» Monday, February 19, 2007

Petitions

Asked how the Prime Minister would respond to the road pricing petition, the PMOS said that what the Prime Minister had indicated was that he fully welcomed this debate, as it was a debate that the UK needed to have about congestion. People had strong opinions regardless of whether there was an e-petition process or not, therefore, what was important was that we addressed those opinions as we attempted to come up with a solution. The PMOS said that if we did not do anything, then congestion would increase, and people had even stronger opinions about that. The Prime Minister would reply to the e-petitioners with an answer on the internet.

Asked if the prime Minister would respond to any other petitions, the PMOS replied that a response did go out to the e-petitioners, and in this case, it was the Prime Minister who was replying directly via the internet. The Prime Minister had made no secret of the view that this was an issue that had to be seriously debated, but that meant not just taking account of people’s strong feelings, rather, it meant coming up with solutions. If people objected to certain solutions, then they had to come up with alternative solutions which were credible.

Briefing took place at 9:00 | Search for related news

7 Comments »

  1. This was supposed to be a replacement tax for petrol tax and the yearly car tax. Now it appears to be an additional tax. This is another stealth tax aimed at the poor.

    Comment by Robert Douglass — 19 Feb 2007 on 4:37 pm | Link
  2. Petition about Road Taxing

    I work for the MOD. I love my job but may have to resign if the tax comes into operation. I live in Basingstoke but work in Bath, doing about 170 miles daily to & from work. How can I afford to pay the planned tax? I can’t even afford to relocate. I think I am better on state benefit. I have always being a labour supporter, but this will the last straw to drive me away from your party.

    Comment by Gina Agboh — 19 Feb 2007 on 6:42 pm | Link
  3. I don’t believe this is the way forward.public transport is not geared for currant lifestyle. and never will be if company’s want to make a killing in profits off the workers. modern life means we live where we can afford and travel to work .some people travel a long way to work to do a job they enjoy or need to do.if this is brought in than car tax and fuel duty should be cancelled out.car tax was design to pay for this not add another tax on more taxes yet again !!!.workers are the ones hammered .if the govenment wants to make the money up then charge companies that make big profits a profit tax .
    As companies will sacriface workers to make these profits larger.creating a greater burden on the state.
    modern lifestyle requires goods transported up and down the country it cheaper than rail and faster most times .there would have to be a big u-turn to change the industry way of thinking.but that’s another issue.
    I look forward to your reply.

    Comment by robert — 19 Feb 2007 on 8:39 pm | Link
  4. I live in a small village in the Suffolk countryside with no public transport therefore I need to use my car.I was under the false impression that road fund as it stands was for the use of upkeep of public roads and transport as very little money has been spent in this direction compared to tax raised I cannot belive that any further tax will be used to improve public transport. The fairest way to charge for road use is to scrap all road fund,any road pricing and instead put it on fuel in that way it covers any green issues as well as bringing in revenue from those that use the most fuel as they would pay the most. Perhaps this is to simplistic but then I am a simple person living a simple life.

    Comment by Michael Tyrrell — 20 Feb 2007 on 2:06 pm | Link
  5. I live in a small village in the Suffolk countryside with no public transport therefore I need to use my car.I was under the false impression that road fund as it stands was for the use of upkeep of public roads and transport as very little money has been spent in this direction compared to tax raised I cannot belive that any further tax will be used to improve public transport. The fairest way to charge for road use is to scrap all road fund,any road pricing and instead put it on fuel in that way it covers any green issues as well as bringing in revenue from those that use the most fuel as they would pay the most. Perhaps this is to simplistic but then I am a simple person living a simple life.

    Comment by Michael Tyrrell — 20 Feb 2007 on 2:07 pm | Link
  6. This latest tax on the motorist is no more than another stealth tax to plug the enormous hole in this country’s finances. It comes from the most arrogant,conceited and self-centred prime minister that this country has ever seen. He is even ignoring those around him in his cabinet and the public at large and one wonders how much longer he can get away with his autocratic dictatorship.When we have a well organised integrated public transport system which is reliable, clean, and at a price which everyone can afford, THEN perhaps it might be acceptable to consider some sort of road useage tax and only then if it takes the place of road and fuel tax. This will never happen of course as Mr. Brown will go even deeper into the red!!

    Comment by Peter Coxell — 20 Feb 2007 on 3:32 pm | Link
  7. This latest tax on the motorist is no more than another stealth tax to plug the enormous hole in this country’s finances. It comes from the most arrogant,conceited and self-centred prime minister that this country has ever seen. He is even ignoring those around him in his cabinet and the public at large and one wonders how much longer he can get away with his autocratic dictatorship.When we have a well organised integrated public transport system which is reliable, clean, and at a price which everyone can afford, THEN perhaps it might be acceptable to consider some sort of road useage tax and only then if it takes the place of road and fuel tax. This will never happen of course as Mr. Brown will go even deeper into the red!!

    Comment by Peter Coxell — 20 Feb 2007 on 3:33 pm | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Downing Street Says...

The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...

Search


February 2007
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Jan   Mar »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728  

Supported by

mySociety.org

Disruptive Proactivity

Recent Briefings


Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries

Contact Sam Smith.

This site is powered by WordPress. Theme by Jag Singh