Ian D
|
| posted on 21/2/07 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
Blairs response
A copy of Blairs response to the road toll petition.
What a load of !!!!.
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
|
|
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 21/2/07 at 11:02 PM |
|
|
I put this into AltaVista and it translates as
"we feel we should at least pay lip service to the petition but to be honest we really don't give a shit. Cheers"....
After all, over 1 million protested against a war on the grounds that it was unjust and illegal, Blair ignored it, went to war anyway and even though
these worries were proven true, he's still in power and screwing the country up. Why should anyone think he gives a poo about 1.8 million
people complaining about road pricing when he can support it on the grounds of "the environment" and it's going to take decades to
prove or disprove the need for such controls.....
At least with the bloody torries you knew they were lying but felt that eventually they'd get nailed for sleezy practice. Blair and his chronies
seem to positively thrive on being completely untrustworthy... Strange.....
|
|
|
Bluemoon
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 09:38 AM |
|
|
"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."
So that's a cost of £22 billion due to congestion by 2025..
"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 they are to spend "£140 Billion" on public transport by 2015. So would it not be cheaper to leave it as is?
Dan
|
|
|
rav
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 11:44 AM |
|
|
I presume I'm the odd one out here, it being a car forum n all, but it seemed quite a logical, sensible argument to me?
Roads are doomed, public transport is the way forward IMHO.
eg Train from Newcastle to London this weekend: 3hrs, advance ticket £8.90.
Driving: 5hrs ish, £25? + stress.
Think I'll go and find somewhere to shelter from the barrage of angry responses...
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 12:12 PM |
|
|
I have commuted by train until recently - I wouldn't ever consider driving a car into London. I also use the Ipswich park-and-ride as long as I
don't have heavy stuff to collect. I'd cheerfully use the trains for many journeys - if their pricing wasn't so mental. Two
examples:
I recently used Trainline.com to get a return ticket for my wife, to go from Manningtree (Essex) to Swansea, about 10 days before the journey. The
best return on offer was around £75. The site hinted that 2 singles might be better, so clicked on that offer - to find about 15 different single
ticket price options! Total madness. In the end, 2 singles cost just over £50. I'm quite certain that if you went into a ticket office they
wouldn't bother to pick out those tickets. BTW: full price is over £100. I use about £25 worth of petrol each way when I drive the same
journey, and I have a car at the destination. Travelling time isn't much different.
If I want to go to Norwich by train, logic says that I should travel from Ipswich as it's closer to the destination. However, if I go 1 station
further away (Manningtree) it's several Pounds cheaper! And it's not that it's a different railway company - it's the same
for the whole of East Anglia ("One Railways" ). Again, by the time I've factored in the car parking, it's cheaper to drive my
car to the park-and-ride outside Norwich.
Until they sort out madness like this they'll never attract people off the roads.
<end rant>
David
|
|
|
pajsh
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 12:43 PM |
|
|
Train from Crewe to London is around £130 return unless you can travel after 1030 when it is £46 and then you have to return after 1830. By car it
will not cost much more depending on where you park.
I normally schedule meetings for after lunch so I can go "locost".
£130 really is way too expensive.
I used to be apathetic but now I just don't care.
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 12:46 PM |
|
|
BRING BACK THE TRAINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
Gav
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 01:05 PM |
|
|
8.90 to get from newcastle to london! i some how doubt that!
used to cost me 7.90 just to york from thirsk t go to collage and that was 1995/96 and that was only 23 miles
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 01:16 PM |
|
|
PS I mean Heavy goods trains you know when we used to rule the world
Id never go on a train I didnt pass mydriving test to go on a shitty diesel/electric train
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
suparuss
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 01:40 PM |
|
|
ive said this before on here and will say it again- they are not interested in what will work only in what will get them more revenue.
it doesnt take half a genius to work out that people wont stop using their cars because they NED them.
instead of trying to price people out of using cars the way to do it as said above is by pricing them into using public transport by provididing a
cheap and reliable service.
and why isnt their a a bus service for all the schools not just major ones?
and the big question- why the hell is blair still prime minister for christ sakes??? wasnt he supposed to hand it over by now?
|
|
|
rav
|
| posted on 22/2/07 at 02:44 PM |
|
|
ok got that wrong - "std advance 1" Newcastle to London = £11.25 without a railcard.
Crewe to London leaving tommorow at 9.30am = £53.30 each way. 2 weeks in advance = £19.50 each way.
Can't see why they need to ramp the prices up so much for last minute travel, thats what pisses me off. If you don't, or can't plan
ahead then it gets stupidly expensive....
|
|
|
