And road pricing takes another step forward...

Originally Posted by Grinch

I ain't walking... do you think we can get a spot on the BBC news?

You go dressed just as your avatar, and I gurantee you'll get your very own 15mins of fame

Any ladies of the org fancy copying Grinch's dress style btw? And no, I don't mean by hiring a gorllia costume. What? No? Oh well, don't get if you don't ask.

You're forgetting the important fact here, every MP works in London. London has a far better (albeit still a bit poor) public transport system than anywhere else in the country. The MPs assume that anyone living in say Preston could hop on the Tube to their job in Manchester - they don't realise that public transport is rubbish and expensive.

[fizzwheel]

How are people in rural area's supposed to manage without a car when theres only one bus a day.

How's this going to effect road hauliers, yep the price of all our food is going to go up.

Theres no infrastructure in place to cope with the extra users, the bus service is over priced and expensive, there's no rail infrastructure left after beeching destroyed it in the 60's and the trains that are their are hideously expensive to use.

Its all very well using pulic transport if you live in London, if you live anywhere else your screwed.

I've been commuting to work by pushbike the last few weeks. But I only live two miles from my place of work, so its do-able. But by god I dont like cycling on the roads, you think car drivers give motorcyclists a hard time, you ride a pushbike on the road, its terrible, and yes I do use the cycle paths where there is one, but sometimes there isnt so I have to ride on the road.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

But I only live two miles from my house, so its do-able.

You live two miles from your house!!

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by Baph

You live two miles from your house!!

Doh..

[northwind]

Originally Posted by adw

I live 90 miles from my parents and would use about 85 miles of the M5 to get there so we're looking at £100 or more. They're even talking about number plate recognition cameras to counter my plans on dismantling the tracking device that will be in future vehicles! It checks you are transmitting your location and if not a hefty fine. What a ****e country to live in.

And there you have it, why the protest against pay-per-mile is currently hopelessly ****ed- 9/10 of all people who oppose the proposals do so based on utter misinformation. The anti-toll campaigns have done a fantastic job of scaremongering and painting worst case scenarios, but what they're failing to do is debate the facts. So you get that BBC report used as if it were reporting government policy, when in fact it's just conjecture. And THEN, you take the unreliable numbers, use the highest figure, and apply that to a situation where far lower charging would apply. It's utter nonsense, there's no prospect whatsoever of that charge being applied to the trip you mention. Now, if you stand up and say "I'm against this idea because it'd cost £100 to drive down the M5" you'll get laughed at. And suddenly, you're no longer someone to be listened to.

There's quite likely going to come a point where serious opposition to persistant tracking is going to be needed. And at the moment, maybe 3/4 or more of the people who'd protest against it (note: clicking a mouse button is not a meaningful protest) have no idea what they're actually against, they just know they're against it/ This undermines the campaign completely... The opposition ends up being wide open to being accused- accurately- of being knee-jerk and uninformed, and the whole thing gets end-run. If there was a shadey government conspiracy to push this through- maybe there is- then this is exactly what they'd want- an opposition without credibility. 1 million people with 9/10 talking bo**ocks is to be feared less than 100,000 who know what they're talking about- because you can simply point to the 9/10 who're talking bo**ocks and paint the whole thing with that brush.

I agree completely Northwind - I'm against it because (a) I'm worried about the privacy issues that I fear will likely arise shortly after the implementation, and (b) because I don't believe that any of the schemes suggested are either fair or effective.

I don't really sign up to the "it'll cost me more" argument simply because overall tax burden is something both economists and the public at large are quite aware of at the moment - the overall tax burden will probably remain largely unchanged, although there will be winners and losers. And the currently proposed schemes seem to indicate the winners will be the well off and those who currently drive very fuel-inefficient vehicles.

There are many sources of information, my comments are based on what i've read so are my opinions. I would trust the BBC and government comments over what you are saying. If i travel on the M5 during peak times which i probably will then a higher rate will apply. It may not be £1.34 a mile but it certainly won't be 2p a mile. There was talk about this also being in addition to fuel duty/road tax, we'll have to wait and see.

You're right in certain aspects, there are many pieces of conflicting information. Until they actually spell out a policy detailing proposed charges and whether current road use taxes are shelved or not, we don't know what the possible outcome will be. Congestion won't decrease with it though, same as smokers pay through the nose rather than giving up. People will carry on paying until they run out of money, the government knows this so can take advantage of it. I cycle everywhere i can rather than drive/ride mostly to save money. Public transport in Bristol is rubbish and over priced and although bristol has a lot of dedicated cycle lanes, it still doesn't stop me being in constant fear of being knocked off my bike. Many parts near where i live are rough to say the least, would i want to get on a bus with all these violent people or cycle through these areas, erm no thanks.

It's inevitable it's going to happen, two million people petitioning against it and Tony Blair sends his email full of waffle saying that something will need to be done. Why not increase fuel duty? At least then people with larger polluting cars will pay more than someone like me with a 18L fuel tank. No need for tracking or satelite technology, expensive computer systems. Just plain old fuel tax. No one can drive without fuel so there will be no problem with getting the money from it. It still doesn't help with the fact that the poorest will lose out first when they have to give up their cars, while the wealthy have nice clear roads. What a country.

Originally Posted by MiniMatt

I agree completely Northwind - I'm against it because (a) I'm worried about the privacy issues that I fear will likely arise shortly after the implementation, and (b) because I don't believe that any of the schemes suggested are either fair or effective.

I am honestly not so sure that this will happen. We already have things like the Data Protection Act to minimise privacy issues etc (so long as people know the Act that is). Of course, there is always the "national security & crime prevention" answer from the government, but they need to be very careful not to break the law by implimenting this system.

If they do, given that we're still in the EU, the EU could indeed prove itself useful to us & force the british government to scrap whatever it's put in place.

The idea of numberplate tracking I don't like, but that's because the ways to circumvent GPS tracking are p*ss easy! I don't fear GPS tracking because I know I can disable it, I am concerned about tracking numberplates for verification against a transmitting GPS signal though (purely because that's harder to get around).

By all means, fight this on a double taxation standpoint. Fuel duty plus road tax plus road pricing, or on the fairness aspect, but leave the privacy debate out of this, it damages the argument.

How many times have people complained about privacy only for the government only to go ahead anyway. Maybe a different angle is needed.

My concern relates to the congestion charge. Londoners were given loads of promises regarding how quickly the price would change, and the area that it would effect. And the government has gone against its word (surprise surprise!). How long before road pricing would be used for speeding? or for limiting your car to the national speed limit? What a mundane existence we've got in front of us