Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: grain.ben on 14 December 2012, 09:16:07
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9744312/Death-of-the-car-tax-disc-as-DVLA-records-become-digitised.html
-
The plans are set out in a Government consultation paper published yesterday by Dft, which is investigating reforming the DVLA, the Driving Standards Agency, the Vehicle Certification Agency and the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency.
I don't envy them trying to sort out that shower of 5h1t3!
-
I agree with the idea, as it is just a paper confirmation of what "the computer says".
However, I would go one step further and scrap road tax complete. It should be a tax when you buy fuel. The more fuel you buy, and therefore the more miles travelled, the more you pay.
The only stipulation I would place on such a scheme is that the amount of tax applied to fuel for this purpose should be transparent to the public so we know how much we are actually paying. ;) ;)
-
while i used to approve of the concept Liz, i have to say i'm not keen on another tax on fuel in the UK...... driving a non LPG'd Mv6 might explain why ;)
-
nice idea if it ever happens,the dvla at the moment are not fit for there purpose,but one things for sure if it ever does happen we will all end up paying more...probably a lot more
-
I agree with the idea, as it is just a paper confirmation of what "the computer says".
However, I would go one step further and scrap road tax complete. It should be a tax when you buy fuel. The more fuel you buy, and therefore the more miles travelled, the more you pay.
The only stipulation I would place on such a scheme is that the amount of tax applied to fuel for this purpose should be transparent to the public so we know how much we are actually paying. ;) ;)
Totally agree with that and so do a lot of people i know , i dont think it will ever happen though :(
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
-
So more cloning of dodgy number plates then, making it easier for road tax avoiders to drive around assuming they dont get stopped and get the VIN read. :-\
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
I understand the maths Entwood, but I do 5,000 miler per year, so for (many?) people like me it makes sense.
Another 20-25p per litre increase for 10,000 mile drivers; I think that would seem acceptable as, let's face it, prices over recent years have gone up much more than that. With no RFL to pay for, I think many would see it as worthwhile.
When I was on business I was doing 100,000 miles every 18 months, so people on business would pay properly for the use of the road. Private users would obviously pay far less. I think that is a fairer (nothing is completly fair of course!!) system. :y
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
-
i worked this all out in 98. average car did 35mpg, average mileage was 12k, scrap RFL and it would equate, then, to 10p a litre. Put this to the then MP of the town and didnt get any reply, strangly?! It could be done. it would mean no more untaxed vehicles, the low milage population would benifit, high milers would pay for there extended use, BUT, some system would have to be put in place for transport. With the best HGV,s on around 8mpg, the cost to customers would be catastrophic. Buses already get fuel subsidies, although they dont like any one knowing this, I wonder why? :y
Keith B
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
Yes, and I would love to be to sort this country out! :y :y :y ;)
-
... It should be a tax when you buy fuel. ......
It's already go about 80% on it by the time you buy it! :(
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
Yes, and I would love to be to sort this country out! :y :y :y ;)
I don't think Geoff would be voting for you, Lizzie! ;) :D
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
But Geoff, that is our choice when owning a beast. We as individuals have accepted that fact, and if we decide it is unfair then we could always buy a Smart car or similar. If we use it I am afraid we must pay for it. So that is true in business, and if you use cars to conduct your commerce then you must pay for all the road usage. It can be offset against tax by all good accountants anyway, but any cost that comes through outside that and effects the bottom line must be addressed by the business itself, not subsidised by everyone else. We live in a capitalist society, and it must pay for itself. If more roads or railways are required due to the business done, then that must be funded by the people using that "service" just as we all pay for the energy we use, or the food we eat.
As I stated earlier no system is completely fair as in life nothing is fair, like the democratic system itself, let alone capitalism, but until there is a suitable alternative we live with it. :y :y
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
Yes, and I would love to be to sort this country out! :y :y :y ;)
I don't think Geoff would be voting for you, Lizzie! ;) :D
Nor do I, and especially once he has read my latest post!! ::) ::)
But I seek no favours, and just tell it as I see it. This Lady is not for turning! ;) ;)
-
I agree with the idea, as it is just a paper confirmation of what "the computer says".
However, I would go one step further and scrap road tax complete. It should be a tax when you buy fuel. The more fuel you buy, and therefore the more miles travelled, the more you pay.
The only stipulation I would place on such a scheme is that the amount of tax applied to fuel for this purpose should be transparent to the public so we know how much we are actually paying. ;) ;)
here here Lizzie toatally agree :y :y it would also stop all the idiots that don't or think they don't have to pay road tax.
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
But Geoff, that is our choice when owning a beast. We as individuals have accepted that fact, and if we decide it is unfair then we could always buy a Smart car or similar. If we use it I am afraid we must pay for it. So that is true in business, and if you use cars to conduct your commerce then you must pay for all the road usage. It can be offset against tax by all good accountants anyway, but any cost that comes through outside that and effects the bottom line must be addressed by the business itself, not subsidised by everyone else. We live in a capitalist society, and it must pay for itself. If more roads or railways are required due to the business done, then that must be funded by the people using that "service" just as we all pay for the energy we use, or the food we eat.
As I stated earlier no system is completely fair as in life nothing is fair, like the democratic system itself, let alone capitalism, but until there is a suitable alternative we live with it. :y :y
:y :y :y :y lizzie for primeminister
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
But Geoff, that is our choice when owning a beast. We as individuals have accepted that fact, and if we decide it is unfair then we could always buy a Smart car or similar. If we use it I am afraid we must pay for it. So that is true in business, and if you use cars to conduct your commerce then you must pay for all the road usage. It can be offset against tax by all good accountants anyway, but any cost that comes through outside that and effects the bottom line must be addressed by the business itself, not subsidised by everyone else. We live in a capitalist society, and it must pay for itself. If more roads or railways are required due to the business done, then that must be funded by the people using that "service" just as we all pay for the energy we use, or the food we eat.
As I stated earlier no system is completely fair as in life nothing is fair, like the democratic system itself, let alone capitalism, but until there is a suitable alternative we live with it. :y :y
:y :y :y :y lizzie for primeminister
Thanks Kevin :y :y
I will run for office in 2015, if the coalition lasts that long! ::) ::)
-
Have you ever thought about being a politician Lizzie? They like to tell people what to do and tax us more too.
Businesses pay enough tax as it is. And what a bad idea it is to do away with the discs. Then, when computer says no (wrongly) as it often does, it'll end up in all kinds of confusion and inconvenience for law abiding motorists. Driving a v6 means we pay more tax anyway due to lower mpg/higher fuel use. If a 3000 mile a year Daewoo driver doesn't like it, tough, stop driving.
Computers don't get it wrong per se. It is the inputter. This whole "computer error" tale that gets branded around it BS. Computers are machines programmed by people. Then data is input by people. Then reports are run by people.
Anyway, back on point. Get rid of car tax. Tax fuel, as LZ says. Great idea. PAYG ain't it.
-
I agree with the idea, as it is just a paper confirmation of what "the computer says".
However, I would go one step further and scrap road tax complete. It should be a tax when you buy fuel. The more fuel you buy, and therefore the more miles travelled, the more you pay.
The only stipulation I would place on such a scheme is that the amount of tax applied to fuel for this purpose should be transparent to the public so we know how much we are actually paying. ;) ;)
here here Lizzie toatally agree :y :y it would also stop all the idiots that don't or think they don't have to pay road tax.
It would also mean the DVLA in Swansea would have a hard job explaining itself if it employed more than 5% of its current workforce and worked in anything other than a an average sized office,which is why its unlikely ever to happen. ;)
Currently it would suit me fine.I do around 13,000 miles per year.5000 on LPG and 8000 on fuel which is a maximum of 50p per litre and is completely tax exempt up to 2500 litres per annum per individual user. :)
-
It's an idea I have always supported, even though I do in excess of 20k per year in my car on (mostly) private business.
However, as a small business owner with 2 vans (soon to be expanding to 3/4) that each do 35-40k it would be crippling and that cost would have to be passed on to the customer ::) Who, incidentally, will have already paid the extra 15-20p per litre on a tank of fuel that is no use to them and will be drained and recycled as well as having to pay it again on the tank of the correct fuel they will have to fill with ::)
Plus, the only way it could be implemented properly would be for the "RFL" element of fuel tax to be collected separately at source. If it was rolled into fuel duty then it would never end up where it should :-X After all, the money they currently collect in Fuel Duty doesn't always end up where it should and is just treated as a "Flexible Income" (or "Overtime" in layman's terms) for the Treasury >:( ;)
-
I don't know whether putting it on fuel is in the governments thinking,however they are indeed considering doing away with the RFL and bringing in "road pricing" instead.
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
Eh? 1816 x £1.30 = £2418.
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
Eh? 1816 x £1.30 = £2418.
Keep up Esty... 1816 x £0.15 = 272.40 ;) ;)
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
Eh? 1816 x £1.30 = £2418.
Keep up Esty... 1816 x £0.15 = 272.40 ;) ;)
Ahhhhh......I see. Thank you for your patience with an old codger. ;D
-
I don't know whether putting it on fuel is in the governments thinking,however they are indeed considering doing away with the RFL and bringing in "road pricing" instead.
You have far more faith in politic than I do.
Road pricing if it ever happens will not be instead of the Road Fund Licence(which is, and always was, a lie), but in addition to. When did a government ever do away with a tax?
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
I understand the maths Entwood, but I do 5,000 miler per year, so for (many?) people like me it makes sense.
Another 20-25p per litre increase for 10,000 mile drivers; I think that would seem acceptable as, let's face it, prices over recent years have gone up much more than that. With no RFL to pay for, I think many would see it as worthwhile.
When I was on business I was doing 100,000 miles every 18 months, so people on business would pay properly for the use of the road. Private users would obviously pay far less. I think that is a fairer (nothing is completly fair of course!!) system. :y
Sorry Lizzie but I think your wrong. Business would only "appear" to pay more. The reality is they would just pass the extra cost on to there customers, so low mileage people like me would still end paying more. Even a non road user would end paying more.
-
lizzie for primeminister
+ 1 ;D
-
sorry i dont agree with scrapping road tax and putting it on fuel... I`m on a low income wage as it is and if my wife didnt work then i dont like to think about the consequences.....
-
Interesting mathematics for you ... If we take the average Annual RFL for an Omega to be £270
and the average mileage covered 10,000
and the average fuel consumption 25 mpg
10,000 miles @25 mpg = 400 galls = 1816 litres per year per omega, so to raise the equivalent of £270 the price per litre would have to rise by 15 p / litre
for the top end cars at £470 a year it would need to be more ... so again .. guessing on averages the actual increase would need to be around 20 p /litre or more and the top end cars would still be "winning" ......
I don't see anyone being happy with a 20 - 25 p /litre increase even if it did mean no more road tax ... especially those at the bottom end of the tax rates !!
headline rate of £1:50 a litre ...... :(
I understand the maths Entwood, but I do 5,000 miler per year, so for (many?) people like me it makes sense.
Another 20-25p per litre increase for 10,000 mile drivers; I think that would seem acceptable as, let's face it, prices over recent years have gone up much more than that. With no RFL to pay for, I think many would see it as worthwhile.
When I was on business I was doing 100,000 miles every 18 months, so people on business would pay properly for the use of the road. Private users would obviously pay far less. I think that is a fairer (nothing is completly fair of course!!) system. :y
Sorry Lizzie but I think your wrong. Business would only "appear" to pay more. The reality is they would just pass the extra cost on to there customers, so low mileage people like me would still end paying more. Even a non road user would end paying more.
That's ok, a lot think I am! ;D ;D ;D ;)
No, all of us would only pay that increase in a companies costs IF you used that business and bought their product. There is always competition, and again the market in our capitalist system will dictate what people will pay for a service or product. The company that cannot manage their extra costs by such a development, which as I have said can be offset against tax, will simply not stay in business. A commercially astute company, and they are the ones who will survive, will cut their wastage and general costs; perhaps reviewing and changing how they use company vehicles, and I have much experience as a senior manager of taking such action.
The general public should not worry about how businesses will survive or not when the government takes action to change the tax regime. It is up to the companies themselves to lobby the Government, or, as in most cases, just take themselves the action necessary for their business.
The question here is what is fair for Joe Public. In regards to road use I believe it is fairer for individuals to pay more for high road usage than those who use the roads in a limited manner. The Government will be controlled on the costs they pass on to motorists by the political climate and the general market forces. That is why the expected 3p increase in fuel duty has been scrapped, and as a separate, but similar situation, railway ticket prices are being held back from the levels the railway companies want to charge.
The sooner the RFL is scrapped and the tax passed on to fuel prices to recognise actual use of the roads by the individual motorist, private or company, the better. ;)
-
I agree with Lizzie. PAYG is the fairest method.
However, let's not forget that the DVLA is Big Brother..... Government's way of keeping track on who owns what and where it is kept.
I'm not suggesting that removing RFL will lose this data, but the DVLA will still have to operate in the same capacity to keep on top of it, if that makes sense?
Also, the punishment income will be lost.... something the DVLA thrives on, I'm sure.
-
Seeing that everything man made goes on the back of a lorry, I think we can assume that virtually everything will go up in price.
-
Seeing that everything man made goes on the back of a lorry, I think we can assume that virtually everything will go up in price.
Not if they allow haulage companies a type of red diesel i:e blue or yellow at a lower rate of tax
-
Something needs to be done. We pay stupid amounts on road tax, stupid amounts of tax on the fuel we buy and now they're on about expanding the number of toll roads. Thats like charging us 3 times to use a vehicle on the road!! They want us to use public transport more, but its hopeless at best. And they want us to use our cars less. Daft
-
Something needs to be done. We pay stupid amounts on road tax, stupid amounts of tax on the fuel we buy and now they're on about expanding the number of toll roads. Thats like charging us 3 times to use a vehicle on the road!! They want us to use public transport more, but its hopeless at best. And they want us to use our cars less. Daft
Public transport. I went into town today with wife and son. I knew it would be a bugger to park and it's only 2 miles so I thought I'd check out the bus. £5 each way vs £1 in the car park. I went in the car.
-
Something needs to be done. We pay stupid amounts on road tax, stupid amounts of tax on the fuel we buy and now they're on about expanding the number of toll roads. Thats like charging us 3 times to use a vehicle on the road!! They want us to use public transport more, but its hopeless at best. And they want us to use our cars less. Daft
Public transport. I went into town today with wife and son. I knew it would be a bugger to park and it's only 2 miles so I thought I'd check out the bus. £5 each way vs £1 in the car park. I went in the car.
We went on the bus. Bus we planned to take simply didn't turn up. Next one was late, then two turned up in convoy. 45 minutes standing in the drizzle at a bus top. Thanks, Stagecoach. >:(
-
Something needs to be done. We pay stupid amounts on road tax, stupid amounts of tax on the fuel we buy and now they're on about expanding the number of toll roads. Thats like charging us 3 times to use a vehicle on the road!! They want us to use public transport more, but its hopeless at best. And they want us to use our cars less. Daft
Public transport. I went into town today with wife and son. I knew it would be a bugger to park and it's only 2 miles so I thought I'd check out the bus. £5 each way vs £1 in the car park. I went in the car.
Things have gone up :o
Last time i went on a bus it was 80p ;D
-
Road tax, will never ever be scrapped, until it is replaced by road pricing, for the simple reason that as more cars become hybrids and also more fuel efficient, the Government are going to be looking at revenue replacement, which is why they are currently taking about changing road tax bands. So in the not too distant future expect to be paying much more if you drive anything less efficient than a 60mpg FWD Eurobox.
In the first 9 months of this year, we used 2,000,000,000 less gallons of fuel than for the same period in 2008. Why?
1. Fuel tax is now the wrong side of the Laffer curve and the Government know it, which is why the Government keep deferring the 3p/l increase as they know it will reduce their revenues more!
2.Wages in real terms are now 13.2% less than in 2008 and still dropping, so the UK population are using their cars less and also mere efficiently, by doing more things in one journey, to cut their number of journeys and mileage.
3.There has been about 10% drop in the number of cars on the road, where many people, who have been hit by the recession can no longer afford to run a car.
4. Old cars are being replaced by smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles.
5. As the country continues to get poorer and the percentage of your overall income taken in tax increases, then all of the above factors will increase.
This is why the Government are going all out for road pricing, when they can charge your vehicle for all road journeys, with rush hour time being charged at considerable premiums. With electric cars they can't tax all electricity to make up the revenue. So it won't be long before you are paying £1 a mile in peak times at peak places plus fuel taxes if you own an old fuel driven car. Eventually, once the whole of the UK network is covered by road pricing this will probably replace road tax. The big advantage of road pricing for Governments is that they can decide on how much revenue, motorist must produce for a given year and set the pricing accordingly. Road pricing could in future be applied to all movement of people in public areas where the Government spends money on our behalf to maintain, roads, cycle ways, pavements, public parks etc, with movement pricing. It will just be compulsory to carry your mobile phone with you at all times to monitor your movements, mobile phones can currently place your position to within about 1 metre, so you are charged accordingly, with heavy fines for those caught on CCTV without their movement charging mobile, the fines will be sent to you automatically through face recognition. These types of projects are all being funded by the EU at the moment to get the technology working and then to decide which will be politically acceptable. The target is to have a EU wide road pricing system in place by 2020, so they know all of your vehicle movements. Welcome to 1984.
The next generation of batteries will be super quick charging (the technology has been developed at a Canadian university), so 100-200 mile plus range and 10-20 minute recharge times are on the horizon. A major cost is going to be upgrading the electricity infrastructure, to allow such high charging currents on domestic supplies. The new Tesla car shows some of what is the future. We will also see more hybrids like the £1m per car Jag project that has just been scrapped. Initially they used miniature gas turbines, but then switched to a 1.6 500BHP engine, to produce electricity for electric motors.
We are going to see many more hybrids over the next few years as car manufacturers, work out the most efficient way of reducing energy costs per mile. A fixed rpm engine to drive a generator is much more efficient than current petrol engines, it is then the case of making the rest of the package work on cost, weight and efficiency grounds.
-
Dont worry about road tax-The money grabbers will dream up some reason to take our money-and we will moan about it but pay it anyway!!
-
I understand, and agree with many of your points symes. However as I stated before:
"The question here is what is fair for Joe Public. In regards to road use I believe it is fairer for individuals to pay more for high road usage than those who use the roads in a limited manner. The Government will be controlled on the costs they pass on to motorists by the political climate and the general market forces. That is why the expected 3p increase in fuel duty has been scrapped, and as a separate, but similar situation, railway ticket prices are being held back from the levels the railway companies want to charge."
....it all depends on what us, the public, will accept from the government and all other politicians of the day. You have also touched on "which will be politically acceptable", and that is the key. The politicians will not have free reign on this, and as shown by the recent scrapping of the 3p fuel duty increase, public opinion (future votes) has a power all of it's own. Where Europe is concerned in all this appears to me to be not in the frame as I cannot imagine a current, or future government, getting that policy through the House of Commons and accepted by an already very sceptical people, swinging constantly towards the UKIP or simply leaving the EU regardless.
I am the last person who wants to pay more than I have to for my motoring. I'd be a fool and a liar to state that! However, we all must accept that we do have to pay something for our travels, whether it is in a private vehicle or using public transport.
In the past only the rich could afford to run cars. Then in the 1950's that I remember, most people still did not own a car or could drive. Indeed in 1958 I can remember there were just two motor vehicles parked most nights in our road; one was the butchers A30 van, and the other was an Atcost Ford Thames Trader builders van. My parents, along with all other people we knew then, did not drive. They could not afford to. However, we know what happened in the 1960's; one big "owner car" boom that more and more people suddenly could afford. In relative terms motoring then was not "cheap", and it never has been, or will be, as it all must be paid for. Then it was for all the new motorways, bypasses and river crossings to cope with the booming road traffic and, even more importantly, the demands of the commercial sector to move freight.
However, harking back to the past is of no use, we know what is today is a fact; heavily congested roads; greatly increasing rail traffic, and even ever increasing air use. The infrastructure to support all this must be improved, expanded, and that will take big money. We the consumers will have to pay one way or another, but again it will be public opinion and political pressure, along with market forces, that will control the amount of revenue raised. The abolishment of the RFL is going to happen, as the current system costs more than a system whereby the revenue is raised on every gallon used in fuel tanks, so that as with any other form of transport you pay for the distance travelled and the infrasture used.
The electric car, at their current prices, has some way to go before it becomes a realistic alternative for more people to own one. The amount of motorists using them will be low for some time, so the number of motorists still using the internal combustion engine to propel them around, in one of the 10's of thousands of those vehicles still being built is going to form the vast majority of road users. That results in what we see currently, in that political and commercial pressure from that group inhibits whatever the government of the day wishes to do in terms of taxing to discourage road use by petrol or diesel vehicles. But, again I stress, we Joe Public will have to accept that we must pay for our travel, but in a fair way. That final point will dictate the colours of future governments, and even our membership of the EU in part or in full.
As for the use of technology to keep track on us; sorry, but that already exists in our everyday lives. Numerous CCTV monitoring on every main road, in towns / cities / villages; ANPR; City Road Charging; computer monitoring of where we shop, what we buy and when; police use of mobile phone GPS systems; linked central computers, along with GCHQ and other intelligence agencies gathering intelligence in ways we will never know - yes we are being tracked already. Road charging is just going to be an extension to all that is in place now.
What we need in all respects of road and vehicle taxing is transparency from the government, and an understanding of where the cash raised from us is being spent, and on what. One thing is for sure, if this country is going to remain a global commercial power house, with a growing industrial sector, trillions of pounds must be spent, and you, I, and future generations will pay for it!
-
Sorry, I meant to address the above post to Rods2, not symes! ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
Thats ok I got lost in what you was saying anyway-I do that sometimes ::) ::) ::)
-
Get a sterling sapphire , and be tax free :P :P :P
Electric is the power of the future ;D
-
No mmate power of the future will be-feet or horses :y :y ;D ;D ;D
-
No mmate power of the future will be-feet or horses :y :y ;D ;D ;D
No mate :P
Available now we can get solar panel fixed to scoots now , so all we need is the sun ..oh dear :-X ;D
-
No mmate power of the future will be-feet or horses :y :y ;D ;D ;D
No mate :P
Available now we can get solar panel fixed to scoots now , so all we need is the sun ..oh dear :-X ;D
Seriously think theres a little problem here ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Plus, the only way it could be implemented properly would be for the "RFL" element of fuel tax to be collected separately at source. If it was rolled into fuel duty then it would never end up where it should :-X After all, the money they currently collect in Fuel Duty doesn't always end up where it should and is just treated as a "Flexible Income" (or "Overtime" in layman's terms) for the Treasury >:( ;)
Just to clear this one up, we have not paid for a "Road Fund Licence" for many, many years. The "Tax Disc" is actually Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) and is, like many other taxes, simply regarded as income for the Treasury. It is not intended to pay for road building, or maintenance or improvements.
-
vote for Lizzie :y. at least if RFL was scrapped in favour Pay as you drive everyone would pay including all the skankers who don't pay at the moment so we probably would not need such a large hyke in prices at the pump with everybody paying:y
While on the subject of skankers perhaps when your in power Lizzie can you introduce a life time ban for people who don't insure their cars >:(
-
vote for Lizzie :y. at least if RFL was scrapped in favour Pay as you drive everyone would pay including all the skankers who don't pay at the moment so we probably would not need such a large hyke in prices at the pump with everybody paying:y
While on the subject of skankers perhaps when your in power Lizzie can you introduce a life time ban for people who don't insure their cars >:(
I would love to do that Macduff. :y :y
There are all too many, especially the young, but not only the young, who are trying hard to avoid the very high premiums, that are putting us all at risk as they are often the ones who do not keep their cars legal in many respects, including being uninsured. As with road tax and replacing that with PayGo, I would like to link the purchasing of petrol to providing proof that someone is insured by some form of electronic swipe card, linked to the central DVLA computer system. All garages would be required to have ANPR cameras that views the vehicles registration and links the information held with the swipe cards details, perhaps along with fingerprint recognition. Only those shown as being the insured driver with that vehicle and/or another vehicle registered with the DVLA, with also being in possession of a full licence, could purchase the petrol. Any attempted breaches would be automatically flagged up to the police. If convicted, those for the first offence would be banned for three years. Second time five years. Third time, final strike full lifetime ban.
Big brother control? Absolutely, and why not if it saves lives and protects the law abiding citizens. If you drive a car it is a big responsibility, and everyone should enter into "the social contract" of providing personal details to prove they can legally drive a motor vehicle. Time to act I believe! ;)
-
vote for Lizzie :y. at least if RFL was scrapped in favour Pay as you drive everyone would pay including all the skankers who don't pay at the moment so we probably would not need such a large hyke in prices at the pump with everybody paying:y
While on the subject of skankers perhaps when your in power Lizzie can you introduce a life time ban for people who don't insure their cars >:(
I would love to do that Macduff. :y :y
There are all too many, especially the young, but not only the young, who are trying hard to avoid the very high premiums, that are putting us all at risk as they are often the ones who do not keep their cars legal in many respects, including being uninsured. As with road tax and replacing that with PayGo, I would like to link the purchasing of petrol to providing proof that someone is insured by some form of electronic swipe card, linked to the central DVLA computer system. All garages would be required to have ANPR cameras that views the vehicles registration and links the information held with the swipe cards details, perhaps along with fingerprint recognition. Only those shown as being the insured driver with that vehicle and/or another vehicle registered with the DVLA, with also being in possession of a full licence, could purchase the petrol. Any attempted breaches would be automatically flagged up to the police. If convicted, those for the first offence would be banned for three years. Second time five years. Third time, final strike full lifetime ban.
Big brother control? Absolutely, and why not if it saves lives and protects the law abiding citizens. If you drive a car it is a big responsibility, and everyone should enter into "the social contract" of providing personal details to prove they can legally drive a motor vehicle. Time to act I believe! ;)
Absolutely agree with every word there Lizzie :y but there is a flaw, if all that came into force, then you would still have illegal drivers on the road like we do now, its not going to be hard for chavs ect ect to get their hands on fuel, they would just pay a mate to get the fuel for them and pray they dont get caught >:( , punishing drivers makes no difference at all unless they are behind bars.
-
vote for Lizzie :y. at least if RFL was scrapped in favour Pay as you drive everyone would pay including all the skankers who don't pay at the moment so we probably would not need such a large hyke in prices at the pump with everybody paying:y
While on the subject of skankers perhaps when your in power Lizzie can you introduce a life time ban for people who don't insure their cars >:(
I would love to do that Macduff. :y :y
There are all too many, especially the young, but not only the young, who are trying hard to avoid the very high premiums, that are putting us all at risk as they are often the ones who do not keep their cars legal in many respects, including being uninsured. As with road tax and replacing that with PayGo, I would like to link the purchasing of petrol to providing proof that someone is insured by some form of electronic swipe card, linked to the central DVLA computer system. All garages would be required to have ANPR cameras that views the vehicles registration and links the information held with the swipe cards details, perhaps along with fingerprint recognition. Only those shown as being the insured driver with that vehicle and/or another vehicle registered with the DVLA, with also being in possession of a full licence, could purchase the petrol. Any attempted breaches would be automatically flagged up to the police. If convicted, those for the first offence would be banned for three years. Second time five years. Third time, final strike full lifetime ban.
Big brother control? Absolutely, and why not if it saves lives and protects the law abiding citizens. If you drive a car it is a big responsibility, and everyone should enter into "the social contract" of providing personal details to prove they can legally drive a motor vehicle. Time to act I believe! ;)
Crikey! It would be easier to buy heroin than petrol!
And how would I get a gallon for my lawnmower?
-
vote for Lizzie :y. at least if RFL was scrapped in favour Pay as you drive everyone would pay including all the skankers who don't pay at the moment so we probably would not need such a large hyke in prices at the pump with everybody paying:y
While on the subject of skankers perhaps when your in power Lizzie can you introduce a life time ban for people who don't insure their cars >:(
I would love to do that Macduff. :y :y
There are all too many, especially the young, but not only the young, who are trying hard to avoid the very high premiums, that are putting us all at risk as they are often the ones who do not keep their cars legal in many respects, including being uninsured. As with road tax and replacing that with PayGo, I would like to link the purchasing of petrol to providing proof that someone is insured by some form of electronic swipe card, linked to the central DVLA computer system. All garages would be required to have ANPR cameras that views the vehicles registration and links the information held with the swipe cards details, perhaps along with fingerprint recognition. Only those shown as being the insured driver with that vehicle and/or another vehicle registered with the DVLA, with also being in possession of a full licence, could purchase the petrol. Any attempted breaches would be automatically flagged up to the police. If convicted, those for the first offence would be banned for three years. Second time five years. Third time, final strike full lifetime ban.
Big brother control? Absolutely, and why not if it saves lives and protects the law abiding citizens. If you drive a car it is a big responsibility, and everyone should enter into "the social contract" of providing personal details to prove they can legally drive a motor vehicle. Time to act I believe! ;)
Crikey! It would be easier to buy heroin than petrol!
And how would I get a gallon for my lawnmower?
Nothing is perfect, and obviously I have not got all the answers :'( :'(. It would be a major step forward though in ridding us all of the tax disc, clamping down on illegal drivers, plus making the roads safer.
Perhaps for small amounts of fuel, i.e. 1 gallon, for lawnmowers and similar, there would be no restriction. This would also cover genuine drivers who break down and need a gallon to get started again without the car being on the forecourt. ;)
-
vote for Lizzie :y. at least if RFL was scrapped in favour Pay as you drive everyone would pay including all the skankers who don't pay at the moment so we probably would not need such a large hyke in prices at the pump with everybody paying:y
While on the subject of skankers perhaps when your in power Lizzie can you introduce a life time ban for people who don't insure their cars >:(
I would love to do that Macduff. :y :y
There are all too many, especially the young, but not only the young, who are trying hard to avoid the very high premiums, that are putting us all at risk as they are often the ones who do not keep their cars legal in many respects, including being uninsured. As with road tax and replacing that with PayGo, I would like to link the purchasing of petrol to providing proof that someone is insured by some form of electronic swipe card, linked to the central DVLA computer system. All garages would be required to have ANPR cameras that views the vehicles registration and links the information held with the swipe cards details, perhaps along with fingerprint recognition. Only those shown as being the insured driver with that vehicle and/or another vehicle registered with the DVLA, with also being in possession of a full licence, could purchase the petrol. Any attempted breaches would be automatically flagged up to the police. If convicted, those for the first offence would be banned for three years. Second time five years. Third time, final strike full lifetime ban.
Big brother control? Absolutely, and why not if it saves lives and protects the law abiding citizens. If you drive a car it is a big responsibility, and everyone should enter into "the social contract" of providing personal details to prove they can legally drive a motor vehicle. Time to act I believe! ;)
Crikey! It would be easier to buy heroin than petrol!
And how would I get a gallon for my lawnmower?
Flog it and buy a goat ;D
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
Thanks! :y :y :y
Yes, that is one of those issues I have not got an answer to. At least modern cars have locking fuel filler caps integrated with the vehicles alarm system. That should keep thefts to a minimum. Nothing is perfect though when dealing with the traits of human nature ::) ::) ::) ;)
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
Thanks! :y :y :y
Yes, that is one of those issues I have not got an answer to. At least modern cars have locking fuel filler caps integrated with the vehicles alarm system. That should keep thefts to a minimum. Nothing is perfect though when dealing with the traits of human nature ::) ::) ::) ;)
Thieves dont mess-they drill hole in tank to take fuel-loads done round this way-lucky me -my rover tank inside own safety cell :y mig wasnt :'( :'(Took 2 weeks to locate new tank :'(
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
That is fine until you have and RBS style technical problem and nobody can get fuel for a week due to computer problems.
Also what happens when you are on a long journey and you realise when you go to fill up 300 miles from home, that you have left the swipe card there?
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
That is fine until you have and RBS style technical problem and nobody can get fuel for a week due to computer problems.
Also what happens when you are on a long journey and you realise when you go to fill up 300 miles from home, that you have left the swipe card there?
You should always carry your driving license and insurance details, along with the means to buy the fuel, with you in your purse/wallet/handbag. The swipe card should be kept with those. If carrying all those documents with you was made legally obligatory, as it is in other countries, then only illegal drivers would be caught out. The police would also have an easier time when stopping an illegal motorist, and there would be no need for the ridiculous rule of providing your documents to a local police station within 7 days; criminals just disappear into the night! This way they can be arrested for a specific offence immediately. ;)
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
That is fine until you have and RBS style technical problem and nobody can get fuel for a week due to computer problems.
Also what happens when you are on a long journey and you realise when you go to fill up 300 miles from home, that you have left the swipe card there?
You should always carry your driving license and insurance details, along with the means to buy the fuel, with you in your purse/wallet/handbag. The swipe card should be kept with those. If carrying all those documents with you was made legally obligatory, as it is in other countries, then only illegal drivers would be caught out. The police would also have an easier time when stopping an illegal motorist, and there would be no need for the ridiculous rule of providing your documents to a local police station within 7 days; criminals just disappear into the night! This way they can be arrested for a specific offence immediately. ;)
<sarcasm>
Why don't we issue everyone with identity cards and make it legally obligatory for eveyone to carry it at all times? That would make things easier for the police. They could just stop people and ask to see their identity ("Papers, please") and if they don't have it on them arrest them on the spot. That would get a few criminals off the street.
Or better still, tattoo everyone with an ID number, maybe on their forearm.
BTW, these ideas aren't original.
</sarcasm>
-
I like all your ideas Lizzie. :y If you are legal you won't have a problem, that way the vast majority of people would be legal, there will unfortunately always be people who will find a way around any kind of rules and regulations. The only serious issue I can see is the increase in fuel thefts from cars.
That is fine until you have and RBS style technical problem and nobody can get fuel for a week due to computer problems.
Also what happens when you are on a long journey and you realise when you go to fill up 300 miles from home, that you have left the swipe card there?
You should always carry your driving license and insurance details, along with the means to buy the fuel, with you in your purse/wallet/handbag. The swipe card should be kept with those. If carrying all those documents with you was made legally obligatory, as it is in other countries, then only illegal drivers would be caught out. The police would also have an easier time when stopping an illegal motorist, and there would be no need for the ridiculous rule of providing your documents to a local police station within 7 days; criminals just disappear into the night! This way they can be arrested for a specific offence immediately. ;)
<sarcasm>
Why don't we issue everyone with identity cards and make it legally obligatory for eveyone to carry it at all times? That would make things easier for the police. They could just stop people and ask to see their identity ("Papers, please") and if they don't have it on them arrest them on the spot. That would get a few criminals off the street.
Or better still, tattoo everyone with an ID number, maybe on their forearm.
BTW, these ideas aren't original.
</sarcasm>
No, that idea is too crude now. What with fingerprint, face recognition, DNA analysing, and electronic tracking, it is not necessary now! ::) ::) ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
Why don't we issue everyone with identity cards and make it legally obligatory for everyone to carry it at all times? That would make things easier for the police. They could just stop people and ask to see their identity ("Papers, please") and if they don't have it on them arrest them on the spot. That would get a few criminals off the street.
Ah yes, just what our old friend Mr Blair wanted... >:(