Past EED rants

Labels

Live leaderboard

Poker leaderboard

Voice of EED

Friday, 31 July 2009

Daftest anti-congestion ever?

Posted by Slim

Is this the worst thought out congestion reducing scheme ever?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/5942306/Motorists-to-pay-250-tax-for-parking-at-work.html

I'm a big supporter of the reduction in car trips, but any system has to be fair and work for everyone, not just businesses. This is daft, it's going to get passed right on to people in employment, while other car users will not be affected at all. What'll happen is firms will reduce parking spaces (the number of which are usually enforced by planning anyway), but still drive to work and park in public spaces. Silly.

Far better to just increase fuel duty if you want to stop people using the car. When the oil price went up, less people drove. It's been proven to work, why not just do that?
Posted by Slim at 10:18

2 comments:

  1. Increased fuel duty is great for people who either live in a city or have access to working public transport. But Where I live there is no way of getting to work via public transport for 8am, in fact I still couldn't manage it for 9:30. So once again us countryside folk get punished because you city folk can't sort your lives out and use the transport provided to you.
    ReplyDelete
  2. Well number one if you work in the city live in the city. Long commuting is daft, I live 8 miles from work and would really love to cycle that.

    But Glasgows weather is rank, it'd be raining most of the time so I'd need a shower and then dried off before work could even start.

    So while I'd save petrol I'd be losing out in a shedload of time.

    The problem with a direct tax on petrol is the impact on delivery mechanisms, which tax non drivers. Long haul companies take a large hit, which is passed on to retail.

    I'd prefer something based on mileage driven and then a class for business/personal. This would be calculated annually as part of your MOT, or when you transfer vehicle ownership.

    Different rates for different purposes, probably be a nightmare compared to the 1 stop shop of the forecourt. But maybe fairer to the poorer folk.
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)