Author Topic: Pay as you go road tax petition (Read 4060 times)

Rose.mary · « **Reply #20 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:16:04 »

Froglets - if I thought the money would go to improving the traffic/pollution problems I too would not object, but I know Mr Brown very well by now.
So I would not trust him one inch.

Rosemary

silly billy · « **Reply #21 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:47:07 »

Why punish people for having 2 cars?? I need mine for work and so does my other half we go at different times in different directions its complete nonsense to punish people for needing 2 cars we tax insure and mot them and thats punishment enough.Neither of mine are over 3 years old so probaly pollute far less than a 10 yr old 4x4 and a 10 yr old sports car.
Why should we make these cut backs when the biggest nation in the world doesnt bother and won't sign up to any agreement to cut emissions.Although I am happy they brought the mighty reds ;D ;D ;D
Scrap car tax and tax fuel more. More you drive more you pay.

froglets · « **Reply #22 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:48:59 »

Silly Billy, sounds like a fair compromise.

kenkew · « **Reply #23 on:** February 09, 2007, 13:25:22 »

I wouldn't support it on the grounds of 'We will put the extra into funding better public transport, cutting pollution and better roads'.
That's been the claim on just about every auto tax rise ever. Wasn't that the claim just last week with the airlines?
I'm sure the amount spent in that direction is a pretty low percentage.

MrsKP · « **Reply #24 on:** February 09, 2007, 17:26:39 »

but the investment won't be improving the infrastructure (and i thought that's what i paid my road tax for anyway), it'll be put into the next world domination attack on anyone who doesn't agree with the mighty western policies. just my tuppence worth anyway.

oh and btw, i got sent the link by another friend, so tried again using a different email address. it would appear there's a problem with hotmail and not gmail, so if you've not been able to sign up before, try another address.

oh and i wasn't trying to spam it, i was merely trying to voice my opinion, just the once.

;D

Bill Door · « **Reply #25 on:** February 09, 2007, 22:27:24 »

I agree with Froglets. I think they should bring it in and then we might see a better Bus/train/tram service that is there to support the customer.

Besides most of us support the idea of re-using materials that have been rejected by others. So why not support something that might just help reduce the carbon footprint of everyone in the country.

Saying that "I would not do it because X never will" is missing the whole point of the problem. If we reduce vehicle travel it might well reduce Asthma, accidents, carbon emissions and stress.

Noone plants anything to stop it growing. Neither should anyone fight an apparent negative with a negative attitude but should look for a positive way to make it acceptable.

Yes i hate the idea of hard charging but also recognise that someone has to start somewhere.

Just think, if there were hard charging then all those lorries and cars that come here from the Continent would contribute to the upkeep of our roads which they don't do at present. Those many drivers that travel around now with no road tax and no insurance would no longer be able to do it.

All those rat runs that cause misery to those that live on them could be hard charged and make life bearable.

Just think of all those concerts/field dos when car drivers avoid the offical car park and leave the car at a nearby road clogging it up. Well hard charging on specific days could go some way to stopping that.

So don't always think negative, try to change it with positive reasons. If you think that the money wll not be used then petition that the change should include an adjudicator to see that the money collected is dealtwith according to the public wishes. May be the government should be required to subsidise the supply and fitting of the equipment and be able to take the cost out of the first five years of the scheme.

Besides if you don't ask and you don't think about what is propsed you may get it anyway with out the required protections.

Anyway thats my take on it. I always hope that my little seedlings will grow into big plants. Any pruning I do is always to make sure that the plant grows stronger not weaker.

regards Bill

RSJK · « **Reply #26 on:** February 10, 2007, 12:52:10 »

I,012,656 now signed

ACE · « **Reply #27 on:** February 10, 2007, 13:48:07 »

They are saying the petition will not make a bit of difference to their plans. Scare tactics! this is just a way of trying to stop you petitioning. They hope people will say 'what's the point' and not put their names down. Urge everyone you know to sign as a record of our discontent.

I see another 'poll tax' revolt looming.

I shall pass it on to my customers with my work truck, Mrs. Ace gets a mileage allowance in her job as she is classed as an essential user, so that will go up as well. Everything will go up in price to cover the costs.

MrsKP · « **Reply #28 on:** February 10, 2007, 14:24:25 »

ah the poll tax. somewhere else i lost out on money !

telboy · « **Reply #29 on:** February 10, 2007, 18:16:17 »

Well posted Sharon!

grawrc · « **Reply #30 on:** February 10, 2007, 20:34:09 »

Other stuff aside, I believe that setting up sytems that can track people's whereabouts are an infringement of civil liberties. Another instance of nanny government and a police state (not just for Moslems). However that "evil" European Union will not allow it to happen (if they are consulted).

Robert_Brenchley · « **Reply #31 on:** February 10, 2007, 23:21:57 »

The whole Blair regime has been about robbing us of our civil liberties, by hook or by crook. That's the problem when you only have an 'unwritten' constitution; it's far too easy for a dictatorial PM to rewrite it to suit himself.

CotswoldLass · « **Reply #32 on:** February 13, 2007, 11:19:43 »

Couldn't agree more Robert!

Hyacinth · « **Reply #33 on:** February 13, 2007, 13:30:06 »

Late night radio news last night put the signatories to the petition at approaching 1.25 million.....unmitigated joy when I heard that the choice of city for the trial is either Manchester - or Birmingham.

Wonder how many more unpaid volunteers like me and my friends, who are out there actively in our community sorting out problems for the elderly/disabled/distressed (potentially 700+ on our books) will withdraw their help? We're currently happy to use our petrol, time, expertise etc. but are not prepared to shoulder this extra charge. I hope that this scheme is scrapped.

theothermarg · « **Reply #34 on:** February 13, 2007, 14:59:00 »

I , trying to sign. it says site is busy try again so i shall. i don,t drive far under 2000 miles a year didnt start till i was 45 . used to shop and go around on a pushbike
that was 15years ago and i don,t fancy doing it again

Trixiebelle · « **Reply #35 on:** February 13, 2007, 19:13:41 »

I was thinking about this today.

Personally, I wouldn't mind being taxed on mileage - it would certainly make me think twice about unecessary journeys in the car and it could encourage 'journey- shares'/using public transport in the long run.

Sometimes when I'm going through town during the rush-hour it makes me sad to see so many people in cars (who probably live less than 2 miles from the City Centre)

I don't mind being taxed on petrol and mileage. Wouldn't want a tracking device though. Far too expensive to apply and too much 'Big Brother'

Maybe we could supply our mileage @ the 6 monthly MOT test and it could be billed from that?

Spruance · « **Reply #36 on:** February 13, 2007, 20:04:34 »

I have already signed the petition from another link, but I fully agree with the objections.

There is possibly an argument for some sort of pay as you go pricing in inner cities, where good alternatives exist.

On the other hand, here in Lincolnshire, public transport is a complete joke. There is a very basic bus network within my home town, but out in 'the sticks' this is almost non-existent. So in other words, a car is absolutely essential.

As usual, the present Government doesn't seem to have thought this idea through. If they genuinely want people to consider using public transport, then it stands to reason that a degree of investment in said public transport system would be a good idea, first!

Of course, the other important consideration here, is that as a direct result of the continuing under investment in the National Rail Network, the vast majority of freight is carried by road.

If road hauliers are included in the road pricing scheme, their haulage rates will increase to compensate. If haulage rates increase, then the price of everything in the shops will also increase, and 3 per cent inflation will be but a distant memory.

Hopefully someone will see sense before this ridiculous (IMO) plan is put into operation.

manicscousers · « **Reply #37 on:** February 13, 2007, 20:16:06 »

heard on the news this morning, signatures are up to 1.5 million now..m.p's going mad ;D ;D

emmy1978 · « **Reply #38 on:** February 13, 2007, 22:28:25 »

Done!

grawrc · « **Reply #39 on:** February 14, 2007, 21:06:41 »

I go to other European countries a lot for my language injections. Just about everywhere I go - France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Spain, Portugal - there is an excellent public transport infrastructure. So I'm happy to use public transport. It's fast, it's frequent and it's reasonably priced.

In Edinburgh it would take me at least an hour and a half to get to work (20 minutes by car) and the same back.

News:

Author Topic: Pay as you go road tax petition (Read 4060 times)