I Pay Road Tax - Latest Comments

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

carltonreid — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 19:19:14 -0000

And if £4bn were raised by chicken farmers should chicken farmers get all that £4bn back to make better chicken farms?

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

David_J42 — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 17:51:31 -0000

Some finance statistics would be helpful to the argument here.

For example if there's £4billion raised in revenue each year from the various road related taxes and then there's £4 billion which is spent annually on supporting the road network then it would be a fair'ish argument to say that the money raised by road related taxes (ie. from motorists) is used to pay for roads.However, if the money raised by road-use taxation is only a small percentage of what is spent, with the rest coming from general taxation, then he's completely wrong and should be put right.

Anyone know figures for the UK ?

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Bob Toomey1 — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 04:16:30 -0000

To have Mike Penning as Minister for Roads is an insult to all road users.Like many other CTC members I also drive a motor vehicle,perhaps Penning would like us all to get off our bicycles and replace them with our cars.This man is totally out of touch,and should be replaced by someone more appropiate.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Andy — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:37:34 -0000

Just goes to show that the education about road safety is severely lacking if an MP cant see he is insighting hatred toward cyclists by not using the correct information. large bilboards and advertising about where peoples money goes would be a good start in creating a better relationship between cyclists and motorists.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

John — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:39:30 -0000

As the secretary of the Southeast Essex Member Group and the President of the Essex Member Groups I feel that this MP should be stripped of his office as he is a danger to the general public and anyone who uses the roads.

Re: Bicycle licences & numberplates: the pros and cons

Theoneaxe — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:43:14 -0000

took me awhile to get the picture too i think it is a little ott myself.

Re: Bicycle licences & numberplates: the pros and cons

theoneaxe — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:24:01 -0000

last time i read the highway code for cars there was a section including cyclists if this is still so they are already aware that we are allowed to use the road. They just want something to winge at because of the choice they made in their type of transportation.

REF: highway code rule 61-65(inc) and 140

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

spindrift — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:25:11 -0000

When asked what he would do to protect cyclists on trunk roads - a cyclist had been killed on the A19 the day before - Penning stressed that cyclists ought to be more visible and wandered off into an example of his well-lit daughter, cycling while at university in Cambridge, compared to her flat mates who did not dress up like Christmas trees.
http://www.bikebiz.com/news/re...
We don't know whether the cyclist who was tragically killed was unlit.
We do know that fewer than 2% of cycling fatalities have unlit cyclists as a causal factor.
We also know the investigation into the cyclist's death hasn't even begun yet.
So why is the Minister For Roads offering excuses for a motorist involved in a fatal RTC?

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

yenrod — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:00:46 -0000

An amateur in a professionals job! - he needs to be replaced imo.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

yenrod — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:57:08 -0000

I, on occasion, ride a scooter, drive a car, but mostly ride a bike - this mans a joke !

Re: Roads minister says motorists pay for roads

Allterrain — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:11:36 -0000

The whole country is anti cycling. We shouldn't go through red lights, but we have to stick up ourselves. It's just a form of bullying

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

carltonreid — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:43:02 -0000

I dislike template letters and MPs constantly complain about them, too.
Mike Penning's email address is: mike@penning4hemel.com

However, I don't feel he'll budge, unless asked to do so via his superiors.
DfT has a contacts form: https://www.dft.gov.uk/about/c...

Press office: pressoffice@dsa.gsi.gov.uk

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Ric — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:32:34 -0000

who can we complain to? can you develop a "template" type letter that we can download and then send (post/email?) to him. any other suggestions?

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Beth A — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:51:58 -0000

Absolutely. If there is one person that gets this right then it should be him. Excuses are not in any way appropriate.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Dombat — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:49:50 -0000

This 2009 blog shows that motorists are still subsidised. Therefore bikes, peds & horses own the roads! http://kimharding.net/blog/?p=...

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Beth A — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:49:24 -0000

Would also like to add that there is a good reason that motorists pay more in tax which has nothing to do with 'roads' per se; because burning fossil fuels is exceptionally damaging to the environment and to people. It does cost the UK a huge amount in many ways including medical treatment for people suffering from conditions such as asthma and dealing with the effect of fatal and life-changing incidents on the roads. The issue with the type of language that he uses is that it almost gives drivers an excuse to ignore this type of effect because they 'pay their fair share' so have the right to keep doing what they're doing.

I also have a car licence and motorcycle licence but don't own either things. I do hire cars occasionally when I need one, mostly from street-parked cars by the hour.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

carltonreid — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:39:47 -0000

He is the Minister for Roads. He needs to know his brief inside out. He was giving personal, backbench MP-style views when he should have been giving minister-style views. The DfT via the DVLA has a policy and a statement on what pays for roads, he should repeat that, not spout forth personal views that are both inaccurate and insensitive.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Baldcyclist — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:31:05 -0000

I am a cyclist mostly, but I am also a driver.
As much as his comments are factually incorrect. He intimates that through "
Tax. Fuel duty and VED " that the motorists pay more in taxation. By the very fact that a motorist pays Fuel duty, where someone else might not, and therefore (possibly) a higher % of their income goes into general taxation, and therefore a higher proportion may go towards roads, is more likely to be what his argument actually boils down too.

So, as much as I personally wouldn't condone his statements in that form, I do hold some sympathy for the position that ahem 'motorists pay their fair share', that of course is NOT to imply that others (me included as a cyclist) do not pay their fair share.

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

carltonreid — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:09:21 -0000

He needs to be pushed and pushed on this point. He's the Minister for Roads, for gawd's sake!

Re: Government minister sticks to his mistaken claim that motorists pay for roads

Beth A — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:48:02 -0000

You know, it's exactly these type of political answers that just don't help. I found it quite incredulous to hear the minister say "believe it or not you have a friend...". Well if he wasn't supporting *all* road users, he'd be failing at his job. You were quite right to push him on this and your point that motorists use exact argument this against cyclists and pedestrians was very well made indeed. Vehicles have struck me while I am cycling and if I point this out they use that very response. I'd like to make this clear to the minister; drivers do use their vehicles to threaten me, backed up by their misconception that they pay for the roads and I don't.

If anybody *should* use the correct language then it's him. Thank you for posting this.

Re: Bike licensing doesn’t work, just ask Boris

Captainstegs — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:54:48 -0000

Troll.

All your "it is just as much of a crime" lines are nonsense for the simple reason that a car is far more capable of killing and causing massive damage. If a car runs a red light it can kill, if a bike does the same...not likely at all. Obviously whilst both are criminal they are not as much of a crime as each other. Is carryinging a catapult with ball bearings as much of a crime as carrying a gun? Both are capable of killing, both are weapons, but I think it's just a little bit more illegal to carry a gun don't you?

If there were a cycle registration scheme it should be free, but there is no such thing, as eventually it all comes back to the tax payer, and why should cyclists have to pay? They're already saving the government money by reducing road congestion, pollution, road wear and (by being fitter) probably hospital charges. How about all noncyclists have to pay for the cyclists registration seeing as noncyclists cost more to support? As I say registration is nonsense.

Jumping red lights to avoid being squashed is not about being afraid, it's about cycling as safely as possible. I'm sorry if you feel that doing things safely is a bad idea. If a light is on red at a junction I will roll slowly to the otherside of the pedestrian crossing. I ensure I'm highly visible, and I get out of a dangerous junction as quickly as possible whilst motorists benefit from not having to negotiate the junction and overtake me at the same time. It's win, win; why would anybody be against this?

The Highway code states that a car should give as much room when overtaking a bike as it would overtaking a car so it should make hardly any difference whether you're in the middle of the road or 1m from the kerb.
Riding in the command position is safer. I've been cycling by the kerb at the same speed as the traffic and cars half overtake, position themselves next to me and try and run in me into the back of parked cars. The safe position when moving at the speed of the traffic is therefore the command position. Riding down a narrow road with cars parked the whole way along on the other side I again ride in the command position as there is not enough room for vehicles to safely overtake me with the oncoming traffic. This does not prevent them from trying it though and nearly killing me.

Groups of cyclists may also perform a manoeuvre called "corking" where they will on purpose make it impossible for a driver to overtake at dangerous sections by riding a few abreast. This is again a safe way to cycle as drivers will try and overtake when they shouldn't putting cyclists lives at risk.

I've banged on the back of a van once, because he had half overtaken me and then proceeded to encroach on the cycle lane and try and run me over, Next time I'll take your advice and just get run over shall I? Banging made him aware I was there and he gave me the room I needed. He then went and pulled in and tried having a go, because he was a jerk

It does make me angry that somebody cannot see the benefits of cycling confidently and that somebody who claims to enjoy "ridding" their bike (whatever that means) is highlighting the statistically negligible downsides of cycling rather than championing the many benefits.

Re: Bicycle licences & numberplates: the pros and cons

Worzel6 — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:39:09 -0000

WHAT UTTER NONSENCE !!! why should cyclist pay road tax when some cars dont pay ?? afterall cycling is the "greenest" transport there is goverments should be encouraging cycling by making better and more cycle lanes for our safety rather than ripping us off ! what next BREATHING TAX ???..!!!!!

Re: “Lytex boys” shouldn’t ride in “middle of road” paid for by motorists, says aggressive Merc driver

carltonreid — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:16:03 -0000

Completely agree.

Re: “Lytex boys” shouldn’t ride in “middle of road” paid for by motorists, says aggressive Merc driver

Rad — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 09:30:30 -0000

Its a pity that so many motorists and pedestrians feel it a right to chastice cyclists for any perceived 'offence', yet from my perspective as a regular and responsible adult cyclist I regularly see pavements full of parked cars, and have had numerous pedestrians step into the road with out looking.
Im not saying Im any better, we all make mistakes, but a social balance must be found where we can ALL respect each others right to travel on footways and highways with as much safety and regard as is reasonably necessary to complete our daily journeys.

Re: “Lytex boys” shouldn’t ride in “middle of road” paid for by motorists, says aggressive Merc driver

carltonreid — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:25:03 -0000

Parts of it are law, parts of it are advice. YOU MUST and You should being the things to look out for.