You can change the style the forum displays by selecting your preferred style at the bottom left of the site.
We have made an enhancement so that old threads should now link from search results to the correct thread. This is not yet in place for single post links
Well for public transport, 1 bus an hour goes thru the village, and im 25 miles away
from carlisle town & 15 miles drive into hexham....
I nearly opted for a 4x4 but the tax talks put me off.... barstuads
E-petition: Response from the Prime Minister
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.
I dont get it, we pay through our a*** for beer, cigs, fuel, road tax and speeding fines. Ive not researched this but im sure we pay more or very close to it then any other country in europe. Yet, the government never has money. Always talk of not enough beds in hospitals, fire fighters on stikes, nurses getting paid less than MCDee's staff, no money for roads etc.. etc..
As usual the tone from Tony is "I know best and you are all stupid, trust me it will be fine...."
Problem is they won't get in again because they are a bunch of useless lying, cheating, untrustworthy disorganised muppets!
And I bloody voted for them!
Not again.
The Perfectionist
sigpic
Audi Class Concours winner Stoner Park 2014, ADI Concours D'Elegance Class Winner 2008, Runner up 2014. Winner, S2Forum Show'n'Shine Billing 2006 & 2008.
Problem is they won't get in again because they are a bunch of useless lying, cheating, untrustworthy disorganised muppets!
Unfortunately though Steve, that could be the very reason they DO get back in.
Its amazing how with the introductions of postal voting just how many dead people voted. Its also amazing that so many people turned upto their local polling stations to be told that they had already voted.
I hope do god we dont have them back in. If we do, I will find a way out of this country and live in the states.
I hope do god we dont have them back in. If we do, I will find a way out of this country and live in the states.
If you think Tone is bad (and he is) - he pales into insignificance in the shadow of Bush and his kronies. All is not good in the land of greed and gas guzzlers as you might think. I lived there for 3 yrs with the missus and enjoyed it to a point, but no way would I want to bring up kids there...
Don't get me wrong - there are plenty of genuinely friendly and honest people that live in the states - it just seems that all of the ones with any power and authority are mentally and socially defective.
But more frustrating is that the honest hard-working folk of America are powerless to get rid of them !
E-petition: Response from the Prime Minister
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
Hey, that's just like the one I received - and there was me thinking that Tony had made a special effort this morning to drop me a line before tucking into his cornflakes...
Past: S2 ABY coupe RS2 spec with lots of mods, S4 B5 saloon, RS6 C5 saloon, S8 D2 FL, RS4 B7 saloon, S4 B6 avant
Decided to think what would happen if a fair percentage of the British public gave up their cars and used Public Transport... Ran through several scenarios, different people in different situations etc. etc. Looked my own situation and whether I could use public transport... I can't because I chose to live in the countryside, enjoy fresh air and trafic free roads.
To cut a long story short, I thought about it, worked out a few rough numbers, ****ed myself laughing and realised that we're all royally phooked!
At the risk of having a political debate on a car forum, which isn't really cricket I suppose, I can quite happily say that I didn't vote for New Labour last time round and certainly won't next time but the problem is that the other two main parties were/are in such disarray that what's the alternative!?! Kilroy-silk?!?
Would you trust Cameron over Blair... I'm still undecided but with policies like this hitting ME where it hurts, I'm hoping we'll all find out sooner rather than later.
Cheers'en, AndyC
1994 ABY Coupe - Projekt Alpinweiss
I'm afraid when he says about road tax to reduce congestion hes talking utter *****!
The up and coming smoking ban in public places will make people smoke less/give up and the government will lose hundreds of millions of ££'s through this, road taxation is one way to overcome this.
It just happens that the media have picked up on the whole global warming issue so Tone thinks its a good idea to introduce this road tax thingy under the shadow of this saying 'Ooh look at me helping to prevent global warming by reducing congestion'
I'm afraid it will hit the rural dwelling people more, my brother lives in the middle of the cotswolds, the nearest local shop is 2 miles away, supermarket is 10 miles away and his work is 5 miles away, there is no local bus service either (hes racking up about 18,000 miles a year) so he has no choice but to drive everywhere.
Its going to hit him and people like him very hard!
So Tony expect a lot of country dwelling folk to be voting against you next election! Including me
'95 ABY Avant - Sold
'98 B5 S4 -MRC400+ = 464ps 741nm
You can reply to this email by posting a question to Roads Minister Dr. Stephen Ladyman in a webchat on the No 10 website this Thursday.
There will be further opportunities in the coming months to get involved in the debate. You will receive one final e-mail from Downing Street to update you in due course.
If you would like to opt out of receiving further mail on this or any other petitions you signed, please email
TellTonyto****off@petitions.pm.gov.uk (soory, real email address is >> optout@petitions.pm.gov.uk )
Said this before, but I told him to **** off to his face in 1991 How many would pay to do that now?
2001 Avus Silver B5 RS4.
2004 A4 Avant 1.8T quattro Sport-LE.
1995 S2 Coupe - sold (sniff)
When I know I'm going to be in stop start traffic I take the diesel.
When I want some fun I go out early Sunday morning in the RS2.
Just can't bear being in stop start traffic in the RS2, it's a crime
Top and bottom is, small island, to many people, and to many cars.
Try telling the 17 year old they can't have a car after passing test.
We can all remember how good it was getting our first car. Why should the next generation have to forgo it.
If you feel the need for a blast, then pick your time of day for a good clear run.
Nuff said.
rs2315.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
How many would pay to do that now? 
(except a towball)
Comment