|
|
 |
| Henzi.Guderian,
H.K |
Monday,
10-Mar-2003 15:43:53 GMT |
|
| i
think the new policy is reasonable,because only this policy
can solve current problem.Besides, adding tax can solve finanical
problem and reduce the deficit of government so that i agree
with the new policy which add a charge on vehicles entering
the central regoin of London. |
| John,
Letchworth |
Saturday,
01-Mar-2003 19:51:05 GMT |
|
| It
seems the train I get in the morning train is more crowed, before
Ken's Tax came in, before I could get a seat 3 mornings in 5,
now the train arrives with commuters already standing ( from
at least Royston) every day. The money raised will fund intra-London
buses while its the trains from Hertfordshire which are even
more packed. |
| Cheryl
Dover, Luton |
Thursday,
27-Feb-2003 09:05:05 GMT |
|
| I
think it is a good idea as it will encourage people to use public
transport more as having to much cars on the road causes buses
to run late. And hopefully it will cut down a bit on polutition
to our enviroment. But we alsop need to think how much car driverd
depend on their cars to get them to work so that they can make
a living, as buses don't run everywhere. |
| Radical,
Bedford |
Thursday
20
February, 2003 |
|
|
I agree with you completely Phil, despite being very pro-car.
I'd advance Belgium and Holland as examples: cycle lanes on
most routes but entirely separate from the road carriageway.
I'd use my bike if we had those! But don't let's have any more
of those stupid cycle lanes painted on the roads - they reduce
space available to cars and aren't safe enough to encourage
cyclists. Question is, who will be brave enough to take 10 feet
off properties to establish safe cycle lanes? Not our illustrious
leaders I think. By the way, what happened to all those railway
lines which were closed? They'd make perfect cycle lanes. |
| Phil,
Stevenage |
Wednesday
19
February, 2003 |
|
| The
congestion charge is mentioned in relation to environment and
public transport. The cynical response is that it is just revenue
raising. I cycle 13 miles into work each day. There are no suitable
bike tracks. The laughable narrow lanes at the side of the road
are suicide. When is the goverment going to seriously look at
more cyclepaths / lanes for getting to work on. I recently commenced
cycling 13 miles (via country lanes) into work each day and
a few tracks would not go amiss. I'm sure plenty of people would
cycle (and keep their cars off the roads) if suitable and safe
lanes existed. |
| Tony,
Chesham |
Wednesday
19
February, 2003 |
|
| I
travel into London each day by coach. Chiefly bechause the rail
service from Chesham is poor, over-priced and over-crowded.
I have noticed no change in journey time to and from work, because
the congestion charge only covers a small area of central London.
I find it amazing that such well-known bottle necks such as
Kings Cross, Park Lane, Victoria, and Hyde Park Corner are outside
the zone (just). Is it possible that these are routes Ken uses
so he wants to avoid having to pay it himself? What is he going
to do about other problem areas, such as the North Circular
or Swiss Cottage. |
| Darren,
Buntingford |
Wednesday
19
February, 2003 |
|
| Stealth
Tax! I give a lift to two people, I work 200yards inside the
zone, I pay Road Tax, Tax on my Company car, Tax on my fuel,
Tax on all the parts on my car and Now £5 to bring some money
to London. I say charge only the cabbies and give them something
to moan about! |
| radical,
bedford |
Tuesady
18
February, 2003 |
|
| The
trains to London are foul, unreliable and overcrowded and the
Tube is worse. Nevertheless, at least London has some semblance
of a public transport system. Can you imagine what it will be
like if other smaller towns, which really have insignificant
problems with congestion, but similar politically correct, money
grubbing attitudes, follow suite in order to rip off the helpless
motorist once again? If you drive around the country, perhaps
through 3 or 4 towns, you will have an evening's work paying
your bills. One mistake, one sign you didn't see, one jammed
phoneline, £80 please. London is one thing, the rest of the
country musn't be allowed to follow. Ask your councillor if
he is pro-car. If not, vote for someone (anyone) else. Better
still, let's put up our own reactionary, pro-freedom candidates. |
| sami,
london |
Tuesday
18 February, 2003 |
|
| I
appreciate this move...this is an era of software I appreciate
the software and wish for the success of this experiment |
| Veejay,
Harpenden |
Monday
17 February, 2003 |
|
| Brave
move Ken - This will encourage employers to move out of London
and spread the work around. It will improve security in the
square mile, it will catch car tax dodgers, it will track stolen
cars, face recognition will help catch criminals, the money
raised will help improve transport - all excellent - well done. |
| john,
mk |
Monday
17
February, 2003 |
|
| Did
anyone see the excellent Panarama programme on Transport last
night? and what we all can look forward to in the future.It
said it ALL.Politician,s in Government & out, are compulsive
Liar,s .They are in a "make believe world"in which they think
that they have the answers to everything, even when they have
not a clue.Sad that most voters are gullable and are not Aware,
that other European Countries do NOT treat their Citizens as
fools to be Milked dry.Do you think mr(I will solve all transport
problems) prescott, used the Park & Ride on his recent Milton
Keynes Visit? , or did he pay the rip off parking charge for
the Jaguar? After all-it was his parties council, that mislaid
£2-7 Million pounds from MK budget.Roz of Bedford, there is
an answer, Vote with your feet at the next election.How many
motorist.s will take part in a million strong protest march
in London, Birm! ingham, Manchester?, and thats what the politicians
count on.If the Kengestion charge is a success, that will encourage
the Motorway tolls, then the A Road,s.When do the Voters , for
which the car is Life Or death, Wake up ?. |
| Ben,
Milton Keynes |
Monday
17
February, 2003 |
|
| I
think in principle it is a good idea. I think we need some new
thinking to get us to stop using our cars - I am the first to
admit that just for the convenience I use my car to get to the
train station which is only a 10 minute walk. Personally, there
is never a problem for me getting about in London and I think
people should take advatnage of the system that is in place.
Of course there will be a few hiccups when the charge starts
and hopefully these will be ironed out as time goes on - however
I do think that certain workers should be excempt such as emergency
services. Unfortunately we can not have our cake and eat it
- we want faster roads but at the same time everyone wants to
use a car - common sense this is can not happen. If less money
was spent on expanding and building roads - more money could
be spent on improving public transport - particularly if the
government see that it is worth investing in. The reason they
cut back on such spending is because very little use it. Its
a downward spiral however because it is so depleted no one wants
to use it. One thing I would say though - what a surprise that
Mr Duncan-Smith is protesting with the public! It seems he can
never make his own opinion and things we will back him just
because he tells us what we want to hear! |
| Richard,
Central London |
Monday
17 February, 2003 |
|
| Excellent.
Monday 17th Feb 12.10pm. We can now get around London on buses
a lot quicker. These cars that have one person in and are taking
up much space have been reduced significantly. Keep up the good
work. |
| Dave
Coles, Abingdon |
Sunday
16 February, 2003 |
|
| We
all must fight this together, let this be the start of the motorist
making a stand against this goverment unfair fight against the
motorist. When thhe public transport ot this country is working
then is the time for these kind of ideas. Has arrangements been
made to increase public transport tomorrow, I dont think so,
if so I have heard nothing of it, yours disgusted, Dave. p.s.
The new Council taxs are due soon, that will be fun, not! |
| Kris,
London |
Saturday
15 February, 2003 |
|
| Ludicrous.
No dispensation for key workers which means Doctors, Nurses,
Firefighters, Paramedics and Police Officers who work shifts
and can't avoid driving to work will be penalised at the rate
of £5 per day for the "privilege" of working to keep Londoner's
safe and healthy. Some of us regularly finish work at 2am. I
tried "bussing" it home at that time of the morning last time
my car was in for its service. 3 hours later I gave up and got
a taxi. Sure, anyone who works normal (i.e. 9-5) hours will
be able to use Public Transport but what of those who have no
choice but to drive? |
| eric,
London |
Friday
14 February, 2003 |
|
| It
really dosn't matter what people think about the Kengestion
charge. Ken is one of those people that has to have order in
his life and insists that others follow his idea of personal
freedom to the cost to their own. London is a working town always
has been, that is how it has managed to be an important capital.
But then i wouldn't expect someone whose only aspiration in
life seems to be to meddle in others. |
| roz
mercer, Bedford |
Friday
14 February, 2003 |
|
| It
seems to me that there is a conspiracy to hammer the Britsh
driver in any way possible because he is such an easy target.
The worst thing about the congestion charge is that it is a
tax on the poor - yet another one that can be ill afforded.
Come April, Council Tax will rocket, the NI increase will cut
back disposable income and many people are not having pay rises
to meet these increases. Britain is not a happy place to live
when it's so unfair and the tax system penalises the worst off.
Our transport system is expensive and unreliable so workers
have to use their cars and through petrol and Road Tax are already
paying enough Is there nobody left in power who with any integrity
whatsoever who is brave enough to speak up for the less well
off? If I could I would leave the UK tomorrow because it has
become a horrible place in which to live. |
| Matt,
Hertfordshire |
Friday
14 February, 2003 |
|
| It
seems to be a good idea, this may give car manufactures the
chance to introduce smaller/space saving energy efficiant cars
that will cut down on polution. also to combat this they could
improve the public transport and make it cheaper. |
| Stuart,
Bedford |
Friday
14 February, 2003 |
|
| The
get "cars off the road" brigade is missing the point entirely
as to why people use their cars in the first place and the introduction
of congestion charging (CC's), CPZ's as in Bedford and hugely
expensive parking schemes, such as in Milton Keynes, will never
solve the problem. There are a number of principal problems
that need to be solved first, some of which are: - 1. The current
infrastructure is already at breaking point and cannot absorb
any more people using it, Thameslink trains leaving London in
the evening already average 100 to 150 standing passengers per
carriage. 2. The current infrastructure cannot absorb any additional
trains or busses because capacity doesn't allow it, hence the
removal of some services in some areas, e.g. track capacity
is full. 3. Deregulation of the busses means they only run on
financially viable routes. There are no busses from certain
parts of Bedford before 07:30 and after 21:00 so don't start
work early or late! Also there are very few busses connecting
the town directly to the rail station. 4. Increasing housing,
as the government has just done, without changing the infrastructure
first only means that the current infrastructure will creak
even more. 5. Spening £80million on a canal link between Bedford
and Milton Keynes is a total waste of money, when only a few
people will use it, and the money could be spent on improving
the road and rail infrastructure in the area. Making both the
A421 and A422 road dual carriageway and improving the rail link
to allow greater capacity. 6. Out of town shopping has been
encouraged but by and large is not served by busses. Even if
they are could you imagine explaing to a bus driver that you
want to take large items home on the bus when in some areas
taking push chairs for children on board is queried. There are
lots more issues fundamental to infrastructure but the above
will suffice. Needless to say that road fund licences, MOT fees,
insurance tax, fuel duty, CPZ fees, etc. do not seem to be enough.
The question is "how do we raise more tax to fund budget shortfalls,
which is what MK has done with its parking scheme, with no changes
to the overall infrastructure". You may like to know that I
have written to Patrick Hall the MP for Bedford several times
but he doesn't seem to think the questions are worthy of a response.
|
| Tobi,
Marlow |
Friday
14 February, 2003 |
|
| 1.
Computer glitches are bound to create problems of charging people
who never entered the zone at all. Image recognition software,
no matter how sophisticated it is, is notorious for misreading
image data. People who never ventured near the zone may get
a penalty notice. I would definitely be enraged for receiving
a charge without entering the zone. My boss recons the daily
amount of data would run to tens of Gigabytes! I guess there
is always enough storage space. 2. This country always has a
legacy of charging for everything possible. I think this is
just one addition to the many taxes, bills and contributions
we already pay, even as non-motorists ... and there will be
yet more to come. Perhaps until the take-home rate of an average
worker ends up around 20-30%. So then, what's the use working?
It's understandable we have to pay for this, pay for that, but
shouldn't they cap it somewhere? Somewhere? 3. The initial days
may be wrought with chaos of drivers trying to avoid the congestion
zone. Alternative routes would be clogged up, and public transport
would be left to cope with the remains of us trying to get to
work. By the way, what's the point having a car and not being
able to use it? Might as well do with out it! 4. Business and
employment may well move out of London on the long-term, as
the cost is ever rising. For one, when I get my car, I WON'T
think of working in Central London (I might reconsider if the
prospective employer opts to pay the charge for me, though that
would be heavy on them! A whopping £1200 pa! £100 pm! £25 pw!).
|
| Maureen,
Luton |
Thursday,
13 February, 2003 |
|
| I
have a feeling that within a few months their will be a back
down and congestion charges will be put on hold - too much is
going on at the moment! |
| Paul,
Milton Keynes |
Wednesday
12
February, 2003 |
|
| Why
do politicians seem to believe that by introducing charges to
their electorates that a problem is being "better managed"?
In Milton Keynes the council introduced controversial parking
charges to "better manage" a perceived problem. It has not made
a blind bit of difference to parking in MK. Why doesn't Livingstone
admit - 1. It's a revenue earning activity 2. That money raised
will not end up being spent on anything in the least related.....
3. That if nobody paid the charges on the day the system could
not cope with all the admin involved tracking offenders down
|
| David,
Berkhamsted |
Wednesday
12
February, 2003 |
|
| I
feel sorry for all the residents on the outskirts like Queens
Park. Commuters are just going to drop their cars wherever possible
and course even greater congestion in these areas.Ken, if you
had got the transport system in place it may have worked but
who ever heard of a bridge or tunnel toll charge before they
were built? |
| Mick,
Luton |
Wednesday
12
February, 2003 |
|
| Just
watch, next Monday the public transport system will be in melt
down with people trying it to avoid the charge. On Tuesday so
many people will go back in their cars that London will be gridlocked!
If you get the transport system working safely effeciently and
cheaply first then people would consider getting out of their
cars and you would not need a charge |
| Alan,
Dunstable |
Tuesday
11 February, 2003 |
|
| It
would have made sense if the money went into public transport
first, and then was partially recouped through a congestion
charge. This way though, it is stupid, trying to force drivers
onto the dirty and overcrowded tube and bus services before
investing in them. |
| Katy,
St Albans |
Monday
10
February, 2002 |
|
| this
won't stop me driving into london - thats what they want me
to do and i dont do anything that this nanny state wants me
to do! |
| Jean,
Chesham |
Monday
10
February, 2002 |
|
| I
drive in and out of London each day - and now will be trying
the train but admit I don't think it will last long. The public
transport system is not adequate to attract people long-term.
That's where more money should be spent. |
| Justin,
Dunstable |
Monday
10
February, 2002 |
|
| I
think the charge is a disgrace - why should we have to pay it
when we already pay road tax, especially for the people who
live there. |
Ìý
|
