Response
to the Anti Road Pricing Petition
At its closure at midnight
on 22nd February almost 1.8 million people had signed to
disapprove of the Governments plans. Clearly the size of the
response has surprised our government and has been the subject of
much debate and coverage in the Press and TV. At 6am this morning
21st February, Tony Blair replied on the No 10 website and his
words are reproduced in full here at 9am. Please take a few
minutes to read it.
The
original petition said:
"The idea of tracking
every vehicle at all times is sinister and wrong. Road pricing
is already here with the high level of taxation on fuel. The
more you travel - the more tax you pay. It will be an unfair tax
on those who live apart from families and poorer people who will
not be able to afford the high monthly costs. Please Mr Blair -
forget about road pricing and concentrate on improving our roads
to reduce congestion."
 |
Read
the PM's reply
"Thank you for
taking the time to register your views about road pricing
on the Downing Street website. This petition was posted
shortly before we published the Eddington
Study, an independent review of Britain's transport
network. This study set out long-term challenges and
options for our transport network.
It made clear that
congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy
answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road
pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that |
advances in technology put
these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or
more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind
politically, feasible.
That is the backdrop to this
issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about
imposing "stealth taxes" or introducing "Big
Brother" surveillance. This is a complex subject, which
cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the
options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices
we face at a local and national level. That's why I hope
this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how
we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as
the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below
provide an opportunity for you to take it further.
But let me be clear straight
away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing.
Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for
now, working with some local authorities that are interested in
establishing local schemes to help address local congestion
problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any
schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and
inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these
local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas.
One thing I suspect we can all
agree is that congestion is bad. It's bad for business
because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects
people's quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That
is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government.
Congestion is predicted to
increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic
prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than
in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue. Part
of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the
most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled
investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses
and over £4 billion on trains- helping to explain why more people
are using them than for decades. And we're committed to sustaining
this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned
between now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort
into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways
Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving.
But all the evidence shows that
improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will
not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we
have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected
increase in congestion. This is a challenge that all political
leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example,
road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and
in Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing
schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road
pricing as a means of addressing congestion.
One option would be to allow
congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in
traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between
cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would
be bad for businesses , individuals and the environment. And the
costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22
billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12
billion would be the direct cost on businesses.
A second option would be to try
to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new
lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres,
and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some
places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are
widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we
cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the
evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new
capacity.
Tackling congestion in this way
would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be
diverted from other services such as education and health, or
increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway
costs as much as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this
approach would entail.
That is why I believe that at
least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to
tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone's interests,
especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road
pricing without exploring it further.
It has been calculated that a
national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could
cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall
travel patterns.But any technology used would have to give
definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should
be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and
pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a
role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold
information about where vehicles have been.But there may also be
opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as
new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be
changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic
jams, not create a "Big Brother" society.
I know many people's biggest
worry about road pricing is that it will be a "stealth
tax" on motorists. It won't. Road pricing is about
tackling congestion.
Clearly if we decided to move
towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case
for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation.
This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel
at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in
rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall.
Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more
congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the
future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to
whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about
possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so
many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided.
Before we take any decisions
about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a
system that works. A system that respects our privacy as
individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we
don't have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing
headlong into a national road pricing scheme . Before we take any
decisions there would be further consultations. The public will,
of course, have their say, as will Parliament.
We want to continue this debate,
so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce
congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If
you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more
detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage
in further debate.
Yours sincerely,
Tony Blair"
To see more information please go
to the No 10
Website
I am aware that there are other cars
and information that could be added to this site to make it more comprehensive, so if you
have material and photographs, please let me know. Please send me, Phil Homer, a
message at: Phil Homer
Return to Cars
Page
Return to Home
Page
|