Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Apr 28, 2024 04:44

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 04:56 
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
Sunday Express

Quote:
DRIVERS FACE SNEAK ROAD PRICING ‘TAX’

Sunday October 26,2008
By Jason Groves Political Editor Have your say(1)

CONGESTION charge schemes could be sneaked in “through the back door” across Britain under new laws to be pushed through Parliament tomorrow.

The Local Transport Bill will give councils powers to impose swingeing road tolls on motorists without seeking government approval.

The Conservatives claimed last night that changes to the Bill contained in 163 government amendments tabled last week, will also limit the need for public consultation.

While the Tories are pressing for councils to consider a binding referendum before bringing in charging, Ministers have ruled out the move.

The Bill will also give the Welsh Assembly powers to impose tolls on all trunk roads in Wales, the first time the body has been given tax-raising powers of any kind.

Shadow Transport Minister Stephen Hammond said the huge number of late Government amendments suggested Labour was “in disarray” over an issue that has sparked massive public opposition. He added: “This Government has a poor track record with consultations. People will not be convinced that the changes to be debated will result in anything other than the Government imposing road pricing against their will. We would encourage councils to hold referenda, so people are given a say.”

Mark Wallace, campaigns director at the Taxpayers’ Alliance, said: “It would be wrong to sneak these schemes through by the back door.

“Ministers do not want to hold consultations because they know road pricing is unpopular. It will be just another scam to increase the amount we have to pay in taxes.”

The Government insists road pricing can help reduce congestion and cut carbon emissions. However, the idea, which could produce tolls of up to £1.30 a mile at peak times, is unpopular with drivers. Last year a Downing Street petition on the issue attracted 1.8million signatures against road pricing, the highest ever recorded on any issue.

Although plans for a national scheme appear to have been temporarily shelved, ministers are pressing ahead with changes in the law to allow councils to bring in charges.

Critics believe the move will result in a confusing patchwork of different tolls covering the country. Ten pilot schemes have been launched and Ministers hope dozens more councils will impose congestion charges.

In many areas they have been accused of “bribing” local authorities to bring in charges by making it a condition of new public transport investment.

Consultation on the pilot schemes has been patchy. In Manchester, £3billion of public transport investment is dependent on introducing a road toll scheme within five years.

A referendum is planned for next month, but critics complain that it contains no mention of the plan to impose charges. The poll simply asks: “Do you agree with the Transport Innovation Fund proposals?”

Manchester Labour MP Graham Stringer, who is calling for binding consultation to be introduced in the new Bill, said: “The Government is trying to pretend this is all about local decisions and that the details of how authorities consult is already set out.

“They want road pricing schemes to be brought in but they want to wash their hands of responsibility. If consultation is going to be meaningful it has to be open and fair.”

Ministers insist they want to give authorities the freedom to manage congestion locally. A Department for Transport source said they did not want to be “prescriptive” about how councils consulted the public.


As we all know "Safety" cameras were not about saving lives and where just a money generating, revenue collection scheme and, because the UK population were starting to see through the government spin and lies things were getting too sticky for them. They (the Government and it's Coucils) had to turn their attention to other ways of collecting more money. The only thing left for them is road pricing, they’ve run out of ideas as we have seen with some of the other stupid ideas they were thinking up to use for raising taxation.

As the government doesn’t have the money to give to the desperate councils, who have also lost the money they made from "Safety" cameras, the councils are now left with looking for any way possible of generating new revenue. The government has enough problems of its own and doesn’t want the responsibly or the backlash from this new road tax so, let the councils do the dirty work (if you want more money then the only thing left is road pricing, be it at your own peril). It's all about money (revenue) and nothing else. When the flack from road pricing gets too much for the councils they will turn their money grabbing attention to something else.

On another note from this article "Town votes out speed cameras" I also personally don’t believe that it’s the end of speed cameras because it’s already been said that the police and SCP’s are using more and more mobile speed cameras. The article only talks about fixed cameras. They’re just not as obvious as what fixed cameras where, and going by the latest news this week they don’t need signs. Now it's just a free for all, they will make even more money.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.020s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]