If this is what the LibDems are planning, they can go take a long jump off a short cliff:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/electio ... untry.html

Obviously some obscure use of the word "fair" I've not yet come across.

I believe that proposal is for a second parliament, not this one. Suprisingly not mentioned in the Torygraph.

I think that they will do it instead of some other tax, but Fuel duty is actually quite effective. It hits the most inefficient vehicles hardest, can be avoided completely if you leave the car at home or do not have one. Personally I would like to see a reduction in the Road Fund License, to a minimal amount and put all road taxes on fuel. Then it also acts as an efficient version of road pricing without the expense of tracking devices, which will be expensive.

That sounds good but doesn't appear to be fair to people in rural areas who have to use cars through necessity.

I mostly agree with what you say, with one modification:

The environmental cost of actually building the vehicle and the cost of damage to the roads should be accounted for. You could do this purely by weight; a two ton 4x4 has roughly triple the rapage of a sensible car.

Heavy vehicles wear the road out faster - even if they did over 9000mpg, the road wear is pretty much proportional to the weight of the vehicle. It's only fair that this is paid for by those that do the most damage. That is what road tax is for.

Personally, I'd like to see a law passed requiring people to justify the purchase of any new vehicle above a certain size and certain fuel efficiency. "because I want it" is not a good enough reason to rape our children.

As to the policy, it's totally stupid. I have no idea why my party is being so retarded. I may even find a pen and write to them; I'll certainly have a word with my local candidate down the pub next Friday. Seriously, duh wtf?!

Well folks round these parts have already kicked out road pricing once, I can't see them changing their minds any time soon. Although I have to say reading the link most of the objections listed as the same as they were to the congestion charge in London and I think most of them turned out to be fairly alarmist in the end.

The thing is, you will never get road charging through if the people being charged believe the money raised will just get dropped into the general taxation take rather than being used to improve roads and/or public transport. That's what happened in Manchester - when asked afterwards why people had voted no generally the response wasn't about the straightforward cost, it was more about nobody trusting the politicians to keep 'their side of the bargain' and actually used the money raised in the way they said they would. I think if a government had a term where they actually did keep their manifesto promises, they'd stand much more chance of getting something like this through in a second term because the public would be more likely to give them a chance. Trying to do this in a first term strikes me as pretty much political suicide.

I think that the damage is actually more like the square of the pressure on the road. You could have a light vehicle paying a token RFL just to cover the cost of the paperwork, and all other vehicles RFL based on the weight of the vehicle.

Though what about electric vehicles which may be heavier yet no emissions?

Assuming the lowest value.... If I was to drive to reading and back in my old car I would pay ~ £70, and would spend ~£70 on fuel.
New petrol drinking accord (older car and petrol not diesel) ~£70 and £130 in fuel

They better think seriously about which motorways are charged, what times and what the traffic will do when they go elsewhere

I think between certain hours should be free, peak carrying the highest cost, and a off-peak time a few hours after rush hour.

I think it should only apply to certain motorways... m25 in particular (having gotten to it a number of times and pretty much been at a crawl for 15 miles isn't good for the environment)

I appreciate the logic but no government is every going to bring that scheme in. People having to pay extra to go to work? The only worse thing a political leader could do would be to be pictured kicking a nurse.

Jon

If I am alone I try and drive at night on long journeys. The roads are clearer and you can keep a steady speed without any traffic jams so any form of road pricing should penalise those at peak hours and even more so if you get caught in a traffic jam.

The other thing is, when was the last time a Government brought in a complex computer system like this on budget, on time and working?

Exactly; long ago in my former career, I did some work for Tarmac at their testing ground and it came out in conversation with their boffins that the cost of making a motorway capable of withstanding traffic from heavy goods vehicles is approx. 10 x that of a road for cars.


How about the congestion charge here in London? Drive in the zone these days and it's pretty much all white vans and reps. i.e. people who need to be there in a vehicle. And whilst most people could see the sense in a central-London charge, the politically-motivated Western Extension to the zone was hugely unpopular and voted against by a large majority, but was still pushed through by former-Mayor Livingstone. One of Boris' election promises was that he'd scrap the scheme, something he still hasn't done despite being in office for a couple of years - and something that may well cost him the next election in 2012.


Though calling your voters 'bigots' comes pretty close second Let's not forget that the original article is from the Torygraph - all the right-of-centre press have an axe to grind with the LibDems at the moment...

Pete

People may complain about the public transport system in London, but it's in a different league to the public transport system anywhere else in the country. Most places don't have an underground, have deregulated bus networks and the trains are underfunded and overcrowded as it is. What is feasible in London is not necessarily feasible in say Birmingham or Liverpool.

For example, I live roughly 18 miles from where I work. I cannot actually get into work by public transport if I want to start at 9AM. Simply can't. I have to catch a bus into town and then get the train in to Manchester than have another 10 minute walk to work. I live in a urban area but the buses don't start until 7:45. That takes 20 minutes or so in the rush hour to get to the bus station, which is a 10 minute walk from the train station. The train takes 40 minutes, there's one at 8AM and one at 8.30AM although I can't guarantee to actually be able to get on either because by the time they get to my station they're sometimes full to bursting already. So given all that, what exactly are my alternatives to driving? Cycling? There are no cycle lanes in most places on the route, it's even further because I can't go on motorways and I'd have to cycle into work in the rush hour in the winter in the dark & rain, getting lungs full of exhaust fumes all the way? Thank you but I have some sense of self-preservation.

They want to charge me to drive into work? On the promise that the'll spend more on public transport? They already charge motorists four times what they spend on roads & public transport anyway. I have no faith in them because frankly they've shown a complete lack of good faith up to now.

People in London can [LIFTED] off moaning frankly. Whenever I'm up there, I can get anywhere I want pretty much with a combo of tube/bus/walking. Down here, I can't get anywhere without my car. That might not be true in the larger towns, but out here in the villagy bits, you're screwed without a car.

I don't however agree with road pricing, as it's the beginning of people charging me based on where I go, which means it's the beginning of people knowing where I go. If the money actually got spent on roads, rails and infrastructure I'd be happy to pay more tax. It doesn't, so I'm not.

I don't know what the answer is, but people who moan that public transport isn't good enough in London or Birmingham or Bristol etc. need to try it down here and have their perspective adjusted.

Steady on - when I was working in London I once had to wait a whole three minutes for a tube train. Three minutes! And without mobile coverage too!
London's infrastructure is not without it's issues, but as you say, try getting about on the public service elsewhere in he country.
I'm also incredibly pleased that I'm likely not going to be in London during the Olympic period, when it'll all apparently 'just work'.