At what point does any government decide that they're taking enough from the motorist who has to pay increasing sums to fill the fuel tank? Judging by recent increases in both VAT and fuel duty the ConLib alliance remains blissfully unaware of the impact at the pumps.
For millions of hard-working families, recently referred to by Cleggers as "alarm clock Britain" (what a ridiculous phrase), who are now paying around £70 to fill up, the cost of getting to work is increasing at rates way above inflation. The irony is that the cost of fuel is, er, fuelling the inflation that the Bank of England is keen to tame. The likely outcome is that interest rates will be heading up; we can almost here Bruce Forsyth (in Play Your Cards Right mode) asking if it's going to be higher or lower than 0.5% I think the studio audience would be screaming at the hapless contestant: "Higher, higher, higher".
When we remember that the cost of fuel is only 42p per litre we can see exactly why governments quite like having millions of cars on the road; every mile you drive and you're sending money to the government at the rate of almost £1.00 per litre. If your vehicle does 30 miles per gallon you're dropping around 13p per miles to the government. If you do 10,000 miles per year, yep that's right, £1,300.00 in tax that you simply cannot avoid.
So, whilst governments are keen to be seen to be caring for the environment they actually don't want to reduce the easy money that we motorists provide -- and that we provide so willingly. If governments are so keen to be green, why are they spending soooo much money on widening our motorways that will encourage more traffic? It also explains why they're so slow at re-opening Beeching's closed railway lines (closed by Marples, who happened to be a director of a road-building company) or why they won't electrify the whole network. Indeed, previous governments have actually looked at the impact that new rail lines will have on the motoriing public; if too many drivers might switch to rail and, therefore, reduce tax revenue from driving, they would not open the line.
It is time for the government to stop fleecing the motorist and work towards a properly joined-up transport network.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
FLASHER LANDS IN COURT
Has the Lincolnshire Constabulary really got nothing better to do than to waste court time (and tax-payers' money) prosecuting motorist Michael Thompson for a minor infringement of the law?
Apparently, the answer is 'no', they don't have anything better to do. Now, we have a situation in which a law-abiding member of the public has a criminal record all because he flashed his car's headlights to warn other motorists that they're heading towards a Police 'safety camera' (aka money-spinning speed trap).
The reason why most motorists, the writer included, warn other motorists of speed traps is because they are frequently cynically placed to do nothing more than to generate revenue; they don't have much to do with safety and with the cut-backs starting to bite we can all expect to see more of these mobile money-spinners springing up on a road near you.
In my region, rural Derbyshire, so many of the main trunk roads have had their speed limits reduced from the national speed limit to 50 mph, accompanied by the condescending statement: "It's 50 for a reason" (and we now know what that reason i$!). A case in point is the A515 from Buxton to Ashbourne, which had it's speed limit reduced to 50 mph.
The argument for reducing speed limits is to reduce the number of crashes or fatalities; having travelled along this road for several years I can't tell you the last time I saw a crash. Now, if you keep to 50 mph you often get stuck behind lorries and tractors, and to overtake you have to break the law, which is a complete nonsense.
The A610 that links Codnor to the edge of Nottingham, on the Nottinghamshire-Derbyshire border, allows you to do 70 mph and then just before a long incline, and still miles away from pedestrians, the speed limit reduced to 50 mph and as you approach the roundabout where the A610 meets junction 26 of the M1, it is reduced to 40 mph.
There must be hundreds of examples from around the country with nonsensical speed limits. The irony is that on narrow country lanes you can tear along at 60 mph when the limit perhaps ought to be lower; but there's not enough traffic on country lanes to make it worth trying to enforce a sensible speed limit. The same goes for villages where often the speed limit is 30 mph (as it should be) but motorists hurtle through.
I am not a fan of speed cameras but I believe they should be deployed where motorists ought to know better, but on the open road the speed limits should be set higher.
As for the motorways, when will we be allowed to catch up with our Continental cousins and travel at 80 mph?
Apparently, the answer is 'no', they don't have anything better to do. Now, we have a situation in which a law-abiding member of the public has a criminal record all because he flashed his car's headlights to warn other motorists that they're heading towards a Police 'safety camera' (aka money-spinning speed trap).
The reason why most motorists, the writer included, warn other motorists of speed traps is because they are frequently cynically placed to do nothing more than to generate revenue; they don't have much to do with safety and with the cut-backs starting to bite we can all expect to see more of these mobile money-spinners springing up on a road near you.
In my region, rural Derbyshire, so many of the main trunk roads have had their speed limits reduced from the national speed limit to 50 mph, accompanied by the condescending statement: "It's 50 for a reason" (and we now know what that reason i$!). A case in point is the A515 from Buxton to Ashbourne, which had it's speed limit reduced to 50 mph.
The argument for reducing speed limits is to reduce the number of crashes or fatalities; having travelled along this road for several years I can't tell you the last time I saw a crash. Now, if you keep to 50 mph you often get stuck behind lorries and tractors, and to overtake you have to break the law, which is a complete nonsense.
The A610 that links Codnor to the edge of Nottingham, on the Nottinghamshire-Derbyshire border, allows you to do 70 mph and then just before a long incline, and still miles away from pedestrians, the speed limit reduced to 50 mph and as you approach the roundabout where the A610 meets junction 26 of the M1, it is reduced to 40 mph.
There must be hundreds of examples from around the country with nonsensical speed limits. The irony is that on narrow country lanes you can tear along at 60 mph when the limit perhaps ought to be lower; but there's not enough traffic on country lanes to make it worth trying to enforce a sensible speed limit. The same goes for villages where often the speed limit is 30 mph (as it should be) but motorists hurtle through.
I am not a fan of speed cameras but I believe they should be deployed where motorists ought to know better, but on the open road the speed limits should be set higher.
As for the motorways, when will we be allowed to catch up with our Continental cousins and travel at 80 mph?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)