I haven’t signed the Downing Street petition on congestion charges for a couple of reasons.
- Something has got to be done, not just because of traffic congestion, but also because of climate change. It’s just not responsible for car usage to remain at present levels, let alone the projected ones.
- The “chicken and egg” nature of public transport and private transport. In other words, do we have a poor record on public transport because people have opted for cars regardless or have people switched to cars out of frustration with public transport.
Finally, why are car manufacturers still making 4X4 vehicles costing £55,000 and doing, at best, 15mpg? Answer, because people are buying them. It has to stop.
Mike Hill 
February 22, 2007 at 11:58 am
Your second point is surely only the tip of the iceberg of a very complex issue, which at the very least encompasses places of employment in relation to where employees live, the feasibility of using public transport with its severe limitations in terms of areas covered, time factors and limitations, monetary costs, reliability and so on. Beeching too has a lot to answer for with the many rail tracks that can either no longer be used, or that are no longer in existence. Were use of those still a viable proposition, then not only would private transport be perhaps a lesser problem, but also another issue, the volume of commercial vehicles which use the road system and further pollute the atmosphere.
With reference to your final point, surely the crux of the matter is that legislation is needed to control both the manufacture and import of gas-guzzling vehicles. Were they not available, they could not be bought.
February 22, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Hi Mike,
I wouldn’t disagree with what you say (I rarely do), but I’m not at all sure that what you say has much to do with the governments ideas about road pricing.
I think the main reason why many signed (me included) is a lack of trust in the governement’s intention. That incredibly accurate documentary on the way government works, “Yes, Prime Minister” once contained the line (appoximately) “Something Must be done, This is Something so this is what we will do”.
But more to the point, apart from things like Beeching, Public Transport is much more expensive than it is in the rest of Europe, even the rest of the world. Some of this is because fares are a form of (indirect) taxation, in that Train Operating Companies pay the government hugh sums for their franchises and this is part of the fare, wheras once there were subsidies.
To take this further, there’s no confidence that any money raised by this will go to tackle congestion or even climate change – after all little of present transport taxes go towards anything in this arena. I’m not necessarily against governments using funds from one area to keep other thigs going, but there has to be a balance and HMG is way off balance.
Although I don’t support Easyjet’s approach in any way, their recent ads on Gordon Brown’s departure tax increases aren’t totally off beam. (Their views on the damage air transport does are less defensible.)
Three other problems are:-
1 As with ID cards, the technology isn’t up to implementing it (and even if it were, the government has a terrible track record on implementation)
2 The costs (ID cards again) will be astronomical £600 per car and £300 per year to administer have been suggested. as this is govenment, it will be bigger. (No doubt, you llike the Bishop of London need to use the car to carry your gear around to some engagements and even if you downsize, you are going to be faced with noticable fixed costs for something like this, even if you use Public Transport most of the time.)
3 Big Brother. I don’t believe Mr Blair’s protestations about privacy being taken into account. We already know that London Congestion Charge details (who was where and when) are being shared with the police and (ID cards again – I didn’t sign that one) Mr Blair already thinks its a great idea to have everyone’s fingerprints on file (even though the matching technology couldn’t make much use of it).
I could go on, but I won’t
David
P.S I trust Anthea is progressing well.
February 22, 2007 at 6:11 pm
I wonder why people are so “protective” of their tin boxes on wheels?
I am getting nearer to my 3 score years and ten and now pay £9 per year for a Senior Railcard – which entitles me to nearly half fares on British Rail. For one reason or another, i have never driven a car and in my child rearing days and later in my grandchild caring days got out and about with buggies, bags and children with very little trouble. I have spent most of my adult years in paid employment in Hospitals and the Probation Service and travelled daily to wherever I was working on public transport. Timetables are essential but otherwise I have found that buses and trains do run at the times stated.
My grandchildren make it very clear that they expect us all to do something to save “their” planet and I am in total agreement. We have to start where we are ourselves in this case and let the ripples spread………. These days I am well known on my trusty bicycle – fairly loaded up but most local journies can be done. Not bad for an old ‘un.
February 25, 2007 at 4:01 am
In theory I agree, something has to be done. However in the more rural parts of the country there just are the public transport options. I have recently moved away from Norfolk, but when I was living there, if you wanted to go to the next town (15miles away) then there was only 1 bus a week. So if the money earned is going to be put into funding public transport then great. But it’s hard to agree with the taxation when the local government refuse to help to add more public transport.
It’s very unlikely that this would even come into play for at least 10 years anyway though. So who knows what might happen between now and then.
February 26, 2007 at 11:54 pm
So the government wants us to use our cars less.
Can someone please explain why they have not yet closed the House of Commons car park ???
February 27, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Hey, check my website out about reduce your carbon footprint.
The newsletter is on there which has been handed out to all the homegroup people at christchurch Downend.
soon want to hand them out to everyone in the church and to other churchs around bristol and people outside church.
http://www.piczo.com/paynemark
http://www.piczo.com/paynemark
cheers
Geoff. Payne. Climate Change Co-ordinator for Christ Church. Downend
March 3, 2007 at 8:07 pm
The problem with congestion or road charging as I see it, is that it is once more a tax on the poor. Rich people will still be able to drive their expensive gas guzzeling 4×4 whenever they please whilst the rest of us will be unable to afford to travel. I would not be able to go to work on public transport and that is only a journey of 8 miles. I could get there in the morning – probably late but the last bus home from my connection leaves too early. A bit too far to walk. Another problem is – tax would be applied to main roads, bypasses and the motorways forcing traffic onto country roads and again through villages.
Surely the C of E sets a good example – very few of our churches have car parks.
March 3, 2007 at 8:58 pm
The problem here is not one of climate change which is not the result of carbon emmission, although it is a very good idea to reduce these and live cleanly, but availability of transport that combines all the things I need to do with absolute deadlines, like meeting a school coach. Climate change is caused by solar rays. The climate change on Mars matches ours without any noticable increase in use of carbon….we have a responsibility to each other to reduce our effect on the planet. My son recently asked if I would put a brick in the cistern to reduce water usage. What a good idea. Take away my office car park and you take away my ability to work as well as run the home, manage the kids and do church stuff and run a business etc etc etc
March 4, 2007 at 1:55 pm
I agree with those who question the cost of installing the instruments to collect the funds raised by road pricing. The only justification for an extra layer of road pricing is that the money is spent on improved public transport to reduce congestion. Even if this scenario came to be, then it would, if it was effective, only have a short life because any green tax is only effective if it changes peoples behaviour. If that happens then the revenue raised will plummet because we would all be travelling by public transport. If it doesn’t happen, all we will have is a very expensive white elephant. Motorists already pay Road Fund tax, Fuel Duty and VAT, and the costs of sitting in traffic jams. Are these not sufficient taxes, do we really need another one?
April 27, 2007 at 12:47 pm
I agree totally about 4x4s. I can’t help having a wry smile about the extra taxes that are likely to be imposed on them in the near future. Why do so many people have them in urban areas?
My son and I had a game on the way back from Dorset recently. As we got closer to London, we counted less Land Rovers (proper 4x4s) and more and more luxury models. They also got cleaner and cleaner! Quod erat demonstrandum!
January 23, 2008 at 4:34 pm
One option would be to ban any gas guzzling (not just 4×4s) from the congestion zone, surely this would encourage people to be a bit more selective about their choice of car.