Possible new tax on the motorist!?

[Michael]

Very well said, we already have a similar system. It's called fuel duty.

 

Not quite a like for like comparison. Fuel duty goes up and down like a yoyo. I'm pretty sure the French motorway charges are pretty much static as they have permanent signs stating the price before you are required to pay.

 

In this country they did a similar thing with the M6 relief road, but that's on top of road tax. It is privately owned, but it shouldn't be. This Government do not get it. It must be one or the other, not both!

[torledo]

Very well said, we already have a similar system. It's called fuel duty.

 

Every tax costs money to introduce, every tax payment costs money to process, every non payment costs money to pursue. When we introduce new taxes we need to consider the efficiency of these tax, in this case I'd imagine a relatively high amount of the tax receipts will spent on administering this tax. Are councils going to have to inspect company car parks to see how many people are using them? Will they be using anti terrorist powers to do so?

 

I not only don't support this tax on the grounds above. I also oppose it on the grounds that motorists already pay a stupid amount of tax. If the government want people out of their cars, and I don't think they do, they just want their money. Then it's very simple improve public transport, as you do it more people will use public transport and it'll become more sustainable. But at the moment public transport is not only too expensive, it's poorly organised, and not integrated.

 

taxes are as much about influencing behaviour/discouraging certain behaviours amongst the populace.

 

You might aswell say, that the govt. don't want thousands of people to give up smoking.

 

Clearly the govt. do want to alter the behaviour of car drivers to a degree and one of the ways to do that is via taxation....it's not all about generating revenues. The govt. haven't worried too much about being able to 'afford' anything have they ? If they want somethign bad enough they'll worry about the accounting later.

 

. It's not about getting everyone to ditch their cars in favour of the bus....but the biggest problems as far as congestion occur at peak time commutes to work and the school run. It's a no-brainer to want fewer cars on the road. What i'd like to see is not more buses as a result but more local train services. But that's a 10-20 year programme involving more stations, changes to tracks etc. That's the way to go for commuting to work.

[K.C.Leblanc]

Not quite a like for like comparison. Fuel duty goes up and down like a yoyo. I'm pretty sure the French motorway charges are pretty much static as they have permanent signs stating the price before you are required to pay

 

No it doesn't, don't fuel duty is a fixed amount per litre. The bit that goes up in firstly the cost of the fuel, and with that the VAT imposed on the total price of the fuel and duty.

[Midget]

If I didn't want to use my car (which would be great as the 3hrs/day is getting to me now) I could use the train. Lets have a quick comparison.

 

I would have to get up at 5am quick shower rush out the door and walk an hour to the trainstation to get the 6:20am train which arrives at 8:30am and then walk 5-10min to work.

 

Or I could get up at 6am, have a long shower, eat some toast, read the news, and eventually leave some time before 7am to get there by 8:30am

 

and then for the return the train is at 6:20pm so Id have to hang around work for an hour. The train gets to my station at 8:30pm and then I have a 1hour walk home.

 

My day is long enough as it is, but 5am to 9:30pm would tip me over the edge.

 

And the cost for this fabulous service? £23 a day with a season ticket.

 

Currently it costs me ~£15/day in fuel and £5.40 for the bridge. I think I will stick with my car thank you.

 

And another thought, even if every person in the company used public transport, the company would still be charged for the parking spaces, so it's not going to encourage people to use public transport at all.

[torledo]

 

And another thought, even if every person in the company used public transport, the company would still be charged for the parking spaces, so it's not going to encourage people to use public transport at all.

 

 

not if they designated the use of the spaces for something else.

[Michael]

The bit that goes up in firstly the cost of the fuel, and with that the VAT imposed on the total price of the fuel and duty.

 

You're right, I got it the wrong way around. I stand correct!

 

not if they designated the use of the spaces for something else.

 

Skips? Wheely bins? Flower beds?

 

Would the parking bays have to be destroyed as to avoid paying the tax? What happens if you're just parking in the street, like I do when I visit most of my schools? Not all of them have enough spaces for all staff and visitors like me.

[grumpy_git]

I don't know, there are some places when public transport is very good and even better than driving - e.g. when it is frequent, reliable, clean and cheap.

 

However I have previously stated my journey to work - 2 hour + public transport vs 35 minute car journey, no-brainer.

 

What the Government really ought to be doing is sorting out public transport, getting rid of cowboys such as FirstGroup and National Express, and providing a service good enough such that motorists will naturally come to use it out of genuine choice.

[Gatt]

I don't know, there are some places when public transport is very good and even better than driving - e.g. when it is frequent, reliable, clean and cheap..

 

There is? where?

[torledo]

You're right, I got it the wrong way around. I stand correct!

 

 

 

Skips? Wheely bins? Flower beds?

 

Would the parking bays have to be destroyed as to avoid paying the tax? What happens if you're just parking in the street, like I do when I visit most of my schools? Not all of them have enough spaces for all staff and visitors like me.

 

i'm guessing you get rid of the white lines, and yes, probably a flower bed or two.

[srochford]

And the cost for this fabulous service? £23 a day with a season ticket.

 

Currently it costs me ~£15/day in fuel and £5.40 for the bridge. I think I will stick with my car thank you.

 

 

Your car was free? Costs nothing to service? Never needs insuring?

 

If you're comparing costs, you need to compare the total cost - it may still be that driving is cheaper (and there are obviously other benefits for you) but your numbers are simply wrong.

[grumpy_git]

There is? where?

 

Edinburgh - well, it was before they decided we needed a tramline and dug the whole city centre up .

[Martin]

Phew,

 

It is a good job that Nottingham has an utterly reliable tram system allowing people to get to work at all times without the slightest interruption

 

NOT!!!!

 

mb

[Martin]

Your car was free? Costs nothing to service? Never needs insuring?

 

If you're comparing costs, you need to compare the total cost - it may still be that driving is cheaper (and there are obviously other benefits for you) but your numbers are simply wrong.

 

Yup, you need to compare the total cost - which would mean including the massive subsidies that the train companies have received and are yet to receive as well!

 

mb

[broc]

I don't know, there are some places when public transport is very good and even better than driving - e.g. when it is frequent, reliable, clean and cheap.

 

 

Switzerland was pretty good last year when I was on holiday; cheap regular bus service in rural areas, together with an integrated light railway network coupled to intercity expresses. It all ran like clockwork (a Swiss clock, naturally).

 

As for where I live, forget it. I could not get to work for 8am by public transport, even though it takes me a mere 20 minutes to drive the 15 miles to work.

 

If they want to tax car parking in the workplace, are they going to tax cycle parking spaces too?

 

This will be an unfair tax.

 

In some areas, to avoid the tax people will park in side streets near their place of work & clog up the side roads; in other areas, employers will bite the bullet & fund it themselves as part of their employee 'benefits' package. This may be applied fairly or unfairly, depending upon seniority & importance, so for example bank clerks will pay the taxes & 'investment' bankers will get free parking as a perk.....

 

This is typical 'city centric' thinking....... trying to impose solutions designed for cities on areas where no problem exists....

Edited August 3, 2009 by broc

[Halfmad]

I agree with Hodge - and those who argue that if we all used public transport we'd pay less for them need to look at statistics for the past ten years showing a jump in public transport use and a massive increase in fairs.

 

Fact is some people NEED their cars for work, I know I do. I can drive up to 500 miles a week on work related business, this isn't for fun, it's essential that I'm mobile to support remote sites and carry equipment. Without my car I couldn't physically do my job. I'd love to commute by public transport, but need the car during the day (and the government won't fund pool cars for us.)

[localzuk]

But he owns the car already. It needs to be insured whether he uses it or not. It needs to be taxed whether he uses it or not.

 

No it doesn't. If you have it 'off the road' then you need neither tax or insurance. You can't drive it, but at least there would be no ongoing costs...

[srochford]

In some areas, to avoid the tax people will park in side streets near their place of work & clog up the side roads; in other areas, employers will bite the bullet & fund it themselves as part of their employee 'benefits' package. This may be applied fairly or unfairly, depending upon seniority & importance, so for example bank clerks will pay the taxes & 'investment' bankers will get free parking as a perk.....

 

This is typical 'city centric' thinking....... trying to impose solutions designed for cities on areas where no problem exists....

 

It's fairly easy to protect resident parking areas by just introducing controlled parking - that doesn't have to mean a huge charge for residents and it brings other benefits because the parking charges pay for someone to walk along the road checking that vehicles are not just parked properly but have valid tax etc.

 

It's always going to be the case that people like investment bankers get paid more than bank clerks - whether that's just because they get a higher salary or because they get more perks; it may not be nice but that's just the way people get paid unless you have some kind of communist dictatorship which says "everyone will get paid £xx per hour no matter what job they do"

 

Completely agree with the comment that there's no need to impose city type solutions on areas outside cities. If congestion isn't a problem then you don't need to do anything to minimise it; you only need to think about policies like charging for parking when you've got to try and ration a limited amount of space on the roads etc. Improving public transport in towns and cities makes sense; in areas of low population density it probably doesn't make sense to have buses every 3-4 minutes!

[Midget]

Yes I need to include the cost of service, tyres, in-sewer-ants, oil and VED, but this would already be purchased whether I was using it for public transport or not (well, the tyres would wear out slower but anyway).

 

I COULD buy a mondeo for £300, insure it for £200 and tax it for £185 and that works out at £2.60 a day. Then just buy another one instead of fixing problems and tyres are only £30ea.

[HodgeHi]

I wouldn't want to walk the measly 6 miles i have to travel to work carrying a powermac G5 everywhere. One of the reasons i need my boot

[localzuk]

I wouldn't want to walk the measly 6 miles i have to travel to work carrying a powermac G5 everywhere. One of the reasons i need my boot

 

Why do you carry a G5 powermac arround with you? That makes no sense...

[broc]

It's always going to be the case that people like investment bankers get paid more than bank clerks - whether that's just because they get a higher salary or because they get more perks; it may not be nice but that's just the way people get paid unless you have some kind of communist dictatorship which says "everyone will get paid £xx per hour no matter what job they do"

 

 

I am not arguing against pay differentials, people should be paid what they are worth, but a tax system needs to be seen to be fair and this one clearly is not.

 

In the past, it has been suggested this parking tax should apply to all 'free' parking spaces. Let us suppose HM Govt decide to impose the tax on all car parking spaces, including those free spaces provided by out of town supermarkets & shopping centres. So the cost of the parking tax will be levied upon the owners of the site, do the shopkeepers then pass on the cost to all of their shoppers, regardless of how they travel to do their shopping, or do they start charging for their parking places?

 

If they only charge car users, it could end up costing them more to collect the tax than the value of the tax itself, so it ends up costing motorists even more & people begin to think twice about how often & where they go shopping.

 

On the other hand if they spread the cost to all shoppers by way of price increases is that a fair tax on those who arrive by public transport?

[HodgeHi]

Why do you carry a G5 powermac arround with you? That makes no sense...

 

It was just an example but considering the weight of this thing it has done a fair bit of traveling for a computer. It was at my home and then it moved with me to my new home and then moved with me again to my second new home only for it to be loaned to my sister whilst she did a media course, and so it moved back to my original home. She has now moved out and it now needs to come back to my new new home.

 

Not really something you want to do on public transport. But i do occasionally take hardware home from work. For example only the other day i took 2 imacs home to create a test-bed similar to works. I also had an xserve on my back seats that was being transported to it's new location. I move quite a bit of hardware around. Something i could never do if i only had public transport. Not because its late or expensive. Just because it's not really feasible.

 

Sometimes you just need a car.

[localzuk]

It was just an example but considering the weight of this thing it has done a fair bit of traveling for a computer. It was at my home and then it moved with me to my new home and then moved with me again to my second new home only for it to be loaned to my sister whilst she did a media course, and so it moved back to my original home. She has now moved out and it now needs to come back to my new new home.

 

Not really something you want to do on public transport. But i do occasionally take hardware home from work. For example only the other day i took 2 imacs home to create a test-bed similar to works. I also had an xserve on my back seats that was being transported to it's new location. I move quite a bit of hardware around. Something i could never do if i only had public transport. Not because its late or expensive. Just because it's not really feasible.

 

Sometimes you just need a car.

 

Discussing 'everyday' and 'when I need to move stuff' is a completely different situation. No-one is suggesting people move house without moving vans (the equivalent of moving a computer around in a car).

 

What relevance is that to the discussion of people using cars every day to get to work?

[HodgeHi]

Because you either use one or the other. Taking into account the cost of running each one individually, you cannot realistically afford to run both at the same time. So if you decide to go the public transport route, chances are you aren't going to be running a car and keeping it at home. So when the time comes that you indeed need a car it won't be there.

 

My point is that its a decision, unless you can afford to run both then you are very lucky.

[localzuk]

Because you either use one or the other. Taking into account the cost of running each one individually, you cannot realistically afford to run both at the same time. So if you decide to go the public transport route, chances are you aren't going to be running a car and keeping it at home. So when the time comes that you indeed need a car it won't be there.

 

My point is that its a decision, unless you can afford to run both then you are very lucky.

 

Car rental isn't hugely expensive. Schemes such as the one that is now operating in Minehead make this even easier - you can rent a car for a few hours if needs be!

 

If I were to look over the last 3 years, I would say I needed car access half a dozen times. Even if I were to rent a car for a full day each time, I'd be looking at a few hundred quid costs.