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: 226 to 300 of 4122

« ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... »

This is just another additional tax - don't kid yourselves. The extra money will not be put in to additional public transport either.

The government spend too much money overseas ie: the wars in Iraq and Afganistan - it hasn't made the world safer - in fact it has made it very unsafe for us all.

Oh by the way, the tracking device the government want to put in your car will be able to track your speed (no more going over 30mph or an instant fine) it will also track all your movements along with the id card they want to issue you with.

The next thing in the pipeline will be a tax on the air you breath and don't even think about sex as that will be taxed as well.

Thank goodness I am nearly at the end of my lifetime - I really feel so sorry for you younger people.

Posted by John, 28th February 2007 2:42pm

If as you say, road tax and fuel duty were reduced by a massive amount this
policy would look very tempting.
But from the past performance of this and previous governments, can anyone
honestly think that would happen. I dont think so!
As for the comment that people won't give up there cars until public transport
is better, I have an idea.
Nationalize all bus and train companies and run them to break even, not to make a profit, this would reduce the cost of public transport and perhaps that would persuade more people to use it!
Or is that me just looking for Utopia!

Posted by Paul Sampson, 28th February 2007 2:42pm

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

I have a disabled child so therefore relay on my car, I drive for a living so therefore rely on my car and I live in a rural area therefore.............. do I really need to say the last bit ?????

Posted by Alan F, 28th February 2007 2:44pm

Don't usually do this - but here goes after reading through the bulk of the comments it does appear to be a 'thumbs down' for the last disgraceful tax idea of this disgraceful government. To put my case - I am 77 yrs old disabled and a widow, my husband having died last May. Apart from ten years with our three children (a luxury not many can afford these days) and , believe me, it was apallingly difficult coping on my husbands salary, I have worked since the age of 15 - 13 if you count during the summer holidays. Also I had our children before the 10 yr allowance on NI stamps was granted , hence a lower Old Age pension when I did retire at nearly 62!
Everybody will be well aware I'm sure of the various moans we OAP's have
Suffice it to say I am disabled following a 'routine' total hip replacement 5 yrs ago - six years ago my husband developed heart problems and, despite supposedly being on an 'emergency' coverage died during the night after being told he would have to ring back for an appointment. OK - so what has all this to do with cars and tax ? Well, until I needed to learn to drive when I was 69, in order to be able to visit my 90 yr old mother in a nursing home, because "Public Transport" hardly existed, we (and she) had walked and used the system all our lives, as did our children.
Most of the time it was pretty grim - 'Nationalised' or not - for all those who, despite this so called 'socialist' government, blame Mrs Thatcher!
I have great difficulty walking, let alone carrying shopping and even though there are shops fairly near they don't cater for everything and the bus service, as such, does not provide stops which would make it possible for me to make use of them. I consider myself to be fortunate having been born when we were all told nobody owed us anything and we were responsible for ourselves - it has certainly cut out the 'self pity' and 'my rights' culture which seems to abound these days. I intend most definately to carry on driving. I give lifts to folk I know and I try to cut down travelling by doing a big shop as infrequently as possible. Has anyone who goes on a bout the 'global warming' really looked 1) the geological/ historical evidence 2) the REAL causes of any temperature changes that can HONESTLY be attributed to human fault 3) the actual size of the British Isles as a contributary factor in all this an 4) howis Gordon Brown - or anyone who fills his shoes eventually going to balance any budget which is run the way he has run it, unless they find more ways of unfair taxes. How will they pay THEIR PENSIONS!
By the way ' Learjet ' and David Hutchings also make valid points and I too find it hard to justify all the 4x4's used to ferry children to and from school school but there are also genuine reasons for many.

Posted by Eleanor Mary Davies, 28th February 2007 2:44pm

I don't agree with anythink that take's more money out of my pocket in tax's every time I get into my car. I think we pay enough already on our car's.

Posted by Colin Wakeford, 28th February 2007 2:46pm

WE WORK HARD TO PAY OUR WAY IN LIFE BUT WHEN YOUR KICKED BETWEEN THE LEGS THAT MANY TIMES WITH TAX ON THIS AND TAX ON THAT ITS TIME TO STAND UP.

Posted by Mark Himsworth, 28th February 2007 2:46pm

People often ask "why dont motorists get out of their cars and onto public transport".

My parents are lucky enough to live in the middle of the Devon countryside. There is a once weekly bus service (one out in the am, one back in the pm). Without private transport, they'd be stranded.

I work 45 miles from home. If I relied *purely* on shank's pony, and public transport, the journey would take 2hr 15min EACH WAY. By car, I can do it in an hour. Thats a difference of 2.5 hours a day - almost an entire day every fortnight saved!

If public transport was a) cheaper, and b) more reliable and with more frequent services, and c) less overcrowded (this applies to trains, not mostly empty buses around my way), I'm sure I would use it.

So since my car is such a good option, why am I grumbling about yet MORE tax on my car? Well I dont have any exact figures to hand, but unless Im very much mistaken, the UK motorist pays more tax than almost any other "world leader". Americans are complaining that "gas" has hit the $2/gall mark - where here it is, if my calculations are correct, over $8/gall these days. Add insurance, road tax, MOT, etc etc... Its an utter disgrace.

The govt say that road pricing might allow them to "reconsider" some of these existing taxes - but who amongst us for a moment thinks we'd see the whole, if any, difference reimbursed?

Not only am I against any further exploitation of the motorist, I am strongly of the opinion that its time we saw something in return for our taxes - a road network of a quality that reflected what we pay for it!

Thanks - rant over!

Posted by Steve Hall, 28th February 2007 2:47pm

I have to say there is a load of rubbish being talked about here.

A CAR IS NOT A LUXURY as some people suggest. Also the motorists contribute huge amounts of money to the Govt. If it was spent on transport we could have the best system in the world.

I would also say that ALL prices will go up if this tax comes into force as the price of products will go up as companies will be forced to pay for staff traveling and then that will go onto the price of goods & services.

Public transport right now is dreadful & expensive, it has been underfunded for years and is now, in some cases, actually dangerous. Also it does not support business users at all. I for one would not be able to travel to my office by public transport - it would take me in excess of 6 hours round trip EACH day to get to my office and back.

This is just another tax on the easy target - the motorist.

Posted by Geoff Robb, 28th February 2007 2:47pm

I'm for and against the taxing, it has pro's and con's. Something has to be done or otherwise in 10-30 years time, it will be too latet and gobal warming will have taken part. We can't live without the enviroment and we are killing it. It's people using 4x4 and stuff. I only have a small car which is 1litre and I only use it at the most twice a week!

Some people think(not that Ive read any comments on here so far) that well I'll be dead so sod enviromental change, let someone else do summat about it. Its like recycling, it takes 5 steps outside to the recycle bin to waste it instead of two to the house hold bin. People need to take control of they actions. The road charging has pro's and con's.

Posted by Dan Little, 28th February 2007 2:47pm

Will the government come clean and advise
1. How much money has been spent on completed new roads (not repairs) since 1982 ie the last 25 years.
2. How much revenue has been raised via the roads ie road tax, fuel tax, road tolls, parking fees and any other charge against the motorist in the same period
3. As a result of 1 and 2 above, why is there such a pitiful percentage of road taxes spent on the roads. Our congestion is a direct result of the lack of revenue spent/investment on the roads. This congestion problem was highlighted 25 years ago and ignored by politicians for fear of upsetting voters.
Stop wasting billions on tedious bureaucracy (and being control freaks) and spend existing money more wisely before you price road building out of existence and ruin UK plc.

Finally, stop being duplicious as we the public do not trust the government to raise road taxes to fund congestion relief schemes. For ten years we have had increased road taxes to fund improvements in public transport and the result is a deteriorating and very expensive public transport system operating sporadically. What a shocking vision for the future....ie pay more and get less !

Posted by Charles R, 28th February 2007 2:49pm

A car is definitely NOT a luxury for me. I am a Care Assistant in the community, I earn very little but the rewards for caring for the elderly and mentally ill are hugely rewarding. I'd like to see any of the MP's showering an elderly person at 6.30am which is the time I start 6 mornings a week. Public transport runs on the hour where I am and the service doesn't start until 7am. Obviously too many politicians sitting idle thinking up daft schemes for us motorists instead of getting on with things that really matter. I was actually wondering if we should send the politicians the bill for our cars as they wish to tell us when we can and can't use it and as from july 1st being told we can't smoke in it either..... WHO THE HELL DO THEY THINK THEY ARE????

Posted by Gillian, 28th February 2007 2:50pm

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

Both my wife and I are disabled. I broke my back and she has just has a spinal operation. We simply couldn't get about without a car. Should I be taxed for not wanting to be housebound?

Posted by Bob Rosamond, 28th February 2007 2:51pm

I do believe that our roads are congested and that we do need to do something about it.
Unfortunately, the only way the government can seem to solve the congestion problem is to tax us one, as if they haven't taxed us enough.

Why don't they do something quite simple and force the companies responsible for our poor public transport to improve the service we receive, and a start would be by providing a service that we pay such a high premium for i.e. being on time, not cancelled, getting a seat and most of all, reducing the cost.

I pay £266 a month to travel to work on Southeastern trains and so does my Girlfriend. Yes, a staggering £6384 a year and what do we get for this? Well if you are not at the station early then the likely hood of a seat is non-existent, then there is the guarantee that just outside London Bridge you will be queued and delayed for 5 to 10 minuets. Not long you would think but add that to the almost daily broken down train in front or the relentless signaling failures and this can add up to a delay of an hour. Then there is the fun return journey with predictably the same result.

Why doesn't the government give a tax break for anyone who drives an eco friendly car or uses public transport? This would surely reduce congestion, but my feeling is that the government will find a way to extort more money from the poor motorist, or as we now it you and I!

Posted by Damien Mcardle, 28th February 2007 2:51pm

has anybody calculated the increase in fuel tax required in order to do away with the road fund licence? In my case -driving 10,000 miles per annum at 10 miles per litre it would be about 16 p./litre of fuel.
A small price to pay if this would avoid the totally unfair imposition of road charging. It ought to be possible to make at least two thirds of the DVLA staff redundant too-think of the savings there!
The real solution is for our Lords and Masters in Whitehall to be honest with the country and start spending our taxes on the people and not on their ridiculous pensions and inflated egos.

Posted by Tony Bowker, 28th February 2007 2:52pm

To say every one who signed the pettition must have lots of cars and 4x4s and is selfish is unfair. We are a family of 4 with one car, a ford. My husband uses it to get to work 25 miles away. He works in the middle of an old army base in the country, there are no trains and no buses that go near there. He would have to get a bus then a train then another bus then walk that last 3 miles and would take two hours each way (we looked into it). it is out of the questiont to move as all of the small villages near where he works are too expensive for us. I walk every where with my two children often carrying shopiing as it is almost imposible to get a double buggy on a bus. Does this sound selfish or just a normal family doing what they can to survive. If this new tax comes in it will cost a fortune for my husband to get to work, but public transport is not an option. I would say that is unfair. May be he should give up work, We can sell the car and house and live in a council house on benefits. May be all the wingers about "selfishness" would prefer it if we did that! You can not and should not genrallise after all we are not communists.

Posted by Zoe Turner, 28th February 2007 2:52pm

There is very little left to be taxed !

Everyday folk will be priced of the roads, i live just outside London & would gladly use the public transport system, to get out & about.
However have you seen the charges on rail & tube :/ How is it that europe can provide a clean & cheap transport system, but here its cheaper to go by car ( at the moment ).
Before the government starts putting tracking devices into our cars, it should provide a cheap enough alternative. But that's not going to happen, why can't we do as the french do, i drive down to the south of france every year & use the minor roads which are excellent ( same can't be said about ours ) The toll roads are there if you want to use them & they are quite cheap for short distances ( M6 toll road seems empty all the time, does no one use it because of the price ) !
Probably why i want to move to france, amongst all the other problems in this country. I've said enough, lets keep fighting people ;)

Cheers Sav

Posted by Savo, 28th February 2007 2:52pm

WHY, WHY,WHY Can't the simple system of scraping road tax and increasing fuel tax to compensate, be adopted?
The amount added to fuel to be based on a nominal mileage and fuel consumption as the basis eg say 10,000 miles at 28 mpg = the road tax removed. That would be 357 gallons or 1621 litres. If the road tax removed was £175 it would equate to 11p a litre.
Those who travel more and/or drive less economical vehicles and therefore pollute more, pay more!
Is this too simple, or for many in government - too complicated? Or maybe I'm missing something here?
JohnD
Comments please

Posted by John Dodd, 28th February 2007 2:53pm

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

Has there ever been a master infrastructure plan ??

Why allow corporate to create large office campus's that require a very high percentage of staff to commute mainly by road, simply because there is no suitable housing near to the place of work ??.

We see far too many instances in this country of national traffic being mixed with local traffic ??

We can see this when a large roundabout is constructed, the agenda of the traffic using the roundabout is totally opposed, i.e. local and national traffic being mixed, the latest solution seem to be to introduce traffic lights and marked lanes, this is a total contradiction in terms for the definition of the original roundabout, designed to keep the traffic moving.
These solutions don't work, they're fantastic in principle if viewed on plan from the air, each route having designated lanes, however once on the ground these road layouts are not easy to navigate, usually best done by a local (local traffic) who knows where they're going, but no use to a non local (national traffic), thus they just don't work, and as for traffic lights to stop traffic on a roundabout that was originally conceived to "keep traffic moving", that's a total contradiction in terms. (Tesco Roundabout, Hatfield,Herts), (University roundabout Hatfield,Herts), (London Road Roundabout, StAlbans,Herts)

Who are these planners ??

Look at Junction 19 on the M25, there seems to be some sort of experiment taking place this week, and I believe there has already been an accident (26/2/07).

Look at Hunton Bridge just outside Watford, Road was modified and remarked late 2006, each morning now, tail backs in all directions....

and thats just a very quick view on certain aspects of roads in our area...there are thousands more

Its not necessarily the volume of traffic, its the design of the roads that also has to be considered

Posted by Simon Hodgkinson, 28th February 2007 2:54pm

We are of course all currently taxed on an 'as you use it' basis through fuel duty (a very high tax relative to the base selling price of fuel) - the more you drive, the more you pay. In fact if you drive a more poluting car ie. less fuel efficient, you pay more (that makes ecological sense, right?). Also, can you imagine if the main routes and motorways ended up with high rates of pay as you go, how busy the minor roads will get as people seek to use cheaper routes..........

Posted by Stewart Rix, 28th February 2007 2:55pm

As a small health and safety company providing services to the construction industry, the team each travel 35 to 40,000 miles each year all over the UK. To achieve the same level of service using public transport is just not feasible, therefore we either reduce the service and charge the customer the same for what would be an inferior service, or increase fees to pay for more staff to cover the same workload. Either of the options is not acceptable to our customers.

And yes I drive a 4x4, but without it I doubt whether I would get into work during the winter months as I live in the upper Weardale area that requires a dodgy drive down a steep rough track, over a wooden bridge and up a steep rough track. A 'normal car' wouldn't last 3 months before damage to the uderside, suspension and body is sustained - I know from experience.

Posted by Steve Armstrong, 28th February 2007 2:55pm

As a disabled pensioner with a Son and his family living 224 miles away, even at 50p a mile it would preclude me visiting him and affording a holiday as well.

I think we pay more than enough considering the state of some roads where the present Tax should have been used for improvement.

Robin.C

Posted by Robin T. Cheesman, 28th February 2007 2:55pm

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

Hello, I did try loads of times to sign the petition but the site kept crashing so I must be one of many who were unable to do so. In any event, public transport is just not safe. My husband is a train driver and he is always being threatened by "the great British public". The things he tells me that happen on the trains to travellers are quite horrendous and there is no way I would want to travel with all these lunatics - lets face it, none of them are kept in the asylum any more, they are all out on walking the streets and using public transport and, as a female, it is far too dangerous to be waiting around for late transport or even using it and, in fact, it doesn't even need to be late in the day to make one vulnerable.

Posted by Audrey Starkey, 28th February 2007 2:57pm

The issue is just too complex to be addressed as - do you support this? or ..do you support that? It is not about being selfish or otherwise. Human nature is inquisitive developmental and ingenious. The clock cannot be turned back. Introducing taxation (in any form) to address a series of interconneted socio-economic issues is just disingenuous. We really need (and how many times have we heard this phrase) a totally integrated approach to our transport policy. Just a few of the elements to be considered:
Why are HGV's (and I mean the really big ones) clogging the arterial motorways during rush hours. Why cannot they travel outside those particular peak hours. People who have to travel by car, e.g., rural communities, disabled, doctor's on call, commuters in areas with inefficient transport systems etc. etc..
As far as the comments posted regarding ID cards etc .- Just read George Orwell. With all the integrated databases, refusal to destroy DNA, ID Cards, CCTV, Tracker Software, Mobile 'phones - You are no longer a 'private' citizen - but that is an entirely different issue!

Posted by Mike Green, 28th February 2007 2:58pm

It all boils down to another Government scam to take take take and give little back. The harder I work and the more I earn the more they reap. I work in a city and live on a dairy farm in the country. Other than my own four wheels I have no option to use public transport. I travel 80 miles a day and pay large amounts of money to park my car an put fuel in it. My other half stays at home and works 16 hr days milking 600 cows to make ends meet, another Government scam robbing farmers so they leave the industry and we can buy more goods from abroad (but that's another story)!!!! I would love to stay at home and work on the farm and help keep the environment greener but like the majority out there I don't have several properties in London to rent out for an extra income!!!!!. I think we have to come to terms with the fact this is the way it's gonna be. Another option is to get out of the EU.........

Posted by Karen Jones, 28th February 2007 2:58pm

I already pay too much tax why should I pay tax on money that has already been taxed? Buses & trains are dirty and unsafe. Imprisonment for those that dont have road fund licence.

Posted by Maria Ball, 28th February 2007 2:59pm

To be honest the whole UK( deffo England!) needs a good looking over, everything seems to be raising, council tax, water bills, gas bills, petrol price's, yet as people are not getting anything for the money we are paying in! They is so many ways to save money and not waste it, you read so many things in the papers about the whole uk going bonkers on stuff and using tax payers money for some person to stand in the street for a day as a 'piece of art' They are more important things going on at the moment. We can do stuff ourselfs, like recycle which should bring down our council tax in time. Turning off electrical sockets to save money. The Goverment is just taking the easy way out on things at the moment.

Posted by Dan Little, 28th February 2007 3:00pm

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

scrap the road tax completely increase the cost of fuel so everyone then who drives pays the same costs this will also eliminate the small element of society who drive around with out any road tax on their cars

Posted by D Jervis, 28th February 2007 3:01pm

Reading through many of responses there are arguments on both sides, and it is difficult to support one aspect of the argument without being conscious of the compelling logic of the other point of view. However while I would support in principle the reduced useage of cars, I would argue this should not be done by imposing taxes. I do not understand why in the age of continued development in technology that our working practices still lags somewhat behind that technology. It must be possible to have more people working from home. Also why can London not have a school busing system?
It is known a large majority of the morning traffic is parennts taking children to school. I think this issue needs to be properly thought through and a range of strategies deployed to reduce car use

Posted by W. Henry, 28th February 2007 3:04pm

I am a member inPrime ministers const. i haven't had a reply yet as promised. has any one else.

Posted by Keith Lumsdon, 28th February 2007 3:04pm

My own view is that we pay enough as it is but if a charge of some sort is inevitable this is the wrong way of going about it. This idea should be abandoned along with the road tax. If everything was to be charged in a petrol tax it will be a catch all situation. The people doing the mileage will be charged, as we are now, by the mile with petrol guzzlers paying the most as they use more fuel. The big plus is that it will also catch the Road Tax Dodgers and those who will inevitably find a way of fiddling the monitoring of their vehicles mileage.
At the end of the day despite any promises this Gov't may make about using the funds on the roads they will inevitably use it to help pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which are really nothing to do with us.

Posted by Les Johnson, 28th February 2007 3:04pm

I have a few issues with the Governments continuing victimisation of road users:
1 I don't want to pay for the Government to track & monitor my every movement.
2 I don't trust them to reduce road tax or fuel prices.
3 Why do road planners continually reduce road traffic area, slow traffic progression & impede flow - they must know this causes congestion.
4 I've never worked close to my home, house prices & employment are very difficult to synchronise geographically. Public transport is an over priced, inconvenient, unreliable & dangerous alternative! Can anyone tell me what other alternatives there are?

Posted by James Quinton, 28th February 2007 3:05pm

Why did I sign? Simple. This proposal is not about congestion - it is about raising taxes. Having had public transport, local shops and businesses, destroyed, people needs must travel by private transport. Having turned many areas into "unacceptably polluted noisy unsafe unpleasant deserts" many people fid themselves commuting increasing distances to work in order to provide a livable environment for themselves and their families. In modern UK many simply cannot afford to buy property close to their workplace.
All of this means increased mileages and environmental damage. The proposed tax system simply intends to capitalise on these facts of present day life.

At present I replace a potential 4-times-a-week bus trip with one weekly car trip and save some three days worth of time - one simply cannot physically carry a car-load of shopping on a bus. Pollution wise I think the car is also better. As against this by both inclination and economic force I holiday by (lightweight) caravan.

How would I react if this tax is introduced? I would avoid town centres and travel greater distances to out-of-town facilities by low tax routes! I feel sure others would react likewise - producing new congestion points, more pollution and further hastening the death of urban commerce and town centres.

In reply to 75, I guess the government does not want us to know how little of the road fund licence comes back to the roads. It is instead suggesting that local authorities produce congestion by reducing major roads to single carriageway and use of other obstructions to produce congestion. Would I be wrong to suggest that the new proposed tax would be time rather than mileage based?

Posted by J M C Mortimer, 28th February 2007 3:05pm

Why is it , that in all the hype of trying to get traffic off the roads, it is overlooked that most of the goods transported around the UK today is sent by road. If you travel on any motorway during the night, they are full of goods vehicles, all carrying about £500.00 worth of diesel in their tanks, which is probably used up in one trip. The amount of fuel duty taken at night must be huge. People buy things from the internet for the best price they can, and then expect the items to magically appear on their doorsteps. It is part of the modern culture to have things delivered to our doors, because of the need to work more hours to cover the extra cost of living. A vicious circle in which there is only one winner, the tax man.

Posted by Steve Smith, 28th February 2007 3:05pm

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

Any tax as you go - will only work and be fair if employment rules are changed to allow any employee to work much more flexible hours - for example any 8 hours in a pariod from say 0600 to 2000 hrs - thus allowing those who wish to can avoid the high tax times. I live in Kent and travel to essex every day - my employer wants 0900 to 1700 - but I doubt they will pay the extra for the time of day I need to travel - however, id love to start at say 0700 and finish at 1500 and pay lower tax and and a easier drive - the change in road tax/toll rules and a change in employment rules need to go hand in hand - otherwise who will pay?

Posted by Kevin Watt, 28th February 2007 3:05pm

It is infantile to suggest that people will forsake their cars before viable and efficient alternatives are available. There will be no such alternatives available for many years because successive governments have paid scant regard to the transport infrastructure in the UK and as a matter of fact have taken significant steps to destroy it in the past (eg Beeching etc).
Furthermore people who live outside major towns and cities are unlikely ever to receive the benefit of any new infrastructure. There are countless villages within 30 miles of London that have had no bus or train service for decades and are unlikely ever to have one.
It is those people who will bear the brunt of road use taxation and they will be unable to avoid it.
Perhaps what we should be considering is increasing taxation first upon people who for example could use alternative methods of commuting to work if only there was capacity for them to do so.
If anyone believes that road pricing will replace vehicle excise duties and taxes on petrol then I conclude that they are being naive.
I have read Tony Blair's response to the petition on road use taxation and frankly I simply do not believe a word of what he says. It is interesting to note that in denying that his governmemnt is proposing 'another stealth tax' he is actually at last admitting that such taxes have been introduced by this means already, and as we all know that is something that both he and Gordon Brown have previously denied.
Car use will undoubtedly reduce and find its own level when people realise that at certain times of day it is no longer possible to drive on the roads at all due to congestion. That will persuade them to either reduce the amount of travel by car, by working at or closer to home, or staggering their hours.

Until then, without something being done about providing alternative forms of shifting people, preferably to where they wish to go rather than where phoney Tony wants them to go, road pricing will be nothing more than an additional and penal form of further taxation which is unlikely to be used for furthering environmental and climatic conservation.
Interesting to note that the government is prioritising the construction of super casinos, to which of course it wishes to attract hordes of happy gamblers who do not now but undoubtedly will use their cars to get there.
It makes a bit of a nonsense of this government's policies doesn't it?

Posted by Colin A Little, 28th February 2007 3:06pm

We should scrap the road fund licence and add the tax to the fuel so that everyone can choose how much or how little they wish to drive, Poland have this system. It would save all the money spent on collecting Road Fund Tax, enforcement and prosecutions which could be diverted to other things, like better roads or public transport improvements.

Toll motorways are good if they are cheap like in Europe but here in this country it is all about how much profit we can make by fleecing the motorist.

Posted by David J Watson, 28th February 2007 3:06pm

As soon as i make my million i will be out there with the rest of them with my hummer limo that does about 5 miles to the gallon and get all the looks from my neighbours because the public transport is cr+p and overpriced. In latvia for example as in other east european countries it is so cheap to travel on the public transport system and its good. If the bus and train companies took some notes of thier prices and regular services maybe they will bring the prices down here and more people would use thier services but untill then i say shove your green lobby as they are full of nutters anyway and half the people on here that are against cars probably couldent afford to run one anyway because they are sat on thier fat backsides doing nowt about it.

Posted by Hummer Man, 28th February 2007 3:07pm

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

I still cannot understand why road tax is not put on fuel and cars issued with an MOT disc instead of a tax disc. This would mean that those who use the roads most or those who could afford to drive the gas guzzlers would pay not only towards the environmment but for their fare share of road use - it would also mean that those 1,000's of drivers who think they can get away without tax wouldn't be able to. As per usual the rich get better off and the poor get worse off. if you by a brand new car you can get cheaper road tax because of its emmisions regardless of how mmany miles a year you drive. if you are not so well off and cannot afford a new car you have to pay more road tax, if you are an elderly person who visits the local shops once a week using your car because the public transport system is so appaling you pay just as much road tax as the rep doing 2,00 miles a week - where is the justice in this?

Posted by Marcus Walker, 28th February 2007 3:08pm

Conclusions drawn thus far: We are a greedy nation, both as a whole and on an individual basis. Cars and the likes of, or at least the way in which they are used are, in some cases, more of a status symbol or just something to play with than they are an outright necessity. Congestion and pollution, although often considered a parallel are fundamentally very different matters. Of the two, I believe the latter is more of a concern.

From a political perspective I find it both amusing and ironic that Margaret Thatcher should be brought into focus. Please remember that prior to her appointment as PM Britain was a second world country. Our GDP per capita in 1979 was in fact lower than that of East Germany! No wonder Britain wanted a change of direction & policy in 1979.

Yes mortgages, interest rates, debt and repossessions soared. However, if mortgage rates of 16% were soley responsible for the demise of homeowners at the time then why is it that, under this current administration, where we have witnessed record low interest rates are we not seeing quite the opposite???

Repossessions in 2005 & 2006 grew to staggering levels! Meanwhile, interest rates were at staggeringly low levels. Could it not be the case that greed has reared its ugly head once more??? Furthermore, Gordon Brown's slice of the cake has grown and grown. We are now the sick man of Europe with regards to taxation. The only reason Brown has not raised taxes further is because the economy would stand to go into reverse.

Higher mortgage rates under the previous Conservative administration were, in part, offset by lower levels of personal taxation. However, one of the greatest problems with society in Britain....'Self Control' or rather a lack of it. As soon as folks have a little more cash in their pockets they start to borrow and borrow over the hill. During the property boom of the 1980's I decided to save my extra cash rather than to spend it. It has paid dividends today.

Personal debt in Britain is currently the highest in Europe, and amongst the very highest in the world. Politics has little or nothing to do with this. It's rather more about personal greed than about politics. However, If debt was addressesd, and credit tightened then maybe, just maybe we would not have so many cars on our roads due to the number of vehicles that are the subject of ridiculously high, and in some cases unaffordable personal loans. Many ofwhich are targetted at young adults on low incomes.

As for motoring, I believe many of us (although I stress not all) are making dozens of unnecessary journeys on a weekly basis. We are blessed with technology and quite honestly don't need to take the car into town to go to the bank, go shopping, book a holiday etc. It can all be done in the comfort of one's own living room.

Posted by Mark Bottrell, 28th February 2007 3:08pm

I use my car every day to get to work as there is not a bus service to get me there, sorry if i walked a mile and a half then waited on a service that is every hour, then waited on another service thats every half hour i could probably make it to work in time for lunch. If they could guarantee that the services would be more regular then i'd be happy to get the bus, but until then i'll be happy to use my car.

Posted by Louise, 28th February 2007 3:08pm

Proposals of this kind are always going to alienate one section of society, I don't think the problem of congestion can be culled with left wing ideas such as these. Driving will become more expensive but the majority of people can afford it which is why this is one of the more dispicable forms of "stealth tax" people are still going to drive because it is necessary, public transport isn't good enough for the whole population to use and even if only 20% of drivers stoppped driving and took to using public transport the system would not be able to cope with it. I think the powers that be need to come up with soething less radical and more likely to work.

Posted by Mohammed Akujee, 28th February 2007 3:08pm

Technology is a great thing- crooks love it, I have never been into a pub and been offered a tax free gallon of fuel but I have been offered wine, beer and cigarettes. Within hours of satellite tracking coming into force villains will have found a way round it and accountants will be finding loop holes to exploit. Tax collected at the fuel pump is about at secure as it gets, it also hits high mileage drivers and thirsty cars the most. If any government wants to reduce congestion they have to find the right carrot- hitting us with a stick will just make us uneconomical and increase unemployment. Give tax incentives to business to provide car share systems, minibuses, staggered employee start times etc.

Posted by Dave Hardwick, 28th February 2007 3:08pm

I am in a quandry abouty which side to support, you see I am disabled and my car is not a luxury but a neccessity and while it is big it is not a 4x4 just a Citreon Berlingo which is equipped to carry my electric wheelchair with a hoist in the back. Because I get Mobility Allowance I dont have to pay Road Tax which if it is abolished will not effect me and unless Disabled Registration drivers are exempt from the milage charges we will be a lot worse off than the average driver. If the V.A.T. part of the cost of fuel is lowered I will be better of and this is something I have been campaigning for,for several years now. Disabled people can if they have adaptations made to their cars have them Zero Rated but unfortunately this does not apply to the fuel to run them, so you can see that we are in a difficult no win situation unless they alter the rules for us.
D.Shaw

Posted by Denis Shaw, 28th February 2007 3:08pm

What we should do is tax all transport based on pollution caused / mileage per gallon. Unless there is a real reason for needing a 4x4 vehicle, or an engine exceeding 1.4 - tax on these should be exorbitant and would force people to use the most efficient forms of transport. I agree with Ken Livingstones ideas to tax the 4x4 out of London - this situation is ridiculous!! Public transport systems will also never meet the real needs of the people - ploughing all the petrol revenue etc into this would at least update our present transport mess.

Posted by John, 28th February 2007 3:10pm

Can't we all just use taxi's?

Posted by Larson E Whipsnade, 28th February 2007 3:10pm

I would welcome the tax only if the government can provide a cost effective and reliable alternative. I currently work 150 miles from home and used to commute using the rail network, back then the price of a return ticket was about £45 which is very resonable because a tank of fuel was about the same price, and I wasnt hammering my car. Now the problem is, my times of employment have changed and so to has the price of a return ticket. This has increased by about 300% to £130. Where is the justification and the incentive to use public transport opposed to my own ????? Answers on a postcard please Mr Blair / Brown

Posted by Neil Grafton, 28th February 2007 3:11pm

I totally agree with post 31 A. Bennetts.

As I understand it over the past 10-15 years only 100 miles of roads have been built, all of the rest being access roads to housing estates etc. Obviously one can't keep building new roads forever.

There is probably no single solution to congestion, road charging will have negligable impact. No one believes that the government would balance out the road charges with reductions in fuel tax it is purely a way to raise and waste more money.

It seems fairly obvious you cannot build new roads forever. Then why not limit the total number of cars. It would be simple to prohibt the sale of a new car until an old car is taken off the road and scrapped. It would give value to old cars as people would buy them to scrap them. That would have the added benefit of stopping people dumping old cars and local councils having to collect them. That would stop overall congestion getting any worse and with sensible road building, affordable reliable public transport would ease the situation considerably.

Posted by Peter Leggett, 28th February 2007 3:11pm

Am I the only one in this country who is sick and tired of hearing how wicked and evil we are if we produce waste at our homes and offices and workplaces. The present preoccupation with damaging the environment because we use our cars, planes and ships in particular, is almost a national sickness.
The government are delighted to get in there and stir these issues up because it is another method of collecting revenue. Nothing that I have read or heard or indeed seen has convinced me that I am going to make an iota of difference to the quality of the environment by leaving my car at home.
We have been encouraged for years to buy diesel powered cars and as a carrot the fuel has been cheaper than petrol. What happens when we all get a conscience and transfer over to diesel fuel, the cost per gallon goes up and we are penalised for 'helping the environment.' For Green agenda, read 'money driven.'
The only people who are delighted with this present agenda are Gordan Brown (more taxes), Tony Blair(another cause for him to champion) and the greens who ride a bike!

Posted by Steve Hayes, 28th February 2007 3:12pm

Travel tax is in one sense a good idea in that it is generally right that the users of a service should pay for it.

What is wrong with travel tax is the complication and massive costs that will be essential to implement and run the system. The London congestion charge and the related costs of running that service are only the tip of the iceberg for a NATIONAL Travel Tax. Who pays? You and me.

The current duty on fuel is relatively simple to operate. It also means that visitors to the UK (be they car, van, or lorry users) all pay their share. Yes, I know that many drivers fill up before they venture over the channel, but NO system is or will ever be perfect.

SIMPLICITY. That needs to be the basis of operating any revenue system that works for the benefit of the country and the citizens within it.

A STARTING position for a SIMPLE transport network that works would be to provide a free local bus service. Yes free, and FREE FOR EVERYONE. (This is not my idea. It was suggested decades ago.)

Benefits of FREE LOCAL BUS SYSTEMS.
- Buses spend more time travelling and less at the side of the road as the driver collects fares and checks passes
- More time travelling means faster journeys, without any extra speed
- Faster journeys makes bus travel more appealing
- Buses more likely to be on time if less congestion; or so regular that it does not matter
- Why use a car if you can travel for free on the buses?
- Less cars on the roads makes bus journeys faster yet
- Less vehicle usage will reduce the amount of road development required
- Less car parks in town centres will make more land available for building in town centres, which ultimately will result in more compact town centres. Less urban spread.
- No need to collect money and issue tickets and travel cards
- No need to buy and maintain ticket machines and pay for printing of the blank travelcards
- No need to account for all the cash and other payment forms.
- More jobs for bus drivers
- More jobs for bus manufacturers
- More jobs for bus maintenance people
- Less overall pollution in urban areas
- Less traffic noise in urban areas
- Less need for inspectors. Spend the money on security marshals to control crime.
- More people using the buses at all times should make the buses safer
- Drivers cab can be totally enclosed to protect him/her from attack
- Users don't need to carry money/change
- Greener
- Cuts the unit costs and per mile costs considerably by making the whole system more efficient
- As you use the buses far more you will be less likely to get caught by a "safety" camera.
- No drink drive issues when you are on the bus

Downsides
- Who pays for it? We do in each local area through our local council taxes. Everyone of us whether we use the buses or not. It will still be far cheaper than building new roads and using our cars more.
- You will need to buy a coat for waits at the bus stop. Oh; you have one already
- Less jobs for accounts staff
- Less jobs for the security cash carriers
- Less jobs for bank staff
- What do you think?

Is it likely to happen? No. Why? Too many vested interests in you continuing using your car - the biggest vested interest being the Government. Government ACTION is critical in implementing such schemes.

I spent a week in Spain this month. Did I hire a car? No. The trains and buses were so cheap and regular that two of us spent less in 8 days using public transport than hiring a car for just one day!

In the 90's I spent a lot of time in Australia. I rarely used a car because the buses and trains were cheap, regular and clean. Even today a 1¼ hour journey by train into central Sydney still costs only AUS$ 8. About £3.50. That is THE fare. Not a saver fare or other 'special' fare. THE fare.

Posted by Paul Aspinall, 28th February 2007 3:12pm

I signed the petition but never received the much talked about e-mail response. Was my vote filtered out, or do I just have a good spam filter?

In terms of future changes they are necessary, but I'm not yet decided how or when. That said I think it's wrong to over-tax with the promise that money is needed to produce the results. Past experience shows this doesn't incentivise delivery. I am fed up with driving on roads that literally damage my car, thanks to poor maintenance.

Posted by Paul Maddox, 28th February 2007 3:13pm

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

Although I myself drive, it is only to get to and from work (30 miles each way) other than that My family uses cycles, public transport and we also own a boat (living near the river avon). My car is quite adequate and fairly small. My take on the whole thing is - why do URBAN families have to pick their children up from school (5 minutes away) in a "Chelsea Tractor", why not a Smart or a Micra. 4x4s have a purpose and it is not fumigating our cities with choking smoke. Can bigger cars be taxed more, not just based on engine size, but also on volume of the car itself ??

Posted by Adam M, 28th February 2007 3:15pm

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

I think that anybody supporting the proposed tax must be blind.
Would they scrap car tax and lorry tax and taxi vehicle tax.. I doubt it
Would they scrap the petrol tax and deisal tax... I doubt it.
Vehicle tax and petrol taxes are too lucrative for them and when they talk about "phasing the new tax in" it is obvious what would happen... the new tax would creep up slowly so that we would'nt notice while we still payed road taxes and petrol taxes.
As for the new tax reducing car uasge... RUBBISH... did any of the petrol tax and licence increase usage... NO.
What the government is doing is letting 5the public vote themselves into a tender trap and being very nice about it. It is just a great big scam as was their excuse for going to war with Iraq... they are the biggest scam makers we have ever known... Blair announces... 1500 troops coming home.. 24 hours later 1600 going to Afganistan.
All the new tax would do is give the manufacturers an excuse to increase prices on the grounds that the delivery costs have gone up due to the new taxes... but then its too late.

Posted by F.littler, 28th February 2007 3:16pm

The important thing here is that cars - however big or small - do huge damage to the environment and something must be done! However, for some of us the alternatives are pretty grim due to the poor quality of public transport outside major cities.

I have signed the petition but am almost regretting it. Putting aside the massive inconvenience (if I had to resort to public transport) or cost (if the scheme were introduced) to me as an indiviual, perhaps we need something like this to get the ball rolling on providing alternatives, or just making people think twice before they step into their car. The issue here is not the individual but the environment.

If the tax is introduced, then it should certainly take engine size into account. People who drive large gas-guzzling vehicles for no pracitcal reaon should be penalised. A fuel efficient car gets from A to B just as effectively with considerably less damage to the environment, not to mention that petrol and diesel are both derived from oil, a finite fossil fuel which will eventually run out.

We can't fight the fact that some sort of change is required at some point, and that point is getting closer.

Posted by Anna Hill, 28th February 2007 3:17pm

I am coming up to 72 years of age, living on the State Pension, plus a very tiny occupational pension and this means that I get no help from the government regarding council tax etc. I just about manage to keep my head above water financially, but have mobility problems which entitle me to a disabled badge. I am limited drastically to how far I can walk without extreme pain and my car is my lifeline. Without it I would be housebound as I have lived in the country for the last eighteen years and public transport is very limited. If I have to pay to drive my car on public roads, I will not be able to afford to go out in it. The government have interfered in our lives enough in the last couple of years. Enough is enough!!!

Posted by Maureen Frankham, 28th February 2007 3:18pm

Big brother watching comes to mind....thought this was a free country?Not only CCTV everywhere, speed, oh no money generating cameras, traffic light cameras, tax cameras,but now a personal tracking system so the government will know where you are 24/7, and have the privelage of charging you !Where is it all going to end? this is to reduce conjestion?...I think not!...To save the environment?....I think not! Why don't we all go to work and give all our money to the government? To reduce conjestion and clean up the environment improve public transport and encourage people to use it ! Do not use these current issues as an excuse to tax the working public more than they are now! The government know that people will still have to use their own transport so they know we are an endless source of income....I could go on, but I think it's time for me to shut up!

Posted by Steve James, 28th February 2007 3:19pm

The simple solution to this is to scrap the "road fund licence" (tax disc) as so
many get away without paying,such as tax dodgers,illegal immigrants,
european truck drivers,tourists.
Simply put 10p a litre duty on petrol & 12p on diesel, if you work out the maths it means that the ones that use the roads most,pay the most and
eliminates ALL the freeloaders.

Posted by Michael Allan, 28th February 2007 3:19pm

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.

David's comment (partially copied above) is utterly stupid and unfeeling. If public transport were widely available, I would tend to agree with him, but tell that to anyone living in an area such as rural Shropshire where there is so little public transport one would need to take up residence in one's place of employment if the car was not to be used. Public transport has been a disgrace in Great Brittain ever since the 'wonderful' Dr Beeching closed down much of our railway system. Ok, so the motorways superceded the railways to some extent, but they are now clogged up with HGVs carying frieght which ought to go by rail - if the railheads were there!
Ask the Government to make provision for decent public transport and maybe we'll change our habits - oh yes and make them safe to travel on as well - free from yobs keen to mug us. At least we are able to lock ourselves in our car.

Posted by Tony Ashling, 28th February 2007 3:19pm

Just read through all the comments and find them very interesting. A couple of things though. I've just bought a Landrover 4X4 and as part of the deal Landrover have paid a CO2 offset equal to 47,000 miles driving. Does that let me off the hook?
From what I understand,the roads that are targeted for maximum charges are urban commuter routes, with motorways having the lowest charges applied to them. How this will help congestion on the currently congested motorways I don't know. I totally agree with the points summerised by Shane in no 74. Until public transport is significantly improved ie frequency and price then I would not give up using my car.
The other thought is, assuming this crazy idea should be imposed upon us. How does the goverment propose collecting the money from us? It was hard enough collecting Poll Tax. The CSA couldn't collect money owed to children. We don't really know how many illegal aliens are in the country. Many cars are being driven around without tax and insurance. etc etc

Posted by David Tomlinson, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

No, I didn't sign. I didnt see an alternative to road pricing either. The country is coming to a standstill, clogged with vehicles, we just cannot go on without doing something.

Posted by Anthony Wilson, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

I have heard and read many comments telling car drivers to 'get out of your cars on to public transport', if only it were that easy! I am presently without my car and HAVE to use public transprt (TFL). I have not only been regularly late, cancellations, hiked up fares... I've also totally missed important appointments, missing an appointment ay court only today!
I would have no problem with giving up my car for good if only public transport were cheaper & RELIABLE!

When I chose my car I chose one as eco-friendly as I could afford, this keeps the cost of fuel, tax, etc down. I am against being taxed depending when/where I drive. It would be better if the government promoted the use of more eco-friendly cars & taxed to the hilt the gas guzzlers, maybe if they took zero tax from cars under 1.3 litres & took more from those above this!
It's the larger engined cars causing the problems!

Posted by Miranda James, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

If this happens we are expected to buy the equipment for our cars (which will not be cheap) and then be monitored and charged by the government for every mile driven.
We are told we will no longer have to buy a road fund licence or pay duty on petrol.

Are all those tax disc dodgers currently being caught by the police actually going to have the necessary equipment installed in their cars? If they can't buy a tax disc then I don't think so.
What about all the foreigners, lorries and private cars, how will they pay for using our roads?

The solution must be to have the tax on fuel only, with no other tax on motorist.
This would encourage us to drive economically.
Make us more aware of the fuel consumption when buying a car, additionally helping the environment.
Anyone driving into the country arriving at one of our ports would need to be charged a landing fee tax which could be rated on their fuel tank capacity. Therefore anyone driving from Dover through the country to Holyhead and over to Ireland will pay the equivalent tax and not drive on the tank of fuel bought on the continent.

Further, restrict the parking in our towns and cities then do away with congestion charging but add more park & ride schemes outside the boundaries.

Posted by Gwenda Wakefield, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

The petition although entirely well intentioned was too simplistic and of course everyone will vote against a tax increase.

What would happen to the tax raised, would road tax / petrol tax etcetera be adjusted accordingly. Would there be any trace of public transport if you lived in a rural environment and why not give huge tax breaks for those who work from home. It has at least started a decent debate. Electric cars are there are should be subsidised and electricity surely must come from a new generation of nuclearpower plants

Posted by Phil Sutton, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

For me, it is not so much the cost issue. Anybody with half an eye on modern technology knows that if you can track a vehicles movements using satellite technology, you can determine not only its location but the speed it is travelling at. The Government says that it would not use this technology for prosecution purposes but on their past performance and expertise at U turns, I take it with a pinch of salt. I would bet my mortgage that it would only be a matter of time before undefendable fixed penalty notices started landing upon doormats.
As far as public transport goes, I live and work in Holland Monday to Friday and it works here. In comparrison, the UK is an overpriced, overcrowded joke!

Posted by John Worpole, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

I get taxed on my emissions, thats why I have chosen one that has a 149co2 and get taxed occrdingly, enough is enough !!

Posted by Cliff Jarman, 28th February 2007 3:21pm

As an OAP who does limited mileage then probably the tax with reduced, or no vehicle tax or fuel duty, I would be much better off.
How-ever I do not like the idea of 'Big Brother' spying on me.
To put this system into effect will cost an arm and a leg and we know who will be paying for it.

Posted by Henry Nayler, 28th February 2007 3:22pm

I disagree strongly with the Government putting a tax on which roads, and how far one travels on those roads in the future. However, if they were completely honest and removed Road Tax as it stands, plus the tax on petrol (currently 2/3 of the price of petrol) I would be prepared to consider the option

Posted by Les Parry, 28th February 2007 3:22pm

Showing: 226 to 300 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