Safe Speed Forums

SPY IN THE SKY ON MOTORISTS.
War on the motorist.

By John Ingham Transport Editor, Daily Express, Thursday 11 May 2006

Big Brother satellite will charge you £1.34 a mile, and will know if you are speeding.

EVERY motorist in Britain is to be tracked by satellite and charged for each mile driven. The Big Brother device, which could see drivers forced to pay £1.34 a mile, was given the green light by the Government yesterday.

War was declared on the motorist by newly-appointed Transport Secretary Douglas Alexander, who has been ordered to push ahead with plans for a road pricing scheme. This includes developing spy-in-the-sky satellite systems to track every vehicle around the clock.

Critics warned that the technology could be used to snoop on the private lives of citizens.
And it was revealed that the system could be used to check if drivers were speeding.

Mr Alexander vowed to make the project his "personal priority". He said: "We have to move the debate from `why' to `how' we might make a national system work in practice."

Feasibility studies have proposed charges of up to £1.34 a mile on the busiest roads at peak times, which could cost urban drivers £16,000 a year. Quieter roads would cost 2p a mile off peak.

Mr Alexander has taken on the road pricing crusade on the direct orders of Tony Blair.

In his appointment letter Mr Blair stated: "Managing demand for road transport and ensuring we get the best out of our existing network are vital. We therefore need to advance the debate on the introduction of a national road-user charging scheme.

"I would like you to identify the other key steps for the successful introduction of road-user charging within the next decade."

Mr Alexander made no mention of previous Government pledges that a road pricing scheme would be offset by cuts to existing motoring taxes.
A Department for Transport spokesman said the scheme could only work if motorists could see the benefit. He added: "We are not looking at imposing new charges on top of existing charges.'

But shadow Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said: "The trouble is that people don't trust what the Government says.

"Even if they claim it won't be used as a stealth tax, they might have trouble persuading the public." Mr Grayling also said that the transport networks needs action now, not in 10 years. Edmund King, executive director of the RAC Foundation, said: "Motorists are not at all confident that the Government will introduce a fair road pricing package linked to reductions in other taxes.

"They already pay £42billion a year in tax of which less than £6billion is spent on transport. Our polls show that 90 per cent believe that the Government would use road pricing as an extra source of revenue.

"Only one per cent was very confident that the Government would reduce fuel duty."

The AA Motoring Trust's head of roads and transport policy Paul Watters said: "Our research shows that 52 per cent of motorists were opposed to a satellite-based system of road pricing on privacy grounds. They had fears that it could be able to invade their privacy.

"There are concerns about the state knowing where you are, where you are going and what you are doing."

Nigel Humphreys of the Association of British Drivers said: "This system could be used to track people's movements everywhere they go.

"It could in time also be used to enforce speed limits and even to override the driver and limit his speed which could cause accidents. It is just like Big Brother and typical of this control-freak Government."

The Department for Transport has for years been saying that. any national road pricing scheme is a decade away.

Mr Alexander said he is making £10million available to the private sector to develop road pricing technology on top of £18million already provided for pilot projects by local authorities in Bristol, Cambridge, Durham, Greater Manchester, Shropshire, Tyne and Wear and the West Midlands.

From 2008-9 there will be £200million a year to help local authorities establish pilot schemes within five years. Mr Alexander said the measures "could make the cities better places to live and work".

He added: "Congestion is getting worse in our major towns and cities and on some parts of the strategic road network. If we do nothing it could damage our long-term economic growth.

"We know that, on paper, road pricing has the potential to cut congestion long term by nearly half. The big challenge is to take road pricing off the drawing board and make it work."

Ministers based in London look out from the windows of their bulletproof chauffeur driven cars and say "Terrible congestion. Something must be done."

This charging scheme is "something" and therefore it must be done.

Perhaps the seat of UK government should be moved to near where Paul lives to see if that changes their minds.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

They have to move the debate from 'why' to 'how'

There has been no debate over 'why'

There hasn't even been a satisfactory explanation offered as to 'why'

For 1, how long is the system going to have to be in place before the *huge* levels of funding wasted, sorry, invested on it are recouped?

For 2, how much are they going to make out of the scheme it is used to enforce speed limits as well as road pricing?

For 3, how are they going to force people to install and maintain the equipment? Even if they made it an MOT requirement there's nothing to stop people disabling it as soon as the certificate's been issued.

For 4, how many people are going to be forced out of work because they can no longer afford to commute? We had this same argument with our LA when they tried to restrict our parking.

Personally I don't believe for an instant that the government will reduce other forms of taxation to offset the cost to the motorist - what exactly would be the point of the scheme if, overall, you ended up spending out the same as you always did? IMO this is just another way of Bliar's government squeazing even more of out hard earned pennies out of us to spend on illegal wars, pointless legislation and big expensive dinner parties. Not to mention the fact that they will be able to monitor everyone's movements wherever they are.

If this is brought in, I'm emigrating.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Maybe they will reduce the congestion through the automatic speed enforcement - here's the typical monthly bill:

So it will definitely reduce congestion then...

The scary thing is Rewolf that it might just happen that way.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Reading between the lines, and conspiracy theories abound, but.....

Douglas Alexander is my local MP, and myself and many of my friends and acquaintances have followed his career with some interest. He is a known 'Brown-ite' (Brown-noser, in fact), and I see Bliar's commandments in the appointment letter as a cast-iron attempt to scupper 'Wee Douglas's' popularity from the outset.

The proposal is a joke, the funding a p+++ in the ocean, and such an opening announcement was always going to make the new minister a front-line target.

Well done Tony - shame someone leaked the letter telling Wee Douglas who's idea it was though...

Congestion charging with speed detection




I can see it coming……



Graduated charging:

Drivers are charged xxp per mile

Drivers are charged an extra 0.1p per excess mph, per second, when exceeding the speed limit

The increased rates are because of “pollution”


What a great idea; that’s exactly what I would do if I wanted to bleed the motorist as dry as possible!
The government will rake it in big time, no-one gets points - they can’t get revenue from a banned driver (hence no-one can complain about losing their license), the wealthy can a££ord it and will likely make use of it (even if only as a status symbol).



You saw it here first!

Surely the same congestion reducing effect could be achieved by making fuel tanks smaller (say 2 gallons or less even) and changing the price of fuel dynamically depending on the congestion in that area at that moment in time. I'm not advocating that system necessarily, I just thought of it; I'm just suggesting that there are other less surveillance-based methods the government could consider surely?

All very plausible except this bit - if you are banned from driving then you aren't earning them money by driving your car. It would be far more likely that you could "pay off" your ban at a rate of £5 per day or something.

Gareth

True, if you don't drive you don't pay; but I think we really would see an popular uprising if they couldn't show that such an expensive scheme had actually reduced congestion, and if the drivers don't choose to get off the roads through extortionate charges, then perhaps banning a percentage of them at any one time would do the trick!

In all honesty, we all know what a 'meek' race we are. We put up with SO much rubbish. I think it will be the same as fuel prices and the petrol strikes a few years ago. We'll take so much and then all hell will be let loose.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

And all the while they fail to see that congestion is self regulating.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

One might wonder how vehicles registered abroad will be dealt with under this system, and, maybe, classic cars in which a suitable tracking installation will not be possible.
It does seem unlikely that other European conntries will follow this course, so the answer may well be to use a vehicle registered, taxed and insured to a company in another EU country - that's all quite legal under EU regulations.
Will this system ever happen? Unlikely as it will just be a shambles, be years late in 'roll-out', 500% over budget, and full of software/hardware glitches.
Will the general public accept having every move they make monitored and watched?

That's the bit that gets me every time. So often I hear (in the same paragraph, no less):

"Congestion costs business at least £20 billion per annum ... we're going to cut congestion by introducing roads pricing."

Clearly they don't equate the cost of congestion with a charge for congestion... WTF? Are they REALLY that stupid? (I'm afraid I think they are.) Or is there something else going on?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

And how will they deal with the tracking system in my car which keeps breaking down under warranty again and again and again?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

It really is frustrating the lack of reliability of onboard electronics...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

This "policy" really is a load of tosh, and if ppl stand for this, then I'm definitely emigrating too.

I can imagine the number of bike sales will shoot through the roof, and seeing as they don't cause congestion, they would be very cheap to run too, with no duty on fuel.

I wonder if it did come on, whether car manufacturers would be forced to link up the odometer & "black box" together, with the two figures being checked during the MOT. If they don't match, then you get prosecuted.

I can also imagine the planning laws crumbling too, as it will force people to live in places where it is cheaper to drive. Small lanes will become massively busier due to it being cheaper..People will bypass using bypasses, and use the old roads that the bypasses replaced.

I think it'll cause a right mess, with various different knock-on effects....

But then when did Bliars government think anything through well enough to realise the consiquences of any of their legislation?

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Europe isn't a problem, as the EU recently approved the concept of making the core technology for the in-car units compulsory for all vehicles sold in Europe after 2009.

http://www.publictechnology.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=4881&newlang=&topic=14&catid=0

The e-Call units referred to contain a GPS/Galileo receiver, a processor and a mobile phone for transmitting voice and data, the current EU plan is that in the event of a crash the unit will automatically transmit the location and place a call to an operator so the emergency services will be able to respond quickly to accidents thus saving thousand of lives. But the specification isn't fixed yet - and the suppliers are pushing for all it's worth - pages 5 and 16 in the following give an interesting insight: http://www.sbd.co.uk/assets/Telematics_Europe_2005_presentation_by_SBD.pdf

How about going to a conference covering the additional services that can be forced into the units: http://www.telematicsupdate.com/europe2006/programme.shtml

If you want to know which faceless EU Bureaucrat is pushing e-Call, then you might be surprised (or perhaps not) to discover that the MEP leading the e-Call process is Gary Titley from the UK, a New Labour, EU expansionist - http://www.garytitley.com/

And the little problem of prosecuting motorists... well plans are well underway for a European Driving Licence - check out Gary Titley's summary of Strasbourg 2006.