You are no doubt all aware of the petition to scrap road pricing schemes that currently has over 1.6 millions signatures. From the Number 10 website, you can link to various other sites and one that attracted my attention was this one.
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/roadpricing/feasibilityst...s
Now, an interesting statement is posted below
Of course, any scheme that involves using sophisticated technology to charge up to 30 million users is inevitably going to be expensive. While we anticipate that the costs of setting up and running a national road charging scheme will fall, they will remain substantial.
J.43 However, the modelling work that we have done demonstrates that the benefits of road charging could be equally substantial, indeed, in many cases, that they could easily outweigh the admittedly large costs. For instance, a national all roads scheme could produce welfare benefits per annum of up to £12 billion. As time passes, it is likely that these benefits will grow, as traffic volumes increase and congestion worsens.
Doesn?t the last sentence suggest that rather than reduce traffic volume and congestion, the expectations are that they will increase and so will the subsequent revenue.
So, if they expect increased congestion and volume then any public statement that states road pricing is being considered to reduce the above, must be a lie.
This just confirms that road pricing is another tax cloaked in a green wrapper !
|
|
According to Today this morning, Dear Leader will be e-mailing everyone who signed the petition. That would impress me. (not)
|
|
|
It was also interesting to read in Autocar this week that the government is actually telling councils to INCREASE journey times and congestion by way of reducing the speed of traffic by way of
'taking space from car traffic by installing central refuges and hatching, bus and cycle lanes'.
Also manipulating traffic signals on local distributor routes and residential access roads to create longer queues.
Anyone out there who thinks this government wants to decrease congestion should try Specsavers!
I imagine that this move is to increase congestion so they can justify road pricing yes?
Or am I being too cynical?
The article is on page 21 of this weeks Autocar if anyones interested.
|
|
|
Estimates reported in the telegraph suggest this hare brained scheme will cost 60 BILLION PLUS to set up and cost 10 BILLION A YEAR to keep going. If there is that much money swilling around they can DAMN WELL IMPROVE THE ROADS THAT WE ALREADY PAY THROUGH THE NOSE FOR. For that amount of money they could easiy renationalise public transport and make it work. It also mentioned that the black boxes could be £500-£600 per car! No mention of what happens when you sell your car. How long will it take the DVLA to update their records. What happens while you wait for the registration to update?
Stupid idea invented by stupid people with no grasp on reality.
The govt are not in the least bit interested in making the lives of ordinary people better. They just want their snouts in the trough and self glorification.
teabelly
|
see my comments on Ladyman.. BBC and ITV last nite.
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?f=2&t=49...8
madf
|
I drove to Switzerland and back last week. It was truly depressing.
On the way out we went via Reims, Mulhouse (where my new C4 was hopefully somewhere on the production line), Basel, Bern. On the way back came up through Germany then across to Strasbourg (past Hambach where my Smart was built) then Reims and up to Eurotunnel. The depressing thing was just how bad our roads are compared to those in Europe. We had two small sets of road-works, a quarter of a mile in total, where it was prudent to slow to 50-60. The rest of the time it was 85 all the way.
French tolls totaled £35, Swiss m-way pass £20. For that we got smooth clear motorways, which I considered to be value for money. But the real point is that if you don't want to pay the tolls, both countries have efficient train services at reasonable prices. Something that is sadly lacking in this country, and something which we all just know road pricing will do nothing to change.
|
But the real point is that if you don't want to pay the tolls, both countries have efficient train services at reasonable prices. Something that is sadly lacking in this country, and something which we all just know road pricing will do nothing to change.>>
IMHO That is exactly the issue with the majority of the motoring public. It is utterly ridiculous to expect people to vacate their cars when there is no decent, reliable public transport alternative. Case in point, I live in Verwood East Dorset and work in Wesbourne on the border of Bournemouth and Poole, a journey of just shy of 17 miles each way. By car it take me 35 - 40 mins including walking time from the car park. If I went by what passes for public transport round here it would take over two hours and require three buses.
The sooner those clowns in Westminster get this into their thick heads the better.
|
>>The sooner those clowns in Westminster get this into their thick heads the better.>>
...and actually have to pay the costs involved out of their own pockets, rather than those of taxpayers.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
PS
I mean, of course, that on cost grounds alone, they would realise why so many still go by car.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Of course if they drop the idea of road pricing they could come up with another way to extort money from motorists, and we'll all accept it saying "isn't it good they didn't introduce road pricing".
Of course far be it from me to suggest that a government would make ridiculus taxation plans and them drop them so the slighly less ridiculos alternative dosn't seem so bad.
|
|
|
I find it a pretty sad mentality when the solution to a problem is to destroy the cause! We have a traffic problem so the solution is to get rid of the vehicles.
For years the 'design' (what design) for living has been about having a central place to work with the use of transport to go there in the morning and again to come back again at night. Why?
|
Is it not illegal to cause excessive pollution? Does anyone know what the the law is about vehicles causing pollution?
I'm sure there is such a thing, so therefore the Government and Local Councils are breaking said Law!
|
We already have a pay-as-you-go motoring tax - fuel duty. If the government wants more money from private motorists, surely it would be so much easier to just put a few pence extra tax on each litre of fuel. Sure, this would be unpopular, but not as unpopular as road pricing and it's technological infrastructure.
Road pricing or increased fuel duty both have the disadvantage that the better-off, although they will moan loudest, will cough up and continue to drive as much as before.
If the government is really serious about reducing traffic congestion for environmental reasons (like we're running out of oil, for instance) then they should consider fuel rationing as a solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it not "both countries have efficient train services at reasonable prices" that function more because they are less suburbanised, people in general live at higher densities in urban areas and public transport is not something that you use only if you are too young/old/poor.
and
that effectively it is quite hard to design a public transport system where people are for one reason or another living a long way from where they work and making journeys in a suburbanised low density landscape.
Would road pricing lead any of the Backroom to reconsider the length of their commutes if they were able to do so given that quite a few posters seem from my reading seem to be driving upwards of 50 miles to work? My experience of knowing people who live and work on the continent is that it is much more unusual to be doing long motorway or A road commutes that can only really be done by car that seem depressingly prevalent here.
|
|
|
|
|
