C-charge: Tech trials go ahead

August 18, 2008

| Submit Comments | Comments (42) | Previous | Next

Eight areas chosen for trials.

THE government is pressing ahead with trials of technology that could eventually pave the way for a national road-pricing scheme.

Eight areas have been chosen to try different types of systems that could be used for local congestion charging schemes.

At least some of the trials will involve satnav-based vehicle tracking that might eventually be used for a national `pay-as-you-drive' scheme.

None of the trials will be in Greater Manchester, which is already considering whether to introduce a peak-hour only congestion charge in return for £3bn of investment in public transport.

But the Department for Transport said today said it was 'absolute nonsense' to suggest the technology trials, likely to involve 100 cars in each area and start in 2010, meant national road pricing would definitely go ahead.

"We're a very long way from that which is why our priority now and over the next decade is on tackling congestion where it is experienced most - in our cities and on our motorways."

| Submit Comments | Comments (42) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

Chris, Irlam (18/08/2008 at 11:30)

All this from a government that stated earlier this year that it wasn't interested in national road pricing.

Don't believe anything they say.

Vote NO in the Toll Tax referendum.

Jay B, oldham (18/08/2008 at 11:32)

why? the majority of people out there dont want this to come in.
its just yet another example of how little a democracy we live in here in britain.
the sooner labour goes the better off we will be.

Ace Shakepseare, manchester (18/08/2008 at 11:34)

Lets have a trial of the gallows incase we bring back hanging "Especially for politicians" Who ignore the voters?.Why have a trial of the technology until we know if its going to be voted for.

PW, Manchester (18/08/2008 at 11:43)

They would know where you are every time you step into your car. Bring back the Soviet Bloc. In those days, our governments had to go out of their way to assure us we were free. Now the Comunist Bloc doesn't exist, they just think they can do what they like with people. We are now moving fast to a Soviet-type dictatorship. Your freedoms are disappearing and you are letting them take them away. Time to call a halt. We showed them what we thought of the Poll Tax, and they trembled in their boots. We can do the same now.

Henry Piggot-Smythe, Prestbury (18/08/2008 at 11:44)

Come on Gordon Brown set the date for a General Election so we can put this rubbish to bed once and for all. This is the last Labour government for decades to come so put your money where your mouth is. It's your call Mr Brown !

Bean B4, manchester (18/08/2008 at 11:52)

Very interesting this. In opur local Advertiser this week, Leese and Karney were bemoaning the way their and their electors views regarding closure of post offices in Harpurhey and Crumpsall (I think). They said they were very disappointed that the views of locals had been ignored.

Correct. That's how a lot of people in Manchester feel about the CON.

Pentest 2, Hyde (18/08/2008 at 13:00)

This bunch of NuLabour idiots won't be in office to implement any 'CON' Charging after 2010 and good ridance too.
Take some, if not all of the commie councils with them too.

dessie, manchester (18/08/2008 at 13:03)

were being told what to have and what to do, we dont live in a democratic society anymore!!

we dont want this CON charge!!!

Trudy, Bolton (18/08/2008 at 13:05)

I bet they have alist of "what we can charge for" and are working their way down it! What next charge for how many times you flush the loo? Wear and tear on pavements if you walk too much? Dog Licences? Children Licences? What about a clean air charge?

Mad Welsh Scotsman, Cadishead (18/08/2008 at 13:06)

"None of the trials will be in Greater Manchester, which is already considering whether to introduce a peak-hour only congestion charge in return for £3bn of investment in public transport".

CONsidering it?? we're not! the local government are trying to railroad it through that should have read

Mad Welsh Scotsman, Cadishead (18/08/2008 at 13:10)

Trudy, have a listen to The Beetles song "The tax man" it just sums this government up to a tee. If you walk to work we'll tax the ground

Kiwi-blue, Christchurch NZ (18/08/2008 at 13:52)

The technology trials should go ahead, so that when the c-charge is implemented, there will be as little disruption as possible!

citycentre, manchester (18/08/2008 at 14:06)

but there is already a pay as you drive tax, its fuel duty

so, once the technology becomes available, why not change to a charge actually measured against both when and where people drive, not just the amount of fuel used on a journey?

ebble, manchester (18/08/2008 at 14:08)

We'll reject the C charge in the referendum. There is little doubt about that. Unfortunately there is little doubt that the councils and government will get their cash one way or another. They have vast, bloated payrolls mainly because of New Labour's huge recruitment over the last 11 years, and the reasonable pay and superb pensions of these people all need to be paid somehow. The gigantic public sector pensions deficit alone means that all sorts of new taxes will be introduced and that existing ones will be raised again and again.

JoeStalin,Gorton (18/08/2008 at 14:58)

PW, I also dissagree with the totalitarian police state that this once great nation is rapidly becoming. However, be not under any illusions because if you have a mobile phone switched on while travelling, then the "Ministry of Falsehood" already have your every move tracked through the "audit logs" of your mobile phone supplier. They known exactly where you are, where you have been and can probably guess where you're going next. Even if you buy a "pay as you go" phone, most shops demand to know your name and address. Every car entering and leaving Manchester already has it's registration plate read. If you own the car that you drive then "New Labour" will know when and where you entered the City Centre of Manchester. Good enough reason never to enter if you ask me. Five years ago, this government lied to the nation about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. For that reason alone, I will never vote labour again as I had done previoulsy since I was 18. If I've not been assasinated for speaking the truth, I will vote against them if we are still having free elections in a few years time.

Black Flag (18/08/2008 at 15:00)

citycentre: "but there is already a pay as you drive tax, its fuel duty so, once the technology becomes available, why not change to a charge actually measured against both when and where people drive, not just the amount of fuel used on a journey?"

The question there is, do the benefits of electronic pricing (variable pricing according to place and time of day) outweigh the benefits of fuel duty (cheaper to administer, doesn't require government tracking of vehicle movements, pricing accord to the fuel efficiency of the vehicle). I don't think they do.

The problem at the minute is that, while it obviously makes sense to increase fuel duty, the government is too scared to do it, because it risks sparking national protests. Electronic pricing isn't as much of a national issue, because it can be initiated in specific areas, (keeping the objections localised) and then gradually moved outwards.

Once a few areas have a scheme, the people there will tend to push for it to be introduced everywhere else, because even those who think that roads should be completely free to use tend to dislike the idea that they are getting a worse deal than other areas.

If objections to fuel duty increases were not as vocal, we'd be less likely to be facing pressure to introduce electronic pricing.

we deserve better (18/08/2008 at 15:05)

Citycentre: 'but there is already a pay as you drive tax, its fuel duty'

No need for a CON charge then.

Are you suggesting we pay twice or, in exchange for a 'national' pay-as-you-drive system, that we should be entitled to tax free fuel?

JoeStalin,Gorton (18/08/2008 at 15:32)

Black Flag, why does it " obviously makes sense to increase fuel duty". Modern society requires us to be mobile in order to earn a decent living so why should we be taxed for travelling to work and back or using our cars for recreation? When you buy a new car the govenment get 17.5% of the price. With the added benefit they have received as a consequence of massive increases in petrol prices, I fail tio understand either why they need to tax us so highly on fuel or what purpose charging tolls will acheive. If they want to increase the tax burden they should do it in an open and honest fashion through income tax.

Fran M (Permissum Populus Constituo) (18/08/2008 at 15:34)

If the councils are in desperate need of extra cash to pay for public transport there are other ways of raising it.

For a start I would charge the residents of roads that have been closed off to through traffic for the upkeep of the roads. Their closure creates congestion. So the residents should bear the cost of maintenance. Why should motorists pay for roads they are barred from using.

It could even legitimately be called a congestion charge.

Similarly I would charge residents of roads that have traffic decalming schemes such as humps and chicanes. These also cause congestion. I believe road humps cost somewhere in the region of £8k each.

Once again (18/08/2008 at 15:46)

So what happens to all the haulier companies and general people who drive into this country from abroad will they be excempt from this, whereas we will have to pay.

citycentre, manchester (18/08/2008 at 16:06)

Black Flag,
no they probably dont yet, but as the technology adavnces and becomes cheaper that may become the case

we deserve better
the congestion part could be included in an electronic road charge, since any reasonable system would allow for variable charges dependent on time and location
so it could become a lot cheaper to use vehicles at night and in less busy areas, and more expensive to use them at peak times in busy areas, while the amount of money raised remains constant
and yes, replacment of fuel duty with a variable road charge would be possible

Pentest 2, Hyde (18/08/2008 at 16:11)

The price of goods would go up if this idiot NuLabour idea ever gets off the ground.
Its already becoming very expensive to live in this godforsaken country without pushing up prices further, ie. transporting goods round the country.
It looks like Mugabe Broone wants to twin the UK with Zimbabwe, and that includes the rate of inflation.

irrelevant, Salford (18/08/2008 at 16:27)

Surely the problem with any tracking system that is fitted into cars is that it relies on it being there. So all the people who refuse to get the tags, foreign drivers who don't have one, and those who simply take them out of the car and leave them at home, will get away without paying.

Don't overcomplicate things. ANPR is mature and works well enough in London, and doesn't rely on the car owners doing anything.

Sir Reginald Ringpull, A-u-L, Lancashire (18/08/2008 at 16:42)

So a Scotish Prime Minister and a Scotish Transport Minister think England should be the test bed.

Nice one guys, look after your seats in Scotland.

ebble, manchester (18/08/2008 at 17:20)

The problem with putting any future tax rises on fuel duty is that the people don't trust the government on that issue either. The government taxed fuel very highly even before traffic congestion and the global wrming hysteria were ever a problem.

If the government had only started to tax fuel more heavily than it taxes anything else when congestion and the environment became problems we would all most probably believe its claims that the taxes were for the general good and not just a way of lining the pockets of the vast legions of government employees.

()

Report

News