Vehicle tracking/Road Pricing policy petition

[lynw]

Downing St have set up on their website an area for e-petitions. One is currently running to petition against road pricing/vehicle tracking policy. The petition can be found here:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/

More stuff can be found here:

Observer, 17/12/06

More than 40,000 people have joined a growing internet protest against government plans to introduce a national system of road pricing to cut congestion. By Friday 44,000 opponents had signed a petition posted by a campaigner on the Prime Minister's official website, dwarfing others logged on it.

The Downing Street site set up an online service for the public to send petitions to Tony Blair last month. The huge response to the road-pricing 'e-petition' in less than four weeks will raise fears that the government's most important transport policy could be scrapped if politicians believe opposition is too great. This follows closely behind a report from the Institute for Public Policy Research think-tank, which warned that less than 40 per cent of people supported road pricing. "


http://environment.guardian.co.uk/travel/story/0,,1973997,00.html

Cant hurt to add names if you object and may actually cause the politicians to think before they act.

[mysteryjimbo]

I dont think its that bad an idea. I never drive by car in congested roads so will pay the smaller rates. I get the tram and use park and ride.

[Jabba]

Personally, I can see arguments for and against road pricing.

For:
Will cut congestion in towns and cities
Will make people think before hopping in their cars for short journies
Will make businesses think twice before making their reps cover huge distances
etc

Against:
Govt will use it as a way of revenue raising - no way do I trust them to make it revenue neutral (i.e. cutting VED and fuel tax to compensate)
Will disproportionately affect those in rural areas
etc


However, I see vehicle tracking as something potentially very sinister and open to abuse by those in power. Where I go and at what time is my business.

[Beenz]

I recon they'll bring in road pricing regardless. And I doubt if they will use the cash to pay for public transport.

Problem here is that there is no public transport that I can reliably use to do thye 40 mile round trip to work. IF they put the infrastructure in place first it would not be quite so bad, but as usual here, they won't.

[PsychoCannon]

My problem is I use congested roads but on the bike I just filter through it no fuss no problems and don't add to the congestion or get slowed down much but now I'll pay for the privelage :(

Maybe if they allow bikes off the charge like london congestion charging :)...AND scrap fuel and road tax :lol: :lol:

Well I can dream....

[Grinch]

I'm torn by this...

[Kate]

I don't agree with this at all. Have a little black box that tracks all your movements? No thankyou very much. You can be sure it will be used to monitor your speed etc.

Also, its all very nice to say it will cut congestion etc but what do people use instead? The trains certainly couldn't cope with it so how are people supposed to get to work?

I do a 62 mile round trip on the M25 every day. If they charge a £1 a mile (which is being discussed) then I would have to pay £62 a day to get to work, I certainly can't afford that. Its too far to cycle or walk, there are no buses and to use the train we are talking 4 hours commuting a day instead of under 2 and I would have to use 3 trains each way.

So if this was brought in I would have to work somewhere else, the options are London, London or London so again we are talking road charge or trains. I can't afford the £20 a day road charge or even the £150 monthly train ticket so how am I supposed to work?

Its all very well reducing congestion and emissions but for me it means I'm out of work.

[Viney]

Well said Kate.

I signed. Im not torn by the idea at all. People need to get to work. People need to be able to do this in the most cost and time efficent manner. If thats by car/bike currently then so beit.

What they need to do is remove road tax from all vehicles, and add it to petrol. That way the people who use it more pay more simple. This country has a good transport system, its just that it can not cope with the volume of poeple that use it. We have some of the oldest Rail networks in the world. Its going to need replacing. It just needs more thought and of course money, to sort it efficently.

Its one of those things that will have wider implications. This country is at breaking point as it is. Its gonna pop soon.

And at a pound a mile, I'd be paying ooo, about £19000 a year. Thats almost what i earn.]

Would you pay £200 to go on a rideout? How many of you would sell your bikes...oh hold on, you wouldnt be able to as no one would be able to afford to run it. THINK ABOUT IT!! Its not good.

[scooby2102]

Just signed it myself - totally against it

[Jabba]

What they need to do is remove road tax from all vehicles, and add it to petrol. That way the people who use it more pay more simple.

That sounds so simple and with no obvious flaws. Bang in line with "the polluter pays" and all that so why don't the govt do it?

I can only think of three reasons:

1. The industry lobby........it will make movement of goods more expensive and the 1000s of motorway miles pounded by reps in Mondeos will become very expensive
2. The govt will find a way of using it as a revenue-raiser
3. The VED system provides a simple check for insurance and MOT purposes. Okay, its not perfect but its better than nothing and swapping for another system will be expensive.

[Viney]

What they need to do is remove road tax from all vehicles, and add it to petrol. That way the people who use it more pay more simple.

That sounds so simple and with no obvious flaws. Bang in line with "the polluter pays" and all that so why don't the govt do it?

I can only think of three reasons:

1. The industry lobby........it will make movement of goods more expensive and the 1000s of motorway miles pounded by reps in Mondeos will become very expensive
2. The govt will find a way of using it as a revenue-raiser
3. The VED system provides a simple check for insurance and MOT purposes. Okay, its not perfect but its better than nothing and swapping for another system will be expensive.

Ok.

Point 1. Road pricing will do this anyway to a greater extent. Lorries etc already pay a hefty whack in RFL. Could create jobs buy buliding more distribution centers around the country as opposed to one in the midlands, then shipping from there etc.

Point 2. It will be a revnue raiser. If they remove RFL, then they need to get it somewhere. If you mean that it would increase weekly as opposed to annualy as current then fair point

Point 3. In this day and age, do we really need some numpty in a post office to check this stuff? We live in the age of technology, cameras, and ANPR (Automatic numberplate recognition) Besides there are more than enough people driving around with out anything anyway. It will stop that!

Point 4..oh there wasnt one, but i suppose that its just to god damn easy.

Just done some simple maths!!
A car that averages 30mpg and covers 10k per year (the averages apprently) and has a RFL of £200 say, the fuel duty would have to rise 13p per Litre to recover that ammount over a year based on the above figures. Hell petrol has fluctuated by 24ppl recently. I dont see what the issue would/could be. Its soooo simple

[Jabba]

If you mean that it would increase weekly as opposed to annualy as current then fair point

I mean that I can't see this govt resisting the temptation to increase total motoring revenue; no way would this present govt miss an opportunity like that.

The same govt who urged us to save for retirement by putting money into our pensions and then started to tax remove billions from the funds in new taxation, the same govt who had an unforseen VAT windfall when petrol prices increased but wouldn't cut duty to compensate, the same govt who...... okay, okay, I'll stop :lol:

Its soooo simple

It is. Would be simple to administer, too, using the petrol retailers as unpaid tax collectors thereby allowing them to save money in addition by cutting jobs at the DVLA VED Dept............ ah, that's why it will never happen :roll:

[timwilky]

Surely they can't bring in road pricing without providing an alternative. Scrapping RFL in favour of adding to fuel costs is unfair on those of us who have no alternative to private transport.

The bus service where I live is a joke last one out of town is at 10:35pm and first in a morning is 6:35. but priced so high I was shocked at being charged £2.50 to travel 3 miles when I last left my car in town for a service. Where my parents live. A bus passes about a mile away 2 days a week. So much for choice.

I live and work close to the M6. about a 40 mile distance. To travel by car takes about 30 minutes. By public transport over 7 hours. Both Preston and Knutsford are railway towns, but on different unco-ordinated lines. I would need to catch the first train out of Manchester to Knutsford. Unfortunately the first train in from Preston arrives after my only available train leaves. Great the time table actually suggests I wait 6 hours overnight on Piccadilly station.

My biggest issue is all the decision makers live/work in London. A city with a public transport infrastructure. The people making these decisions all think that this kind of public transport is available to all.

I honestly think the government should be encouraging business to use more home working where possible. I am fortunate and can do quite a bit of work from home, except when in meetings engineer mode. But I am encouraging more use of video conferencing, application sharing etc to permit more remote meetings to take place. It is in business interests. no more expensive office space, no needs for heating, lighting, canteens, etc. The cost of a broadband connection is far less than a seat in a town centre office block. I know empire builders like to see bums on seats, but they need to be educated that these are the most expensive bums to employ. A guy getting on with his job remotely and with the flexibility to put his hours in where they are needed is a valuable asset.

[Filipe M.]

A guy getting on with his job remotely and with the flexibility to put his hours in where they are needed is a valuable asset.

MayI give my boss your phone number? :lol:

[Grinch]

It would also help if we taxed people coming into the country?

[Viney]

Surely they can't bring in road pricing without providing an alternative. Scrapping RFL in favour of adding to fuel costs is unfair on those of us who have no alternative to private transport.

My biggest issue is all the decision makers live/work in London. A city with a public transport infrastructure. The people making these decisions all think that this kind of public transport is available to all.

Tim. I see where youa re coming from, but you made the decsion to stay with your current job and commute the distance you do, so the fact that you have no alternitive is a feeble ecuse ;)

As for Living in lodon...come and live here for a while, and i garuntee that you'll be moaning about the transport system soon enough. Yes we might have this infrastruture, but we have 10 times more people using it!

Let me ask you this then. If you had to make a choice between road pricing or Fuel on petrol, what would you take?

Jabbs: I agree totaly, we are all screwed either way.

[fizzwheel]

road pricing or Fuel on petrol, what would you take?

I guess I'd take it on fuel. But I'd insist that the extra money I pay is actually used in the upkeep on the road system and that the railways are nationalised again and that some of the extra fuel revenue is used to fix our railway infrastructure so that all of the heavyfrieght is taken off the roads. The bus service where I live is a total joke it would take me less time to walk to work than it would to get the bus and its more expensive than running a car is.

It could work. It used to, all it would need is a fleet of smaller lorries to take the freight to its final destination.

[Biker Biggles]

Signed.
Could be a brilliant idea but far too Big Brother.Until we get some cast iron safeguards built into the constitution of this country,I'm dead against the state knowing anything about me.Nothing to hide(I think)but there's no trust in those in authority.Their mentality would be to sink to the lowest common denominator and use it as a petty fund raiser and worse.Who would have thought they would use street surveillance cameras to issue parking tickets when they first came out a decade ago?They were meant to prevent your Granny getting mugged or murdered I thought. :evil:

[mysteryjimbo]

I dont know what the problem is. You can be tracked by you mobile phone to couple of metres.

[Warren]

i noticed chuck norris has signed it.

if i was tony blair, i wouldnt want to argue with him.

[Biker Biggles]

"Don't know what the problem is"
Time to revisit Orwell's Big Brother and re watch Enemy of the State.
Like most technology there's nothing inherently wrong with it,and it can do a lot of good,but it's what uses it is put to that is the problem.A high tech tracking system if used solely for road pricing is one thing,but you just know it would never stop there.

[mysteryjimbo]

"Don't know what the problem is"
Time to revisit Orwell's Big Brother and re watch Enemy of the State.
Like most technology there's nothing inherently wrong with it,and it can do a lot of good,but it's what uses it is put to that is the problem.A high tech tracking system if used solely for road pricing is one thing,but you just know it would never stop there.

As i said. They can track mobile phones if they so wish. :roll: Hence complain about that if you've a problem. Are you being tracked by mobile?

[Biker Biggles]

Mobile phones could be a problem,but are a bit of a red herring in this context.You can use an anonymous pay as you go phone,and, more important, they are not compulsory.Contrast that to a compulsory tracker in every vehicle and the impending ID cards(compulsory)that are mooted for the next decade and you have the framework for a total surveillance society.That's a problem to me,and IMHO,it's an incredibly complacent position to accept that as OK. :roll:

[mysteryjimbo]

Mobile phones could be a problem,but are a bit of a red herring in this context.You can use an anonymous pay as you go phone,and, more important, they are not compulsory.Contrast that to a compulsory tracker in every vehicle and the impending ID cards(compulsory)that are mooted for the next decade and you have the framework for a total surveillance society.That's a problem to me,and IMHO,it's an incredibly complacent position to accept that as OK. :roll:

Its not compulsory to have a car either.

I see phones as a "necessity" as most people see cars. I've had one for 11 years. Several years before pay as you go came along. I could live without if i didnt want to be "tracked". I do live without a car and could live without a bike if i didnt want to be tracked.

Paranoia about tracking isnt going to stop it. It isnt intended for it and wont be used for it. If they wanted to track personal items you keep with you would be the way to go. Mobile phones and RFID should be causing a bigger stir. Your car isnt anywhere near you if you use public transport.

Conspiracy theorists all of ya. :lol: A load of rubbish

I'd also like to carry a single card with me, such as an id or drivers license. No more extra cards, credit cards, loyalty cards and all that crap. I'd like them all on one thank you.

EDIT: the reference to enemy of the state. His car wasnt being tracked, his clothes were (suggest RFID). Another suggestion could be the references in Demolition man to implanted chips causing people "show up in the grid" (ID Cards).

[Biker Biggles]

We could go on for ever about the methodology,but the total surveillance society is coming rapidly here.That's what really concerns me.I suppose it boils down to how much you trust those who are given great power not to abuse it.Me?I don't trust them any further than I can throw them.

[ArtyLady]

I think all the problems would be solved if things went back to how they were a couple of hundred years ago, when no one commuted to work, they worked within the community they lived in and traded with each other.

well its a nice theory anyway 8) :lol:

When I lost my licence due to ill health for 19 months, it made me think, that if I didnt already work from home I would have been stuffed. I did have to give up a part time job that I did alongside my business, 10 miles away as Im not good with public transport, so my only alternative would have been to have taken a job (not much in the way of choice though) in the town I live in which is within walking distance.

The upside is that I have discovered the joys of online grocery shopping :thumbsup:

[Jelster]

They don't need to have the ability to track you so why do they want it ?? You could quite easily put toll booths on roads and tax the people that way, you could even find an independent company to do it too.

Taxing by the mile isn't fair, end of. People who live out of town sometimes have no option but to use private transport, and they didn't necessarily choose to live there either, they may have been brought up in the area.

If I have a meeting in Birmingham, and am "forced" to go by train, from where I live, I have to take a train to London, tube across town, and another train to get to Birmingham, then some other means to get to the meeting, a minimum of 3 hours. I can be there in 90 minutes by car, and I can be more productive as I don't lose a whol day for 1 meeting.

The theory may look good on paper, but in practice it just won't work....

.

[skint]

Over 1.7m signatures! And all that signed will get an email from the PM...:-k