review of Britain's transport network. This study set out long-term challenges and options for our transport network. It made clear that congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that advances in technology put these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind politically, feasible. That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about imposing "stealth taxes" or introducing "Big Brother" surveillance. This is a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national level. That's why I hope this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for you to take it further. But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working with some local authorities that are interested in establishing local schemes to help address local congestion problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas. One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion is bad. It's bad for business because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects people's quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government. Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue. Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains - helping to explain why more people are using them than for decades. And we're committed to sustaining this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned between now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving. But all the evidence shows that improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion. This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing as a means of addressing congestion. One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses, individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12 billion would be the direct cost on businesses. A second option would be to try to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity. Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other services such as education and health, or increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this approach would entail. That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone's interests, especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without exploring it further. It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But any technology used would have to give definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold information about where vehicles have been. But there may also be opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a "Big Brother" society. I know many people's biggest worry about road pricing is that it will be a "stealth tax" on motorists. It won't. Road pricing is about tackling congestion. Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall. Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided. Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a system that works. A system that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we don't have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would be further consultations. The public will, of course, have their say, as will Parliament. We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage in further debate. Yours sincerely, Tony Blair
well yes, what I said was that motorists pay an annual tax, which means the same as paying it yearly. the point is that currently it's a flat-rate tax, depending on the type of vehicle but not on how much you use the roads. the point of road-pricing is that the tax will vary according to usage, which seems fair enough.
