Road Charging

[wrightyrs]

This topic is going to affect every one of us in one way or another, and most of us directly, so please take the time to read it and go online to sign the petition.

The government's proposal to introduce road pricing will mean you having to purchase a tracking device for your car and paying a monthly bill to use it.

The tracking device will cost about £200 and in a recent study by the BBC, the lowest monthly bill was £28 for a rural florist and £194 for a delivery driver.

A non working Mum who used the car to take the kids to school paid £86 in one month.

On top of this massive increase in tax, you will be tracked. Somebody will know where you are at all times. They will also know how fast you have been going, so even if you accidentally creep over a speed limit you can expect a NIP ( Notice of Intended Prosecution) with your monthly bill.

If you care about our freedoms and stopping the constant bashing of the cardriver, please sign the petition on No 10's new website

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

Please also send this to everyone in your address book who might care.

 

[oliie]

Another viewpoint supported by no evidence or hard facts whatsoever by someone who is not even close to the actual RFP or proposal process.

Those that know the facts are likely to support the system (including professional drivers).

There is another thread on the forum in which I outline my viewpoint and position on the subject.

I refuse to enter a debate without facts, especially given the wider implication of the tax structure system for fuel as part of the overall road charge programme.

O.

 

[Stuart]

Buy the tracking device and let it live in the garage all year round. Then take it out for weekends.

 

[Johnnytheboy]

I've already signed it a while back, because as far as I can tell, it's going to ruin my firm and probably end up putting us out of business. But then, hey, Gordon Brown can pay my dole with all the money everyone who can afford it will pay him.

Don't forget, there is likely to be some element of CO2 price banding, so Trophy owners will get treated in the same way as owners of "gas guzzling 4x4s".

But who do you vote for? They all want to inroduce it.

 

[fazedesign]

Another viewpoint supported by no evidence or hard facts whatsoever by someone who is not even close to the actual RFP or proposal process.

Those that know the facts are likely to support the system (including professional drivers).

There is another thread on the forum in which I outline my viewpoint and position on the subject.

I refuse to enter a debate without facts, especially given the wider implication of the tax structure system for fuel as part of the overall road charge programme.

O.

Please enlighten us with the facts then ollie!

All I can see is another opportunity to screw a few quid out of the motorist in the name of the environment. The true cost of this won't be known until it's forced upon us and we have to pay the bills... and when you combine this with the realisation that it'll soon be followed up with compulsory pay as you go insurance and speed enforcement, i think you are left with a very bleak future for the motorist.

If the goverment really wanted to do something, it could look at simple ways of offsetting carbon emissions whilst trying to reduce it such as perhaps planting a few trees, and establishing a viable public transport network to entice people out of their cars - but instead it chooses to hit us in the pocket as ever.

I think you can probably guess whether my name is on the petition!

 

[pete g]

Hey up,
I agree with you Oliie, scaremongering.
Some sort of sensible charging good idea.
The roads are clogged up with people driving half mile to school and god knows else.
Gordon has to raise cash for hospitals and better pub trans (tax bill wont change) that was neglected for many years, remember Maggie and her 'no such thing as society' and 'would never travel by train' well thats why the roads are clogged.
If people had to pay via fuel tax or whatever there would be more room for drivers like you and me.
But it probablly wont happen and we will have to stick to the track to get away from trucks and 4x4s!.....

 

[oliie]

Pete - at least someone is taking two minutes to think things through rather than shooting from the hip.

A common misconception about road charging is that it is a tax conceived to work in addition to an existing, unaltered, motoring tax framework.

I never see anyone mention the abolition or reduction of annual car tax, the reduction of fuel duty or any other tax incentive in the same breath as 'Road Charging'.

Thank goodness there are those that still think with a broad mid and without a one track agenda. If we were all like the ones who signed the petition we would never have any duty on fuel. Sure, everyone would be better off from a financial aspect. For about 6 months when the economy starts to crumble.

The extra spending will mean that mortal citizens reduce their savings. The reduce savings rate will force the central bank to raise their interest rates to encourage savings. The increased interest rates will pull other socio-economic levers, such as mortgage rates that are linked to base rates. People will moan. International firms will take their business to another country on the back of increased lending rates to fuel their expansion. The movement of jobs overseas will increase the unemployment rate. The economy crumbles.

But hey, you've an extra 60p in your pocket for every litre of fuel.

Except that you're unemployed and can't afford even a litre of tax-free petrol.

Its an exaggerated example to make a point. But the economic principle is the same.

Road charging is not necessarily an extra tax per sae. For many it is likely to be tax neutral. It is more about changing attitudes than about raising funds. For those that don't do much driving they're likely to pay less under the proposed system. Those that drive a lot pay for what they use. But they will have the option to reduce payments by changing habits (read: using the road off-peak). After all, why penalise those that hardly ever drive to fund those that make a living driving? Someone has to pay for all the wear and tear etc. Why penalise an 80 year old lady with the same car tax as a 35 year old travelling sales-person?

I am fortunate to be close to this scheme and a now-scrapped charging scheme.

Those that shoot from the hip don't know the full story. Who can blame them? There hasn't been full press coverage of a proposed solution. However this can't be done until the RFP process has run its course. Its a chicken and egg situation with the added risk of a premature hatch.

There are a couple of countries that have implemented a road charge system exceptionally successfully. In one instance the system has been live for over seven years. In fact the benefits of road charging have boiled over to provide many other benefits to the average citizen. I have witnessed the system and can also vouch for its effectiveness.

That country has, arguably, as good an economy or better economy than the UK (read: GDP, unemployment). It's certainly not a coincidence!

There will always be a divide on this subject. But like all good things, you'll never really know how you did without it until you've witnessed it for yourself.

The trick is to disseminate the benefits to Joe Public in order to roll out the scheme against the staunch critics, who in my experience, don't really understand the economics behind the decisions being agreed. Tax drives a change in attitudes and this one will be no different.

I've seen the maths, and it adds up.



Cheers
O.

 

[oliie]

^^^^^^^^ P.S. I am not trying to get anyone to agree with me re. the above!!! I am merely stating my viewpoint, which in most cases, is much more informed than many of the other opinions I have read on the subject!

 

[fazedesign]

Ollie, please send me any links to data showing how this scheme would work & how it would be tax neutral - I'll happily examine them with an open mind.

The crazy thing about this idea is that we already have a usage-based tax on motoring in fuel duty, the more you drive the more you pay...

It's comments like "Tax drives a change in attitudes and this one will be no different. " that scare me the most - I believe that the current government (and any current likely alterantive) cannot get past the notion of persuading change by hitting people in the pocket is the only way forward. Our lives are being dominated by ridiculous amounts of ever increasing regulation and I can only see this continuing.

My alternative to this would be to abolish road tax and increase fuel duty to cover this and also third party cover for all drivers. Instantly there is no uninsured drivers to chase, and no road tax evaders, which should free up a whole heap of resources. The biggest problem for transport in this country is the chronic lack of viable public transport - i only have a 10 mile journey to work but it would take over 2hrs to do the journey without a car, so it's little wonder I choose to drive. One only has to look at the quality of service in other countries to realise how bad this place is...

 

[wrightyrs]

I copied this thread from PistonHeads.com and thought that it might be of interest to some members on here.

i do not agree with it completely,i am far better read than to take it as complete fact.
But i'm all for statements like this if it generates interest in the topic and encourages members to look into the facts in greater detail.

 

[oliie]

My alternative to this would be to abolish road tax and increase fuel duty to cover this

You've got it mate!

That is what road charging is all about - but it allows for a new function in the process: discrimination by road type and by time.

So it is like your proposal but with the added control of promoting certain times to drive in order to reduce congestion. In the end it will be tax neutral but at either end of the spectrum it will influence behaviours in the light of reducing congestion.

This goes back to my point: it is not a new tax on top of an unaltered framework. It works hand in hand to be tax neutral.

O.

 

[fazedesign]

Ollie, the problem is that I don't trust the government to make it tax neutral, and I can also see that it will simply be expensive when people actually want to use the roads to go to work... I totally understand the change in attitude idea, but if its about changing the times we drive can we expect government organisations to lead the way by staggering their opening hours between 8am and 8pm? I'd love for us to move toward a 24 hour society (I'm rubbish with mornings, lol)

It just appears to me that the goverment wants to use the stick rather than the carrot to facilitate change (in all aspects of its operation, not just this). I'd like to be convinced that a scheme such as this is truly of benefit to the nation but I just see it as the thin end of the wedge when it comes to eroding our freedom of movement without monitoring, coupled with a nifty way to squeeze a bit more cash out of those who can afford it anyway.

If you do know of any documents in the public domain explaining in more detail the nature of this scheme I would appreciate a link.

 

[Steve]

I think what most people disagree with are the implications of having a GPS device in the car and the future possibility of never being able to exceed the completely out of date speed limits on public roads without prosecution. There will always be road tax of some from or another, but please don't think that this system will replace fuel duty, that will still rise as before. There will be no point owning a performance road car at all, just have a bus (SUV) and trailer a track car to the overpopulated tracks, and expect to get raped in the arse for the pleasure.

 

[Cue]

totally agree with this - is we abolish road fund license or whatever it's called now and implement a system where you're charged on the type of car you drive, driving style and where, when you drive and how many miles (all of which are possible with current technology) it will be fairer to the motorist.

Plus you'll start to see automotive companies actually putting money into alternative fuel cars. Business will spread out more in the suberbs, funding local economies - reducing traffic on the Motorways. All is good apart from the fact that the combustion engine will be dead within 20 years (i suppose it's ok as long as we get the sound and pace from a new type of engine)

 

[Steve]

Bio-ethanol will stave off the electric motor/hydrogen fuel cell for a couple of decades I think. Better for carbon emmissions than batteries with the net carbon output with none of the nasties involved in battery production. Plus it's 107 Octane, yippee! Hydrogen fuel cells are great but far too expensive for mass production, the costs will come down though just like with photo-voltaic cells, if they can find a substitute for the platinum needed for the membranes. Hopefully we will never see fully electric battery cars on the road, the Prius is a joke, proven that it needs to be run for a decade to make up for the embodied energy in it's manafacture. Better off driving a Range Rover Sport around.

Fuck road tax, let's just ban people who don't enjoy driving from using the roads. :lol:

 

[Johnnytheboy]

I never see anyone mention the abolition or reduction of annual car tax, the reduction of fuel duty or any other tax incentive in the same breath as 'Road Charging'.

Yeah, right. I won't hold my breath. Ian Macartney (? cabinet minister) came on Radio 4 the other week when the Stern report came out and said that if road pricing was revenue neutral it wouldn't work.

So prepare to bend over and get screwed by Gordon Brown.

Oh, and Steve Gunnis is right. Once they've got a little black box in your car, be prepared to have the speed of your car controlled for you. The system is called Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA), and it's being developed whether we like it or not.