Tony Blair is thinking about offering those who object to the road pricing plans a trial arrangement:
Motorists will be asked to volunteer for road pricing as the government moves to reassure opponents of controversial pay-as-you-drive charges.
As tension mounts in government over what is seen as an ill-informed but powerful opposition movement to Labour’s transport policy, Tony Blair will this week email every person who signed a petition on the Prime Minister’s official website objecting to the plans. Writing in today’s Observer, Mr Blair welcomes the debate but stresses: ‘I believe road charging is surely part of the answer here as it is in many other countries.’
Firstly, those of us opposed to this scheme are not ill informed. To assume that we are is itself ill informed. Secondly, there are those of us who do not, in principle, object to road pricing. Privately owned and operated roads priced according to the laws of supply and demand are fine for me – providing the system is equitable. And providing all other road taxation is abolished. In other words, the money I pay goes directly to those building and maintaing the roads I use.
My objection is to any form of increased taxation that is designed to “save the planet”. Such a notion is absurd; all it will do is line the coffers of the treasury. If you want to reduce carbon released into the atmosphere, perhaps you should think about entrapping it through photosynthesis… But I digress and I don’t want to get into the quasi religious environmental argument here.
The PM’s intervention comes as The Observer has learnt that transport department officials held talks about introducing pricing on a voluntary basis until enough motorists have signed up, when a national scheme would become easier to implement.
My original assumption that this “consultation” was nothing more than a sham appears to be accurate. Having realised that there is a backlash building, ministers are seeking to undermine the backlash rather than address the concerns. One of which is the surveillance and privacy implications inherent in the tracking and monitoring of motorists for the purpose of billing them. There is no sign that ministers will let go of this one:
Under the plan, first suggested by the RAC Foundation, drivers who chose to install satellite-tracking equipment to measure how far they travel, and where and when, could be offered discounts on other motoring taxes.
So, it’s a good old fashioned bribe, then. It doesn’t address any of the concerns raised. Not one.
Volunteers would also benefit from other uses of the ‘black box’, such as navigation, help with finding parking spaces, and pay-as-you go insurance, said Edmund King, the Foundation’s executive director. ‘If [drivers] have got a meter they’ll think more about their actions, they’ll cut out some journeys and they’ll save themselves some money,’ he said. ‘There’s nothing to lose starting with a voluntary scheme, but it would be political suicide for any government to impose it on people.’
Let me state this in simple terms; no matter what the carrot offered, there is no way I am going to allow anyone to monitor my movements, and there is no way I am going to tolerate any form of tracking device on my vehicle. This is not negotiable. Given that my insurance is under £100 fully comprehensive and that I can buy a satellite navigation device relatively cheaply, such bribes will not work on me during the “voluntary” stage anyway.
If it comes to it and such devices are fitted by the manufacturer at the behest of government, I will seek out those motor factors prepared to disable them. My life is my own. My whereabouts at any given time is no one else’s business but mine and those with whom I interact. It is none of the government’s business and I will not, under any circumstances, cooperate with them.
I will not, therefore, be joining the ranks of the volunteers. I await Mr Blair’s email with interest…