'War on Motorist'

[Steph]

I have put this here because it impacts all road users. Consultation closes May 11th, and it is a deeply loaded questionnaire. The subject is on how Teh Eevil Councils are unfairly bilking poor, honest drivers by (cont p94)

A lot of free text boxes, and I have mentioned ASL infringement in one. Unsurprisingly, my submission was along the lines of "More! Bigger fines! Tax on stupidity!" than they are clearly hoping for.

You know your duty...

https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/restricting-the-generation-of-surplus-funds-from-traffic-contraventions

[Socks]

Yet another very biased 'survey', I have responded.  Not with the responses that it is designed to encourage.

[nicknack]

Done.

[rr]

Done, string up the selfish drivers was the gist of my responses.

[Jaded]

The best way to restrict surpluses is for drivers to follow the rules.

[Mr Larrington]

I believe the phrase or saying "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" may have appeared in this Unit's response

[fd3]

^ I said the same!

[Flite]

Done.
Along the lines of why would anyone think that fining drivers for infringements is a bad idea?
Provided the money is ringfenced to improve infrastucture for active travel.
I felt it necessary to explain what I meant by active travel.
And don't just fine them, get bad drivers off the roads, retest them etc....

[fd3]

I asked why there should be a cap on arresting bad drivers; what's next, a cap on how many burglars the police are allowed to arrest?

[Sergeant Pluck]

https://road.cc/content/news/uk-government-review-motorists-caught-out-cycle-lanes-308187

Now, as part of the next step in its plan, the DfT is seeking views on how to “restrict the ability of local authorities to generate surplus funds from penalty charge notices”.

The contraventions include motorists driving through no entry, no left or right turn, or prohibited vehicle signs, or unlawfully entering box junctions, and driving in mandatory cycle lanes.

I think that must be the worst such “survey” I have ever encountered.

[Steph]

I will admit that when I wrote in response with suggestions about towing away and crushing, I avoided saying anything about leaving the drivers in the vehicles.

I DID point out that if the council is making extra money from lawbreakers, it means savings for honest 'strivers' etc.

[Arminius]

That is the worst consultation I've ever seen. I didn't respond in the way they were hoping, I don't reckon.

[CrazyEnglishTriathlete]

I have just been moved into another constituency by the latest boundary changes.  The MP of my new constituency send round a newsletter to all his new consituents which featured an article by a local councillor 'I believe we should be able to drive our cars how we want, when we want, where we want' rant.

I will stop there as I have no polite words....

... but this guidance shows just how badly they have broken government.

[John Stonebridge]

that's a joke of a consultation.  I've responded and went out my way to suggest bigger fines and greater enforcement. 

[Duckfoot1606]

that's a joke of a consultation.  I've responded and went out my way to suggest bigger fines and greater enforcement.

+1. I also repeatedly answered that we need enforcement of existing laws before we start thinking about new laws

A

[toontra]

Hopefully will go the same way as their survey of people who live in LTN areas - i.e. it backfired.  Turns out people like them 

[drossall]

I'm baffled. If the law is wrong, change the law. The idea of law-makers proposing that people should be encouraged to disregard the law risks bringing law-makers into disrepute unemployment. Oh, wait a minute...

(Not a member of any particular party, and vote differently in different elections.)

[Lightning Phil]

Surprised they were able to get away with that “survey”.  Appallingly constructed with only one aim.

[drossall]

I'm a bit shocked too. I thought perhaps that the Civil Service would have a role in making it more even-handed, just in order to make it actually return representative views.

[Jaded]

I'm a bit shocked too. I thought perhaps that the Civil Service would have a role in making it more even-handed, just in order to make it actually return representative views.

Civil Service, you say? Standing in the way of our elected representatives? I think not!

[HTFB]

I think that must be the worst such “survey” I have ever encountered.

You must have missed the truly risible one on bringing back imperial weights and measures.

I'm a bit shocked too. I thought perhaps that the Civil Service would have a role in making it more even-handed, just in order to make it actually return representative views.

Civil Service, you say? Standing in the way of our elected representatives? I think not!

It's not a survey, it's a consultation. The purpose is to gather views, not to find out which is popular. The two different uses of "representative" here imply something of what is going on. And no, the civil service is not there to get in the way of ministers. Quite the opposite.

[drossall]

But isn't a useful consultation aimed at finding out what people think, as opposed to finding people who think like you do? If so, I thought the Civil Service might have the role of helping a consultation to do that?

[Arellcat]

Is there a "war on the motorist"?

https://spice-spotlight.scot/2022/08/26/is-there-a-war-on-the-motorist/

This post explores whether claims of such a “war” are reasonable, looking at:

• trends in car ownership and use over the lifetime of the Scottish Parliament;
• motoring costs;
• roads investment;
• local authority parking charges;
• the development and roll-out of travel demand management measures across Scotland.

The short answer is: no.  There just isn't.

As a side note, these USAnian statistics are amazing: https://www.bts.gov/content/us-vehicle-miles .  In 2019 they collectively drove a distance equivalent to travelling from the Earth to the Moon and back again, every five seconds, for a year.  To put it another way, 3.26 trillion miles is a seventh of the distance from the Earth to the nearest star after the Sun.

[Mr Larrington]

One Tory rentagob promised on live TV to end the “War On The Motorist”, though when asked why they’d been waging war on the motorist for thirteen years they suddenly developed a fascination for squirrels.

[Dickyelsdon]

The initial intention (ignoring the other motives clearly at play) doesnt seem to have been discussed so far? 

Restricting the generation of surplus funds from traffic contraventions.

Personally I dont think its good to allow councils to generate major income/funds from fines. While it seems good at first glance all it will lead to is a cost-benefit approach. So all those cycle lanes blocked by the odd parked car etc. will never get resolved (i know majority dont anyway) as the councils will focus on city centers and such. These issues need to be tackled BECAUSE they are an issue, not becasue they generate revenue directly for the local authority.

The same goes for those wanting the money ringfenced for Active travel. I cant think of anything worse. Little effort would be made to police traffic contraventions if it only raises money for things they dont want (active travel). Not to mention that will undoubtedly mean no central funding for active travel, as 'there is already a method for local authorities to create that budget'. Far better for active travel budgets to come from a central pot (which surplus funds would contribute to anyway).

Of course if you dont trust the government to correctly manage this 'excess' then there is no chance local authorities will either, so there is no way to win.