If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Waiting for an email from Mr. Blair
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
When I come home on Wednesday evening, I will check my email and see if I had an email from the Primeminister.
He has promised he would email everyone who has signed the Road Pricing petition to explain why, when, how and try to persuade us. Lets see.
One of the ministers has today warned Blair that he is making a mistake offering this petition service to the people and then completely ignoring them/us.
I get the feeling more and more that Blair has now lost all his inhibitions and is using the his position as a game or something. He doesn't have anything to lose so he is acting like a person with a couple of million bucks with 2 days to live.
What is going on?
He has promised he would email everyone who has signed the Road Pricing petition to explain why, when, how and try to persuade us. Lets see.
One of the ministers has today warned Blair that he is making a mistake offering this petition service to the people and then completely ignoring them/us.
I get the feeling more and more that Blair has now lost all his inhibitions and is using the his position as a game or something. He doesn't have anything to lose so he is acting like a person with a couple of million bucks with 2 days to live.
What is going on?
0
Comments
The e-petition asking the Prime Minister to "Scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy" has now closed. This is a response from the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.
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
This might not effect the casual driver who just uses their car for the weekly shopping but think about all the businesses that use vehicles on a daily basis, the would have to raise their prices to be able to match the costs of this new scheme (if it ever comes into action) which would lead to a massive increase in the costs reaching the average consumer.
It's what I expected.
Will read it through properly later though.
I object massively to putting any sort of tracking device in cars. But to be honest we're going to start to charge for peak time use of cars by other means.
Though the very first issue I'd tackle is the school run. It's amazing how much better traffic is when it's half term. However much it costs to provide every school in the country with buses it'd be money well spent.
It is scary though the idea of having a GPS device fitted to your car so the government knows where every vehicle in the UK is at any given time.
It's not fair really that someone who sits in traffic and uses loads of petrol for his a/c is taxed exactly the same as someone who is, for example, taking a bus load of schoolchildren on a trip somewhere in the countryside. Obviously the second will cause far less congestion, thus 'cost' society less, and in fact the value of the trip is probably greater too.
Road pricing means those that drive cars into central london will be heavily penalised, and those that drive their kids 5 miles to school in rural areas wont be.
I didn't actually read his letter, I've just attended seminars about it and it does seem to be an emotional kneejerk 'ARGH TAX IS BAD' that people hate this kind of thing. OF course, someone who is cynical could say that these tax 'redistributions' end up with the government making more money. But that's more a matter of where do we draw the lines, rather than the principle overall. And is actually, probably more down to civil servants than government.
Then I will probably be arrested ...
Most schools have buses, mine did - but people who lived within walking distance (about a mile or 15 - 20 minutes, small village area kind of) often carred to school anyway.
I'd like to see carpooling lanes like in America, too
My beef with road pricing is that it's an obvious solution and there is no thought about things like the environment, family life etc....
In my final year of Uni, after i do my gap year in the summer, I am going to do a dissertation on the topic of "Building a high-speed rail network in the UK". I do believe that a fast, safe and RELIABLE public transport is the way to go.
Anyway....
Also the reduction in traffic during holidays isn't as much due to less school journeys as people assume - large chunks of it is people with school age children taking time off in school holidays and not driving into work (the other main group of course are teachers - who would find it difficult to travel in school buses, if only because they often need to be in earlier and leave later than the children).
Perhaps they should introduce mini congestion charges around schools and charge parents a tenner every time they drive their kids to school or near it.
A lot of kids could do with a daily walk anyway.
I think high speed is ok, but high capacity is better. Double decker trains are on the cards aren't they? Look at london; even with a long train with all the carriages, in the morning most people have to stand as there just is no space to sit. It's a similar story in other places of the country. The main problem is not a lack of reliability, as by all comparitive / relative measures we have a very reliable train service, but is an issue of capacity and pricing. Double the seats, half the fares?
That's still cheaper than the bus if you have more than one kid.
Whilst most schools provide buses, you only get free travel if you live more than three miles from the school, and its your closest school. That's an hour's walk, in each direction. Great if junior is eleven and its December, and its pitch black in both directions.
I lived 2.95 miles from my school, as a crow flies, and the crow flew a deserted quarry and a deserted wood. The bus route was about 8 miles each way, and the child fare was £1.20 each way. That was in 1998, too, I shudder to think what it would be now.
It's easy to criticise but not so easy to provide practical solutions. Most parents can't afford to be paying £6 a day for their kids to get to school, and especially not when there's a perfectly good car parked outside.
Thinking of my local area, people got the bus [free] and I often walked home with them and it took about 40 minutes, or 30 if you power-walked. I don't see a problem with a half hour walk to school, most people leave for the bus at 10 past 8 anyway, so you'd get to school for 8.40, registration starts at 8.45 / 8.50 so they're fine.
In all honesty, the people who got dropped off, and I hate to sound cruel, but they were often just lazy. Lots and lots of kids walked further, in fact people within 10 minutes walk would often get dropped off.
That was 2005 ish though.
Three miles is definitely more than half an hour's walk, it used to take me nearly an hour (about 50-55 mins), and whilst I'm not the fittest I'm not exactly unfit. It still takes me about 45 minutes to walk that distance now. You could perhaps walk fast in flat terrain, but most people don't live in flat terrain (my school and my house were on opposite sides of quite a steep valley).
Perhaps it is "laziness", but I doubt it. I could have got the bus- which would have cost my parents £2.50 a day, in 1998- and in summer in good weather I did sometimes walk home. But for the most part I got a lift- the petrol cost was about 60p a day for both me and my sister, as opposed to £5 a day by bus.
http://local.google.co.uk/maps?f=d&hl=en&saddr=kirby+muxloe&daddr=groby&sll=52.633688,-1.23785&sspn=0.063239,0.217667&ie=UTF8&z=13&ll=52.649729,-1.236992&spn=0.063216,0.161362&om=1
I suppose it's roughly three miles. I wouldn't say any less than that was unreasonable to walk, as from my experience (and bear in mind it wasn't that uncommon I walked back, because I didn't have a bus pass, and my friends lived in Kirby) it didn't take that long. If you just strolled leisurely talking and going at a snails pace it takes around 50 mins to an hour.
I think I'm deviating from the point anyway, sorry!
It takes 10 mins in the car, and is much cheaper. Which is why people drive rather going on the bus.
When they say free, they actually mean £50 per child for the year
This is the man who told you that Iraq had WMD, and you believe him on this? :eek:
Less of the attitude please, I'm getting really fed up with your rudeness these days. Manners don't cost anything, why do you always feel the need to talk down to people? I was merely pointing out that in my experience, the buses were free for those who were a 40 minute walk away, people who lived closer than that (which is a reasonable walk in my opinion) could buy a school bus pass at a cheaper rate (£36 for a year, oh gosh!), or walk, or get a lift.
They have your real address and phone number too and access to your bank account etc.
Don't panic Mr Mannering!
What are you on about? It's the government, they know everything about us.