MENU LOGIN 
   Redirecting... ...to our OLD website!


We're still in the process of converting the site to the new format.

Apologies for the inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.

-Matt, Admin

5

Ok - go now to OLD site

No thanks - stay on NEW site


General Chat/Anything Goes

RAC Foundation calls for road pricing shake up

RAC Foundation calls for road pricing shake up - Forums [Biker Match] RAC Foundation calls for road pricing shake up - Forums [Biker Match]
Home / Search Forums / General Chat/Anything Goes /

RAC Foundation calls for road pricing shake up

 Posts: 8       Pages: 1/1

Post Reply
THE RAC Foundation has called for Britain's road system to be made "pay as you go" following the revelation that just one third of the revenue brought in by road tax and fuel duty is being ploughed back into the UK's road network.

In his new report, Foundation head Stephen Glaister heavily critcises the UK's current road funding system, which pulls in over £46billion per annum in fuel duty and road tax, stating the majority of the revenue is being used to balance out other government money-losing schemes instead of being used to improve the country's road system.

Glaister, a retired professor of transport and infrastructure, believes the remaining revenue is spent on many of the government's cash-gobbling projects, including welfare and health. He also believes the current administration system is destined for poor performance because there's no level of ownership and no target levels of service. Glaister believes this could be remedied if control over the UK road system was handed over to a new, powerful non-government body.

Professor Glaister emphasises his proposals are to run in place of the current system, not subsidise it; serious savings could be made in road tax and fuel duty if charges were made to use motorways and other roads - similar to the schemes used in European countries.

In his report, Pro Glaister says:

User charging is one element in a balanced package of measures designed to improve conditions on the road network—with the proceeds being used to fund investment in the system. It is not simply an additional revenue-raising tool for government.


   Update Reply
Brummie Jackie @ 12/07/2010 21:42  

trouble is the Government are telling you to travel further for a job, but if this went through then you would have to pay more for the privilige

I work 50 miles away and at the time had no choice but to travel, so on top of the additional duty I pay on my exorbatant fuel costs, I will then have to pay more for using the roads. hmmmmmmmmmmm


   Update Reply
catman61 @ 12/07/2010 21:51  

Yeah yeah we ALL can see another revenue maker coming lol Just another way of patching up the HOLES !! But not in our roads

   Update Reply
Deleted Member @ 12/07/2010 21:52  

Cant say i am in favour of it to be honest as it would seriously hamper some folks like already said who travel to work and the ones that travel for a living

   Update Reply
Brummie Jackie @ 12/07/2010 21:54  

You have to be an optimist to believe that the government will give money back to road users, Any new road charging system would only become a supplementary form of income to the government.
yes, I know I am a pessimist but only where government is concerned.

   Update Reply
thehairyone @ 12/07/2010 21:55  

Don't think that's pessimistic at-all but realistic.

Anyone that thinks any money that would-be raised would-be representative and "ring-fenced" is a fool IMO.

   Update Reply
invalid characters @ 13/07/2010 07:39  

if they spent the money to fix it properly in the first place and stopped using crap materials they wouldnt actully spend as much as they do fixing it over and over and over and over then we wouldnt have to be charged

   Update Reply
madhat @ 13/07/2010 08:31  

Ahh yes Mad', but you seem to-be forgetting the fact that government departments have to "balance the books" ref' an annual budget and there's a relatively simple commonsense bypass procedure performed should you get a job there.

   Update Reply
invalid characters @ 13/07/2010 08:37  

 Posts: 8       Pages: 1/1

Back to top
Facebook Twitter Google Pinterest Text Email