±«Óãtv

All been in the pipe for along time,
road charging, people monitoring etc.
Good old European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. EUSSR to you and me!

The most secure method of Travel is by car.
Buses and trains get blown up in Bliars Britain = some legacy.

We don't all have mugs to pay for our families safety Tony - unlike you and yours!

And by the way - where is 2 Jags 'Integrated Transport Plan', he's been working on it for nearly 10 years hasn't he?

Dear Newsnight

You may include the bombings in India today

India and Pakistan must not get drawn into the conflict in the Middle East and Afgahnistan with islamic extremists. They would like to see them entering this quagmire, which would be followed by the destablisation of the Pakistan Government followed by its involvement.

We also need to ensure that the West does not trigger this by accident. I fear there is a chance that George Bush may have asked India for troops to use in a possible attack on Iran, when he visited, perhaps that is one reason he offered huge amounts of aid?

India stayed out of Iraq on the grounds that there was no UN mandate, and it was of concern when the West changed tact on this and started looking for one against Iran. Then Bush visits India-

No fresh troops means no attack on Iran. India, please do not be bullied or manipulated into getting involved and do not let events, however horrible, cloud your judgement on what is best for the whole region and for your country

Best wishes
Bob Goodall

i would like to point out that we already pay transport tax in the form of
Road tax and exorbitant tax on fuel.
This is a greedy untusted goverment who even if they did lower road tax and fuel charges would start to raise them again every budget along with there lovely new transport tax.
They have never cared what the public think or we would never have gone to war and if they kept there word there would be no university charges and a better national health service,a CSA that acually payed out the money that was owed and the list is just endless.
they could not organise the proverbial P*** up in a brewery and even then they would charge a huge entrance fee

So simple .... Just add the tax on fuel...simple to administer, not costly & fair. But this government would prefer the Big Brother approach to have each & everyone on their data Base!

The EU has reversed the smoking ban within the EU parliament buildings. This means that there will be separate aircondioned rooms for smokers. One law for the lawmakers, another for the rest. Road pricing proposals are rightly oppposed because they are perceived as behaviour altering non hypotheticated taxes, designed mostly to raise revenue. Politicans are perceived as being two faced on this issue. Had a fixed percentage of road and fuel taxes been pumped into expanding the road network and improving it, rather than deliberately neglecting it, motorists might have been prepared to listen to proposals to improve the environment and a longer term improvement plan involving road pricing. Its a case of trust. Whatever they promise, motorists will probably not be willing to pay for it in advance.

As usual the government claiming to be in favour of reducing emissions but the duty rates on LPG and Bio diesel are going up!

They just mentioned about Climate change and how they are trying to help reduce emmisions, YET they are penalising people trying to create bio-fuel in the form a of license which costs upwards of £30,000 and the motorist is being charged more than any other European country for using bio-fuel. Bio-fuel is so much more cleaner and will help reduce emmision yet the government want to penalise! Hypocrites.

So Tony Blair wants to know what to do instead of road pricing. Here's a couple of real, practical suggestions.
1. Legislate such that any child who lives less than two miles from their house may not be driven to school. That will dramatically reduce the morning rush hour congestion.
2. Dramatically invest in rail, level the playing field (equal REAL subsidies for rail as per those given to road transport) and charge for commercial freight by road such that it is cheaper to send it by rail.
Doing these two things will free up roads for those of us who have no choice but to drive to work at fixed times in the morning. I'm sure there are many more measures that could be taken, far short of 'big brother' snooping (sorry, I meant road pricing) that would relieve congestion.

Having watched the 'discussion' it is very obvious that the politicians and notably the female from Transport 2000 have no argument except shouting down and ceaselessly interupting anyone with whom they do not agree. They were manifestly incapable of listening at all. Just as any other dictatorship imposes its will this one continues in its relentless Orwellian path. I wish I were young enough to escape this rapidly disintegrating once great country!

Road Pricing.

TAX.BROWN

The British tax payer is paying more.
We are paying more for petrol/diesel and gas and electricity from a false war created by blair. Revenue from petrol received by Brown.

How much money raised from road licence has been spent on the roads and infrastructure?

Build roads and improve green fuel.
When will Mr Blair and Brown gain touch with reality. Parallels can be drawn with the tories a previous arrogance and lack of empathy in 1997.

So go on push the congestion charge through after all.It will do the Country a favour, lets just see what happens in the next general election.

Why is it that the only answer the government seem to come up with for green policies is to raise prices?? All this does is make sure the rich can carry on doing as they please and the poor suffer from a greatly reduced quality of life. The most obvious solution is to give everyone in the country a carbon allowance. Those that find alternative methods of transport, energy and heating will be able to sell the remains of their allowance to higher consumers. This will reward low users and promote greener policies - the carrot always works better than the stick.....
A bonus of this scheme will enable the reduction of allowances year on year resulting in each member of the population playing their part in reducing their impact on the planet.

I want to make a brief point on a certain issue troubling me. Its all well and good creating a greener Britain by introducing this new transport tax which, will hopefully reduce the number of vehicles on the road, but what happens to those businesses who have no choice but to use their own form of transport? As an Estate Agent i cant just hop on the bus to go to an appointment. Will those individuals who have no alternative get a relief in the tax they pay???

I work 37 hours a week on my days off I work for a Nursing agencey which inovlve traveliing ,I have always voted for labour but the new labour is no longer for the working class . I start work at 0645 my first bus is at 0700 henace I have to use a car. I also do voulntray work which inolves using my car if the rd pricing is itroduce then the oragnaistion may suffer because they will not get the volunteers that are needed. All this goverment as done since they have been in power is put up taxes

TO MUCH TAX! Money Grabbers!!!

Council admits FORCING people into Council Carparks. For no other reason removing on street parking!

I will never be able to afford to live and work! I live in Paignton and the most local town with jobs is over forty miles away. (over 80 miles total) every day!!! There is no way I could afford to pay £1,600 per year on yet another LABOUR TAX!

It will not takle congestion. There is not intention to cut congestion! Look at London and the mayor who asked for more congestion by asking for the London Olympics!

The price of fuel over the last ten years has Trippled. Most of this is TAX!

We are already paying huge tax to travel.

We have to travel. The government are shutting down local towns. Shutting down post offices. Local shops closing. Shops shut down. Hospitals shut down. etc.

live in the country. I have to live in the country. I could not afford to live anywhere else! I have to travel. I have to drive a 4x4 to feed animals etc. Mud tracks across fields etc. I am not a rich town dweller!

The average wage here TWENTY YEARS ago was about £12,000. Today the average wage is about £12,000 here! No change! Yet petrol is about FIVE times the cost it was. Living exprenses greatly increased. Council tax of £1000s per year! High Huge rent!

etc.

I might as well jump off a bridge now! At least I will leave the country and life where your are FREE.

Where your human rights of freedom are not strangled.

I has proved NOT to stop congestion.

Lies by the government. Sneek this TAX in again.

Not listening to the people.

Trafic Warden TAX
Speed camera TAX
Congestion TAX
Parking TAX
Travel TAX.
Petrol TAX.
Road TAX

TAX TAX TAX

The rich get richer. The poor get stamped on and die.

OW

I would not be able to drive at all! Therefore not be able to work. Therefore not be able to eat. Therefore not be able to live!

Having just seen the road pricing 'debate' on Newsnight, I find myself wondering who on Earth could think that this arguing bunch of people could ever do anything to convince others of their side of the argument? Mr Ladyman actually came across very well, answering all questions put to him calmly and assuredly.

For the record, I am anti-road pricing. In answer to the question reportedly put forward by the Prime Minister, I would reply that instead of introducing road pricing, why don't we drop the price of public transport? The knee-jerk reaction here is to go for the wallets of the drivers, but surely you can do that from the other direction, and still leave those who must use their vehicles in a financially viable position. The cynic in me wonders whether this was ever considered. The logistics and funding would be difficult to organise, but not impossible. Repeatedly, governments of all persuasions have shown that if they want something enough, they can make it happen. Why can't we have a bit of common sense and compassion in this case?

And incidentally, with regards to the comment about "the great white elephant" that is the environment - I know carbon-this and emission-that are the buzzwords of the year, but please! The last official figures I saw said that only 3% of the emissions of this country were due to non-commercial road use - not the 21% quoted in the programme. If we are going to put up with this nonsense, then at least target the right groups - big business, comercial haulage, factories etc. and see how they can reduce their so-called 'carbon footprints' before you turn on the poor sods who are just trying to get by in the world...

This government has no shame – even in front of the cameras the minister spins and dissembles. They plan to use the EU Galileo satellite tracking for road pricing, and claim they will not track motorists movements – yet satellite tracking FUNCTIONS by tracking. Any system that records journey start and end points, and then calculates the road costs, involves tracking and recording. It has to. They have already approved a police central tracking process based on automatic numberplate recognition, now operational, which records every car journey it deetects. They are telling complete untruths, and they know we know, Utterly shameless.

They tell us they will deliver a system that costs little to run so has low management costs. The system they are planning is based on the EU Galileo satellite, which they have already committed to, and which they have already put massive amounts of money into. It will be HUGELY costly to set up and run. Again, they are simply not telling the truth.

Finally, it is not just about tax. It is about the country having no trust at all in this government. Blame TB for that – Iraq, tuition fees, ID cards, Peerages, single parents. Now the distortion of genuine climate change issues simply to fuel taxation.

Mr Ladyman and his supporters do not live in the real World. It is not just people in rural areas that have poor public transport; many UK cities are just as bad and in too many cases there is not a public transport alternative. If Mr Ladyman wants to engage with his opponents I suggest he comes to Nottingham and shows me how I can do my job without regularly using my car. If a realistic alternative existed I would use it.

The Government is at war with the motorist. There is no real investment to improve roads or the alternatives. Nottingham celebrates 1 new tram route, but meanwhile direct train services to Coventry, Wolverhampton, Stoke and Manchester Airport have been scrapped. Congestion has got worse, but rather than build alternative modes of transport to tackle it we are told we will just be charged. Numerous speed cameras are hidden on roads which have ridiculously slow speed limits where it is very easy to make a mistake and get caught out. Meanwhile, thousands of speed humps slow traffic down to such a slow speed, they have to accelerate afterwards and this increases CO2 emissions. When I raise my concerns with the Government they are patronising and tell me I am wrong, exactly as Mr Ladyman did today. If they carry on like this they will continue to loose public support – they’ve lost mine.

Charging money to target congestion is adding insult to injury and misses the point. Congestion is by itself a disincentive to travel at peak times, but people still do it because they have no choice. A real solution is to give people such a choice, rather than try to make it too expensive to leave home. The lack of a good enough transport infrastructure to get everyone from A to B is the problem, congestion is just the symptom. Congestion charging and road pricing only helps those who can afford to keep driving, not those who have to give up their job because they can't afford the cost of commuting to work. If congestion is to be regarded as the only problem, then just ban all driving, and all the roads will be quiet! But how many commuters will be helped by this? The real success of any transport scheme will only be proven by demonstrating an increase in the throughput of people, not simply a reduction in cars. By this benchmark the London Congestion Charge is a failure, and so will the road pricing scheme.

So simple .... Just add the tax on fuel...simple to administer, not costly & fair. But this government would prefer the Big Brother approach to have each & everyone on their data Base!

So, is my ±«Óãtv license fee paying for Jeremy Paxman's gold-dust-laced cocktails then? No wonder they wanted to increase it...

Those of us living in rural areas need our cars to get around and there is rarely a hint of congestion unless you count waiting at a 'T' junction. Why should we be penalised when the road system has been allowed to fall in to such state of disrepair; in many areas roads have been deliberately made less efficient by narrowing, humps, one ways, closures. The current proposals for road charging are required by a directive issued by the EU some time ago and it has long been the intention that any systen should include tracking that is compatible with the systems used by the galileo 'spy in the sky'. To describe it as anything other than a system that will keep track of everyone's movements (except criminals, of course) and another stealth tax is the real manipulation of information. It is reprehensible that this government are once again implying that others are manipulating the information to mislead the public. They could run masterclasses in that black art.

The government surely has a problem convincing the public they are serious about tackling any aspect of our transpport problems. In 1997 the government in the form of John Prescott told us he would reduce car travel within 5 years and produce an integrated transport plan. Did he (they)back off from doing anything because the feared the reaction of the electorate?

are the very poloticions who levy this tax going to pay it for themselves or are they going to add it to their exspenses? i feel they should pay themselves to set an example. its not as if they are going to suffer like everyone else who doesnt earn as much as them. i think it is disgusting

Re.Congestion charges.
Over the past year I have attempted to avoid using my car when traveling to and within London.Despite congestion charges it would have been far cheaper and quicker to use my car. My experiences of London transport have been appalling: confusing different methods of ticket collection by different bus companies: pushed in queues: fights on buses:rude driver/conductors who appear more concerned at meeting time schedules than stopping at bus stops; aggressive transport police who manhandled confused Japanese tourists off a bus and verbally abused me when I attempted to intervene:passengers spiting on the floor of overcrowded tube trains. I have now gone back to using my car which I find quicker,cheaper,safer,more comfortable and less stressful. Yet I actually enjoy using public transport in other European countries.

KFN

The minister, like all of his ilk, was happy to talk about 'engaging' and 'debate' and even more happy when the Transport 2000 lady offered him the lifeline of motoring now costing less than it used to do. What they both conveniently chose to forget was the relative equation between how much government revenue (taxes, fines etc.) is versus how much of that goes back to motoring needs. Although I don't claim to be up-to-date, I recall a couple of years ago that the revenue was around £6billions versus £1 billion expenditure.

Where's the debate or even transparency about that? They claim to have been misrepresented but whose fault is that? If the case for road charging had been made properly by them along with the intent to make commensurate reductions (or removal) of current taxation (fuel, Road Fund Licence) there may be greater willingness to be persuaded.

All governments, but especially this one, totally avoid what happens in commercial organisations and really ought to happen for UK plc. That is to charge (via taxes) the true cost of providing specific services so that people can make a proper judgement on whether they are receiving value for money in return. That way National Health provision would be covered by one tax, Social Services would be covered by another, Transport (sub-divided of course) would be yet another and so on.

Oh, for some honesty. The man from the newspaper may not have been quite so eloquent as the minister but he was certainly not hectoring in the 'holier than thou' fashion of Transport 2000's representative, complete with her red herring of climate change. He did make the significant point that the government is completely disconnected from the lives of the majority of people.

Firstly, road pricing is going to hammer an even bigger stake between the rich and poor divide, with the people who most need a car at the most congested times the least able to afford it; leading to an ivory tower highway for the fat cats to get to the bank. People only use roads at crawl hour out of necessity, not for fun!

Secondly, motoring costs are cheaper but oil prices have dropped in the last 6 months or so and car prices are significantly cheaper because of competition and market saturation. As well as this people power forced Brown to abolish the fuel duty escalator-and quite rightly so-, which also made him nervous about future rises in fuel taxes; the motorist finally spoke!

Thirdly, this country has higher motoring taxes, less road infrastructure per square Kilometre, more congestion and, unsurprisingly so, the least return on taxable investment in roads. Some £40 billion and only about £6 billion returned to road AND rail infrastructure-scandal! We can't keep building ourselves out of trouble they say, it appears they haven't even started by all accounts.

And finally, the government can't make its mind up whether the road pricing and congestion charge are to...reduce congestion...or to 'save the planet'? What we really need is a policy that saves all of us from the politicians. Stop your emotive idelogical fantasies and get on with giving us a decent cost effective infrastructure with an integrated transport system, which includes cars by the way. Every other country is more than capable of doing it (for less tax) so why can't we? To charge people to use roads they have paid for many times over is ridiculous.

i think that you should consider into publics view point... and for me i do think the same as one of the person saying that the amount of money we give to the government adn in return we have not receive any goods in return. It is a good idea to reduce congestion but however, there are some better ways of getting round this. If this plan succeed i would consider immigrating to other countries.

On tonight's show four out of the six panelists, including both politicians and the big business representative were all pro-road pricing. From the minister's permanent smirk it was clear that this policy, like nuclear power, is a done deal. Another part of Tony's legacy to the nation perhaps? It was left to a journalist from the Sun and the small business rep to make the alternative case. It's a shame that the presenter wasn't up to chairing this kind of debate. Where is Paxo when you need him? Or would the minister only appear if Paxo was kept out of the ring??

The only relief is that this is a policy which will sell badly in all those northern and midlands constituencies filled with drivers that Labour depend upon for re-election. In much of Britain public transport is just too expensive and inconvenient when it's not on holiday, on strike or run by Virgin. Which is why all who can do so drive and the Sun is picking up the sound of war drums from outside the Westminster Village.

Mr Bliar's Government has encouraged "out of town" commercial development, closed local hospitals and post offices, and at the same time has underfunded public transport and the road network. All this has made the private motor vehicle more essential.
Congestion is surely self regulating - once a road is gridlocked it cannot get more congested - and over time people will find another route, alter working hours, change job or move house!
Legislation has already been passed to allow the police to keep vehicle tracking details for up to five years.

Dismissing views that nearly 2 million people at least partially and publicly agree with as 'nonsense' does politicians no favours. They seem to be missing some points:
- references to taxes already paid on road travel include the tax collected through fuel, where, intrinsically, the more you travel, the more you pay. The government refers only to road tax. The petitioners do not.
- asserting that systems would not track is not credible without further explanation. The policy is to price roads differently, so how can an appropriate charge be levied unless journeys are tracked in some way? Perhaps there is some confusion between tracking, monitoring and recording in the minister's statement. As it is, it seems like 'nonsense.'
- reiterating (at increasing volume) that more and more people use public transport is not evidence that the public transport system is any better. It just proves that it is busier and more congested.

I think many people would prefer to use public transport if it were more reliable, convenient and affordable, and if people felt safer. It's not good enough to penalise the public for the failure of public transport. Provide viable alternatives and see what happens.

The lady (whose name escapes me) from transport 2000 really does need to take her head out of the sand. Instead of shouting down every other speaker, with her inane argument, perhaps listening to another point of view might educate her. The real problem over the Earth's resources is nothing to do with my using the car. The most significant fact with the Earth's increase in temperature is due to the Sun's influence on this planet, and nothing that we can do will influence its activity. The Earth's resources are diminishing due to population demands. Until something that all politicians in all nations do about population control, the problems will only increase. London's additional car tax has now made this a no go area. When my daughter and grandchildren visited us from the U.S.A. and wished to visit London, the rail fair would have been over £100 for a day out. So instead of visiting London Zoo as they requested, we paid a visit to Chessington by car. We just do not go to London anymore, nor will we visit any town or city with a congestion charge, which will not help any retailer suffering high commercial business rates and rents.

I just watched the Blair legacy piece, it was brilliant. Jeremy should be left out more often. He has discovered that some actual manufacturing still takes place in Central London, though it was revealing that the owner of the church bell manufacturer cited Govt bureaucracy and regulations as a greater threat to his business than all of his competitors.

At Morgan Stanley, Jeremy correctly elicited the fact that here is a company that lives both on, and by the margins. They take their fee on buys and sells whether gains or losses are made. Nothing wrong with this. What was terrifying was the growth in derivatives. London has been a global pioneer in financial market development, but if the derivatives market unbundles badly, as predicted it might, the Wall Street Crash of 1929 will seem like a mild recession by comparison. Here is a single topic worthy of a Newsnight special. How many company and state pensions, deposits and other funds are invested in derivatives? A derivative is a gamble. It is not a share, a bond, a unit in a fund or something that has some underlying value. It is a bet on, for example, the future value of a currency, an index like the FTSE100, interest rates or the price of oil.

In the kind of gambling that Betfair facilitates, the gambler takes the risk and the losses are personal. In the equally risky world of derivatives gambling, the gambler takes his salary and bonuses and the losers are the many people who were unaware that the gamble has taken place.

Whether Blair is a bystander, facilitator or promoter of the kind of financial service industries featured is unclear.

Few will doubt his entitement to credit for the mindless jobsworth creating bureaucracy that has disproportionately affected small businesses, employees and citizens generally.

This "forum" made me really angry. Talk about one sided with Government "Hacks" of Liberal and Labour once again showing why the voters distrust them so, trotting out their lies to justify ripping us off-yet again.
Put to a vote I would guess 90% would support the Man from the Sun and the businesswoman from London.
What made it worse was the shrieking woman from Transport 2000 going on about car ownership being cheaper.

Yet another "statistic" in the best interest of Sir Humphry Appleby,- put the right question and you get the answer you want. Cheaper? Not on my budget paying the top car tax, and running costs for a 15,000 miles per year and I have a free transport pass for all of Merseyside which I use.
As car owners know, whatever they use to price us off the road we will pay it and so road charging will NOT make the roads any less congested, but make sure the Government receives yet another "nice little earner".

We let Labour get away with dodging the spying worry by saying that there were many other ways of checking on motorists. In those immortal words of the Today programme "name 3?"
Debate??? Don't make me laugh. The politicians have already made up their minds. Its road pricing, like it or not,-the universal panacea for clearing the roads. The horse and carriage industry will make a killing, or at least the Tories will when they win the next election, conspicuous by their absence in this so called "debate".

The Transport 2000 apparatchik and the minister did not convince; these people are widely regarded as untrustworthy - with good reason, as far as I can see.

They piously trumpet and bray about the cost to the environment of driving, when their real agenda appears to be letting government plunge its hands into our pockets - or worse, improving their longterm 'relationships' with private companies, which they have made extremely profitable through allowing them to penalise (tax, in effect) UK drivers without any reasonable form of accountable representation.

Let me clarify the environmental position for the government spinners like that (apparently stupid) Lush:
making people pay more for essential journeys obviously does not help the environment; reducing the need for those journeys might.

Sustainable solutions, though, need foresight, planning and the ability to deliver - these are qualities in which our political and establishment leaders have proven lacking, though perhaps they believe they hide these deficiencies with their greed, self-serving ambition and bluster.

In ten years time the unnecessary cost of moving hundredweight's of metal (our cars!) will be prohibitive;
though pertinent to planning this appears to often be willfully disregarded - witness the closures of local postoffices, local chemists and other local services.

Any constructive comments, Lord Sainsbury, or do you save them for unminuted private discussions with your pal Tony?

I might be wrong, but I reckon the girl who represented Transport 2000 tonight was on the other week, hounding us to support some other cause. Don't you just love professional lobbyists, who've never had a real job away from the village of Westminster

This Government have done nothing but bring in more laws, to criminalise the legal motorists in this Country. They see this as a 'nice little earner' to gain more tax and revenue. Their biggest lie, is saying "that we have to introduce these measures to cut back on carbon emissions, and traffic congestion it's a Global warming thing!" In reality, we are a small, (yet very overcrowded Nation)
What impact can we seriously have on the World perspective, if larger Countries like China plan to open 500 new coal fuelled power stations, to cope with the increase in their economic expansion?
I despair at this Governments dishonesty and spin!

AS the chap in comment 1 said - The Government say that they will have to convince us that this is the right scheme (in other words - it's going to happen). We are having the debate but road pricing is coming whether we like it or not. The Goverment have already signed up to EU Directive 2004/54 which will ensure that all EU countries have the same road pricing scheme. Done by satellite - which means that our every movement will be tracked.

Mr. Blair

Labour is by far the most TAXing party ever in history!

No only the most TAXing mut they try and slide in al these taxes WITHOUT askign anyone is they want them. I had absolutely no idea that the congestion zone in London would DOUBLE over night. No one told me or allowed me to object.

As always, these soul-less, heart-less, mind-less politions are looking after number one and not listening to the people. Not looking at the real impact on peoples lives. After all they have huge expense accounts. Private chauffers. Paid for parking. Cars given to them. Huge incomes . This may be pocket change to a politician but I can assure them that this is literally life and death amounts they are talking about. Life will be impossible.

I will never be able to go to London ever again. I could not afford it. I will not longer be able to visit friends and family. No longer be able to work there. No longer visit the shops there. Never again go to the cinema. Never be able to go on holiday there.

As a visitor, a holiday maker to Britian, who on earth would come to the UK and travel around this once great country of our and visit all our great holiday resorts when they know they will be slap with huge taxes.

The people of the UK would also rather travel abroad for their holidays then to take their holidays here. At least you have freesdom and democracy abroad.

I need top be able to carry large items in my car. I would not be able to take these daily on a bus! It just is impossible.

Travelling by train is a richmans luxury. For instance I was quoted over £200.00 for a train ticket from Newton Abbot to London return. Where do they make these prices up from. I could fly to America and hire a car for a week for this.

The government have absolutely no intention of reducing congestion, reducing emissions or listening to the people.

Yes the government tranport woman and Mr. Ladyman were skin crawlingly awful. They over talked others, shouting back at them it seemed. Mr Ladyman had the most insincere expression, smug, blinkered. Trying to justify his job and fat paycheck. He did not succeed.

Nature will take care of congestion if and where is exists. If there is congestion, people will abapt naturally to this by changing route, job, home etc. There is absolutely no need for a TAX to stop this. It will not work and have been proved not to work.

The trafic figures in London are almost back at a level they were four years ago. Congestion charging DOES NOT WORK and will never work.

Big brother watching us also will not stop the fundamental need in todays lives to have to travel.

Do the government want to LOCK US ALL UP in our own homes. Congestion Charging is the start to this route. Yes Orwell was right.

Just think of the civil unrest of people confined to their home. Not being able to work. Not being able to feed their family. No being able to go to leisure activities. Not being able to take your family out or on holiday. Being forced even more to stay in and watch TV! Just think have good that will be for the healh or our children. The health of society. The health of the country.

There is so much wrong with congestion charging that I feel that I may be here all year.

Please let the government know how ludicrous there ideas are.

TAX TAX TAX

I thought Labour were meant to be the lowest taxing party, well that is what they told us when they ran.

No stop my sides are splitting. Not from laughter but from a labour hernia.