| Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Tony's reply to the Road Tax E-Petition | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 21 2007, 08:26 AM (235 Views) | |
| u4coffee | Feb 21 2007, 08:26 AM Post #1 |
|
Just Married
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thank you for taking the time to register your views about road pricing on the Downing Street website. This petition was posted shortly before we published the Eddington Study, an independent review of Britain's transport network. This study set out long-term challenges and options for our transport network. It made clear that congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that advances in technology put these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind politically, feasible. That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about imposing "stealth taxes" or introducing "Big Brother" surveillance. This is a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national level. That's why I hope this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for you to take it further. But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working with some local authorities that are interested in establishing local schemes to help address local congestion problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas. One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion is bad. It's bad for business because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects people's quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government. Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue. Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains - helping to explain why more people are using them than for decades. And we're committed to sustaining this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned between now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving. But all the evidence shows that improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion. This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing as a means of addressing congestion. One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses, individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12 billion would be the direct cost on businesses. A second option would be to try to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity. Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other services such as education and health, or increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this approach would entail. That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone's interests, especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without exploring it further. It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But any technology used would have to give definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold information about where vehicles have been. But there may also be opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a "Big Brother" society. I know many people's biggest worry about road pricing is that it will be a "stealth tax" on motorists. It won't. Road pricing is about tackling congestion. Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall. Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided. Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a system that works. A system that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we don't have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would be further consultations. The public will, of course, have their say, as will Parliament. We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage in further debate. Yours sincerely, Tony Blair |
![]() |
|
| safc_fan89 | Feb 21 2007, 09:16 AM Post #2 |
|
safc_fan89
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I bet Mr Blair didn't write all that... |
![]() |
|
| Lord Tau | Feb 21 2007, 09:44 AM Post #3 |
![]()
|
Whilst I was reading that, I could hear Tony's voice in my head. Is this good or bad? |
![]() |
|
| The STIG | Feb 21 2007, 10:49 AM Post #4 |
|
Unregistered
|
that's a bad thing tau, very bad Big Brother is Watching You! |
|
|
| Lord Tau | Feb 21 2007, 11:02 AM Post #5 |
![]()
|
Well, I suppose that is better than watching Big Brother!! roflmao |
![]() |
|
| u4coffee | Feb 21 2007, 11:32 AM Post #6 |
|
Just Married
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
roflmao
|
![]() |
|
| wickedwitch | Feb 21 2007, 07:12 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hmm. What a complete and utter load of twaddle. I could cut traffic congestion by more than half without spending any of the taxpayers money. All that needs to be done is to restrict each household to one vehicle between them (instead of one each). Children would have to go to a school within walking distance of their homes (unless they were at boarding school) and bus and train operators would have to get together to make sure that buses got people to a train station in good time to catch a train (and vice versa). Simple innit? |
![]() |
|
| The Saint | Feb 21 2007, 07:37 PM Post #8 |
|
Unregistered
|
No it isn’t….because as your government privatizes the public transport system, those loving private enterprises kill off the less profitable routes, only having their buses traveling on the cash cow journeys! A viable public transport system is vital to reducing congestion and without it, everything else is simply impossible. You need to give people a viable way to get to work 24/7 or people will be left with no alternative BUT to use their own cars. But the short sighted government see this as only part of the solution, where it is not, it is ALL of the solution. Give people a cheap alternative to cars and they will use it. When I worked at Nissan, I often finished in the early hours of the morning, so without a car, or paying a $30 taxi fare, how am I supposed to get to work without a vehicle? And as my wife worked too (well until my son was born), and out shifts often overlapped, we needed two vehicles otherwise one of us had to give up their job. Oh and if you want to get people on the buses, ban those people who stank of pee and I was always stuck next to on the rare times I used a bus/train. |
|
|
| stradlin24 | Feb 21 2007, 08:02 PM Post #9 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
not really! so, whilst i'm at work, which is 30 miles from my house my wife and son are stuck in the house all day because they don't have a car to go out?? no f**king way! prisoners in their own home! we live in a little village and there is no trains and one bus every 5 hours so one car?? i think not next suggestion please |
![]() |
|
| stradlin24 | Feb 21 2007, 08:04 PM Post #10 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
...and i'd like to see you walk to the nearest school to us!! roflmao roflmao roflmao roflmao roflmao |
![]() |
|
| wickedwitch | Feb 21 2007, 09:09 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ah, so my bright idea wasn't quite as bright as I thought then? Perhaps I ought to change it to restrict each URBAN household to one vehicle between them (instead of one each). Children would have to go to a school within walking distance of their homes (unless they were at boarding school) and bus and train operators would have to get together to make sure that buses got people to a train station in good time to catch a train (and vice versa). Bus and train services would have to be vastly improved in order to get people to and from work. More people could be encouraged to use the services if the prices were reduced - at present the cost of public transport is totally silly and prohibitive. Where I live, our bus service is daft. When people want to go to and from work they use single deck buses. During the day time when hardly anyone uses the buses, they put on double deck buses! Which is why I get to work an hour before I need to as my husband gives me a lift on his way to work. He can't use public transport because it would take him 2 hours for a 12 mile trip and there aren't any buses that would get him to work for 8.30 anyway! |
![]() |
|
| The Saint | Feb 21 2007, 09:21 PM Post #12 |
|
Unregistered
|
In most of America (apart from the real big cities) the public transport stinks or does not exist. Without a car you cannot survive. |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Road Cars · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)





12:35 AM Jul 11