http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/19/david-cameron-sell-off-roads
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
"David Cameron unveils plan to sell off the roads"
(30 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
in England.
PPP/PFI was such a great success after all so let's do it with roads.
Posted 13 years ago # -
This could mean that motorists could legitimately claim that their VED payments are funding the road network.
Edmund King was on Today on R4 making claims about far more money coming in from motoring taxes thatn is spent on the roads.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I guarantee, with the introduction of this, the government will suddenly be stressing that road tax doesn't pay for roads...
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Edmund King was on Today on R4 making claims about far more money coming in from motoring taxes thatn is spent on the roads"
Well it's true - if you add VED + fuel taxes etc., but the money is spent on much more than just roads - police, A&E etc. etc.
But it's like 'why should I pay for schools, I don't have any children?' Etc. etc.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Is it the same situation we have in Scotland anyhow, with Bear, Amey, Transdev et al fixing the roads under contract?
Posted 13 years ago # -
I read somewhere that VED only covers a relatively small proportion of the direct costs of the road network but fuel tax covers substantially more (someone jump in with stats).
However there are many indirect costs:
- accidents
- induced stress
- local pollution
- removal of local streets as a place for kids to play
- obesity
- global pollution
...and some of these have enormous financial costs as well as social costs.
Posted 13 years ago # -
People who will (if they build more road) be responsible for increasing traffic will be paid with a portion of the money raised from emissions tax. Boosting only, if anything, the road-building and car-selling (and potentially the service-station-nasty-food-selling) bits of the economy.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Stepdoh - nothing like the situation in Scotland. The Scottish Government still owns the trunk road network - BEAR, Transerv etc. are simply maintenance contractors.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"removal of local streets as a place for kids to play"
Don't suppose anyone has made any attempt to put a price/cost on that.
Interesting timeline here -
http://streetplaylondon.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/track-demise-of-uks-play-streets.html
Posted 13 years ago # -
There are some things which make independence look pretty attractive.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Ahh, I see, so it's an actual sell off of the roads, and then what, the government rents them back on our behalf?
That seems a sensible type of plan that's worked without fail in the past.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@amir: (someone jump in with stats).
Road spending in most recent year I could find: just over £10bn. Could only find an exact figure for 2009, which was £9.8bn. That's split into £6.5bn local roads, £3.5bn national roads, but I couldn't find out how much of that means motorways and other roads only motor vehicles can use.
VED raised 2011: £5.8bn
Fuel duty raised 2011: £22bn; I don't know whether home heating/cooking oil and gas have duty on them, and if so what percentage of the total is from that source, what is from vehicle fuel and what is from fuels used for boats, planes, etc.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Meanwhile on Twitter -
"
Tudor Evans (@CouncillorTudor)
3/19/12 8:44 AM
It would appear to be an ideal day to bury news of the NHS vote with news of the Olympic Torch and Toll Roads that will not be built.
"
Posted 13 years ago # -
The big question is, do individual toll roads make any money? Isn't the M6Toll always losing money.
As opposed to the nationwide services like the Autostrade per l'Italia, which seems to make loadza.
Posted 13 years ago # -
As far as I understand it. The scheme would involve the long term lease of the English trunk road network to a foreign government owned fund (probably Chinese or middle eastern). The foreign fund would pay an up front fee to the UK Government. The UK taxpayer would then make annual payments, probably including a guaranteed profit, to the foreign fund for the term of the lease.
The lessee would be monitored by an independent regulator, to ensure it met the terms of its lease.
In summary - UK taxpayer subsidises Chinese/Arab government for running UK infrastructure already paid for by UK taxpayer.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@uberuce - "total wider costs of elevated BMI", 2007 estimate, £15.8bn a year and rising.
"Healthy people taxed to pay for flat slobs SHOCKER" as certain headlines might read ;-)
Like the suggestion that murderers and CD rippers place different weights on breaches of their respective laws, the comparison has limits. The more broadly you consider the outcomes the more dilute (for instance, if nobody could drive a car any more, there would still be fat people and some related costs on society).
Posted 13 years ago # -
Cameron unveils passing of enormous buck
The Daily Mash.Posted 13 years ago # -
Posted 13 years ago #
-
That this is suddenly released from Tory Party HQ into the news has nothing whatsoever to do with trying to take attention away from their plans for the NHS in England and Wales...
I think Cameron's speech tried to trot out the failed logic that this is needed because the roads are too congested so we need more money to build more roads to ease the congestion. And if we could just have more roads and magically less congestion then economy would make so much more money and we'd all live happily ever after.
Posted 13 years ago # -
tried to trot out the failed logic that this is needed because the roads are too congested so we need more money to build more roads to ease the congestion.
The same failed logic that is building the Aberdeen bypass and additional Forth road bridge (minus any facilities for pedestrians/cyclists), and built the M74...
Posted 13 years ago # -
"The same failed logic that is ..."
OK - serious question -
Why is it that 'we' (more or less) understand that 'building more roads won't solve the problem', but those who make the decisions only consider that people (voters?) want to travel more/faster/further - but without any delays/congestion - oh and 'the public' don't want to have to pay...
Posted 13 years ago # -
'We' see the roads from viewpoints other than the inside of a car stuck in a string of traffic. Douglas Adams Puddle Syndrome blinkers 'everyone else'.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Why is it that....
I think, sadly, it's mainly because politicians and (their advisers) are not really in favour of logic or facts because they are usually an inconvenient constraint on what they can promise to do or to change.
So, it doesn't really matter whether building roads will make the problem worse or better. There is a lever attached to a machine for building roads. There is no lever for alleviating conjestion on the roads (although there could be).
Our political class is addicted to the "we must do something, this IS something, so lets do that" type of thinking in transport especially.
Only when the "build roads" level breaks (and it's been stuck for a while by lack of funds) will there be a search for something else. This "initiative" mught just do the trick!
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
bbcgms (@bbcgms)3/20/12 7:17 AM
David Watt @the_IoD tells GMS his members might be happy to pay tolls if M8 was upgraded to 3 lanes using private investment
"
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
TransformScot:Stephen Joseph:
New roads fill up with traffic whether financed by the Chinese, a pension fund or from public spending:
http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/media/19-mar-toll-roads-dont-make-sense
Original Tweet: http://twitter.com/TransformScot/status/181797884386213890
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
BBC Radio Scotland (@BBCRadioScot)
3/20/12 9:00 AM
On Call Kaye this morning: Would you be willing to pay a toll to improve Scotland’s roads? 0500 92 95 00 text 80295 bbc.in/GAa99h"
Think I'll give it a miss...
Posted 13 years ago # -
If some one will lend me a couple of million I'll put a third lane on the M8... For a small section say Livingstone to the Bypass, charge a tenner a day return, easy make your money back in couple of weeks!
None of the surrounding roads could cope with the volume of traffic, the bus service from Livingstone is hopeless as is the train.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I don't believe politicians are stupid (or if they are, they have fearfully smart advisors).
Everybody in government will understand that building roads won't help with congestion, but building roads is a vote winner, and therefore we build roads. Obviously they put a better spin on it than "we want to waste a ton of cash on populist flagship schemes, despite knowing that it will make little difference".
Take the new Forth crossing as an example. It will have slightly higher capacity because, although it has only two lanes, public transport will use the old bridge (although I think the old bridge will come down, when the reality of maintenance costs for a tiny number of vehicles hits home).
Yet, suppose it did reduce journey times into Edinburgh by 15 minutes. That will allow people to move 15 minutes further into Fife, where property is currently cheaper, and have the same commute. (Obviously the dynamics of who lives closer to the bridge and does what will also change).
The end result is that driving into Edinburgh from Fife will be no more pleasant or convenient than it was before, because if it was, people would relocate there until the "excess pleasantness" is absorbed.
Posted 13 years ago # -
On the toll front - I suspect this is a smart way to segue into full on road pricing. Like controlled parking, where most people are happy until an adjacent CPZ is created, then suddenly they can't park, so another CPZ is needed, ad infinitum.
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
