Democracy is dead

[erastes]

This is the response that I got from Tony Blair for expressing my views on the recent e-petition - saying "no to tolled roads"

I have to admit that the bit that amused me most was the reference to Mr Ladyman. I have no doubt that the tolls will go ahead - the voter's and constituents views have no relevance in this country.

E-petition: Response from the Prime Minister
The e-petition asking the Prime Minister to "Scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy" has now closed. This is a response from the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

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 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
Further information
Both the 10 Downing Street and Department for Transport websites offer much more information about road pricing.

This includes a range of independent viewpoints, both for and against.

You can also read the Eddington Report in full.

You can reply to this email by posting a question to Roads Minister Dr. Stephen Ladyman in a webchat on the No 10 website this Thursday.

There will be further opportunities in the coming months to get involved in the debate. You will receive one final e-mail from Downing Street to update you in due course.

Comments

[sabethea.livejournal.com]

Is it terribly rude to ask you what your reasons are for being against tolls for roads. I have a feeling that I think it's a good idea, despite the fact that I'm one of the people who would struggle most to run a car under those circumstances. If - and I admit this is a fairly big if - the money is spent on improving public transport (which sadly wouldn't help me much as I'm disabled and can't get to the nearest bus stop anyway), then it seems like quite a good scheme.

[liebesdammerung.livejournal.com]

There are a lot of toll roads in the USA. It doesn't really matter, but it's annoying.

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

Er...you left the response out. After "the voter's and constituents views have no relevance in this country," there's just a lot of white space.

[leatherdykeuk.livejournal.com]

I got the same reply. Sadly, it will go ahead whatever we, the public, will say, and then the roads will be segregated.

For Privileged Only

[leatherdykeuk.livejournal.com]

We don't object to voluntary use toll roads - we have the T6 already. What we're objecting to is the plan to charge per mile on EVERY road: when I take my kids to school I would pay for each of the eight roads I use - even the one I live on.

[rwday.livejournal.com]

I can't see it either - probably we're missing some upgrade that will allow us to view whatever type of graphics file it is. Usually I just switch to IE and view there, but I can't see it either.

Or else their politician's words are as empty as ours are...

[aunty_marion]

It's an absolutely enormous IF. As in, It Won't Happen. What will happen, when road tolls go ahead - and despite the petition, despite the fact that it probably represents only a small proportion of those who object to the idea, I have no doubt from reading the response myself that they will - is that there will be a few very tiny 'upgrades' to public transport such as painting stations, repositioning bus-stops (to more inconvenient places, probably, judging from my own experience!), and probably cutting services in the name of 'efficiency' and 'cost savings'. The rest of the money will just go straight into the government's coffers.

[valarltd.livejournal.com]

US toll roads can mostly be gotten around on secondary roads. I learned 2 different ways to avoid the I80 construction in Chicago.

He's talking about making all roads, including the street you live on, into a tolled road.

[liebesdammerung.livejournal.com]

Good God. That's just retarded. How is that even possible/enforcible/legal? Is the plan to make driving so expensive that no one can do it?

[valarltd.livejournal.com]

There was a dealie tried in California, where you have a box in your car and it mock-tolled you for every trip.

The grocery store might be 50c, your daily commute $1.10 and a cross-country trip something like $50.

I don't know how Britain is doing it. The point is to severely reduce driving.