Road pricing to quadruple driving cost
Test shows huge leap in costs and loss of privacy
Satellites to price you off the roads?
To check the system, Car magazine put a satellite tracking system and the Government's provisional pricing structure to the test, with chilling consequences. A black box tracker was fitted to a Ford Focus, and the magazine discovered that the device, already in use by fleet operators, pinpointed the car's every move to within three metres. The system can also identify speeding infringements, even by as little as 1mph.
In practice
However, there is also the potential for a huge jump in motoring costs.
The magazine tried out the system on some of Britain's most congested roads during the rush hour and applied the Department for Transport's sample prices per mile, following the Government's charging principles: the more congested and major a road, the higher the cost per mile.
And in conclusion, Car found that the cost of motoring would rocket for millions of Britain's commuters.
The first journey, from Peterborough (Cambridgeshire) to Baldock (Hertfordshire), took in a mix of motorway, urban, A roads and rural roads, with prices varying from 86p a mile on the gridlocked A14, to just 4p a mile on the rural A505.
At today's prices, this 53.2-mile journey would have cost £3.57 in fuel duty and road tax, in a 1.6-litre Ford Focus averaging 44.1mpg. But under pay as you drive charging, Car estimated that the journey would cost £17.50.
Similarly, a 74.3-mile journey from Peterborough to London -- depositing £4.84 into Government coffers at today's rates -- could cost £20.85 when pay-as-you-drive is up and running.
"The Government says half of motorists will pay less if road pricing comes in. But the other half – some 14m drivers – face big hikes in their cost of commuting," said editor Jason Barlow. "Not to mention the 140,000 drivers who will be subjected to the top rate, provisionally priced at a hefty £1.34 a mile."
Something must be done
Car agreed something has to be done about the congestion that blights our roads -- and the Government claims this pricing structure would cut total jams by 46 per cent.
"Having conducted a real-world test, we believe satellite tracking could provide a sophisticated, precise way to make motorists pay for their true cost of motoring," said Barlow. "But it will be a huge challenge – and cost billions of tax-payers' money – to develop a bullet-proof system that works not just for one car, but for the 28m cars out there on Britain's roads."
Car believes there are other crucial issues that must be dealt with, before the system is implemented. Barlow: "We are concerned that congestion might be displaced from high rate, major roads – which are best suited to dealing with heavy volumes of traffic and typically away from residential areas – and onto cheaper, minor roads, causing congestion there.
"We need the following guarantees from the Government. First, that the public transport system will be improved, to offer a true, reliable and flexible alternative to the convenience of the car. Second, that employees will be guaranteed flexible working hours, to help motorists avoid peak time charges if they wish to.
"And finally, we would like the Government to go on the record, and promise that satellite tracking won't be used to catch out motorists for accidentally slipping just over the speed limit."
This isn't progress it is a throwback - the effect is to re-establish patterns of movement back to pre-WWII levels. Owning a car (let along using it) becomes a major privilege.
I know Car were trying to be politically correct with their analysis and requests but I don't think they go anywhere near far enough.
The system as proposed is so fundamentally flawed as to be wholly unrealistic. No amount of "public transport" can compensate for loss of liberty that this would create. And the real kicker is that it is all being worded to make it look favourable.
It was bad enough when BAA/BA got away with adding just one extra lane to the M25 instead of the ten (extra) that is actually needed to handle the increased passenger capacity their new terminal will create. If that had been made public would they have been allowed to get past provisional planning permission? Instead they propose that the public transport system should be throughly reinforced to create "gateways" but in reality that hasn't happened yet and is unlikely to happen anytime in the next ten years.
Now we have the government trying to pull off the same kind of trick for the entire country because they can't think of a better way to do it. Just because it is the best method they have found yet it doesn't make it feasible. This system stands to bankrupt everyone on a moderate wage or less within just a few years. I can see some of the argument as correct and justified but the package as a whole is not just a bitter pill it is poison by another name.
So far I have done everything legal I can think of to stand against this growing threat but it seems like a runaway train that no amount of opposition can hinder.
- once every 5 years you get to vote for one shower of sh't or another...but chances are you live in a "safe" seat where the majority of the local populace are too stupid/blinkered/gullible to change their vote, so your vote is effectively worthless.
- you also get to vote for local councils, except they're full of NIMBY's and jobsworths who don't want to do any hard work in the real world.
- once you've done that they then completely ignore their manifesto's and do what the hell they want, safe in the knowledge it'll be 5 years before you can kick them out and by that time you'll have forgotten all this and they'll be dangling a tax-cut carrot anyway so all the numpties will just vote them back in again!!!
Failing that if people feel so strongly about this, which I do, then if and when they fit these new tracker units to your car all you have to do is RIP it out and throw it in the back of a skip lorry etc.
People can bring down the system if there is enough kickback.
What pisses me off is that anything with an engine in this country is just getting hammered. People talk of track-days to enjoy motorsport, yet they impose so many more rules on that its just ridiculous. I enjoy Motocross but finding tracks, noise "pollution", the 12 day rule etc just do my little head in.
You can't move on the roads which cost a fortune to drive on, and you are treated like an infant off-road. I hate it all passionately, how and why its got into this giant mess I'll never know. Don't care. Italy, I love you.
havoc said:
Ah, that'll be democracy in this country then:-
- once every 5 years you get to vote for one shower of sh't or another...but chances are you live in a "safe" seat where the majority of the local populace are too stupid/blinkered/gullible to change their vote, so your vote is effectively worthless.
- you also get to vote for local councils, except they're full of NIMBY's and jobsworths who don't want to do any hard work in the real world.
- once you've done that they then completely ignore their manifesto's and do what the hell they want, safe in the knowledge it'll be 5 years before you can kick them out and by that time you'll have forgotten all this and they'll be dangling a tax-cut carrot anyway so all the numpties will just vote them back in again!!!
What for those of us who own fun cars, and enjoy 3 hours driving on weekends?
If it happens, I'll be the first to have a tracker bypass switch installed!
We the public do not like congestion, we are the ones who "suffer" when roads are congested. And we unanimously agree that paying to drive is not a solution we want. When are the days of cleverly worded proposals going to end?
The only fair payment scheme would be for those who drive to give the money to those who do not. Even that is not fair. Handing over money to the government is robbery!
This thread incites more fury in me than any I have ever read before. Pray it doesnt come to pass.
why are 'some' people against modern vehicles whe there are other ways to cut pollution and deal with the environmental factors. cars today the most efficient and environmentally friendly they have ever being and continue to become ever better.
its only being just over a year and half since i passed and its seems that my driving days are over already.
the thing is that the mps dont really get to feel like or know what it is like to be the average person who is struggling as it is with all the taxes and such.
FYI are bring in tax breaks for companies that buy home computers for their workers - to encourage home working - but it's bollox as it's just means cheap PC's for people
Simarly and move laughable is the Bicycle scheme to encourage more people to cycle to work !
Plotloss said:
Why oh why dont they just incentivise teleworking?
Let employers not pay employers NI for every employee that telecommutes.
Less journeys, less stress related illness, less sickies, lower overheads.
Its not rocket science but then it doesnt make any money either...
FYI are bring in tax breaks for companies that buy home computers for their workers - to encourage home working - but it's bollox as it's just means cheap PC's for people
Simarly and move laughable is the Bicycle scheme to encourage more people to cycle to work !
Plotloss said:
Why oh why dont they just incentivise teleworking?
Let employers not pay employers NI for every employee that telecommutes.
Less journeys, less stress related illness, less sickies, lower overheads.
Its not rocket science but then it doesnt make any money either...
UKBob said:
A lot of stuff I wholeheartedly agree with
This whole concept scares the
out of me...it will be yet another nail in personal freedoms and in so-called "anti-social" hobbies (think shooting, think powered water-sports...) So...what can we do?
- Write to MP...might not be a waste of paper, certainly worth the effort. Just be rational and eloquent.
- Write to Ladyman...that probably WILL be a waste of paper
- Petition? We've all seen how Westminster treat them.
- Public campaign...worth a shot, trouble is it takes a lot of £££, and the gov't has a lot more to fight it...it's got all the taxpayers' money!!!
Any other suggestions???
Plotloss said:I have a broadband connection paid for by work to allow me to access the network at home and at the weekends, to save additional trips to the office.
Why oh why dont they just incentivise teleworking?
Let employers not pay employers NI for every employee that telecommutes.
Less journeys, less stress related illness, less sickies, lower overheads.
Its not rocket science but then it doesnt make any money either...
This connection is taxed at 40% (following our recent clarification from the Inland Revenue) as there is a chance that I could use it for non work related stuff (which obviously I don't
). Encouracing tele-working is a long way off. Once more, take with one hand and take with the other.
I thought that for a vary long time now (was it in the Magna Carta?) we have had a right to go about our lawful business unimpeded by the state.
So unless they just ignore our rights (again) they'll have to make driving without a tracker illegal! Then they'll know who you are, where you are, and charge you for the privelige.
Emigration or Revolution?
Time for the British revolution to begin! They think they are so far beyond it in this country that they are safe! Pah! History says otherwise!!
(don't know whether I'm allowed to say that of course. You have to be careful what you say on your videoscreen nowadays, big brother might be watching!)
Trains can get us half way but we still need trucks!
So, stuff costs more, and we pay more to go A to B. We end up with less disposable income so we buy less, and we go out less, and when we do spend we spend less and get less as products have increased in price.
If we give up our cars, products still cost more, and likley that the now overwhelmed public transport can't cope, so they increase costs for congestion (already seen this mentioned).
We end up *maybe* making a saving doing it this way, but overall it'll probably cost us the same, but we won't have the freedom of the car we had before, for negligible saving.
So, EVERYTHING will cost more, and we'll have less income.
We'll demand higher pay, which drives prices up further for goods and services.
I think we can see where this is going.
Inflation can be bad enough moving with much more subtle forces.
But a DIRECT alteration to the cost of transport will just send this country spiralling into the sh1te.
Fair enough for those whit LOTS of spare income, but all that money they take in tax will just be more money we won't spend on the now expensive goods.
No matter which way it goes this country will go tits up!
And we'll loose our privacy too
Will never happen, even Tony BLiar isn't that stupid! Or is he?
Dave
>> Edited by Mr Whippy on Wednesday 3rd August 13:34
Plotloss said:
Why oh why dont they just incentivise teleworking?
Let employers not pay employers NI for every employee that telecommutes.
Less journeys, less stress related illness, less sickies, lower overheads.
Its not rocket science but then it doesnt make any money either...
I can't work from home unless I can provide a "secure" room to convert into an office, as I only have a one bedroom property (i can't afford anything else) I don't have one. I can't get to work by public transport and to cycle requires me to climb a BIG hill, no surprise my largest outgoing (after a mortgage) is already petrol!
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff