So pay per mile is definitely on the cards for London, it’s a 30 minute video with links to the source material. The London Assembly (secret) public consultation ends on the 10th March https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-02/Road%20User%20Charging%20-%20Call%20for%20Evidence%20_0.pdf
The video link Road User Charging - Another secret consultation, and it's TERRIFYING - YouTube
“CRIKEY GEOFF, I THINK THEY WANT TO STOP ME SEEING GRANNY”
…and a chip in your arm!
I think it is inevitable. There has to be a massive overhaul of the VED system because of the growth of EVs.
Add to that every political party acknowledges we have to reduce car dependency, the best way to achieve that is road pricing. The London Congestion Charge is a case in point, I live on its border but since it came in twenty years ago I’ve managed to avoid paying it entirely except on two isolated occasions. All my Central London journeys are now walking, cycling, bus, Tube or on the rare occasion I need to carry something heavy, a taxi. That is the shift in thinking which happens when you have to pay per use.
Personally it should benefit me. I own a car in the highest VED band. I have SORN’ed it in the past but that is a faff. I do so few miles every year it would doubtless be cheaper for me to pay per mile.
As 83% of my immediate neighbourhood do not have access to a car, I’m sure I’m not alone.
Road User Charging - Another secret consultation, and it’s TERRIFYING
Haha, hardly secret when the info is online and these elected reps are on the committee.
Well, that is me potentially looking for a new job if this comes in!
will likely price me out of my job. Not sure how that benefits anyone then…
The best way to shift car dependency is to provide alternatives. Whilst these exist in London, the rest of the country there often isn’t a viable alternative.
My local bus route takes you to the nearest city centre, not where the majority of employment is actually located.
yup, we’re pretty rural where we are, a bus every 2 hours of which still turns up whenever it feels like it. A train station, even to get to the closest big town actually requires you to go back in the other direction to change to get there.
Whitehall only give a shit about themselves though, and all those who vote on this stuff rarely live in the environments which are most affected.
Tackling climate change is a key issue.
It’s just that the targets are are wrong. Aviation fuel is still tax free, ships (commercial and pleasure) burn the nastiest shit out there in the form of bunker fuel and ministerial cockwombles take private jets across the UK to avoid having the shit kicked out of them by the public.
Whilst the proposed solution is always to squeeze those that have the least options for alternatives available to them.
If you aren’t angry, then you aren’t paying attention.
Hmmm undecided on this but I’m lucky that I don’t need to come into London anymore.
Do we know if motorbikes are gonna be part of this change? I assume yes, but hopefully at a lower cost?
That’s the wrong way to look at it. Once this starts in one area it will spread to cover everywhere when they realise there is money to be made.
I’m 100% with you on this. It is madness that we effectively subsidise aviation and penalise rail. And I am angry about it.
I’m also undecided. Even if it spreads it all depends on how the measure would be adjusted for each location and what the end goal is.
As an idea, it’s not bad theoretically because VED at the moment is a very blunt tool. But it would need the rate to be so flexible and tweakable. For example: cars that are big polluters pay a higher rate. Cars that drive in city centre roads where pollution levels are high, pay a higher rate. But is the end goal to reduce pollution or to reduce traffic? Of course with these measures what starts off as a reasonable fee very becomes quite an expensive price.
It also has a reverse effect in pushing people back into cities / places with better infrastructure if they can no longer use a car to get around, and that’s not a good thing to have a population even more centred around the urban areas. That would put a bigger strain on services and then quickly we’re back to square one. I’m not entirely sure how the trains would cope with extra people going in. Admittedly the pandemic has pushed people to work from home but there are some signs that might not last forever. Prior to the pandemic getting on a train from a commuter town, 45mins outside of London was a tactical mission.
I also agree that doing this while allowing people to travel stupid distances for very short amount of time (and for relatively cheap tickets) via air is a bit hypocritical.
I agree with your first two paragraphs but this is untrue.
Every environmentalist agrees cities put less strain on the environment per capita. Moving back into cities is exactly what we have to do with our large populations.
There are endless studies on this if you fancy further reading.
I don’t know about the environmental impact. I haven’t ha d a chance to read those articles and can’t really argue with people who have studied it.
My concern is less the environment but the of lack of resource. GPs, schools etc where everyone competes for space to a ridiculous level and inflates prices more.
I agree that people moving out to commute long distance into a city centre is not the right thing.
I need to read up on 15min cities… But generally I think the solution is to move businesses outside city centres (or perhap better expressed as capital centre), so people can follow and not need to commute as.much.
so they are doing away with congestion charge and ULEZ and instead PAY per mile, or is it paypermile on top of ALL other charges?
It’s just a consultation at this stage so it isn’t anything yet.
Item 8 asks ‘if smart charging is introduced, which charges or taxes should it replace and how should the current charges and taxes be changed’
interestingly one of the questions was where should we run a trial. How can they offset the fuel duty which is in essence a pay per mile scheme unless this went national. Otherwise we’re paying twice for the same thing!
Pay per mile will become a thing regardless, in 20 years when there is only a limited amount of combustion cars on the road, the government will need to get back all that lost fuel duty somehow.
The change to EV is already hurting the VED haul, that’s why they are talking about removing the zero rated band. The change is happening very quickly, they can’t wait 20 years to reform VED.
I think the move to pay per mile is probably inevitable but it will take years of consultations, reports, trials, manifestos, legislation, awarding contracts to their mates, installations, etc.
Much quicker will be changing VED to size and weight instead of emissions. That can be done at a stroke, will bring EVs into the net and will incentivise the market to provide smaller lighter cars.
I agree on the time frame was more a number I was putting in, but yup agree with you… They cannot afford to lose that kind of cash so will have to make it somewhere.
Between VED, fuel duty & VAT on fuel alone it’s something between £35-£40 billion a year.
Throw in all the incidentals & its a further loss of a few more billions. For example, there’s around 32 million taxed cars in the UK. If all of them have an annual oil & filter change then that’s probably £15-20 in VAT just on parts which is another £480-640 million that needs to be found.
