Road pricing

[empip]

Perhaps there exists a golden opportunity for HMG to balance the books a little.
If satellite-tracking was invoked for road pricing, the arbitrary speeding offence could disappear ...
A vehicle's record would be there to access, no need for more cameras, habitual speed limit breakers would be cornered, perhaps the odd transgressor quickly adjusting to the limit would have evidence that their driving conduct was exemplarary before and after the transgression, more convincing than the habitual criminal at court wearing the borrowed monkey suit and pleading deep remorse for crimes commited with the resultant lowering of sentence passed.
But alas this probably would not happen, the road safety campaigners would demand - if the whole velocity record is there, then use it to curb speeding, eventually who could argue with that?

I have a growing feeling it will come, cameras gone .. all movements monitored more speeding fines no camera or operator costs... And from reading the article below - the info will be up for grabs..

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2015804,00.html

...The Observer has learnt that transport department officials held talks about introducing pricing on a voluntary basis until enough motorists have signed up, when a national scheme would become easier to implement.
Under the plan, first suggested by the RAC Foundation, drivers who chose to install satellite-tracking equipment to measure how far they travel, and where and when, could be offered discounts on other motoring taxes. A likely method of payment, modelled on trials under way in the US, is that drivers would pay their tolls at the petrol pump in return for discounts on fuel duty.
Volunteers would also benefit from other uses of the 'black box', such as navigation, help with finding parking spaces, and pay-as-you go insurance, said Edmund King, the Foundation's executive director. 'If [drivers] have got a meter they'll think more about their actions, they'll cut out some journeys and they'll save themselves some money,' he said. 'There's nothing to lose starting with a voluntary scheme, but it would be political suicide for any government to impose it on people.'...

PS. I have spent time in Singapore, and been sitting in traffic jams, so much for that then, paying through the nose for - more of the same ! The people there pay more for their cars and for the right to drive a car than anyone anywhere AFAIK - they just divert the cash from other projects - most aspire to owning a motor, if only on a w/end entitlement... Business here may get more freedom of the road under road pricing, but at what cost? What if we choose the car over their products? I think we may do so...
No doubt finishing up where we started... In a traffic jam

 

[esra_ptrap]

There's a piece in today's MoS which adds further to the farce which is road pricing.
Norwich Union, who are pioneering pay as you go insurance, have stated that the Government's tariff (set to reduce road usage) is at odds with their's (set to charge more for high insurance risk)
i.e. The Government will charge far more for long journeys on motorways (areas of typically low insurance risk) whilst NU will charge more for the urban journeys (areas of typically high insurance risk) and time of day ... VERY expensive between 23:00 and 06:00 ... Popular times to make long journeys on motorways to miss traffic
Just another example of how these plans are being rushed through without any joined up thinking ... Or any thinking at all actually IMO ... Other than how the Goverment can make some more easy £'s out of the motorist.

 

[joe-90]

Satelite road pricing is a load of cobblers. Cars would be 'chipped' just as mobile phones are.

There's only one way to charge the motorist more - and that's by upping the duty on fuel. Try chipping a litre of petrol.

 

[Softus]

There's only one way to charge the motorist more...

Apart from all the other ways of course.

 

[joe-90]

Let's hear them then.

 

[empip]

HMG will do what they set out to do ... irrespective... The old ID card will be two a penny after introduction - most anything made by one man can be copied by another somewhere.

If a relatively small number of looners can complain about a silly tv prog and the treatment of a willing participant (free to walk at any time)... Leading to a Prime Minister of Her Britannic Majesty's Government actually even acknowledging her existence, never mind meeting her for a 'chat' --- Anything is possible.
He will have noticed the anti road pricing petition ... He'll wonder how many peeps have internet access? How many of those are interested in anything other than entertainment? How many of the rest own cars? How many will bother to complain? More to the point how many will not complain but feel the same ?
I reckon 1.5 million is a fair old number out of the residue from above, more than those actually complaining about Shipla - Perhaps he'll invite 1.5 mill or so motorists to No.10 for a chat...

They will be spinning all out to sugar the pill now.

When they offer 'free - sat spy in car take up - with some kind of tax rebate' - we should all take it up, then reject the whole thing at the end of the test period.. Hah, some chance, the 'Guinea pigs' will be hand picked converted disciples... The outcome of any trial already guaranteed a success for HMG ..... The media spin may not be enough , perhaps they'll get a bum cheek instead of the other one this time...

New labour -- All stick and no bleedin carrot !

 

[jonnyfishing]

Excellent post empip,how true.
If when Ministers,MPs,councilors and their disciples tell us to get out of our cars and save the world, shouldn't we be saying PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH AND LEAD BY EXAMPLE (all the time, not just when the media are about.) No exceptions and no exemptions.That way we can all contribute to reducing global warming and give the world a fighting chance.

New Labour is a joke,should be called New Liarbour,run by Tony Bliar.

 

[jonnyfishing]

Of course it is an unfair tax - thought up by people who are paid travel expenses or live close to their work (so therefore it doesn't affect them). What will it do to tourism within Britain? People will not be able to holiday in their own country or even go for family days out - too expensive. They will not be able to go to work - it won't be worth it for the salaries that many are paid. People will use villages as rat runs as it will be cheaper. Low paid workers are already having to live miles away from where they work as they can't afford to live nearer - they will then not even be able to afford to travel to work! Forget holidays, weekends away or even nights out to go to a theatre etc.

 

[esra_ptrap]

Interestingly though, foreign tourists won't be trackable or, therefore, charged ... A bit like how they don't get tracked down for camera speeding tickets already but we get spot fined in Europe ... Hmmmnnnnn anyone see the problem here?

As I keep saying ... Not thought through by anyone ... Other than how much revenue it will generate.

 

[confidentincompetent]

Thing is what alternative to the car have we got? Public transport is a joke around here in Dorset...Recent sell offf's by the councill has resulted in some services being withdrawn = loads of buses half full on main routes..the train industry is relishing the fat profits they will make as they raise their fares in line with the road pricing. I only do about 5k miles a yr thats just working not pleasure!! As I asked one councillor at a meeting once, why do you use your car.. he stuttered ''well I have to, I have a lot of appointments for council business and it would be impossible and an extra expense to the council tax otherwise' It took him a few seconds to realise what he had said. Perhaps Civil Disobediance is going to be the deciding factor.. like the poll tax revolt? When the lower paid working man realised he was going to be skinned.......

 

[Softus]

The Road Pricing petition. Has it struck anyone else the way it strikes me?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6378571.stm

Q: Do you think the Government should or should not introduce a system for charging motorists by the mile, during busy periods, to cut congestion?
A: 74% said "should not".

Q: Which if any, of the following, would make that policy acceptable to you?
A: 55% said "If the money raised was used to improve public transport."

So, two thirds of the people who said "should not" changed their opinion when presented with a way of utilising the money raised.

Does this mean that half of the population is incapable of stringing two thoughts together and imagining ways in which the money can be put to good use, until the ideas are spelled out for them?

If so, what hope does democracy have?

 

[solo]

Been looking at the new Citroen Dispatch van. It's got all the tracking kit on it already. So there's the start from the manufacturers. The big guys are just going to pass any costs onto the end user. The little guy, already struggling against his various registration fees, training costs, cowboys, and whatever else it takes to be considered legitimate, is just going to suffer further. I travelled fifty mile for one job yesterday. I don't know what they're planning to charge eventually but I'd have had to slap that on top of the price. Ultimately, does anyone really think it will have any effect other than to swell the income of the Treasury?

 

[gcol]

There's only one way to charge the motorist more - and that's by upping the duty on fuel. Try chipping a litre of petrol.

Joe, I don't often agree with you but on this occasion we're not far off. I started a thread a while back offering a possible change to road tax to make it fairer and so that everyone paid for what they used. //www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=48195&highlight=
If you had to pay more for fuel, would that not encourage you to:
1. Move closer to your place of work
2. Find a job closer to home
3. Not use your car for unnecessary journeys
All reduce the amount of time you spend clogging up the roads. This could be step 1. Step 2 could be to make kids start school at 8am.

 

[jonnyfishing]

[quote

if so, what hope does democracy have?[/quote]

What democracy ? What Blair and his cronies decide is what we get, doesn't matter what people think or want. The only time we have a chance of democracy is at election time, that is until he finds a way to remove the word(democracy) from the english language.


solo [/quote] I don't know what they're planning to charge eventually but I'd have had to slap that on top of the price. Ultimately, does anyone really think it will have any effect other than to swell the income of the Treasury?

It will on the people who can't pass it on, if they try by asking for a pay rise they will be frowned upon as militants.So the plan in my opinion is to drive only a section of the population off the roads, then when that is achieved will they target the next section ? All in the name of saving the planet. I agree that global warming must be tackled a.s.a.p. but if this is construed as being one of the ways then we should all pay and not have sections that are exempt or able to pass on the charges intended to make us use the car less. If this is the way to go, let everyone contribute to saving the planet by "Practicing what they preach and leading by example"



[/quote]

 

[twm.bwen]

Q: Do you think the Government should or should not introduce a system for charging motorists by the mile, during busy periods, to cut congestion?
A: 74% said "should not".

Q: Which if any, of the following, would make that policy acceptable to you?
A: 55% said "If the money raised was used to improve public transport."

So, two thirds of the people who said "should not" changed their opinion when presented with a way of utilising the money raised.

quote]

Not that statistics is anywhere near one of my strong points but the above doesn't mean that anyone changed their mind. To my mind it says that of those 75% who objected, 55% said that spending the money on improving public transport 'would make the policy acceptable' to them if any thing could.

As some old dude said "There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies, and statistics." and "Statistics don't lie but liers use statistics"

Does that make sense?