User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: The Biggest Petition Online...

  1. #1
    Regular Member The Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    'Norf Yorks.
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default The Biggest Petition Online...

    .... and 1.8 million people say they DON'T want it, and his Tonyness sends around an email beating around the bush claiming that all this is not a stealth tax on the motorist and it is tackling congestion. B0llocks.

    The people have spoken and said we don't want it, the goverment say they do. End of.

    Anyway if anyone hasn't recieved the email here it is:

    "E-petition: Response from the Prime Minister
    The e-petition asking the Prime Minister to "Scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy" has now closed. This is a response from the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

    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"

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Blackburn End
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Thanks for sharing that with us John, I wondered what his reply would be.

    Manchester looks like being the next city to get the Congestion charge and IMHO doesn't need it as the traffic flows quite well but at the end of the day, the Govt & Councils need more & more money to give to the scrotes, immigrants and work shy, and the easiest people to get it off is........................us, honest, working, tax paying people.

    I'll meet you at the barricades

  3. #3
    [Ex]Admin Duncan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Sussex
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CDTi View Post
    .... and 1.8 million people say they DON'T want it, and his Tonyness sends around an email beating around the bush claiming that all this is not a stealth tax on the motorist and it is tackling congestion. B0llocks.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Gsi3.2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Technical directors office
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Given the fuel tax and the road tax we pay already.. don't get me started on motoring stealth taxes..

  5. #5
    Regular Member R-man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Beds
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    I got the email, straight into my Junk mail folder. How apt.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Gsi3.2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Technical directors office
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default


  7. #7
    Regular Member addyboy1982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Northampton
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    LOL

    Hadn't had a reply yet so checked the junk folder and sure enough mine was in there to

  8. #8
    Ex Vec-C Admin ed taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Looking Through a Camera Lens.
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vectra Estate

    Trim : Elite

    Engine : 3.2 V6

    Year : 04

    Mileage : 55000

    Default

    If this government do implement these "stealth".....sorry congestion charges charges, it will be their well deservered downfall.

  9. #9
    Regular Member wardy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chichester
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    What gets me is the cost of the infrastructure that will be wasted on a tracking / pay by the mile scheme.

    If you accept that something has to be done to link car usage with tax (and I not saying that is right or wrong) but if it is going to happen, scrap the road tax & increase fuel duty.

    Hang on a sec, before you shoot me down in flames on this, but if the only driving tax you paid was at the pumps, them the more you travel, and the bigger your car, the more you'd pay. So the little onld lady who pops to the shops etc would pay next to nothing, but sales reps would pay more. This would also encourage greener more fuel efficient cars (you can tell I run a diesel!)

    The main advantages would be the administrative savings. just think, no tax disc (you could instead display a MOT certificate disk in your screen instead). There would be no tax dodgers, i.e. if youre driving you've paid. None of the "off road" SORN rubbish etc etc.

    It would be easy enough to issue tax rebated to haulage companies, bus, taxi drivers etc.

    I just don't understand why they are even considering introducing another beurocratic nightmare that will probably cost as much to administer as it will generate.

    Rant over, sorry

  10. #10
    Full Member Big Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Is a very naughty boy
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    I agree Wardy, but the more you drive the more tax you pay at the pumps already......Its just another tax on top of at least two others we already pay for running a car/van or whatever it maybe..... Do we need another?
    Now I need a turbo to keep up!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The biggest thank you ever
    By bigmac in forum General Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 22nd April 2011, 13:26
  2. Do you think I a petition would help?
    By Vectralicker in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 27th March 2011, 15:04
  3. Biggest sub
    By chris fixter in forum Electrical & ICE (including SatNav)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 29th January 2009, 00:24
  4. biggest RIP OFF ever!!
    By mat100edt in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 17th December 2008, 15:50

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •