Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue May 05, 2026 03:23

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Sir Rod Eddington report
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 23:49 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
As anyone seen the news today (I watched this evening) about a report coming out tomorrow by Sir Rod Eddington. It’s supposed to emphasise that there is no option but to introduce road pricing to curb congestion on British roads.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 23:52 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
Dixie wrote:
It’s supposed to emphasise that there is no option but to introduce road pricing to curb congestion on British roads.


How about spending some of the money they screw out of us on the road network..... :x

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 00:06 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Dixie wrote:
It’s supposed to emphasise that there is no option but to introduce road pricing to curb congestion on British roads.

Well any moron can curb congestion by taxing people off the roads :x

But the idea that a government-run variable road charging scheme can effectively optimise the use of road space is complete pie in the sky.

I firmly believe that it will eventually run into the sand, but we'll have years of people spouting crap, failed experiments, unintended consequences and ruined businesses and lives before it is proved that it's an unworkable pipe dream.

So give up hope of any significant improvements in our land transport system for the next twenty years :cry:

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 00:08 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
Gizmo wrote:
Dixie wrote:
It’s supposed to emphasise that there is no option but to introduce road pricing to curb congestion on British roads.


How about spending some of the money they screw out of us on the road network..... :x


It also emphasised that more cycling lanes/routes where the way forward.
Looks like they want us all on bikes. :roll:

Sorry I think I've put this in the wrong forum (a few red wines perhaps) :)

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 00:16 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
Blimey .. T2K are not fully in favour. Their spokesman said it cannot work unless drivers see a decent alternative .. like fair public transport at fair price and buses etc which actually run frequently and go where people need to travel.. when they travel ... :shock:

Otherwise

T2K guy .. blimey! wrote:

People will think this is just another stealth tax



Blimey.. heard it 5 minutes ago on BBC Radio 2 News .. :shock:

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 06:00 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued the following PR at 04:28 this morning:

PR413: 'Price the poor off the roads' scheme is flawed and doomed to fail

news: for immediate release

Road pricing is in the news again. Safe Speed discovered critical flaws in the
very principle of road pricing that render the entire megabuck system null and
void.


Congestion SELF REGULATES.

The primary regulator of road use is, and always will be journey time. If
congestion increases, some people don't have time to travel and congestion
eases. If congestion reduces some people find that they do have time to travel
and congestion increases.

The threats of gridlock are false. Suppose it took four hours to drive to work;
what would you do? Sit in traffic for four hours? Of course not. You might
change your job, move your house or make alternative travel arrangements, but
one thing is certain - NO ONE will sit in such traffic every day. So there will
never be gridlock.

They say that congestion costs business £20 billion per annum. Isn't that a
congestion charge? Isn't it in the nature of business to control costs and
maximise profits? If they could avoid the £20 billion costs then they would.
How are they supposed to be 'more motivated' to manage the costs imposed by a
congestion based road pricing charge? Countless thousands of businesses have
already re-located away from congested town centres to other places with better
road connections, and by doing so have REGULATED the costs that they suffer
from congestion. It's this that has created an 'M4 corridor',


Road pricing is REGRESSIVE

Suppose we price the poorest drivers off the road - and that's what would
happen on some busy routes. Immediately the roads are clearer and journeys are
quicker. Wealthier people who were time-constrained from using the roads soon
take advantage of the improved conditions and congestion is restored to
previous levels.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Road pricing is fundamentally flawed and will
never deliver an improvement in congestion. Congestion is already regulated by
journey time - if it takes too long to travel then we make alternative
arrangements. It really is as simple as that. There is no sustained gridlock
anywhere in the world and never will be simply because people are not stupid
enough to sit in gridlock."

"Road pricing is also a tax on the poor - technically a regressive tax - it may
alter the average wealth of those stuck in traffic but will NEVER ease
congestion. It is also massively complex and expensive. It would burn massive
amounts of money and deliver no significant benefit."

"Congestion in London has been self-regulated for 30 years with just about zero
traffic growth. Ken Livingstone's congestion charge has NOT reduced journey
times or reduced the number of vehicle movements; although you do have to read
Transport for London's self-congratulatory reports very carefully to find out!"

<ends>

Notes for editors
=================

Paul Smith investigated road pricing in 2004 after the House of Commons
Transport Committee called for information. Our memorandum is published here:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 18we58.htm
Further arguments and data are available at the link.

Recent Safe Speed forum discussion on the 'Pros' and 'Cons' of road pricing:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10857
(three pages) We CANNOT BELIEVE that anyone is stupid enough to think that this
scheme will work! The list of 'cons' is huge.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 08:53 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
Daily Mail

Quote:
Now pay-as-you-go road taxes are in prospect

by RAY MASSEY
Last updated at 23:00pm on 30th November 2006

Image
Toll rage: Motorists are set to face pay-
as-you-drive road toll charges of up to
£1.50 a mile under

Motorists are set to face pay-as-you-drive road toll charges of up to £1.50 a mile under 'stealth tax' proposals revealed in a major report commissioned by Gordon Brown.

The report by former BA chief executive Sir Rod Eddington will call for billions of pounds to be raised from Britain's 30 million motorists to provide funds to improve crumbling roads and struggling rail services.

But the proposals are set to prove hugely controversial with motorists in this country who are already face among the highest charges in terms of tax, petrol and speeding fines.

Published in advance of next week's Pre-Budget statement, Sir Rod's report is set to provide the blueprint for Chancellor Gordon Brown's transport policy as Prime Minister.

The proposals will also fuel controversy over increasing intrusion into citizens' privacy with cars to be fitted with electronic black boxes which will track their every movement either by satellite or roadside beacon.

Motorists be charged by the mile, with prices rising at times of peak congestion and lower when traffic is light. Drivers will receive an itemised bill each month setting out where they drove and how much it cost.

The most polluting cars, including 4x4s, are set to be charged the most.

The proposals have also sparked rows about how the cash raised will be used, with critics fearing that instead of being used to cut congestion, the money will become yet another Government cash-raising 'stealth tax'.

Ministers have already laid the ground for road-pricing by including legislation for pilot schemes in the Queen's Speech although the Treasury isacutely sensitive to the charge that it is gearing up for yet another tax grab.

Undert the Queens' Speech plans, regional road-pricing trials will start in five years.

The aim is to have a national jam-busting scheme in place by the middle of the next decade with drivers paying up to £1.50 a mile to use the busiest and most congested roads at peak time.

The Transport Department has declined to rule out charging 'gas-guzzlers' more than lower polluting vehicles.

This suggests a shift in policy towards more environmentally-friendly or 'green' measures.

Originally ministers insisted that pay-as-you-drive charges would replace road tax and petrol duty, and would be 'revenue neutral'.

But, driven by the new 'green' agenda, that commitment appears to have been abandoned.

Sir Rod's report will also call for greater spending on roads and on the railways - but with funds concentrated on easing bottlenecks rather than on major projects.

On the railways he believes that lengthening trains and platforms would be a more practical way to cope with congestion - particularly on busy commuter services in the South East of England.

For this reason, he is expected to reject the idea of a high speed North-South rail link, arguing that it is more cost effective for road and rail networks to be used more efficiently.

He will also call for a streamlining and shake up of the over-complex planning regime that hinders investment in big infrastructure projects.

But the former BA boss will, perhaps not surprisingly, back expansion of aviation, a move which will infuriate campaigners who oppose more airports and flights.

Sir Rod will argue that cutting congestion is essential to Britain's economic prosperity and that road pricing or 'demand management' schemes are more effective that costly multi-billion pound prestige schemes.

Ministers are also anxious to avoid the embarrassment of repeating ambitious promises of a fully 'integrated transport system' which has still yet to materialise. That was replaced six years ago by a 10-year plan, which itself was quietly pared back after Railtrack's collapse.

Tories say the need is for quick fixes now to go alongside longer term planning.

Last night the Conservatives accused the Government of publishing yet another report while failing to get to grips with Britain's 'urgent' transport problems.

Ahead of the Eddington Report , the Tories released their own strategy document setting out their priorities for the system.

The party called for a programme of rapid action to ease bottlenecks in the system, along with major longer-term projects to make a lasting difference to the traffic infrastructure.

And it said a much stronger green dimension and a more integrated approach to transport planning were needed.

The Conservative Strategy Document - entitled Getting Around: Britain's Great Frustration - sets out an initial foundation for the policies expected in the party's next election manifesto.

Shadow transport secretary Chris Grayling said: "The Government's latest report on transport - the Eddington Report - is the eighth major document they have produced on transport, and yet virtually all the improvements they promised in their 10-year plan for transport have been cancelled or kicked into the long grass."

He acknowledged that road pricing and tolling were likely to play an increased role in the strategy of any future Government, but added: "We certainly would not want to see premature moves to an untested national scheme. We believe that congestion charging and road pricing should be used to generate additional transport capacity rather than to price people off the roads altogether."

Mr Grayling noted: "The Government has clearly failed to follow through on its stated aim of improving our transport system - and for most people travel has become more difficult in the past 10 years.

"We have trains that are getting more and more overcrowded and roads that are getting more and more congested."

On the Eddington recommendations, environmental group Transport 2000 said: "We will support Eddington on road pricing, but only if revenues go back into public transport and other measures to give people real choice. We would oppose funding going towards big new roads programmes."

Road pricing was first floated by former Transport Secretary Alistair Darling - now Trade and Industry Secretary but tipped to be Chancellor under a Brown premiership - whose mantra in support of the policy was "doing nothing is not an option."

Mr Brown was also vociferous backer of Sir Nicholas Stern's 'green' recommendations for action on global warming.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
So, you appoint an Australian ex-head of BA to do a report on transport.

He says we should not build many new roads or a new rail line from North to South of the UK but instead that some airports should be expanded. What a surprise.

I think the big problem for road pricing is how you introduce it. If the promised tax cost neutrality is to happen then it must be introduced in a "big bang" all at once. How will this be done?

Anyway, it will take so long to get this up and running that I won't care as I will be dead or so old that I won't drive any more.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:15 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
I only put this (Daily Telegraph ) here because of this:

Daily Telegraph wrote:
It also emerged yesterday that a new Labour stealth tax is raking in £14 million a year by charging for replacement car registration documents – a service that was free just two years ago.

Motorists who lose their documents must now pay £19 to get a replacement under changes introduced at the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency for the financial year 2005/06.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:46 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
The BBC Have Your Say discussion is quite predictable...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:09 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued the following PR at 9:50 this morning:

PR414: Road Pricing fundamental question number 1

news: for immediate release

Road Pricing fundamental question number 1:

=========================================================================
If congestion costs business £20billion per annum, Why haven't businesses
changed their plans to save this cost? Isn't this already a 'congestion
charge'?
=========================================================================

Answer: They already have - as much as they can. Businesses have relocated away
from town centres for better road connections. This effect has already created
the 'M4 corridor' and thousands of business and retail parks.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Time is money and congestion is a cost to
business. Where businesses have been able to avoid this 'cost' they have.
Adding to the cost with a road pricing scheme will only make a small
difference, perhaps equivalent to one year's traffic growth."

"It's not only business that makes efforts to avoid congestion. Who wants to
sit in a traffic jam? We all do what we can, when we can to avoid the jams."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:12 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued the following PR at 10:19 this morning:

PR415: Road Pricing fundamental question number 2

news: for immediate release

Road Pricing fundamental question number 2:

==================================================
Can road pricing be greener than fuel duty?
==================================================

Answer: No it can't. Fuel duty is a PERFECT 'carbon tax' because virtually
every carbon atom in fuel ends up in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Every litre of
fuel burnt creates exactly the same amount of CO2. (petrol and diesel have
slightly different values)

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "When they say road pricing is 'green' don't
believe them. Fuel duty is a perfect carbon tax. Whatever they do with road
pricing would be far less green than fuel duty. For example people will travel
further to avoid high priced zones thereby increasing CO2 output."

"Of course if they used road pricing to price us off the roads, that WOULD
reduce CO2 output, But they could get a better effect at far lower cost with
fuel duty increases."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 13:27 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued the following PR at 12:25 this afternoon:

PR416: Road Pricing fundamental question number 3

news: for immediate release

Road Pricing fundamental question number 3:

========================================
Will we see gridlocked cities?
========================================

Answer: No. Of course not. People aren't stupid enough to sit in gridlock. If
congestion exceeds a tolerable level, people and business change their
arrangements. This limits the level of congestion to one that people choose to
tolerate.


Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Their threats of 'gridlock' are false. There is
no long term gridlock anywhere in the world and there never will be. People
will avoid travel long before they sit in gridlock. In this way congestion
self-limits traffic long before gridlock."

"Travel time is (and always will be) the fundamental journey choice regulator.
If it takes too long to travel, then we don't travel. It really is as simple as
that."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 13:48 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 13:36
Posts: 1339
I still think this is a strategy so that they can 'compromise' and let us off with only a large rise in fuel tax, for which we will be expected to be eternally grateful.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 14:42 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 13:36
Posts: 1339
If the current BBC Have Your Say is at all representative, then this plan could very well lead to something close to civil war if implemented. I think people are much closer to breaking point than the government realise.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 14:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Zamzara wrote:
I still think this is a strategy so that they can 'compromise' and let us off with only a large rise in fuel tax, for which we will be expected to be eternally grateful.


It's probably mainly Eurocrap I think.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 15:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
When, oh when, will the realisation that travel costs for companies involving fleets of road vehicles are a significant part of the companies operating costs and, as such, must be recovered from the sales prices of the goods or services provided.
Thus, any such road pricing will have a direct effect on the ex-factory price of that which we are trying to sell all over the World. An inflationary pressure on these prices will make it more difficult than ever to sel our goods/services in Europe and the rest of the world with the resultant impact on unemployment and the loss of taxation from both corporation tax, inome tax and national insurance contributions.
Additionally, it will lead to protests which will make the poll tax disturbances look like a teddy-bears picnic. I mean, if you drive 25 miles each way down a M-Way to and from work every day at, say a projected £1-00 per mile, that's £50 per day you'll need to find out of your taxed income. i.e. you'll need a pay rise of c.£17,000 per annum just to break-even. If not you would not be able to afford to go to work any more.
That's why it simply won't work and won't happen. The backlash would be too great.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 15:50 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 21:15
Posts: 699
Location: Belfast
:gatso2: Oh no, not again! I saw an item about this on the BBC lunchtime news. The moment it was mentioned that the report was "Treasury-sponsored", I thought, "Well here we go again." How many more times to we have to put up with Sir Somebodyorother being given an obscene amount of cash and then wheeled out to tell us all what the Government wants us to hear? That's the third time in almost as many weeks this has happened. Note: An anagram of Sir Nicholas Stern is "ON STRAINLESS RICH" I'm not convinced and neither were most of the people intervewed in the BBC report. Everyone basically said, "It's just a way of screwing more tax out of us." Oh dear, I think the natives are getting restless. :gossip:

This report clearly lacks substance. It's hoped that road-pricing will raise £28 billion to improve public transport. Excuse me while I have a sardonic laugh to myself. :rotfl: Sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, the words, "Improve" and "Public Transport" contradict each other within the same sentence.

Add to that, has this former boss of BA bothered to consider what would happen if road-pricing is passed on to the haulage industry? I'll leave it for all the truckers on this forum to tell him.

While we're on the subject, check the AOL motoring page. There's a poll going on regarding public transport. So far 67% say they wouldn't use it even if it is improved. We're all expected to say, "Look at the King in his wonderful new clothes!" I'm not the only one who says, "The King is in the altogether!"

_________________
Anyone who tells you that nothing is impossible has never bathed in a saucer of water.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 17:32 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
So are we actually now pleading for incresaed fuel duty? Perhaps this threat of road pricing has served its purpose....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 18:30 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire
I personally believe that any increases in taxation will harm the economy.

Consider this:

Either road pricing or increased fuel duty will make cars more expensive to run.

For those living in council housing especially, but equally to those living in owned/mortgaged properties, the car(s) is(are) probably the most valuable tangeable asset they own. Or rather have on finance??

By making car travel more difficult, the value of cars falls. Make a big difference to the cost of using a car, the car will become almost worthless.

Now we have a situation whereby millions of people have an asset which they will pay a lot for, which is probably worth scrap value.

If second hand cars are sought to offset the extra thousands spent on travel tax, the opposite will be true......... residual values will be uncharacteristically strenghened, whilst dealers and manufacturers wont be able to charge "new car" prices (i.e. the cost of making them plus a small profit margin). Many of the world's manufacturers are already struggling financially.

Either way, by charging the public more to travel, someone, somewhere is going to suffer from it. Whether that's people defaulting on car loans helped by travel tax, and having no assets worth repossessing, or low-income people forced out of employment by the 2 prong attack of road pricing/fuel duty on one side and they car's they'd likely buy increasing in value due to demand from the more affluent trying to limit their travel costs.

Maybe it will just be the manufacturers and their numerous British factories which suffer as the new car market slumps putting many thousands out of work and (most likely) unable to relocate (their houses are worthless because of the location and lack of employment) or commute (road pricing).




Someone needs to point out to these gluepots that there's no such thing as a free lunch.

There's only so much money going round in the country, and there are other countries in the world.

It's only the distribution at macro level which varies. Try to milk more resources in one area only means more leakage elsewhere.

It's like trying to build a deep pool of water at one end of the bath.


Ultimately, the economy acts on a global level. People who economise on a global level will simply sidestep the UK.

The government need to realise that they're already taking as much as the country can sustain. Ask any more and those who can will up and leave. Those who can't will throw in the towel and claim benefits.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 233 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.073s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]