Finance Choices
Pay as you go road tax mooted
The transport secretary, Alistair Darling, is seeking cross-party support to legislate for the world's most ambitious road-charging scheme to avert the prospect of "complete gridlock" on Britain's highways.
Under the government's proposals, drivers will have to pay between 2p and £1.30 a mile for each car journey. They will be monitored by satellite, with variable rates levied according to the time, type of road and location.
To mitigate the blow, there would be reductions in fuel tax and vehicle excise duty, although Mr Darling has refused to say whether the overall tax burden on motorists would rise or remain the same.
Mr Darling's proposals, which will be outlined in a speech to the Social Market Foundation on Thursday, were greeted warily yesterday by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Both parties said they supported road charging in principle but insisted it must not be used as a "stealth tax".
The shadow transport secretary, Alan Duncan, said: "At tempts to cut worsening road congestion are always welcome.
"However, we are astonished that there was no discussion on it in the run-up to the election. I don't imagine the Speaker will be pleased that it is being announced outside parliament."
The Liberal Democrat transport spokesman, Tom Brake, said: "The 'spy in the sky' proposal could be the solution to crippling congestion, but it will be rejected if it is simply another Labour stealth tax. It cannot be a substitute for the integrated public transport system Britain needs."
The government wants to put a bill before the House of Commons within two years for a pilot charging scheme using satellite technology, which could begin in the Midlands or in Manchester by 2010.
Nationwide charging could follow within "ten to 15 years", although Mr Darling cautioned that this would be impossible to impose without widespread public support.
In interviews with several Sunday newspapers, Mr Darling warned that the chronic congestion and pollution of Los Angeles could become common in Britain. "If we don't do anything, it's pretty clear to me we would face complete gridlock. More and more cars will grind to a halt and the generations to come will curse those people of my generation who didn't do anything about it," he said.
No other country has attempted nationwide charging and the satellite technology needed to track cars accurately is still in its infancy. However, Germany has introduced a scheme levying a variable toll on lorry drivers and Britain is working on a similar "spy in the cab" scheme for heavy goods vehicles to begin in 2008.
A feasibility study by the Department for Transport concluded last year that charging all motorists could cut traffic by 4% - enough to reduce the amount of time drivers spend in jams by as much as 46%.
Motoring organisations say charges for rush-hour drivers could be useful in encouraging people to stagger their journeys. But the RAC Foundation pointed out that car owners already pay £42bn annually in tax, of which only £6bn is spent on improving roads.
Bert Morris, director of the AA Motoring Trust, said: "We all believe we can't go on the way we are, because the system is grinding to a halt. But charging on top of the existing fuel tax and car tax is simply not going to be accepted."
Other experts believe charging would be pointless unless it raised extra funds to pay for improved public transport.
Tony Grayling, assistant director of the Institute for Public Policy Research, said: "The government must press for a partly revenue-raising scheme. Otherwise, the growth in traffic on off-peak and rural roads would outweigh the reduction in cities."
Ministers believe that the success of London's congestion-charging scheme and widespread acceptance of the M6 toll road in the Midlands show that the public can be won over to the principle of paying for journeys.
But Stephen Joseph of the environmental pressure group Transport 2000 said Mr Darling was still proceeding too slowly. "I think he could move further and faster on this. In the short term, it still seems to be business as usual - widening motorways without putting in any measures to limit demand," he said.
Why do we need road charging?
The number of cars on the roads has surged by a quarter over a decade to 25m, fuelled by prosperity, frustration with public transport and cheaper cars. Government forecasts suggest that the time drivers spend in traffic jams could rise by 20% by 2010.
Ministers have tried prising motorists out of their cars by increasing tax on petrol but this prompted fuel blockades which brought Britain to a near standstill five years ago.
How will charging work?
Cars will contain "black boxes" linked to a satellite which will monitor their every move. Motorists will receive regular bills, charged at variable rates: a Sunday drive down a country road may only cost 2p a mile, but a rush-hour commute around the M25 could be charged at £1.30 a mile. It is hoped this would encourage people to change their habits and avoid commuting by car.
Who will pay for the technology?
Many cars already have satellite tracking devices to help drivers find their way. The government believes these will be almost universal before any charging scheme begins in a decade's time. But "retro-fitting" older cars is likely to cost at least £100 each and it is unclear who would foot the bill.
Who will set the prices?
This is a moot point. The government is likely to set the fees but motoring organisations want an independent regulator - known, perhaps, as "Ofjam" - to ensure drivers are not exploited.
How much money will it raise?
An estimated £9bn annually. Alistair Darling has promised that any charging scheme would be introduced alongside cuts in fuel duty and road tax. But it is unclear how big these cuts would be.
What would the proceeds be used for?
Motoring organisations want the money to be earmarked for improvements to the road network. Environmentalists would prefer a system pioneered by London's mayor, Ken Livingstone, in which receipts from the congestion charge have been used to improve public transport.
How popular is the idea?
It would face strong opposi tion but most people feel that congestion must be tackled: only 11% believe the present system of road tax works.
Six out of 10 would accept road charging if overall levels of motoring tax do not increase. This rises to 66% if there were "good alternative ways to travel".
Will it really ever happen?
Probably, although it may take many years. The Conservatives and the Lib Dems both favour charging in principle, so a cross-party consensus appears possible. But all sides are wary of enforcing road charging without sufficient public support.
A referendum in Edinburgh recently overwhelmingly rejected a city-wide congestion charge, providing a reminder of the strength of feelings on the issue.
Under the government's proposals, drivers will have to pay between 2p and £1.30 a mile for each car journey. They will be monitored by satellite, with variable rates levied according to the time, type of road and location.
To mitigate the blow, there would be reductions in fuel tax and vehicle excise duty, although Mr Darling has refused to say whether the overall tax burden on motorists would rise or remain the same.
Mr Darling's proposals, which will be outlined in a speech to the Social Market Foundation on Thursday, were greeted warily yesterday by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Both parties said they supported road charging in principle but insisted it must not be used as a "stealth tax".
The shadow transport secretary, Alan Duncan, said: "At tempts to cut worsening road congestion are always welcome.
"However, we are astonished that there was no discussion on it in the run-up to the election. I don't imagine the Speaker will be pleased that it is being announced outside parliament."
The Liberal Democrat transport spokesman, Tom Brake, said: "The 'spy in the sky' proposal could be the solution to crippling congestion, but it will be rejected if it is simply another Labour stealth tax. It cannot be a substitute for the integrated public transport system Britain needs."
The government wants to put a bill before the House of Commons within two years for a pilot charging scheme using satellite technology, which could begin in the Midlands or in Manchester by 2010.
Nationwide charging could follow within "ten to 15 years", although Mr Darling cautioned that this would be impossible to impose without widespread public support.
In interviews with several Sunday newspapers, Mr Darling warned that the chronic congestion and pollution of Los Angeles could become common in Britain. "If we don't do anything, it's pretty clear to me we would face complete gridlock. More and more cars will grind to a halt and the generations to come will curse those people of my generation who didn't do anything about it," he said.
No other country has attempted nationwide charging and the satellite technology needed to track cars accurately is still in its infancy. However, Germany has introduced a scheme levying a variable toll on lorry drivers and Britain is working on a similar "spy in the cab" scheme for heavy goods vehicles to begin in 2008.
A feasibility study by the Department for Transport concluded last year that charging all motorists could cut traffic by 4% - enough to reduce the amount of time drivers spend in jams by as much as 46%.
Motoring organisations say charges for rush-hour drivers could be useful in encouraging people to stagger their journeys. But the RAC Foundation pointed out that car owners already pay £42bn annually in tax, of which only £6bn is spent on improving roads.
Bert Morris, director of the AA Motoring Trust, said: "We all believe we can't go on the way we are, because the system is grinding to a halt. But charging on top of the existing fuel tax and car tax is simply not going to be accepted."
Other experts believe charging would be pointless unless it raised extra funds to pay for improved public transport.
Tony Grayling, assistant director of the Institute for Public Policy Research, said: "The government must press for a partly revenue-raising scheme. Otherwise, the growth in traffic on off-peak and rural roads would outweigh the reduction in cities."
Ministers believe that the success of London's congestion-charging scheme and widespread acceptance of the M6 toll road in the Midlands show that the public can be won over to the principle of paying for journeys.
But Stephen Joseph of the environmental pressure group Transport 2000 said Mr Darling was still proceeding too slowly. "I think he could move further and faster on this. In the short term, it still seems to be business as usual - widening motorways without putting in any measures to limit demand," he said.
Why do we need road charging?
The number of cars on the roads has surged by a quarter over a decade to 25m, fuelled by prosperity, frustration with public transport and cheaper cars. Government forecasts suggest that the time drivers spend in traffic jams could rise by 20% by 2010.
Ministers have tried prising motorists out of their cars by increasing tax on petrol but this prompted fuel blockades which brought Britain to a near standstill five years ago.
How will charging work?
Cars will contain "black boxes" linked to a satellite which will monitor their every move. Motorists will receive regular bills, charged at variable rates: a Sunday drive down a country road may only cost 2p a mile, but a rush-hour commute around the M25 could be charged at £1.30 a mile. It is hoped this would encourage people to change their habits and avoid commuting by car.
Who will pay for the technology?
Many cars already have satellite tracking devices to help drivers find their way. The government believes these will be almost universal before any charging scheme begins in a decade's time. But "retro-fitting" older cars is likely to cost at least £100 each and it is unclear who would foot the bill.
Who will set the prices?
This is a moot point. The government is likely to set the fees but motoring organisations want an independent regulator - known, perhaps, as "Ofjam" - to ensure drivers are not exploited.
How much money will it raise?
An estimated £9bn annually. Alistair Darling has promised that any charging scheme would be introduced alongside cuts in fuel duty and road tax. But it is unclear how big these cuts would be.
What would the proceeds be used for?
Motoring organisations want the money to be earmarked for improvements to the road network. Environmentalists would prefer a system pioneered by London's mayor, Ken Livingstone, in which receipts from the congestion charge have been used to improve public transport.
How popular is the idea?
It would face strong opposi tion but most people feel that congestion must be tackled: only 11% believe the present system of road tax works.
Six out of 10 would accept road charging if overall levels of motoring tax do not increase. This rises to 66% if there were "good alternative ways to travel".
Will it really ever happen?
Probably, although it may take many years. The Conservatives and the Lib Dems both favour charging in principle, so a cross-party consensus appears possible. But all sides are wary of enforcing road charging without sufficient public support.
A referendum in Edinburgh recently overwhelmingly rejected a city-wide congestion charge, providing a reminder of the strength of feelings on the issue.
posted by Bruce Wayne at 7:25 AM
Pay as you go road tax mooted
10 Comments:
They think they can track literally millions of cars using satellite technology? I wonder which new labour donor will be making millions out of this coming fiasco. They'll spend a fortune, to find that it is impossible to make it work properly without spending a further fortune and then when it still not working properly it will all be scrapped. Where have we seen this all before?
Always a stick and, sadly, no carrot. People in this country regard public transport as a dirty necessity for students, the poor and the old. Most other European countries have wonderful, cheap and clean public transport. If public transport were MUCH better in this country then you would see a genuine reduction in traffic. All they are going to do with this new proposal is make people poorer and more miserable as they drive in their comfortable cars knowing that the public transport alternative is even worse!
Just another stupid idea along the lines of making graduates work until they are 75. The £6bn or so that the UK gov has spent in killing families in Iraq could have been diverted to spending on an effective integrated transport system.
And a change in thinking (perhaps with tax breaks) could stop people driving vast differences to end up sitting at a computer when they could do this at home or not at all. How many of the journeys people make to do their jobs end up adding any value at all?
So - an effective integrated transport system which makes public transport the choice for convenience, effectiveness and reduced pollution and more online working would be a step in the right direction.
I like this part:-
"A satellite tracking system would be used to enforce the toll, with prices varying from 2p per mile for driving on a quiet road out of the rush hour to £1.34 for motorways at peak times."
Effect? Instead of people travelling from say Swindon to Hungerford on the M4, they'll go onto the B4192 (the back road) instead. It doesn't take much longer, and if people start weighing one against another, it may tip over to more using the back road. Bet the villagers will be pleased!
Road congestion has a self-regulating effect. There is no impending crisis. Once roads get too busy, people just start to make lifestyle choices. Personally, I travel early down the M4 every day at the moment. I travel 50 miles and yet have no congestion. I choose to go earlier to avoid it. Bring in "peak" travel, and you can bet that the "peak" will move, so that people travel a little earlier to avoid it. The effect then being, that it becomes the peak. A lot of people choose jobs that are closer because they don't like the travel.
It is remarkable that when discussing the issues of congestion it is almost always assumed that people use their cars out of carelessness or joy of driving. What is never mentioned is that this country has probably Europe's most expensive and least efficient public transportation system and people have to use their cars not out of choice but out of necessity. Forcing people out of the road makes only sense if they have an alternative - otherwise it only penalises the poor and reserves the roads for the rich.
I find it interesting that driving your car has now become so abhorent for society that the Government now plans to introduce measures for drivers that were previously reserved for paedophiles and rapists.
Also, where is the financial disincentive against ownership of inefficient vehicles such as 4x4s? This measure offers nothing to save the environment and merely edges us further towards Orwell's vision of mass surveillance.
I love the bit where they say this will replace road tax and fuel duty - they really think we're stupid, dont they?
I'm old enough to remember when they told us VAT would replace Income Tax and Corporation tax.
Why do we put up with this crap?
A good idea if you ask me. The more you drive the more you should pay IMO. The current system is very unfair especially for somebody like me who only drives approx 6-7000 miles per year. Wether it will reduce congestion remains to be seen but It's a move I'd welcome.
I must admit, I'm not convinced that generally this is a good idea.
Picking up on a point Tim made - they may be approaching this from completely the wrong angle.
For example, say that most of the traffic in cities at 8am to 9am is people going to work. It doesn't take a genius to work out that if the company gave it's employees flexible working hours they'd be able to avoid the 9am rush, they'd come in less stressed and I would suspect you'd save a fortune on sickdays.
It won't cost more than maybe £100,000 for the government to publicise it (plus free publicity) and is vastly cheaper than trying to implement some new technology that no one else in the world seems that interested in...
Finally to pick up on a couple of things from the article:
I love the bit about "Mr Darling warned that the chronic congestion and pollution of Los Angeles could become common in Britain".
LA has a number of problems including the way it was built which means going anywhere except by car is virtually impossible hence the jams, the really inefficient cars, the heat over there and the geography which means the pollution gets trapped and forms smog.
There also the part about "Many cars already have satellite tracking devices to help drivers find their way.".
Trouble is those boxes don't transmit and I doubt any in the future will transmit so all cars are going to need another blackbox fitted at a cost of £100 or more going by current prices.
Personally I would say they've got a heck of a fight on their hands to get this one accepted unless they can show that for the majority of people who don't live in cities and don't face traffic jams every morning, that it's a worthwhile solution (especially financially).
Trev
The idea of charging by the mileis one of the most ridiulous that i have ever heard. I spent many years working my way through the levels of retail management to the point that i now one run of my comapanies very sucessful stores. In response to this i now have to drive 25/30 miles to and then from work around the m25, unfortunately being retail we start open at 9 so exactly how would the all knowing government like me to change my travelling patterns. Now to be fair i can get public transport but to do this (and i have tried it once) it takes me 2 hours and 25 minutes to get there, out of the drive or sitting on a train/bus/hike which would you choose? i do understand the problem and a issue does need to be solved but this tax is going to hit people who cant afford it, cant avoid it and have no other option, viva revolution i feel.
Post a Comment
<< Home