16.02.07 Why did you sign the travel tax petition?

del.icio.us

digg

Technorati

Furl

reddit

SPURL.NET

3982 comments 25316 votes

Unless you have had your head buried in the sand for the last 6 weeks, you will have seen and quite probably signed the travel tax petition.

Did you sign the travel tax petition?

Over 1.5 million UK citizens have now signed the petition which will be closed to new signatures on 20th February.

The petition is a plea to "scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy" which the Department for Transport is proposing as a solution to congestion on UK roads. Every vehicle would be tracked via satellite and motorists would pay tax depending on how far they travel, at what time and on which roads. This new travel tax would probably take the place of vehicle tax discs and fuel tax (so petrol and diesel would be much cheaper).

We are delighted that the British public is getting so involved in this issue. However, for this petition to be a success, it should not just dismiss this travel tax idea outright. Instead, it should spark a debate into the pros and cons of this tax. If the proposed system is a bad idea then how do you think motoring should be taxed in the future? Let's all have our say and see if we can come up with a better solution. You tell us:

Do you support the concept of paying tax according to when and where you drive?

Could this new road tax system work?
Do you have a better idea of how to tax motoring?

Your Comments

Click here to add your comments

Showing: 1 to 75 of 4122

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... »

I think any new tax on the motorist is a good thing. If the public can't be bothered to get out of their cars and onto public transport then how do they expect the government to fund the development of roads they demand accross the countryside.

If a tax would help get people out of their cars and onto more econmical and/or socially acceptable transport, it should be introduced. Indeed, everything related to motoring should be taxed to the hilt unless it can be proven that it is benificial to the public as a whole and not just to one selfish individual.

Posted by David L, 16th February 2007 4:27pm

This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.

Well... a car is a luxury item, so for a start that should keep the poor out of this equation.. if you are poor you shouldn't waste money on running a car... also i love the attempt at playing "the innocent will be hurt by this" card - i would guess that most people who will sign this petition already own three cars, five of which are 4x4s and would quite happily drive the 5 minutes to the shops without a second thought to the environment or their own health... if you drive more, you should pay more... makes perfect sense to me.

There are and always will be other healthier ways of travelling, and if people actually put their support behind these public initiatives, rather than sticking to their selfish, unsociable metal boxes then the services would improve (sure they aren't great at the moment, but that wont change until they are used more). It would also help towards more of a community feel rather than this cold ignorance of anyone elses existence that we currently seem to have.

Plus why is tracking anything automatically sinister and wrong (sounds like the ID card argument to me) - it's only wrong if the information is used incorrectly (call me naive but the government are so useles at implementing databases the information will never be used well enough to form a Big Brother state), and how could that information be used in a negative way anyways / unless of course you are doing something that you shouldn't be or completely paranoid! if i could i would have cars completely tracked and regulated (speed and location) by an external system / collective as it seems that a lot of people are incapable of driving safely or worrying about the consequences of killing pedestrians.

Posted by Una B., 16th February 2007 5:09pm

The assumption "Vehicle Tax" and "Fuel Tax" would probably be replaced, is over enthusiastic, to say the least.

The London "Congestion Charge", does not allow this to happen.
The Fuel Import Duty will remain in place, and its VAT portion.
The Vat on the remainder, may be reduced?

The idea is to reduce traffic congestion, not increase it. However, the use of private car's is about to become very expensive. Companies involved in Transportation or running Car Fleets, will write off the costs to Company Taxes or pass it on to the consumer, as always.

Posted by Learjet, 16th February 2007 6:10pm

David & Una I am a disabled person I NEED my car (motability) as I have difficulty walking. My income is approx £82 per wk. I do not drink or smoke or waste money in any manner. The distance from my home to my local shopping centre is 1 mile, cost? by car 44p by bus £1.05. I cannot afford to take the bus, nor can I take a bus, as the bus stop is too far for me to walk. Taxing motoring to the hilt would cause severe distress to "selfish" me. Your comments are insulting to me. The best way to cut congestion and CO2 are to limit couples to only one child and reduce the overall population, I have none.

Posted by John Irving, 17th February 2007 11:30pm

John,

I didn't tell you this before, but I also have a disability and rely 100% on my car. I'm 19 and have a neuromuscular condition, therefore a car is an absolute necessity.

If people have such a narrow, simplistic view of the world as to say "everybody should stop being selfish and use public transport", then I'd say that's their problem. A few people need to learn to look at issues from other perspectives before blurting such hostile and insensitive comments.

Many people depend on their car - such as people with disabilities, people who drive for a living and people who live in rural areas. There's no need for such irrational and extremist opinions - it's a question of balance.

Posted by Mathew, 18th February 2007 12:52am

It is all very well saying get out of your car and use public transport but in many areas, either A) there is none or B) we have been out-priced by train companies precisely because the enormous growth in use of public transport as lead to overcrowding problems and poor punctuality. Everyone in London knows that transport is a major problem. Its unusable, expensive, dehumanising and run down. On long runs like Edinburgh to London taking a car load of people down is more environmentally friendly, on a carbon foot print basis, and costs less then half that of a discounted ticket on GNER. Critics claim the rises in the Underground fairs are due to overcrowding, and trying to stop people using it. Perhaps we should all work out home or go back to the dark ages.

Posted by Peter Fosdike, 18th February 2007 10:19am

Obviously there are people who do require cars to get around, and i meant no offense to those who really can not cope without a car (was it not obvious who i was really complaining about?), but the majority of people really don't need to drive... it is just a lazy, easy and expected alternative at someone elses expense and has become far to a-casual-thing that does effect our society and environment a great deal; more so than many people acknowledge.

And yes, running a car full of people does work out more economical in certain instances but i rarely see 5 seaters with more than one or two people onboard, so in practice travelling by bus or train does work out better.

My bet is that a great deal of motorized travelling could quite happily be replaced with walking / cycling at the benefit of all (we may yet loose our title of the most obese country in Europe and lessen the effect of asthma on children) plus if there were more of a demand for it, other forms of transport could be put in place or invented. But again nothing will change without public demand (which is why there will still be no public-transport in some areas until it is demanded).. And then just maybe.. by slowing the speed we all rush about in the crazed world, we might find time to actually relax, enjoy and notice things a little more. But i do agree a balance needs to be found in all areas of life, i just happen to think this tax would balance things out quite nicely.

Overcrowding however (underground aside - this just needs to be rebuilt to modern standards, but can never be done without a loss of money as we only have a single track line and not enough headroom to extend trains to double-deckers) but overcrowding on trains is actually coerced in to happening by the "companies" that run what should be a subsidised public service, they could quite happily add extra coaches on many lines but it would be at their expense and wouldn't allow them to try and spread the times commuters attempt to travel.

In the end, for me, it makes no difference how the case is argued.. i am still of the mind set that if you drive more than others you should pay more than others (if that disadvantages the disabled then special cases / discounts should be set-up to compensate).

Lastly, where does it say the driver would be "taxed to the hilt" - the different tax could yet work out better for many?

Posted by Una B, 18th February 2007 1:30pm

Unless they allow cycling on footpaths, there is no way most people will go for it as cycling on public roads is way too dangerous, even with the so called cycle lanes as they are so small and most car drivers ignore them anyway!

Posted by Salman, 18th February 2007 3:20pm

I think drivers should be fined if caught driving in cycle lanes, which is already the case with bus lanes.

In reply to #7, I think you underestimate the potential of science to reduce CO2 emissions from cars. Taxing is only part of the solution. The government should be reducing taxes for the greenest vehicles whilst taxing Range Rovers and BMW X5s far more than they are currently doing.

Apart from the fact that these huge vehicles are damaging to the environment, they are also extremely dangerous to pedestrians and take up too much road space, especially in town centres.

The idiots who buy these huge cars don't need them either. They just want the looks to give their self-esteem a boost. People should pity them, since they're obviously materialistically-driven, shallow people! :P

Back to the original point though - I think incentives should be introduced to persuade motorists to use biofuel and LPG. Supermarkets and fuel companies will start selling these 'green' fuels ONLY when demand increases.

I don't understand why some people advocate a return to the stone age. There's huge potential for science these days and I don't believe it's rational to put society into reverse gear simply because it's the easiest way to combat climate change! No pun intended, btw. ;-)

Posted by Mathew, 18th February 2007 4:33pm

Sorry, its not only the disabled who NEED a car, my partner is a self employed plumber, he's just starting out so money is tight to say the least, pray how do the public transport advocates propose he goes to work? Somehow I can't see him hauling his tool box, pipe benders, drain rods etc on and off the bus. Our vehicle is not a luxury item it is an essential for our family's sole income.

I know everyone assumes if you are self employed you are loaded but this is not the case, he doesn't have a van as we can't afford two loads of tax & insurance so a large car is a more practical option, 1 vehicle suitable for both family & business use, hardly a self esteem boost Matthew.

I suggest people stop generalising based on their own limited experience and personal bias. Instead perhaps it would be smarter to try realistically looking at all the different types of car users in different areas, we don't all live in major cities and simple local geography means in many areas public transport simply doesn't cut it

Most of us, I can assure you, will not match the media based stereotypes everyone seems so quick to attack. My own suggestion would be scrap everything and charge purely on fuel with a variance in price based on the type of location and type of usage.

For instance, if a number of public transport options are available for commuters in a major city they will be charged a premium for fuel if they decide to drive instead. Inland Revenue could issue cards for those road users that, by virtue of their occupation, cannot work without a private vehicle eg tradesmen, haulage firms etc. and the DSS could issue similar reduced rate cards for disabled drivers.

Posted by Kath, 18th February 2007 11:40pm

its alright everyone saying to get out your car and onto the bus or train but what happens to these people who live in the areas that have no or very few buses a day, and then when you go to use the bus they are full up with the countrys OAP's and thats probobly as they only get free travel, so does that mean when the paying customers on the buses are also paying for these OAP's who all get these free bus passes !!! i think this goverment needs to have a big think and see what they are doing not just with fuel prices and tax but with everything

Posted by Rob, Age 16 (a Bus User), 19th February 2007 2:25am

Kath, nobody here suggested that ONLY people with disabilities need cars. My dad's job involves travelling the country each and every day, so he also NEEDS a car.

Rob, I don't understand your objection to free bus passes for pensioners. Pensioners are often amongst the poorest in society. Their mobility may also be limited due to old age.
We can't blame the pensioners for crowded buses and trains - the companies themselves need to expand capacity to cater for demand. This may have already been done if it wasn't for Thatcher's privatisation drive!

Thatcher the milk snatcher is responsible for public transport woes yet again! :P

Posted by Mathew, 19th February 2007 11:39am

One or two misconceptions, seem to exist in this blog.

TRAINS.
All rolling stock, and engines are owned by the Government, and leased to the operating companies, at very high rates. To get extra carriages, they have to apply to the Government, to get them to approve their plans, and then build the carriages. As usual this seems to take forever, especially when the Government does not have the money to build the rolling stock.
Privatisation in name only.

BUS PASSES.
Most bus passes, have time restrictions on them. Cannot be used before 9.30 am Mon- Fri to avoid congestion, but anyone can buy discounted tickets for use at any time.

LONDON CONGESTION CHARGE.
This came into being in 2003 at a cost of £161 million, the running of the scheme was handed to a private company CAPITA. Any proceeds were to be spent on Transport Improvement within London. The perceived running costs were £120 million per year, they now stand at £143 million, and gaining.

London Underground received a new logo at £1.9 million, so far the only improvement.

The present extension costs, are perceived to be another £103 million in addition to the original costs. It all depends on, who is doing the accounting.

ROAD CHARGES.
Pilot schemes will be trundled out in 2008, in many urban area's to test the waters. The costs are staggering, but the main problem is the Galliaeo System to actually monitor transport movement, this has slipped from 2012 operation to 2020 operation, and its costs are begining to soar. During the pilot schemes, there are no plans to reduce Fuel Tax or Vehicle Tax.

Trying to change peoples travelling habits, which succesive Governments have made cheaper and easier to do, because of perceived consumer spending being the major factor in a country's GDP. This has led to the present gridlock on the roads, and cheap air travel. Using a sledgehammer to drive in a nail, is not the best practice.

Let more people work at home, and operate School Buses, are quite simple options.

Posted by Learjet, 19th February 2007 1:00pm

How dose charging people help the enviroment?????????

What good will it do to charge people to go to work? ( sorry boss cant come in for 9am the charge is to high, I will be in at 7am and you will have to pay me overtime so I can aford to go home)

All the Motor ways and A rodes will be empty and the tail backs on the B roads will brake all records.

Where is the public transport? I work in public transport and its dogy do do
All this will do is price people off the road. People with money that buy the most poluting cars will just pay it. people like me that are on a budget and have a group C car will no longer be able to aford to drive.

And as for the system that will track wher you are and what speed you are doing, over my dead body. The words Police and State come to mind.

Posted by Ian Grice, 19th February 2007 1:40pm

How about taking the bus to work?

I think road charging is a brilliant idea in principal, but the revenue should be cost-neutral by reducing fuel duty to compensate drivers.

You can blame the state of public transport on the Tories - as well as the introduction of the Fuel Duty escalator.
Labour have abandoned the Fuel Duty escalator over the past couple of years, whilst the Tories and Lib Dems are promising to re-introduce it if/when they come into power.

Posted by Mathew, 19th February 2007 4:15pm

You cant get a bus to work most of the time or they dont turn up, I know I drive them. Public transport is a joke, and an expensive one at that. Thanks as Mathew said to the tories. It should never have been de regulated.

Posted by Ian Grice, 19th February 2007 9:14pm

Road charging has to be the right way to go. Over the last nine years, traffic volumes in the UK have increased by around 3%. This has led us to having some of the most congested roads in Europe.

This has been caused by the notion that we all grew up with in owning a flash set of wheels, and passing your driving test on your 17th birthday! The aspiration to own a car is enormous. Road Pricing can force a change, but it will not happen overnight. By the time my daughter is able to drive, I expect the area within the North and South Circular Road, in London, to be part of the congestion charging scheme. Manchester, Cambridge and Edinburgh are all considering it now. Wake up! It's coming to a road near you.

My sympathy for disabled drivers, who rely on their cars, is diminished as not one disabled person has pointed out on this blog the perks of concessionary parking if you are in possession of a Blue Badge (I am afraid I have to pay a parking fine if i stop on a yellow line).

Posted by Ben Owen, 20th February 2007 12:57am

Ben
You too can get concessionary parking, just get an illness or be born disabled, live in constant PAIN, be unable to walk or have great difficulty walking because of PAIN, be unable to work because of PAIN. My sole income is just £82 per wk incapacity benefit and out of this I have to run my house with all the various expenses on my own as I have no partner, children or parents to financially help me. Do you think I choose to live like this. No, I would gladly give up my blue badge to go back to the work I did for 33 yrs and get my live back. On my income road charging does not worry me, it terrifies me.

Posted by John Irving, 20th February 2007 4:36am

Hang on a minute. If any Government wants to introduce a national road toll then the public transport alternative has to be in place BEFORE this tax is implemented. And please get away from the so called 'green' issue. Since when did putting a tax on something help the environment? If a government wanted to help the environment it would make it so prohibitively expensive that no-one could afford to go anywhere. As that isn't going to happen, doesn't it suggest that a 'road toll' is no more than an extra tax gathering idea?

Posted by Sonia Smith, 20th February 2007 11:12am

hi all,
did anyone else watch the trevor macdonut programme on monday night, where they had 6 or 7 workers at a factory in the n/e including the boss, and they worked out who would be better off with road pricing, and what a surprise the boss who drives a £ 40,000 range rover, and does 35,000 miles a year is £ 2000 better off, while the shop floor worker in a £ 7,500 peugeot driving 10,000 miles a year was about £ 850 worse off, now why does that not surprise me,
but of course everything you buy in the shops will go up in price, because everyone will want to get there extra costs back,
but will the inflation rate go up, no i doubt it....... lol

Posted by Colin Moorse, 20th February 2007 12:19pm

Tax tax and more tax. Over the past 10 years councils have been busy narrowing roads, closing roads and making dual carraigeways into single carraigeways. On top of this traffic light phasings are short and are often in use even when there is little traffic around. Is it any wonder there is congestion? Now we motorists will have to be taxed off the road in order to reduce the congestion that councils and government have caused.

As for climate change - has any of these greens thought about how the activity of the sun affects the earth? It is a variable source of heat and logic should inform people that when it is more active (as it is now) then planets orbiting it will get warmer. But that arguement removes the need to tax us all back into the stoneage - and that just won't do.

First it's a green tax, now it's a congestion tax. Why don't they just admit that they won't be happy until they've taken every penny from us? As for polititians, they're all the same - Labour, Lib-Dems and the Tories support road charging.

Posted by Paul Murray, 20th February 2007 12:41pm

Ben Owen,

Why are you complaining that you cannot park on double yellow lines? Do you not understand the concept that many with mobility difficulties find it difficult to walk significant distances?
Would you like a disability of your own so you're able to park wherever you choose? Don't be so arrogant.

Your "sympathy" for disabled people diminishes because poor little victims, like you, can't park on double yellow lines? Don't make me laugh!

So... if you REALLY want a disabled parking badge then perhaps you should get your leg amputated!

People like you cannot feel "sympathy" anyway. Everything's always about you!

This is supposed to be a civilised forum. I am only retaliating since people such as Ben cannot see the insults hidden within their comments.

Posted by Mathew, 20th February 2007 4:57pm

I must say I am getting so fed up with the avrage driver beeing taxed to bugery, I wonder why I bother looking for the most economical cars. It makes me want to get a gas gusaling gigantic 4x4 and drive it everyware in 3rd gear

Posted by Ian Grice, 20th February 2007 8:33pm

Thank you John and Matthew in refering to my comments so pertinently. Unfortunately both of you missed the main point, and took exception to my last paragraph which was a side issue.

I, too, have a disability. I actually have a hospital appointment tomorrow morning (Wed 21), but to get there I am going by good old public transport even though it will take much longer to get there. It would be much more convienent for me to wake up an hour later, walk out of my door and jump in my car, but the option is to go by public transport - leaving the house at 6.45am.

Two things to point out: firstly I have never had a parking ticket, because I don't park on yellow lines and always overjudge my length of stay since it saves a lot of hassle and expense; and secondly do remember that according to the social model of disability, we are all disabled. We all depend on each other to some extent.

Posted by Ben Owen, 20th February 2007 11:53pm

Sorry Ben, I apologise.
I have never had a parking ticket either. I think it's essential for people with mobility difficulties to have special access in order to reduce the distances we have to travel.

I think it's regrettable how people who depend on personal transport the most can't afford the expenses. The wealthy will always be able to pay the ridiculous levels of fuel duty we have in this country - which is totally immoral and wrong.

Good luck for tomorrow anyway.

Posted by Mathew, 21st February 2007 1:32am

I think the current tax system should be left as it is. The government are trying to find new ways in which to build revenue and reduce traffic, but would you want a black box type device installed in your vehicle at your own expense tracking your every move? There should be more time spent in coming up with a solution that will benefit all drivers and the environment, I don't see how the environment could possibly benefit from increasing charges on tax. Another point I would like to add is in certain areas of the Midlands the road quality is very poor, pot holes and damaged tarmac don't help the life of your suspension, which when gets damaged, you pay for it, why not charge the government for this, after all....we do pay road tax.

Posted by Sanjay Patel, 21st February 2007 10:50am

the only thing left to tax is the air we breathe........watch this space !!
Without a shadow of doubt , people rely on cars because of an inferior public transport system. trains, buses etc are overpriced ,overcrowded and generally unreliable. If you can't get to work on time and lose your job as a result , then you become an even bigger strain on the system. Promises of investing in the transport system have been spouted by this government for years and it's just got worse not better. I bet any revenues earned (I mean robbed) from us wont be re-invested wisely. Most of us struggle just to live from day to day without even more taxation !

Posted by Nigel, 21st February 2007 9:26pm

If road works were better planed, lights beter switched, road built like they are in Germany and the road network monaterd better, ther would be only half as much congestion on UK roads.

Posted by Ian Grice, 22nd February 2007 1:42pm

To travel by public transport from the area I live to work would take approximately 2 hours. I can do the road journey round about 45 minutes. If road congestion charges came in at the price they are quoting for a the trial in the area I live, it would cost be approximately £15 a day to travel to work.

I would rather pay higher petrol prices than road charges, which is one thing I never thought I would say 3 years ago.

Posted by Julie Towers, 22nd February 2007 2:11pm

another way of raising taxes on us motorists. i live in the country and we have a bus every 2 hours!!!!! and none at all after 6pm or sundays
so how do i get to work 15miles away for 7am

Posted by Johnsadler, 22nd February 2007 7:20pm

I've wondered for years why we have such a complicated way of administering our road vehicles when there seems to me to be a relatively simple way to do it. Abolish the road tax as it is,then.

1) tax would be gathered from the fuel tax. More you drive more you pay.

2) insurance would be shown by disc in window. As road tax now.

3) MOT certificate as now with disc for windscreen.

This has always seemed to me to be a lot easier to administer and at the end of the day those of us who either do the most miles or have the thirstiest cars obviously pay accordingly and no one can escape paying, unlike the present system and as we are all computerised nowadays MOT and insurance should also be safer

Posted by A Bennetts, 22nd February 2007 9:55pm

Haha ... just look at everybody moaning about tax.
Thank you Mrs Thatcher for turning our country into an American-style egotistical and selfish society.
It's all about meeee! >:P

Posted by Mathew, 22nd February 2007 10:53pm

A Bennetts. I totaly agree with you. (sort out the 4x4 brigade aswell) Of course it will never happen like that because its to simple. Why do it the easy way when millions can be wasted bringing in a complicated over priced system!

Posted by Ian Grice, 22nd February 2007 11:21pm

All colours of Government are guilty of raising taxes without first thinking of the consequences - remember the poll tax? The present is the most greedy in its requirements for our cash, but where does all this money go?

The present government is not democratic in that Blair occupies his master position with only 1 in 5 of the electorate voting for his party - the number of non voters rises every election because people have given up on our so called democratic system. Yet in 1997 Blair promised to look at the electoral system - then found he had a vast majority and the present suited his purpose.

So, the massive vote in the petition on this further increase in taxing the motorist will not stop this man doing what he wants - nothing else has stopped him doing anything! Can anyone believe one word he says anymore?

When British Rail was privatised it was deemed opportunistic to use the franchise method of controlling who did what and how and in doing this the rail companies have to pay vast sums of this TAX before they can operate their rolling stock - the present Railways are therefore at a major disadvantage in having to charge to first recoup this innocuous tax before starting to make any profit. The quality of TV was destroyed by the same method in Thatchers days, that's why we have so many repeats and long running nonsense programmes thrown at us all the time.

The result is that most of our heavy transport is by ROAD, not rail. This traffic is the road killer, not the private motorist. Take away 25% of the heavies and we would not have a problem - sorry hauliers but your vehicles are doing the damage and all because you have no real competition from the rail network - which doesn't seem much interested anyway and nor does the government.

Government by stealth? No, it's open warfare now!

Colin Outram

Posted by Colin Outram, 23rd February 2007 1:31pm

In the West Midlands area, slated for a pilot scheme in 2008, this area contains long sections of Motorway's namely M6, M5, M42, M40 and M54.
It also contains the only Toll Road in the UK, the M6 Expressway.

With Road Charges based on time of use, Peak Hours 7am-10am and 4pm-7pm, the charge per mile could be as high as £1.29p/mile on motorways during these times. This makes the M6 Expressway cheap, and run by a private company, now there's a thought.

The "A Roads", and many "B Roads", suffer from congestion also in this area, so the hunt will be on, to find the cheapest route to destinations. Only to find there are none, as everybody else will have the same idea. Welcome to Blair's Britain and private motoring.

Posted by Learjet, 23rd February 2007 2:26pm

Mathew,

Everybody is complaining about tax because its the only thing that this government is good at is raising taxes.
You must be too young to remember how well off this country was under Mrs Thatcher's government.

Its thanks to our current government that my family and other families all over the country are being totally hammered for the most disgusting tax of all, Inheritance tax (or the penalty for a life time of hard work). It may have been the Tories who introduced it but they introduced it to tax the VERY rich not the average UK family of which my family most certainly are. Labour have come along and just used it was an easy way to make money by lowering the threshold to a ridiculously low level.

This road pricing is just another excuse to hammer the UK motorist.

I'm afraid this country has just become a complete shambles and will only get worse when Gordon Brown becomes PM.

Posted by Peter, 23rd February 2007 2:27pm

Peter, you must have lived in a differant UK to me in the Thatcher years.

Posted by Ian Grice, 23rd February 2007 9:43pm

In my view we do need to reduce carbon emissions and pollution but the road priocing proposals are unfair and will impact more on the poorer members of the community many of whom depend on their cars to get to their low paid jobs in supermarkets, call centres and the like.

Anyway, isn't fuel duty a road pricing scheme? - the more you drive, the more you pay. Why construct a huge new bureaucracy at great cost to the tax payer. My policy - increase road tax on gas guzzlers progressively, reduce it on eco friendly cars and keep petrol prices roughly the same in real terms.

Posted by Peter Owen, 24th February 2007 1:57pm

Peter it because as I said in post 33 doing it the easy way is to simple for anybody in power, they always have to spend as much as they can and make it as complicated as thery can. I agree carbon emissions must be cut, but why go affter everyone, some of us chose the least poluting cars, house hold appliances ect, why should we suffer for the likes of people that dont care, and use a 3.5lt 4x4 to do the school run? As with any goverment this is a tax on the avrage worker, people with mony wont care, company car drivers wont care. everything will go up in cost to cover the extra companys have to pay. It is one of the most short sighted ideas I have ever seen.

Posted by Ian Grice, 24th February 2007 2:25pm

Ian,

I've have always been a supporter and voter of the Tories and I think Mrs. Thatcher was a good leader. Unfortunately these days the Tories are fairly weak opposition and haven't had a decent leader for some time now. I can't see things being much better with the Tories being in power at present or the Lib Dems as they are all as bad as each other.

The road pricing policy worries me a lot and the possible monthly bills that would come from it. I drive a Ford Focus which is a nice car and not a gas guzzler but I do drive quite a few miles and need my car for work and social use. I fear that the tax bills could be quite frightening.

Posted by Peter, 24th February 2007 4:26pm

To my mind the fuel duty path is a much more sensible way forward as far as an environmental issue is concerned. Gas guzzlers get hit harder than the more eco friendly cars.

Blair has however stated that this is to tackle congestion on the roads. This scheme will simply shift the congestion onto the "cheaper roads". It will also affect alot of people's lives significantly.

There have been alot of generalisations made on this page about people driving cars. Let me explain my situation.

I have only just started driving. I'm 26 btw. For the past 7 years I was working in a large city, commuting in from home on the train. About 3.5 hours travelling a day. It would be about 2 hours in a car, but I was quite happy on the train - it was cheaper (at least with a railcard!) and providing I didn't have some psycho breathing meths fumes all over me I could get some shuteye.

I then finished my research at uni, and was out into the big wide world of work. I'm an engineer - 90% of engineering jobs are based in the middle of nowhere. Travel was a nightmare!

There is a works bus (although Stagecoach nearly cancelled it recently, and may still do at the end of the year), but it only travels from the center of town to work. one in the morning at 7am and one at night at 5.20.

I don't live in town, so have to take a 30 min bus ride in to catch it - the first bus leaves at 6.30.... all it takes is a 2 minute delay and I'm scuppered. Similar with the train, although the first train is 20 minutes earlier - and then a 20 minute walk from the train station to the bus station.

Getting back at night is fine though (when it runs on time) and I would leave work at 5.10, and get home about 7 (if the wind was blowing in the right direction).

That is providing I don't have to work late to get some numbers out, in which case I'm on the public bus again.

The nearest bus stop to where I work is a 35 minute walk down a busy A road, with neglected pavements all the way. Imagine a typical lancashire winter evening walking down there - let alone the recent storms we had!

When I eventually get to the bus stop, buses are every hour, and you are waiting on a busy 2 lane dual carriageway. A number of times the bus would fly down the outside lane and just go straight past me. These buses stop at 7.30 too, so if you miss the last one....

So anyway, a car seemed to be the only real viable means of getting to work, and whilst many class not having to arrive at work drenched to the skin, sneezing and coughing (not just from the weather, but have you seen the state of buses and tubes? Trains aren't too bad though I will say) a few cuts and grazes where stones are kicked up off the road at you after a 90 min bus journey and 30 min walk a luxury, and totally stressed maybe it is, but for many people a car is essential!

My journey is now cut down to 35-45 minutes each way. However, the journey either takes me along the motorway, or through the aforementioned town - both of which will be highly priced roads as they both have heavy traffic - even at 7am. When this comes in, unless the goverment has sorted out the public transport issues it has been trying to sort out for the past 20+ years then I will be looking for a new place of work.

Ironic that the work I currently do is essentially as a contractor to the government....

Posted by Matthew A, 24th February 2007 6:09pm

Sorry Peter (36) but I have to agree whole heartedly with Ian about the Thatcher era. She did nothing for the middle and lower classes (am I allowed to say that?) in her reign of terror.

Remember the Poll Tax fiasco, negative equity with property prices plummeting, mortgage rates of 16%+, job losses by the million. It never ended. We also have her to thank for the present lot being around for the past ten years.

She eventually made the Tory party unelectable and that's the reason we have this Blair run regime of 'it's my ball and I don't want to listen to you, mere public nobodies', Then we have the finances run by the ever ready Brown with open hands for your hard earned cash. There is nothing whatsoever New about New Labour. Tax and tax again now before spending.

But where has all this extra taxation gone? Brown once had a seriously large "war chest" full of money. And just where will the increased road taxes go? Frittered away like the rest of it!

Posted by Colin Outram, 24th February 2007 7:18pm

Heh.. again people are assuming that a greener stance is towards global warming. For me it's more about air quality than anything, i don't want to have my children growing up with breathing problems (that isn't just CO2). And also not coating every stretch of land in tarmac and glinting boxes - so things are actually greener (which really helps against CO2)...

Higher Fuel tax or a Road tax, i don't mind, i just want people to think less about what they feel they HAVE to do and more about how their actions effect others and where they can make concessions (sacrificing something for the good of others seems to be an endangered compulsion) - not that people who drive don't worry about this in other areas of their lives - just that driving is an area that is overlooked as necessity when i believe for the majority it is otherwise.

And to those who say charging more wont fix the problem, linking money to anything automatically makes the world think more - look at climate change, the second anyone mentioned that climate change could be costly the ball started rolling that much quicker. But yes, with the arguments about those better off people, maybe Fuel Tax would be more balanced.

Sure not driving may make doing things more difficult, and where it makes things actually impossible exceptions should be made, but nothing will change without some effort - effort it seems a lot of people aren't prepared to put in as it would make their life "unbearable" - But then again seeing the number of people who complain they haven't even got time to recycle i shouldn't be surprised.

The whole point is that attitudes need to be changed from "I wont be able to afford to drive to work" to "How can i get in to work in a better, healthier, cheaper, safer, more humanized way". And yes at the moment there isn't a solution everywhere in the country, but by making a/this change it will force people to find & conceive other better ways (group travel, more investment in public transport due to demand) - it wont happen if we don't, it wont and shouldn't happen over night, but it will make things better for the future.

You never know, it might even get people involved in pestering local governments to implement new ideas and make people feel like they can actually make a difference to their community again. (for example encouraging local businesses to provide a/more work busses)

Finally..

I don't under-estimate the power of science, i just don't trust it's power to be utilised fully until it is either profitable to do so or it's the only remaining option ;)

Claiming that "police state" argument, in this situation, can only lead me to think you like breaking the law by speeding?

And i don't know where the "Self-employed earn more" idea came from either, I'm self-employed and i get by, that's it :) and before people rally to say - aha so you don't have to travel to work - i cycle the 5 miles to my office and back every day no matter the weather and would quite happily cycle 25 miles but knowing that i wanted to be "green" i chose to live near to where i work (is not always possible, but again for the majority it could be).

Posted by Una B, 25th February 2007 4:17am

I have read through ost of this debate, forgive me however if this has been discussed. First my husband and I are both teachers. He travels 80miles a day to work as do many teachers at my school. I'm lucky my school is only 3 miles away. But yes I do drive my car because besides the ffact that the first bus would not get me school in time to teach my first lesson, I also carry piles of books and coursework folders to and from school and the bus fare is £5/day. Teachers salaries as you know are set by the government. We have never had a high income and that is unlikely to change. We struggle to survive on what we earn as do many other middle income families. We rarely use our cars other than for getting to work. If the travel tax is introduced it is likely that we would both have to stop working as we would not be able to afford the cost of getting to work. Two more teachers leaving the profession. I'm sure we would not be the only ones.
Also I wondered how would medical staff stand with the travel tax. would a doctor have to pay for travelling to see patients. He's travelling for his work in the same way as a plumber or an electrician may. If a doctor doesn't have to pay then where is the line drawn?
Just a thought.

Posted by Carol Hayward-peel, 25th February 2007 8:40pm

My wife is self employed, shes a driving instructor, how dose she price her lessons if this tax comes in? " yes I know it was £20 last week but you went through town a few times today so that will be £30 this week"

All those lovely quiet country lanes will be like the M25 so every one can save a few quid. What will the air quality be like then?

And yes I do speed, I caught my self doing 33mph the other day so that would be a fine. And I dont want any body to know whare I am at every moment of the day because Its my buisnes.

Last point Pay to use the roads? Have you sean the state of some of the Magor routs? I have seen smaller craters on the moon compared to some of the pot holes round me, drains that dont, so the roads flood, surfaces that melt in the summer to name just a few problems. Why arnt they tackaling the main poluters namely indastry? I can tel you why, you cant make a proffit out of that.

Posted by Ian Grice, 25th February 2007 8:41pm

Introducing pricing mile by mile is a really idiotic solution. I'm a Nanny and combined travel to work and the use of my car at work is around 300 miles a week. This would break me. I moan at the price of fuel and Tax as it is, let alone the insurance we have to pay.

I am going to have to stick up for 4x4 drivers too. (Yes i am one) just because we are big does not mean we are any different to the driver who drives a Jag or any other high performance car. The news and the goverment pick on us because of our size. We are no longer or wider than a family car just TALLER!! so pick on someone else for a change.

Buses and Trains are a joke too. wrong type of snow, wet leaves on track, train delayed, bus late, no bus turned up. Shall i go on We would always be late for work. the goverment want us using public transport but we cannot rely on it...

Posted by Beverley O'neill, 26th February 2007 3:23pm

Its not just the fact 4x4s are gas gusalers, they are not as safe as "normal" cars. Easyer to flip, longer breaking distance, more likely to kill someone (drivers included)etc. But all high perfourmance cars need to be targated. Anything in tax band E,F and G. Ther is no need for such poluting cars.

Posted by Ian Grice, 26th February 2007 8:39pm

Just what about the rural area, surely people who live in these places need to run their cars, for work maybe to travel distances that are to far to walk ,or cycle, and as there is no public transport, buses, trains, etc. as in the towns, what other choice is there than to drive. Plus of course then there is the trips to the doctor, taking the children to school, ( most schools for the under 11yrs. are situated away from the centre of the village ) to far for 7yr. olds, and to dangerous, also the shopping, to much for the elderly to walk carrying groceries, If the pay as you drive is brought in how are we to pay an extra tax, will the government raise the pay scale in the country area, to counteract this. I think not. Maybe RICHARD TURPIN rides again.

Posted by Ralph Terry, 26th February 2007 11:10pm

There would be a lot less cars on the roads if the government made credit harder to come by. How many loan advertisements are screened daily on t.v.?? There are thousands upon thousands of people driving around in cars that are acquired on the' never never '. But this government isn't interested in reducing credit opportunity as it will simply reduce it's enormous' tax burden on the average man or woman in the street. - We're all going to hell in a handcart I'm afraid, as things can only get worse.

Posted by Richard Conley, 27th February 2007 4:20am

Why should it be harder to get credit, that dosnt sound very fair. I bet you would be the first to complain if sudanly you couldnt get a morgage on that new house you wanted.

Posted by Ian Grice, 27th February 2007 1:14pm

I agree with the earlier comments around cars being a luxury item. Do people really need their cars? Road pricing (with the abolition of road tax and higher fuel duty) could only be a good thing, a people would think whether they really need to drive 500 metres to the corner shop and back. Or, why not walk to the bus stop and catch the bus to work? With higher duty and road pricing, the government could go some way to subsidising public transport to make it cheaper than it is at present (55p per mile LON-MAN via rail, compared with 17p per mile PAR-CAL)

Posted by Thomas Peoples, 28th February 2007 12:24pm

I think that public transport is a great idea. I live a little in the country. In my car I can get to work in 25 minutes (Including traffic) whereas the journey on public transport would take over two hours.

The other thing to mention is that public transport is not even slightly safe. When the government stops robbery, muggings and drug dealing/taking on their transport real decent people may use it. I for one will not.
I would much rather see my wife locked in her car driving to work than on three busses and a train.

Posted by Lyle, 28th February 2007 12:25pm

The only way I can see my son each weekend is by driving down the M6! I already pay my ex-wife's travel costs to meet me half way as well as my own travel costs (and child support!!!). This is the only way that my son can keep in regular contact with his dad. I can't move closer to him because it would mean resigning from my job. It seems unfair and unjust that I might be penalised for making this journey in the future. I am quite sure there are many people in the same boat as me.

Posted by Steve Irvine, 28th February 2007 12:26pm

What most people in this country forget is that our stupid and 'internationally glory seeking politicians' have surrendered most of our rights to arrange Britain's own affairs to a mostly unelected quango shuffling between Brussels and Strasbourg and known as the European Economic Community !!
That mob is NOTHING TO DO WITH ECONOMICS any more, but is now telling US what we can and cannot do with our own country, our own legal system, and our own affairs!
You can all put what you like on this website, and say what you like, but you will have to ask permission from Brussels before you altear ANY laws or VAT !

Posted by Peter Motson, 28th February 2007 12:27pm

Would if not be fairer to add the cost of any fuel tax onto the cost that you pay at the pumps for fuel. That way, the more fuel you use, the more you will pay. This will also catch foreign drivers that pay nothing towards their road use whilst in the U.K.

Posted by Andy Kirk, 28th February 2007 12:31pm

I am employed as a site manager in the construction industry and I average around 1,500 business miles per week covering several sites throughout the U.K.
If my company had to pay for every mile I travel then i think I would be looking for another line of employment and as a result my earnings would take a tumble as this is the only line I have ever worked in.

Posted by Paul Abram, 28th February 2007 12:31pm

its just the goverment getting richer on our hard earned money start looking after the roads by mainaining them properly before charging people

Posted by Gary J, 28th February 2007 12:31pm

I do support being taxed on when and where you drive, however, I would need to know a lot more about the whole issue before I consent to lower fuel prices and disbandment of road fund licence. In my estimation, sooner or later the licence for car road tax will be replaced when the whole thing has died down. I am a road user.

Posted by Stella Dellicompagni, 28th February 2007 12:36pm

If you look around the world we are at the moment one of the highest taxed countries relating to the motorists!
Why should we fund the goverments expenses { Like 2 Jag Preston }
If other countries can do it why cant England?
If the goverment was to show some respect for the motorist instead of treating us like an ATM then we possibly could respect them more.
Ask them where all the road tax monies go! They never have answered that question. It surely does not go back into the roads!
They cannot even locate their camera's in the right and safest places!

Posted by G Mac, 28th February 2007 12:44pm

The problem with the current excuse for a government is that it cannot see further than the end of its collective nose and is blinkered to boot!! The (alleged) administration has its collective snout so deep into the public trough that it could'nt remove it if it tried. What does this mean? In Blairyland there is no such thing as cancellation of existing taxes. Your road fund licence - to give the tax disc its original designation - hasn't contributed to either roads or their maintenance for years. And to think that any socialist administration would willingly cancel any income which it garners from fuel is naive in the extreme. So ... we end up with an exorbitant vehicle taxation system which encompasses not only road fund licence and fuel duty (albeit they will be called something different) but having to pay for the privilege of 'driving' on the antideluvian cart tracks which masquerade as roads throughout the country. Get rid of Blairyland and the socialists, and that will be the first step towards improvement! After all, nobody else could take an eden and turn it into a hades they way that THEY have over the past ten years !!!

Posted by William K Riddiford, 28th February 2007 12:50pm

I would hate the idea of being tracked wherever I went. It feels like another "big brother" idea. Freedom to move around is important and the idea of having a tracking system in my car just appals me. CCTV cameras have their uses in keeping crime down but this idea is preposterous.

Posted by Maureen Teicht, 28th February 2007 12:53pm

I agree that, the more motoring you do, the more you should pay. However, this could be easily achieved through fuel taxation, where high mileage motorists and those with "thirsty" vehicles would pay substantially more.
The Government's proposal is another "I Spy" idea, let's keep an eye on the masses. George Orwell's only error was that his predictions were 30 years premature.
I would love to take public transport but to complete a 4 mile journey to work would take me 1 hour, including a 45 minute walk to the nearest town as there is no public transport in my village.
If the Government had invested in public transport like most other civilised countries, we would now have more viable options.
It also sounds as though David L has good public transport facilities or he would not gripe so much about those, like me, who have no realistic options.

Posted by Ken Hastings, 28th February 2007 12:54pm

I hate the idea of having to pay tax on how far i drive. I've just finished a 4 year university course and have a hefty student loan to pay as well as other expenses such as living costs, mortage. My currently place of work is about a 35 minute drive away, but by public transport it takes me 2 buses taking around 2 and a half hours to get to exactly the same place, and i know this as i used to do it every day but it just took it out of me.

I doubt the public transport will get better either, as i need to cross counties.

Petrol prices are already too expensive and tax is paid on there. If i'm getting charged stupid amounts for driving, then i might need to find another job and i'm really happy here :-(

Posted by Steven Davies, 28th February 2007 12:54pm

I really do not agree with being taxed on where you drive and when! I live with my mother just outside a town where over the past year and a half the public transport has been cut. The bus service used to be every half hour, with the last service from the main railway connection leaving the station at 10.30pm and on sundays it was an hourly service. It has now been changed to an hourly service throughout the week with no sunday service. Perhaps it can be suggested how we are mean't to travel having no option but to get in the car. And god help us if there are any power cuts meaning alarm clocks do not go off in the morning!

We have no option but to own cars. If i had to travel to work by public transport it would take me over one hour, as opposed to 15-20 minutes, and that is assuming that the connections would be good and tie in either way!

I agree that most families have more than one car, but given my situation we have no option but to have this amount of cars as no one works in the same direction so would not easily be able to car share. There is no public transport that goes directly to anyones work destination within the household (without the need for having to travel directly into central london to be able to make the return journey back out)

So, assuming this goes ahead, we will obviously be penalised for using the road having been given no other viable alternative!

Posted by Lindsay Brown, 28th February 2007 12:56pm

Remember the government reduced tax on buying a new car, because we all complained that it was cheaper to buy abroad???
Now it's much much easier to own a car thanks to the government, but at the same time they want us all to stop driving them!!
The government are not stupid - they know that fiddling with the taxes in whatever buzzwords they want to use will mean a net increase in their cash flow and most definitely NOT a noticeable reduction in congestion.
This ultimately means the road pricing tax is just another sneaky way to make more money for themselves and at the same claim they are trying to help the environment.
I would not oppose any change to transport taxing if the benefits were clear and, more importantly, acheivable.
I live in a rural suburb in Scotland and public transport to my office would require at least 4 bus journeys per day along with a 4 mile return walk per day, or alternatively taking my car to either the park and ride bus stop or the train station with a further bus journey or 4 mile return walk to my office. If there was a bus stop within 1 mile of my front door which took me to within 1 mile of my office then I would gladly take the bus and laugh all the way to the bank with my tax savings, but this is not the case! It won't be improved easily either as the local bus company is private and therefore the government has no control over them.
Also, while I'm on the subject of where I live, I'd ideally like to avoid transport all together, but as the local council seem content to allow every major housebuilder in the land to cram our city centre with 'executive apartments' the huge price and lack of existing or new family housing near to my office has forced me (and many thousands of others) to buy out of town.
The bottom line is that we HAVE to be taxed on transport, the government just has to come up with a way solving the problem by not indirectly increasing the current huge taxes we pay and still encouraging us to change our ways.

Posted by Marky D, 28th February 2007 12:56pm

Why should the motorist be clobbered again, we get mobile speed cameras everywhere, plus static ones. We pay high fuel costs, which is taxed, we pay road tax, we have to MOT our cars after three years old, we pay tax on our car insurance, if we need to repair our vehicles we pay tax, dont you think the government gets enough money out of motorists. I am all for saving the environment but there are limits to which some motorists can go to, surely the government could help the environment by convincing the Americans to stop burning fossil fuels like they have gone out of fashion. We can all do our bit, but taxing motorists is totaly unfair.

Posted by Maldwyn Parsons, 28th February 2007 12:57pm

If goverments want to tax the motorist to death thats ok but why not lets all take public transport and watch it grind to a halt.The infastructure cannot cope the country would stop and queues for basics would cause riots.Maggie tried it with poll tax now Blair is trying it with petrol look what happened to Maggie
Lets protest with our hands and vote that smarmy s-o-b off the planet

Posted by Ken Platt, 28th February 2007 12:57pm

i too need my car for work.
I work for the NHS covering many sites across Essex. If pay as you use was introduced this would increase my costs greatly. yes I am being selfish but think of it this way
All NHS workers that use their cars thats nurses, managers, maintainance, pharmasists all get an allowance for the miles they drive. We buy the petrol- pay the tax and the allowance returned is taxed again. If we go to pay as you drive- we will pay this, claim it back from the NHS- increasing the deficient- then even all you public transport users would miss out on services that will need to be cut to pay for the staff.

Think about it this is just about my purse- it will effect everyone
cost of plumbers, builders etc will need to go up- they wont want to be driving miles in a day to loose all that money back to travel costs

even if public transport ran continuously there will always be people who cant use it!

Posted by Karen Whent, 28th February 2007 12:57pm

I have a small company that any increase whatever way its done would have a huge impact, and would have not option but to pass it on to the customer.
I guess the fairest and easiest way to go would be to link it with miles driven. All these details are already on the MOT.

Posted by Paul Giles, 28th February 2007 12:58pm

This is an extremely interesting debate, and one which will always provoke a great deal of emotion. I live 30 miles from where I work, and as I'm a Housing Officer I am not allowed to live close to my office for health and safety reasons. To get the bus from where I live to where I work is actually extremely difficult, the old one-bus-every-two-hours rule applies, and in any case I need my car for visiting residents. You could say that I chose to live 30 miles away from my place of work but my personal circumstances are such that there was very little element of choice involved. I also resent paying for the "black box" to put in my own car so the government can track me wherever I may be. And as for "breaking the law by speeding" I would very much like to meet the driver that can put their hand on heart and totally truthfully say they have never ever gone even 1mph over a speed limit. It's bad enough with the GATSO Revenue collectors by every roadside. One solution to congestion would be a system such as the USA Yellow School Bus to get some of these enormous cars containing one tiny child going half a mile up the street to school, off the roads. In case you're wondering, I drive a small car myself, but am thinking of taking my motorbike test, although I would be quite likely to be killed or injured by a driver concentrating on trying to stick to arbitrary speed limits or looking out for GATSOs and not paying attention to the road. Rant over.

Posted by Emma Mclean-cook, 28th February 2007 1:00pm

This proposal is further unnecessary growth in government. Just scrap the road tax and hike fuel duty to compensate, and sack those civil servants no longer necessary instead of employing more on a project which will waste millions of our money.
Whether it is a green issue or a congestion issue, the cause is the same: too many people, both nationwide and worldwide. How to cure that I leave to wiser people than me, just glad I won't be here to see them fail.

Posted by David C Serle, 28th February 2007 1:00pm

I would be happy to use public transport, if it was at a realist price. I live 35 miles away from where I work, yes my choice. And if the public transport network was good, I would be more then happy to use it. However, I bought a new car and travel in everyday.

A new car, monthly payments, daily petrol's bills, monthly insurance, monthly maintenance is still £50 better off per month then getting the cheapest public transport alternative.

I for one am sick of this country and the tax's for living. My profession has a national / worldwide shortage and I feel no remorse at all for bailing this sinking ship. Good luck to you all. If you can leave, do it.

I use to be proud to be English / UK citizen, no longer.

Posted by Craig Ellis, 28th February 2007 1:00pm

the goverment is always saying about public transport but where i live the buses run every 2hrs and the last one is at 6pm so i can't be with out my car now

Posted by George Neil, 28th February 2007 1:01pm

I believe that this situation is six of one, half a dozen of the other. If the government made public transport safer, more reliable and cheaper then I think the majority of the public, including my family, would choose public transport over using our own vehicle. People won't give up their own cars until public transport is better but the government won't make public transport better until people give up their cars. Its all money driven!

Posted by Shane Huller, 28th February 2007 1:02pm

Showing: 1 to 75 of 4122

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... »

Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.

Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of PetrolPrices.com (Fubra Ltd)

« Go Back to Main Blog