£1.34 per mile Pay As You Drive
Discussion
£1.34 A MILE
Pay-as-you-drive plan to cut rush hour traffic jams
MOTORISTS will be charged more than £1-a-mile to use their cars during rush hour, it was announced yesterday.
Transport Secretary Alistair Darling is getting tough on drivers with the pay-as-you-drive scheme to ease Britain's traffic-clogged roads.
And he warned the Government would not keep building more roads to keep motorists on the move.
Under the plan drivers would have to pay £1.34-a-mile to use motorways and trunk roads at peak times.
Vehicles would be fitted with monitors which would be scanned by 'readers' fitted on road gantries and bills sent to people's homes.
Mr Darling insisted: "There is a limit to how much more road capacity you can create."
Other proposals to cut congestion on the roads include:
TIDAL FLOWS: The direction of traffic of one lane of a motorway is reversed to ease rush hour traffic jams.
HARD SHOULDER RUNNING: The emergency lane is opened up during peak periods to make extra room.
DYNAMIC LANES: Cats' eyes are used to change three lane motorways into four by narrowing lane width.
VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS: Maximums are lowered and minimum raised in rush hours to improve flow. The proposals come after a report said The Highways Agency has been "too slow, too timid and too cautious" in finding ways to speed up traffic.
The Agency, which runs motorways and main roads throughout England, was told to find radical "quick win" solutions to beat snarl-ups.
The National Audit Office also said it was "behind its overseas counterparts" in finding solutions to jams.
And it criticised transport chiefs for not knowing about big sporting and entertainment events in advance which often bring motorways grinding to a halt.
Highways Agency boss Archie Robertson admitted they had not done enough to ease the misery of jams.
He said: "We are already taking steps to address some of the issues identified but fully accept that we have more work to do."
He added: "I will ensure that where recommendations for improvement are safe and appropriate to deliver, we will take action."
The National Audit Office report said average traffic speeds had improved between 1998 and 2003 but they were still slower than 1995.
Traffic volumes on all roads rose by 14 per cent between 1995 and 2002.
Sheer weight of traffic accounted for 65 per cent of congestion, while things like accidents made up 25 per cent and roadworks 10 per cent.
http://spod.cx/s?7bb
>>> Edited by ledfoot on Saturday 27th November 23:11
and the Government still let in tens of thousands of Asylum seekers, Refugees etc each year?, add to that that it is also encouraging overpopulation with it's policies on children!,(Tax credits so it pays to over breed! ffs!)
Build MORE roads, use all the money we pay in Car Tax not a small percentage of it into Road building programmes!, simple
iam
Build MORE roads, use all the money we pay in Car Tax not a small percentage of it into Road building programmes!, simple
iam
WTF are you on about iam? What the hell does immigration and ethical policy have to do with motorways?
Headline : house prices rise again
Iam : OMG RELIGION IS STUPID
We don't need more roads. What we need are more people to get off their arses, and buy a motorbike, pushbike, or use a bus.
Oh yeah, and if you want fewer new births, then get ready to work another 20 years, and receive a lower pension, because thats the reality.
I drive 20,000 miles per year, and entirely agree that motorways should be tolled. I don't agree that the hard shoulder should ever be used, its an extremely unsafe idea. The direction changeable motorway lane sounds like a good idea, provided that its separated from the flow of other traffic by barriers.
>> Edited by parrot of doom on Sunday 28th November 00:16
Headline : house prices rise again
Iam : OMG RELIGION IS STUPID
We don't need more roads. What we need are more people to get off their arses, and buy a motorbike, pushbike, or use a bus.
Oh yeah, and if you want fewer new births, then get ready to work another 20 years, and receive a lower pension, because thats the reality.
I drive 20,000 miles per year, and entirely agree that motorways should be tolled. I don't agree that the hard shoulder should ever be used, its an extremely unsafe idea. The direction changeable motorway lane sounds like a good idea, provided that its separated from the flow of other traffic by barriers.
>> Edited by parrot of doom on Sunday 28th November 00:16
"We don't need more roads. What we need are more people to get off their arses, and buy a motorbike, pushbike, or use a bus".
statistically far too dangerous for me I am affraid, and as for buses, where are they then?, I live just 2 miles from work to get a bus I have to catch 2 and thats even before they start running!!
those hundreds of thousands of Asylum seekers and immigrants are given free cars as they get too much offence on the busses btw!, that IS true, also adding to the amount of Traffic on our roads surely?, (wife works for DSS so I DO know it's true!, 6k allowance too btw! for a car, I wish!
iam
statistically far too dangerous for me I am affraid, and as for buses, where are they then?, I live just 2 miles from work to get a bus I have to catch 2 and thats even before they start running!!
those hundreds of thousands of Asylum seekers and immigrants are given free cars as they get too much offence on the busses btw!, that IS true, also adding to the amount of Traffic on our roads surely?, (wife works for DSS so I DO know it's true!, 6k allowance too btw! for a car, I wish!
iam
parrot of doom said:
We don't need more roads. What we need are more people to get off their arses, and buy a motorbike, pushbike, or use a bus.
........
I drive 20,000 miles per year ...
You'll not be cycling then?
parrot of doom said:
The direction changeable motorway lane sounds like a good idea, provided that its separated from the flow of other traffic by barriers.
You mean a single lane with barriers on both sides? Running in the central reservation where the lights are currently?
There are a few local schemes around - Aston Express way in Brum and one of the roads in Cardiff come to mind. I have never used either more than once at peak times. Any regular users have an opinion on hos well they work?
>> Edited by LongQ on Sunday 28th November 01:31
>> Edited by LongQ on Sunday 28th November 01:33
What about car pooling and/or letting high occupancy vehicles use EMPTY bus lanes? Most of the traffic I encounter in peak hours is all single occupant, so why not do something to encourage more car sharing? Just once it would be nice to see this Government come up with a "transport" policy that didn't involve stumping up more cash, telling us we can't do something or spying on us everywhere we go.
This is puzzling me....
Congestion - We can't build our way out of trouble
Housing - Let's build our way out of trouble
Of course we can build new roads, we just need to be a bit creative about it. Look at something like "The Big Dig" in Boston. Let's stop faffing about with Domes and Olympics and do something useful.
You simply WILL NOT get people out of their cars whilst the alternatives are so infrequent, unreliable and generally unpleasant, so please just quit trying (how many 10 year plans have we had now?). We don't all sit in traffic twice a day for a
ing giggle Mr Darling.
This is puzzling me....
Congestion - We can't build our way out of trouble
Housing - Let's build our way out of trouble
Of course we can build new roads, we just need to be a bit creative about it. Look at something like "The Big Dig" in Boston. Let's stop faffing about with Domes and Olympics and do something useful.
You simply WILL NOT get people out of their cars whilst the alternatives are so infrequent, unreliable and generally unpleasant, so please just quit trying (how many 10 year plans have we had now?). We don't all sit in traffic twice a day for a
ing giggle Mr Darling.imho alistair darling is an anogram of 'pathetic waste of human life' and a living example of the pro's to abortion.
tax,tax,tax...........if they actually did what the british taxpayer paid them to do with the same enthusiasm as they do for ripping the
shirts off our bloody backs then we'd be the most admired country in the world.....instead we are stuck with a bunch of no-hope w*nkers who cant find their arseholes with both hands,a map and a search party!
a cabinet full of arnold judas rimmers.......thats what weve got!
tax,tax,tax...........if they actually did what the british taxpayer paid them to do with the same enthusiasm as they do for ripping the
shirts off our bloody backs then we'd be the most admired country in the world.....instead we are stuck with a bunch of no-hope w*nkers who cant find their arseholes with both hands,a map and a search party! a cabinet full of arnold judas rimmers.......thats what weve got!
ledfoot said:
MOTORISTS will be charged more than £1-a-mile to use their cars during rush hour, it was announced yesterday.
FFS do they never stop, so it's road tax, increasing MOT charge, increasing insurance, increasing fuel duty and then you're going to be taxed again when you (along with at least 85% of the working populus) drive to work, to do a days graft which you end up getting taxed out of about 20% of it...
What about people who only use their car to go to work and back? is it really fair to charge them EVEN MORE than old Mrs Miggins who poodles around at 25mph on the roads from 10am till 4pm, before shuffling off home before the rush comes?
ledfoot said:
Other proposals to cut congestion on the roads include:
TIDAL FLOWS: The direction of traffic of one lane of a motorway is reversed to ease rush hour traffic jams.
HARD SHOULDER RUNNING: The emergency lane is opened up during peak periods to make extra room.
DYNAMIC LANES: Cats' eyes are used to change three lane motorways into four by narrowing lane width.
VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS: Maximums are lowered and minimum raised in rush hours to improve flow. The proposals come after a report said The Highways Agency has been "too slow, too timid and too cautious" in finding ways to speed up traffic.
Tidal Flows: DANGEROUS DANGEROUS DANGEROUS...
the way this sounds is that the congested side has an extra lane tacked on from the uncongested side, which (say for example, the Tyne Tunnel) would serve to increase congestion on both sides as the volume of traffic waiting to move through will be impeded at the other side... (not only that, but there will be even more jockeying for position to get into the new lane, and that could then serve to increase rush hour accidents)
Dynamic Lanes: DANGEROUS DANGEROUS DANGEROUS...
You're packing more cars into the same space - if something goes wrong, and a car has a blowout or similar, you have a massive problem (read, pile up).
At least with a 3 lane system if a car has a mechanical problem, there is sufficient space around it to get other cars out of the way, if you turn 3 lanes into 4, you're reducing that margin for evasion by about 8% per lane...
Variable speed limits: YOU WOT????
Maximums are lowered and minimums are raised... just HOW will that work???
Say you then have a max of 50mph and a min of 40mph, you're making all of the traffic sit within a 10mph boundary (which will probably be enforced by endorsable FPT's on both sides of it) and causing more problems by making driving competitive, and again - reducing the space for error.
Come the next GE, this shower of s
t government MUST be removed... they're going to wreck the country if they're left to their own devices - they HAVE to be relieved of office...Oh, forgot about hard shoulder running - does this really need to be considered???
it's an emergency refuge lane - NOT part of the highway, it is there for EMERGENCIES only...
simply cramming traffic into the space we have already is not going to work - if a problem occurs, it will be a major disaster rather than an incident - if a petrol tanker or whatever happens to overturn or spill during the rush hour, with 100% of the road surface taken up by queueing traffic, you'll be able to smell cooked chicken for MILES around... without emergency access this will increase death on the road...
(or is that their idea, that way they can justify more scameras, and by increasing the death rate on the roads, it will make scameras seem to work by having a small decline in deaths immediately around them, as people fear for their licences and what's left of their freedom)
it's an emergency refuge lane - NOT part of the highway, it is there for EMERGENCIES only...
simply cramming traffic into the space we have already is not going to work - if a problem occurs, it will be a major disaster rather than an incident - if a petrol tanker or whatever happens to overturn or spill during the rush hour, with 100% of the road surface taken up by queueing traffic, you'll be able to smell cooked chicken for MILES around... without emergency access this will increase death on the road...
(or is that their idea, that way they can justify more scameras, and by increasing the death rate on the roads, it will make scameras seem to work by having a small decline in deaths immediately around them, as people fear for their licences and what's left of their freedom)
The British Chamber of Commerce claim
"75% of British businesses back the proposal"
Wonder if they will be saying that when we cannot afford to purchase their goods and services....
when inflation will rocket as we will all demand higher wages to be able to afford to go to work.
when we demand higher wages to go to the out of town centres where some of these nutters want to locate businesses
when nurses and teachers will not be able to get to work ... because they cannot afford it...
And cycling will be banned as it will be far too dangerous from the volume alone....
"75% of British businesses back the proposal"
Wonder if they will be saying that when we cannot afford to purchase their goods and services....
when inflation will rocket as we will all demand higher wages to be able to afford to go to work.
when we demand higher wages to go to the out of town centres where some of these nutters want to locate businesses
when nurses and teachers will not be able to get to work ... because they cannot afford it...
And cycling will be banned as it will be far too dangerous from the volume alone....
The motorways ain't the problem. It's the junctions. They would have to extended the exit ramps, So that vehicles at busy junctions, Don't sit on the motorway waiting to get off. And also add armco right along the exit to stop queue jumpers 
. Who we all know end up slowing down the middle lane as well. ATB Derek
>> Edited by winnebago nut on Sunday 28th November 07:37
. Who we all know end up slowing down the middle lane as well. ATB Derek >> Edited by winnebago nut on Sunday 28th November 07:37
How's this for a radical idea:
Fix public transport so it is at least as good as it used to be (we could start by renationalising), and reset the prices so that it's not ridiculously expensive.
Lots of other countries do this and suffer from *far* less traffic problems without persecuting motorists in the proposed fashion.
As usual, this new proposal is yet another sneaky way of handing the country's remaining functioning facilities to the rich, and until we give people an alternative (ie public transport) it amounts to taking away the freedom to travel, at least for those with lower incomes.
Aside from that, all motorway tolls would do is force everyone onto the minor roads. Nice.
Also, don't forget that "toll cameras" could also function as speed cameras, in the same way as SPECS.
Vote these extremists out at the next election.
Fix public transport so it is at least as good as it used to be (we could start by renationalising), and reset the prices so that it's not ridiculously expensive.
Lots of other countries do this and suffer from *far* less traffic problems without persecuting motorists in the proposed fashion.
As usual, this new proposal is yet another sneaky way of handing the country's remaining functioning facilities to the rich, and until we give people an alternative (ie public transport) it amounts to taking away the freedom to travel, at least for those with lower incomes.
Aside from that, all motorway tolls would do is force everyone onto the minor roads. Nice.
Also, don't forget that "toll cameras" could also function as speed cameras, in the same way as SPECS.
Vote these extremists out at the next election.
article said:You've got to be joking, NONE of these ideas will work; all are dangerous or just plain stupid. This is either an empire building exercise for those with vested interests, or they are trying to scar us into something else: toll roads.
TIDAL FLOWS
HARD SHOULDER RUNNING
DYNAMIC LANES
VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS
The real key to solving congestion is driver skill. Driving lessons/tests should include motorway driving and should be made much harder, instead we dont get any motorway instruction at all! The art of driving is being dumbed down, like everything else in this country.
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
I think it's been mentioned before but the obvious thing to say is.
If it's rush hour congestion then it means it's people going to work, how will taxing them reduce the congestion if they still have to get in to work in the first place?
Just like every other dingbat idea this joke of a government comes up with it's only ever been half thought through.
Doesn't all this tax gathering remind anyone of someone from our past history....................King John perhaps? And didn't we force him to sign a certain document curbing taxation for irrelevant purposes.
Magna Carta I believe it was.
Time for another maybe?
>> Edited by FourWheelDrift on Sunday 28th November 12:27
If it's rush hour congestion then it means it's people going to work, how will taxing them reduce the congestion if they still have to get in to work in the first place?
Just like every other dingbat idea this joke of a government comes up with it's only ever been half thought through.
Doesn't all this tax gathering remind anyone of someone from our past history....................King John perhaps? And didn't we force him to sign a certain document curbing taxation for irrelevant purposes.
Magna Carta I believe it was.
Time for another maybe?
>> Edited by FourWheelDrift on Sunday 28th November 12:27
FourWheelDrift said:
I think it's been mentioned before but the obvious thing to say is.
If it's rush hour congestion then it means it's people going to work, how will taxing them reduce the congestion if they still have to get in to work in the first place?
Just like every other dingbat idea this joke of a government comes up with it's only ever been half thought through.
That's inaccurate ; none of their ideas have every been thought through at all (I don't count "will this get us votes")
So we reckon that the Mirror has come down against the Labour party for this election, then.
Your average Motorist (and that's nearly all enough) will look at paying £1.34 per mile, on top of everything else, as unacceptable. Unacceptable enough to vote differently.
Good on The Mirror.
And note: This sort of charge is unlikely to appear for years - and I'm sure Labour would rather it was discussed AFTER the next election rather than before it.
Frankly - I think its TIME for some scaremongering tactics to get these evil bastards out.
Your average Motorist (and that's nearly all enough) will look at paying £1.34 per mile, on top of everything else, as unacceptable. Unacceptable enough to vote differently.
Good on The Mirror.
And note: This sort of charge is unlikely to appear for years - and I'm sure Labour would rather it was discussed AFTER the next election rather than before it.
Frankly - I think its TIME for some scaremongering tactics to get these evil bastards out.
supraman2954 said:
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
Indeed it is. But once the privilige is bestowed upon you you do pay the Government for it for ever after...
Having said that I would support making the "L test" as hard as getting, say, a Rospa Silver/IAM pass. Its still not everything - and most people can pass with determination - but the roads would be a safer place.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff