New road charge plans revealed

JagoPlasma said:
Well this "crap little government" is in its 3rd term, and the british public voted them in AGAIN, so anyone NOT wanting them in power is in the minority

Not true. A minority of the electorate voted them.
 
Just read through all the posts on here and the Mrs. and I were really peeved when we heard about this scheme.

I work from home now but I used to work in Malvern. It was a 13 mile journey that took me 30 minutes during school time and 20 minutes when it was half-term etc. Also, there was no way that I could get a bus to get me from Worcester to Malvern reliably and cheaply. Also, the train was a no-no because I would have either had to bus or walk into the town centre and then catch the very unreliable train into Malvern. This was supposedly a 10 minute journey but if you could get the advertised train then you were very lucky. Also, the train wasn't cheap!

I could fill my car up with £30 worth of petrol and wouldn't have to refill it for 2 weeks. Therefore, quite cheap.

My Mrs. on the other hand, does a 35-45 minute journey every morning along the M5 and M50 and with the new scheme it would cost her a fortune to get to and from work. She said that if such a scheme came in she'd lose so much money in travelling and income tax that it wouldn't be worth going to work!

If a scheme like this was to materialise then it'd hit the poorest and the people that have to travel a lot the hardest e.g. lorry drivers. The government always go on about the poor nurses and the poor teachers. What about the poor people that are actually trying to make a go of things by not claiming benefits and are actually going to work?

On the social side of things would people start looking closer to home for work and would people go to out-of-town shopping centres as often? Therefore, not only would retail and other industries be hit but I think employers would have to start offering incentives such as "we'll pay your road usage charge if you come and work for us".

Or, this could be a ploy by the government to get us to focus on something that may never see the light of day and divert our attention away from other controversial schemes such as ID cards?!

Anyway, rant over! :)

Moosh
 
Not true. A minority of the electorate voted them.
True, but who's fault is that? They won the majority of those who bothered to vote. Keep going on about it isn't going to change it. If people got off their backsides then perhaps we wouldn't be lumbered with Blair or whoever. The problem is none of the parties are inspiring the electorate so how can we know who is, or isn't the majority choice? Surely if Blair was that unpopular this 'silent majority' would have registered, voted, and got rid.

They didn't. Obviously he isn't that unpopular. Whether we like it or not.

Which with schemes like this.............. :rolleyes:
 
overkill said:
Surely if Blair was that unpopular this 'silent majority' would have registered, voted, and got rid.

They didn't. Obviously he isn't that unpopular. Whether we like it or not.

Which with schemes like this.............. :rolleyes:

you obviously don't know the British Public :rolleyes:

do a survey - ask every British motorist if they hate fuel tax ..... out of those that say yes, see how many are prepared to spend 10 mins of their time doing anything about it .... not many.
 
you obviously don't know the British Public
In fact if the British people are motivated enough they will do what's needed. They've turned out well enough to protest against the govt over various issues.

do a survey - ask every British motorist if they hate fuel tax ..... out of those that say yes, see how many are prepared to spend 10 mins of their time doing anything about it .... not many.
Case in point. The British motorist did indeed register their displeasure to the point where the govt thought it might be an election loser. Had the leadership of that campaign not blown it, it well could have been.

The point is, they aren't motivated enough to get rid of him. The main problem being, as before, the opposition aren't offering sufficent to motivate them. So, we get Blair again.

Who knows, the way Blair is going, next time a big turnout may bring about a change? But the way it's going don't quote me on that................... :rolleyes:
 
overkill said:
In fact if the British people are motivated enough they will do what's needed. They've turned out well enough to protest against the govt over various issues.

Case in point. The British motorist did indeed register their displeasure to the point where the govt thought it might be an election loser. Had the leadership of that campaign not blown it, it well could have been.

The point is, they aren't motivated enough to get rid of him. The main problem being, as before, the opposition aren't offering sufficent to motivate them. So, we get Blair again.

Who knows, the way Blair is going, next time a big turnout may bring about a change? But the way it's going don't quote me on that................... :rolleyes:

a section of the motoring public did - not 'ALL' ... not ALL people that complain , are unhappy or disagree with things do anything about it.

There were MANY more people against the war in Iraq than actually turned up to demonstrations.

There have always been many people who express displeasure to freinds and family, but simply don't make any effort to do anything about it.


78% of drivers when polled said they were unhappy with the fuel tax rises - quite alot did demonstrate by blockadding fuel depo's

..... but not 18.5 Million ...... which is my point
Sugguesting that if people do not like something they will do something about it is simply 'wrong'
Some will but not all.

There are 60 million of us in this country, and many may take issues with all sorts of things, but are too busy ( truthfully or imagined ) to demonstrate, vote, boycot etc.
 
do a survey - ask every British motorist if they hate fuel tax ..... out of those that say yes, see how many are prepared to spend 10 mins of their time doing anything about it .... not many.

it has already been pointed out that we Brits will fight against an unjust law - hence Brown running scared of the petrol tax issue before the election.

This proposed road pricing scheme is a sham - I don't think it will ever actually appear. There is little prospect of them getting the necessary GPS systems installed and working in every car, the cost would be prohibitive. Also does this mean that foreign cars and lorries travel free on our roads , at present they at least pay tax on any fuel....they should be taxed on arrival presumably?

Individual ID cards.......spy in the cab Big Brother systems....sounds like a fascist little crappy Government to me Overkill. Not trolling (whatever that is) but the truth.
 
it has already been pointed out that we Brits will fight against an unjust law - hence Brown running scared of the petrol tax issue before the election.
Good lord! Agreement! :D

a section of the motoring public did - not 'ALL' ... not ALL people that complain , are unhappy or disagree with things do anything about it.
A section of the populous vote not ALL - even with a full register. Exactly my point. Not everybody is unhappy or disagree with Blair otherwise they would do something about it.

There were MANY more people against the war in Iraq than actually turned up to demonstrations.
Not according to the opinion polls there isn't. That's coming from someone who was against the war. The polls showed huge fluctuations of anything between 50-60% in support. Personally I think that's unlikely, but.............

Sugguesting that if people do not like something they will do something about it is simply 'wrong'
Not at all. We have gone to war with huge public support, seen public opinion massively sway from peace to war (Winter 1938-spring 1939) seen govts swept from power by huge margins, seen huge turnouts in referendums. All of these showed that if the public is engaged they will turn out in huge numbers to show their feelings. The problem is, is that nothing is collectively engaging them.

We need politicans to start seizing the big issues again not piddiling around with "safe" policies and bland politics. Some hope.

Individual ID cards.......spy in the cab Big Brother systems....sounds like a fascist little crappy Government to me Overkill.
ID cards are used by many govts around the world. I hardly think they are all "fascists". Spy in the cab? What you mean like tacos? I really don't see the big deal with this. Sorry.

If they were watching my every move with cameras in car doors, tapping my phone (this happened to a friend of mine in the 80's) had the right to enter my house without a search warrant (1995 criminal justice act - since repealed) and follow me about because of my political convictions - then perhaps we are talking big brother. At the moment we aren't even close.

Take a trip to the Stasi museum that's Big Brother.
 
Maybe its all a ruse to stimulate public discussion in which case it has been successful. There is no doubt that some thing has to be done to change the car culture. Cars mean more to us than plain convenience - they give us freedom to go where we like when we like, we can travel within our own space and only allow those we wish into it and they are an undenaible status symbol. What is also a fact is that are way too many of them and we are too reliant on them.So whats to be done thats the question. A carrot / stick approach that is for sure. Carrot= a cheap( subsidised) reliable, effective, efficient public transport system. Stick = unnecessary use of the car.Cut out the short journeys for eg and cycle instead, put your kids on school buses, own just one car per household and make it small.Get use to travelling with others , strike up a conversation with strangers as it makes the journey better.Get use to other peoples b.o.
 
overkill said:
True, but who's fault is that? They won the majority of those who bothered to vote. Keep going on about it isn't going to change it.

I'm not going on about it - just correcting a factual mistake that someone had made.

And correcting your mistake, Labour did not win a majority of those that bothered to vote.
 
Ethics Gradient said:
a section of the motoring public did - not 'ALL' ... not ALL people that complain , are unhappy or disagree with things do anything about it.
There were MANY more people against the war in Iraq than actually turned up to demonstrations.
There have always been many people who express displeasure to freinds and family, but simply don't make any effort to do anything about it.


78% of drivers when polled said they were unhappy with the fuel tax rises - quite alot did demonstrate by blockadding fuel depo's
That last sentence is simply not true.

The people who *did* blockade the fuel depots in September 2000, where truckers (like myself), farmers and the odd taxi driver, who had nothing better to do. The private motorist did nothing. :nono:

chard said:
Also does this mean that foreign cars and lorries travel free on our roads , at present they at least pay tax on any fuel
Foreign lorries do not pay any fuel tax, as they fill their 1000 litre tanks in Calais, then catch the boat over here, then run about all week undercutting the rates that British haulier has to charge due to the excessive taxation on fuel. :thumbsdow
 
Foreign lorries do not pay any fuel tax, as they fill their 1000 litre tanks in Calais, then catch the boat over here, then run about all week undercutting the rates that British haulier has to charge due to the excessive taxation on fuel.
Also, these foreign lorries don't have to pay the exorbitant road tax that our lorries have to pay I believe.
 
la gran siete said:
A carrot / stick approach that is for sure. Carrot= a cheap( subsidised) reliable, effective, efficient public transport system. Stick = unnecessary use of the car.

Unfortunately all we see is the stick approach. And they're ratcheting that up big time. :rolleyes:

No sign of any carrots. :(
 
Chard said:
it has already been pointed out that we Brits will fight against an unjust law - hence Brown running scared of the petrol tax issue before the election.

overkill said:
Good lord! Agreement! :D

I'm glad you believe that the whole population will be out on the Streets fighting for Justice .... shame its not reality.

Are you out infront of parliment waveing a plackard everytime your feel something is wrong ?

A small minority of people will do - and this is often dependant on the depth of feeling as to how many. You seem to not have a grasp of social anthropology, especially with regards to the population of this country.

" its a waste of time " - " nothing will change " - " I'm too busy "

for alot of people, social conditioning, self interest, fear of being singled out, creates an inertia with regards to 'complaining' or activily campainging against for for an issue.

Take for example the numbers of people that say they were (are) against fox hunting. How many went out to stop hunts, lobby parliment etc ..... and how many just restricted their 'outrage' to saying 'its terrible' when asked about it.

to look at the issue of the iraq war:

overkill said:
Not according to the opinion polls there isn't. That's coming from someone who was against the war. The polls showed huge fluctuations of anything between 50-60% in support. Personally I think that's unlikely, but.............

so even if it was only 40% against the war .... thats still 24 Million people.

Many of those people simply complained in the pub or on internet forums ..... less than 5% actually took the time to go out and publically complain.

If only 5% activly did somethign about a WAR they disagreed with, how many will do something about a PM and a government election that they consider a forgone conclusion.

I would sugguest to you that the majority of people dislike Tony Blair, out of that you will have some that will vote against him, others that just can't be bothered to vote, and further groups that dislike him but wonlt vote for any other party.

'Better the devil you know' is not mandate for the PM that the public are behind his policies.
 
I thought it was common knowledge that if people like a situation they wont bother to comment on it, and people that dont like it will.

Oppinion Polls are flawed, I was for the war but never rang an oppinion poll once because i was happy with things the way they were. now if it was something i didnt want then i would put in my two pence.

And as for they guy saying i was wrong about labour winning by a majority, I guess they are not in power at the moment then, because last time i checked you had to be in the majority to win an election
 
JagoPlasma said:
And as for they guy saying i was wrong about labour winning by a majority, I guess they are not in power at the moment then, because last time i checked you had to be in the majority to win an election

When was the last time you checked then? Or are your maths just extraordinarily poor?

Please explain how Labours result of 36% of those that voted is a majority?
 
JagoPlasma said:
Oppinion Polls are flawed, I was for the war but never rang an oppinion poll once because i was happy with things the way they were. now if it was something i didnt want then i would put in my two pence.

..... you don't ring offical opinion polls ......


...... they contact you and ask for your opinion be it for or against .........


you ring TV and radio station polls that are 'unoffical' since they don't take representative samples of the populace.
 
Squiffy said:
When was the last time you checked then? Or are your maths just extraordinarily poor?

Please explain how Labours result of 36% of those that voted is a majority?

... and thats less than 16 Million people.

That leaves another 28.4 Million people ( who could vote ) that voted for other parties or no one at all.

1.5 Million aren't on the electoral register but are of voteing age

which leaves 14.1 million inelligible to vote due to age or being barred from voteing.

^ just to put those percentages into perspective for those people who are under the mistaken impression that the Labour party has a majority of the country supporting it.
 
Ethics Gradient said:
I'm glad you believe that the whole population will be out on the Streets fighting for Justice .... shame its not reality.

Are you out infront of parliment waveing a plackard everytime your feel something is wrong ?

A small minority of people will do - and this is often dependant on the depth of feeling as to how many. You seem to not have a grasp of social anthropology, especially with regards to the population of this country.

" its a waste of time " - " nothing will change " - " I'm too busy "

for alot of people, social conditioning, self interest, fear of being singled out, creates an inertia with regards to 'complaining' or activily campainging against for for an issue.

Take for example the numbers of people that say they were (are) against fox hunting. How many went out to stop hunts, lobby parliment etc ..... and how many just restricted their 'outrage' to saying 'its terrible' when asked about it.

to look at the issue of the iraq war:



so even if it was only 40% against the war .... thats still 24 Million people.

Many of those people simply complained in the pub or on internet forums ..... less than 5% actually took the time to go out and publically complain.

If only 5% activly did somethign about a WAR they disagreed with, how many will do something about a PM and a government election that they consider a forgone conclusion.

I would sugguest to you that the majority of people dislike Tony Blair, out of that you will have some that will vote against him, others that just can't be bothered to vote, and further groups that dislike him but wonlt vote for any other party.

'Better the devil you know' is not mandate for the PM that the public are behind his policies.

Completely agree.

And to add to it, I often hear "what's the point?" when it's about protesting against anything. People don't believe their voice will change anything.
 
Irrelevant nonsense JagoPlasma.

You stated "Well this "crap little government" is in its 3rd term, and the british public voted them in AGAIN, so anyone NOT wanting them in power is in the minority"

64% of those voting did not want Labour in power.

Therefore, as I said in an earlier post, your statement was not true, and only a minority of the electorate voted for Labour.
 
JagoPlasma said:
you cant count the votes/oppinions of people that didnt vote, thats like making statstics up on the spot.

Just because they don't vote doesn't mean they don't exist and that they don't have an opinion.

When you say a majority of Brits voted Labour, it's simply not true. Even if you only count people who voted, 36% isn't a majority. 51% is a majority.
And if you wonder how they got through then, it's because 2 parties share the remaining % making them have less votes each then Labour but more combined.
 
Off topic for too long the thread is New road charge plans revealed
 
JagoPlasma said:
*cough* http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hcio/stateparties.cfm *cough* looks like a majority to me??

you cant count the votes/oppinions of people that didnt vote, thats like making statstics up on the spot.

a) Thats just daft - ofc you can count people that didn't vote ... because they are citizens of the country.

if I came into your place of work and asked for sugguestions for a christmas party and 20 of the 30 people in the office gave opinions and voted on it:

8 voted for a Hotel do
6 voted for a Boat trip
4 voted for a Mystery do
2 voted to put the money towards better laptops instead.

... the other 10 either weren't available, couldn't make up their minds, or were not interested.

so those 8 people who wanted Hotel do win.

than means that 12 people activily wanted something else, 10 people couldn't or wouldn't vote.
The 'majority' of people who voted didn't want a Hotel do ..... just like the majority of voters in this country didn't want a Labour party as the Government.




those figures you linked to are seats not votes. They do NOT reflect the actual votes.

Labour seats = 356 votes = 9,556,183 votes 35.2%
Conservative seats = 197 votes = 8,772,598 votes 32.3%
Lib Dem seats = 62 votes = 5,982,045 votes 22.0%

there are 644 seats so ifseats reflected actual votes:

labour 226
cons 208
Lib 141

so some how ( due to bias in the electoral boundaries )

even excluding all those that didn't vote, it is quite clear that the majority of voters DIDN'T want a Labour Government.

..... unless you want to argue that 14.75 million votes for the other 2 main parties was less than the 9.5 Million that got the Government elected.

Note: sorry Garrett, you posted that while I was writing and posting this
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom