I signed the petition some time ago but both yesterday and today my wife has tried and each time it says the email has been sent(the one that you click on to register on the petition) and both times it has not arrived,it is not in spam.So are they restricting the number of people able to sign the petition?
I signed the petition some time ago but both yesterday and today my wife has tried and each time it says the email has been sent(the one that you click on to register on the petition) and both times it has not arrived,it is not in spam.So are they restricting the number of people able to sign the petition?
I have signed the petition and hope that the powers that be will take note, however I believe that this is more likely to elicit the response of "look how we consulted the public before forcing this through".
Marc
Marc
I suggest everyone who has added there name to the petition goes to - http://www.writetothem.com/
Inform your MP and councillors that you will not be voting for a party that ignores the petition and advise them that unless they are stupid they will realise as we all do that we already pay to use the roads every time we stop at a fuel pump.
Inform your MP and councillors that you will not be voting for a party that ignores the petition and advise them that unless they are stupid they will realise as we all do that we already pay to use the roads every time we stop at a fuel pump.
It said on local radio today that 'the service is not currently available' thats one way to keep the numbers down.
8 days to go so if you havent signed now is the time to do so.
8 days to go so if you havent signed now is the time to do so.
The petition was posted on the No 10 site by Peter Roberts, of Telford, Shropshire, who has been a member of the Association of British Drivers (ABD) since 2001 and they have nothing to do with the government even if it a proposal. So basically it is an unofficial petition.
So your point is ?
The site acceoted the petition and its scaret the Sh 1 t out of Labour and many other politicians.
It's also made it plainly clear that Labour have no intention of listening to people they are supposed to represent !
You may be happy to be screwed by Blair and his Chronies yet again but there are at least 1.4 million people who are happy to tell the Nupmties in number 10 and 11 and tall there flunkies that the dravy train can bite back ;-)
The site acceoted the petition and its scaret the Sh 1 t out of Labour and many other politicians.
It's also made it plainly clear that Labour have no intention of listening to people they are supposed to represent !
You may be happy to be screwed by Blair and his Chronies yet again but there are at least 1.4 million people who are happy to tell the Nupmties in number 10 and 11 and tall there flunkies that the dravy train can bite back ;-)
Only three days left to register your name one the petition which now exceeds 1.5 million however I am interested that today my paper shows a programme on ITV at 8pm on this subject but suprise suprise it is not on am I to assume that the powers that be in No 10 have put pressure on to stop it being broadcast as it might cause unrest and even more people on the petition!
And a comment from the tw@ in charge....
"It shows that a lot of the public need educating "
This government is completely out of touch with reality.
"It shows that a lot of the public need educating "
This government is completely out of touch with reality.
An alternative view?
I am all for a "Use based" form of charging, provided it replaces all other vehicle associated taxing. Also I have nothing against nailing those that speed between camera to camera, and absolutely nothing against any system that tracks and finds those who cheat paying insurance. It could if used properly be the way to influence vehicle use, avoid congestion and significantly inhibit the dishonest. The campaign would be better directed to ensuring it does get used properly.
Obviously I am virtually alone amongst, what is it now 1.5 million? who want to keep a system that allows dishonesty, has totally failed to address traffic jams and hides those who disregard speed limits. It surprises me that is the system they strive so vigorously to keep.
One day we will have to wake up and get real. Fear of being traced when we use credit and debit cards, mobile phones and WiFi?? People are kidding themselves they can hide, so what's the problem?
The only sticking point is that parties of all flavours like to milk vehicle use and ownership. We need cast iron assurances that charging and fining would be equitable but I cant see a fairer concept than one based on charging for how we chose to use our road network. The concept must be the most logical there is, identifying where we actually drive, at what time, at what speed and in what vehicle. I would also like to see them integrate driver identification as well. It could cure a lot of our present ills.
I am all for a "Use based" form of charging, provided it replaces all other vehicle associated taxing. Also I have nothing against nailing those that speed between camera to camera, and absolutely nothing against any system that tracks and finds those who cheat paying insurance. It could if used properly be the way to influence vehicle use, avoid congestion and significantly inhibit the dishonest. The campaign would be better directed to ensuring it does get used properly.
Obviously I am virtually alone amongst, what is it now 1.5 million? who want to keep a system that allows dishonesty, has totally failed to address traffic jams and hides those who disregard speed limits. It surprises me that is the system they strive so vigorously to keep.
One day we will have to wake up and get real. Fear of being traced when we use credit and debit cards, mobile phones and WiFi?? People are kidding themselves they can hide, so what's the problem?
The only sticking point is that parties of all flavours like to milk vehicle use and ownership. We need cast iron assurances that charging and fining would be equitable but I cant see a fairer concept than one based on charging for how we chose to use our road network. The concept must be the most logical there is, identifying where we actually drive, at what time, at what speed and in what vehicle. I would also like to see them integrate driver identification as well. It could cure a lot of our present ills.
JTQ.
What a strange attitude when we have have had use based charging for years. It's called fuel duty and then to add insult to injury the charge VAT on the tax as well as the fuel cost!
We also have millions more cars than say the French and more per head than most countries with our Government having coined billions of Revenue that they have frittered on nearly every lame duck project rather than put a fair ammount back into the roads and safety measures.
Those of us who are against the tracking in the main will not support the uninsured or thiose dodging road tax.
The proposed tracking will price people off the roads charging in some cases hundreds of pounds for one journey, many people would not even be able to get to work!
There is technology available to prevent cars being filled with fuel if they are unisnsured or not taxed without people being tracked and priced off the roads.
What a strange attitude when we have have had use based charging for years. It's called fuel duty and then to add insult to injury the charge VAT on the tax as well as the fuel cost!
We also have millions more cars than say the French and more per head than most countries with our Government having coined billions of Revenue that they have frittered on nearly every lame duck project rather than put a fair ammount back into the roads and safety measures.
Those of us who are against the tracking in the main will not support the uninsured or thiose dodging road tax.
The proposed tracking will price people off the roads charging in some cases hundreds of pounds for one journey, many people would not even be able to get to work!
There is technology available to prevent cars being filled with fuel if they are unisnsured or not taxed without people being tracked and priced off the roads.
Charging tax on fuel has no influence at all on what roads you drive on or at what time you drive. So its not really a "Use Based" form of taxation, it only influences how much fuel you chose to buy. Detecting where,when and how much you use your vehicle, including the vehicles CO2 emissions could be a much better way, if done equitably. I would accept a taxation factor if towing, it though must be fair.
If people are priced out of their jobs then surely they are traveling too far for us to accommodate in the long term.
Its just that people seem to have closed their minds to finding solutions to the road usage issues we face. Failure of Governments to use the money correctly is another issue, and I certainly agree with many on that, but it cant be a reason for not seeking fair, "user pays" solutions.
If people are priced out of their jobs then surely they are traveling too far for us to accommodate in the long term.
Its just that people seem to have closed their minds to finding solutions to the road usage issues we face. Failure of Governments to use the money correctly is another issue, and I certainly agree with many on that, but it cant be a reason for not seeking fair, "user pays" solutions.
If we just take the car as one vehicle on our roads apart from the huge fuel tax'x this countries politicians have levide on motorists for many years there is also the tax benefits re duty and VAT based on the "Treasure Island" prices paid in the UK apart from all the revenues from insurances, garages, breakdown services and afteer market suppliers etc etc etc. Despite the decline of manufacturing this country still leads the world in Automotive things with the Japanese, Germans, Italians amd Americans still sending new models here for fine tuning and development. Even the high tech world of Motorsport from F1 and on down relies on British technology even if they Base themselves in Italy Japan or Germany.
The idea that you impose restrictions on when people drive or where they live to commute to work is abhorent and a backwards mentality of a bygone age especially when your country and its coffers have benefitted so much from the car and its owners when thos running the country have squandered the monies earnt and ignored their own scientific data and plain common sense.
The idea that use based taxation is imposed is Blairite gobeldy **** and political propaganda that some our blind enough to swallow.
Go and stand on Motorway bridge and look at what passes under it
between 6 and 9am. Do you think most of the drivers would be there if they could go at another time.
When I and many others are working we rely on cars or we would be out of work, often driving many miles to meet customers needs. How @@@@@@@ much more are we expected to pay!
The roads have been paid for time and time again, so called Green concerns should firstly be addressed by Industry and Governement before they try and pin the blame and guilt trip on the motorist followed by giving them the bill for their failings!
Cleaner fuels and car building processes have been available for years, yet the big boys have clocked up huge profits.
Mr Blair, Mr Ford and Mr BP are the people responsible for what spews out of your exhaust pipe and chose to ignore the damage from it for many a year.
If you and others are so naieve as to blame yourself for the internal combustion engine and then believe that some kind of pay as you go scheme will be fair is a joke.
The answer to road usage is to build the roads and juctions we need to keep our economy and roads flowing. If that means under passes, foot bridges or barriers to seperate pedestrians from road users that is what should be done!
My average commute to a UK job is proabably around 300 miles a day, and rarely in the same direction so where am I supposed to live.
Mr Brown is pleased to grab from the income my business makes and brings from abroad, but some numpty now thinks my clients would pay
The idea that you impose restrictions on when people drive or where they live to commute to work is abhorent and a backwards mentality of a bygone age especially when your country and its coffers have benefitted so much from the car and its owners when thos running the country have squandered the monies earnt and ignored their own scientific data and plain common sense.
The idea that use based taxation is imposed is Blairite gobeldy **** and political propaganda that some our blind enough to swallow.
Go and stand on Motorway bridge and look at what passes under it
between 6 and 9am. Do you think most of the drivers would be there if they could go at another time.
When I and many others are working we rely on cars or we would be out of work, often driving many miles to meet customers needs. How @@@@@@@ much more are we expected to pay!
The roads have been paid for time and time again, so called Green concerns should firstly be addressed by Industry and Governement before they try and pin the blame and guilt trip on the motorist followed by giving them the bill for their failings!
Cleaner fuels and car building processes have been available for years, yet the big boys have clocked up huge profits.
Mr Blair, Mr Ford and Mr BP are the people responsible for what spews out of your exhaust pipe and chose to ignore the damage from it for many a year.
If you and others are so naieve as to blame yourself for the internal combustion engine and then believe that some kind of pay as you go scheme will be fair is a joke.
The answer to road usage is to build the roads and juctions we need to keep our economy and roads flowing. If that means under passes, foot bridges or barriers to seperate pedestrians from road users that is what should be done!
My average commute to a UK job is proabably around 300 miles a day, and rarely in the same direction so where am I supposed to live.
Mr Brown is pleased to grab from the income my business makes and brings from abroad, but some numpty now thinks my clients would pay
cris,
I feel from your response that you're so consumed with your argument together with a hatred of "government" that you can't even read what I have written, let alone open your mind to consider alternatives.
Of course the existing system is wrong, you berate it yourself at length then staggeringly are fighting so fervently to keep just that failed system rather than consider an alternative, unquestionably fairer one.
I suspect on your 300 mile daily commute you will find plenty of time, in the inevitable snarl ups to reflect on how much better things could be if a bit of logical re thinking is brought to bear.
I rest my case; good-bye, I have had my say on this one.
I feel from your response that you're so consumed with your argument together with a hatred of "government" that you can't even read what I have written, let alone open your mind to consider alternatives.
Of course the existing system is wrong, you berate it yourself at length then staggeringly are fighting so fervently to keep just that failed system rather than consider an alternative, unquestionably fairer one.
I suspect on your 300 mile daily commute you will find plenty of time, in the inevitable snarl ups to reflect on how much better things could be if a bit of logical re thinking is brought to bear.
I rest my case; good-bye, I have had my say on this one.
Using modern technology and back roads and villages etc. When I was working I never found it to bad as I was forced to work and travel at in godly hours a lot of the time.
You talk as though there is no answer JTQ.
The answer lies with inproved entrances and exits to many roads and more roads in places.
But what Government wants more ways to rob all our pockets, causing grid lock is the easy option for them to plunder yet again with tracking.
If your road mileage cost you
You talk as though there is no answer JTQ.
The answer lies with inproved entrances and exits to many roads and more roads in places.
But what Government wants more ways to rob all our pockets, causing grid lock is the easy option for them to plunder yet again with tracking.
If your road mileage cost you
I am against tracked road charging, as we already do pay over the odds to drive our vehicles, It is widely recognised throughout the world that the UK driver is taxed by the government more than in most other countries.
The way the tax burden is already targeted at road users is in its self not fair, It would be far more equitable if the annual taxes were dropped and recovered from additional duty on fuel, so the more you use the more you pay, and it is more difficult to dodge, and visitors to the country also pay to use our roads.
I have major concerns about the use of the technology the Government is proposing. Satellite tracking, as most of us who use SatNav's, will know relies on a good signal to operate correctly, otherwise it can become confused about when and where you are.
I have found my SatNav, suggesting that I am 5 miles from my actual location, albeit only for a few minuets, but perhaps that would have recorded me in a high rate zone, not to mention the speed at which I must have 'travelled' when it finally recognised where I really was.
If they get it wrong, how do you challenge the charges they make? You can bet that the legislation to cover challenges will be loaded so rather than the Gov proving their data is correct, it will be up to the driver/owner to prove they are wrong! What chance will we have?
Government's (both parties) track record has proven to be abysmal when managing the introducing and running large and complex computer systems. They don't get it right, and it costs us more and more to cover the mistakes they make.
Data is currently misused and it will only be a matter of time before the tracking records from the system are abused. The abuse will become commonplace and eventually legalised through backdoor changes to legislation. This is Big Brother Big Time NOW.
The introduction of the system is being described as necessary to reduce congestion. Will it work? I don't think so - because, the greatest congestion occurs whilst the majority of working people have to get to and from work. Whilst there is a public transport option for some people for many there isn't, - so the problem will still exist.
Past and present governments have dismantled the public transport system. It is now disjointed and is not capable of handling the current demand, so a significant increase in passengers who try to change from personal transport is just not viable.
To reduce congestion we need to remove the need to travel and/or shift travelling times to even out the peak flows. We should have viable reliable public transport, and I suggest that Education authorities should re-introduce school busses for every child to remove the need to the 'school run',
Failing all that perhaps we should move the whole of the UK to the middle of Australia.
This government has a bad habit of raising the worst case scenario and using a wave of misinformation to push through with actions which we the public live to regret. (Does this remind you of '45 minutes').
We must remind the government (of which ever flavour) that they are there to serve us, not the other way round.
The way the tax burden is already targeted at road users is in its self not fair, It would be far more equitable if the annual taxes were dropped and recovered from additional duty on fuel, so the more you use the more you pay, and it is more difficult to dodge, and visitors to the country also pay to use our roads.
I have major concerns about the use of the technology the Government is proposing. Satellite tracking, as most of us who use SatNav's, will know relies on a good signal to operate correctly, otherwise it can become confused about when and where you are.
I have found my SatNav, suggesting that I am 5 miles from my actual location, albeit only for a few minuets, but perhaps that would have recorded me in a high rate zone, not to mention the speed at which I must have 'travelled' when it finally recognised where I really was.
If they get it wrong, how do you challenge the charges they make? You can bet that the legislation to cover challenges will be loaded so rather than the Gov proving their data is correct, it will be up to the driver/owner to prove they are wrong! What chance will we have?
Government's (both parties) track record has proven to be abysmal when managing the introducing and running large and complex computer systems. They don't get it right, and it costs us more and more to cover the mistakes they make.
Data is currently misused and it will only be a matter of time before the tracking records from the system are abused. The abuse will become commonplace and eventually legalised through backdoor changes to legislation. This is Big Brother Big Time NOW.
The introduction of the system is being described as necessary to reduce congestion. Will it work? I don't think so - because, the greatest congestion occurs whilst the majority of working people have to get to and from work. Whilst there is a public transport option for some people for many there isn't, - so the problem will still exist.
Past and present governments have dismantled the public transport system. It is now disjointed and is not capable of handling the current demand, so a significant increase in passengers who try to change from personal transport is just not viable.
To reduce congestion we need to remove the need to travel and/or shift travelling times to even out the peak flows. We should have viable reliable public transport, and I suggest that Education authorities should re-introduce school busses for every child to remove the need to the 'school run',
Failing all that perhaps we should move the whole of the UK to the middle of Australia.
This government has a bad habit of raising the worst case scenario and using a wave of misinformation to push through with actions which we the public live to regret. (Does this remind you of '45 minutes').
We must remind the government (of which ever flavour) that they are there to serve us, not the other way round.
John.
You make some good valid points.
For many people the chaos has been caused by poor polocies for years and Public Transport will never replace personal transport.
A lot of Rural areas exist only because people commute by car.
Will they waste even more time and money on Public transport?
Or will they be forced to abandon Rural communities and be forced into city living!
Present governement only wants to come up with gimicky ideas rather than address the hard facts and work with what motorists have paid for.
Roads are for traffic that keeps this nation working.
Alternatives to slowing traffic flow and for keeping it moving would solve much of the problems.
You make some good valid points.
For many people the chaos has been caused by poor polocies for years and Public Transport will never replace personal transport.
A lot of Rural areas exist only because people commute by car.
Will they waste even more time and money on Public transport?
Or will they be forced to abandon Rural communities and be forced into city living!
Present governement only wants to come up with gimicky ideas rather than address the hard facts and work with what motorists have paid for.
Roads are for traffic that keeps this nation working.
Alternatives to slowing traffic flow and for keeping it moving would solve much of the problems.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/
Over 1.6 million have now signed up and some of our Police have been warned about passing the deatils on and told not to use works computers to post their support!
What are Blair and Labour scared of ? The truth coming out may be!
Facebook
Twitter