Vehcile Tracking & cost per Mile Tax

Post by **Mike** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:26 am

Hiya

I don't know if you have heard of the above proposal but there is an online petition to Number 10 asking for the tax idea to be abolished. We have until the 20 February 2007 to sign and I hope you all will!

Sign Petition

ttfn
Mike

BarcelonAl · Post by **BarcelonAl** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:58 am

That's me signed up...

Post by **johnriley1uk** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:46 am

Sue and I signed up to this a few days ago. At that point the total number of names on the petition was over 1.5 million.

A very remarkable amount of dissent that should motivate an urgent rethink by the government. If implemented as proposed the economy would collapse as no-one would be able to afford to travel anywhere.

Of course we could all buy horses, but think of the health issues, the smell and all the greenhouse gases that would generate.....

Post by **Mike** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 1:41 pm

1.6 million signatures now. It has been interesting that the figure has increase so much over only a couple of days. Al mentioned that the poll was on Top Gear last night so I hope they have much more.

I heard a statistic that there are 33million licensed vehicles on the road at the moment. I know that 72% of the population own a driving license (from the national statistics office) this makes a driving population of about 2.7% of all drivers voted. It is not at all much really. . . . :D

mr_e · Post by **mr_e** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:12 pm

Au contraire, it is quite a lot when you consider the usual apathy amongst people when it comes to votes. There must be some statistic for that as well. I voted for it, because I'm worried about the effect on rural communities...and the governments record on large-scale projects.

Andy · Post by **Andy** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 9:12 pm

I've signed up but I don't think it will change their minds. I hope it does but I fear they have made up their minds already.

Post by **johnriley1uk** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:15 pm

The proposal as put to us is clearly unworkable, so we all know it's not possible. So, after getting everyone very worked up about the impossible, some lesser and barely possible scenario will come into place and we will all feel very grateful that the government has listened.

I'm obviously a wolf in sheep's clothing, and thanks to the petition they now know who I am. As they do all of you as well.

It's fortunate that I'm not paranoid.

Post by **Mike** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:43 pm

It is interesting to see what the 'experts' say about this issue. I particularly like Jeremy Clarkson's response. Paraphrased it went a little like this.

We have a fair tax for our car usage - Fuel Duty. This penalises those who choose thirsty vehicles or decide to rack up lots of miles.

I don't think this will ever get to be law. Can you imagine - 'Yes will will all spend hundreds of pounds putting a tax system into our cars'. Thank you mr government. . . . . . Or do you think they are going to spend the money installing the technology into vehicles. . . . .

Post by **Mike** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:05 am

I received and interesting response to this from 'Tony Blair' apparently - some how I don't think that he even bothered to look it over. The first half says practically nothing. The second half witter's on about almost nothing. I will have to read it more in depth and create a detailed critique of 'his' argument.

Yawn. It was very, very, very long response, I think they plan to bore us into submission.

Post by **johnriley1uk** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:23 am

You mean it wasn't just me he e-mailed?

The only thing missing from his dismissive missive was a picture of his pearly white smiley teeth...

mr_e · Post by **mr_e** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:50 pm

I didn't read it poroperly, but the general gist was that he can't rule anything out, arguing that we can't simply do nothing about the current situation. They're worried about the effects on the economy and environment, etc etc.

Andy · Post by **Andy** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 6:18 pm

I personally hated the part where it stated our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a ''big brother'' society because it is a joke. I agree with Clarkson on this issue (as I do about a lot of other things but that is another thread).

Post by **Mike** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 10:22 pm

I think it would have saved a whole lot of time it they had simply said.

Tony Blair Muppet PR Department wrote:We are planning this. We don't want to tell you we are planning this thoroughly yet. We want to reassure you that you will possibly be taxed in this manner in the future. Our aim is to get the most money out of you possible in the name of sustainable environments. Big smile, wide scary eyes - emphatic hand gestures.

PDT_023 PDT_001

Post by **Mike** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:43 pm

Well I briefly saw an article in the paper the other day that suggested the following rates

City Centre - ?1.34 per mile
Inner Suburbs - ?0.14-0.86 per mile
Outer Suburbs - ?0.04-0.14 per mile
Country - ?0.02 per mile.

Lets just analyse this a little bit. The M6 does not go through the country much between Manchester and Birrmingham. Does this mean that you will be on the suburbs rate for the whole journey? 80miles at 0.14 per mile = 11.20 per journey. To be precise 11.2% of my YEARLY road tax bill. That must be an increase of 1000's of percent. Disgusting!

Worse - Journey into Manchester - Suburbs all the way - 18 miles, just outside centre - 2 miles, in centre 1mile.
(18 x 0.14) + (2 x 0.86) + (1 x 1.34) = 2.52 + 1.72 + 1.34 = ?5.58 or 5.58% of my YEARLY bill, in only 20 journeys (ie 1 Month or so just to and from manchester not counting other journeys) i will have paid as much as I do in one year currently. INSANE!

Andy · Post by **Andy** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:57 pm

What really iritates me about this is the knock-on effect that it will have on our social lives and those of our future children. Think about it, travelling for me to Manchester / vice versa to see you all is the equivalent of ?4-?5 on top of petrol every time. Ludicrous really. I won't stop there either because once this comes in prices will rise steadily because they'll shove out a globabl warming statistic and they'll introduce newer more finicky laws. What do they want? All of our money?