Finally, the road tax to be used to actually build and maintain roads.
So it should be!
Buttering up ready for the VED increases that are on the way, especially if you’ve got a Diesel car.
Thanks Juddian, you’ve just made my day (twice even) 
Sorry mate, just that when they offer to do the right thing…after bloody generations ■■■■■■■ our money up the wall…you just know, if you’re a cynical old sod like me (us) whose been around long enough not to trust these shysters for a second, that there’s always a price to pay and its usually genuine working people who behave honourably that pay it.
Which would obviously wipe out the cyclist argument that VED isn’t anything to do with road funding.In reality,regardless of how they try to dress it up,like road fuel duty,it is just another form of unfairly,selectively applied taxation,to fund the requirements of all. 
I’m impressed, it took five entries before cycling came up, for cyclists it’s never been about funding the roads, it’s an emissions tax, cycles don’t have any, nor do pedestrians or horses & that’s why they don’t pay either. Conveniently forgetting of course the millions of cars on the road that don’t pay any form of taxation either but don’t let that stop you.
BillyHunt:
I’m impressed, it took five entries before cycling came up, for cyclists it’s never been about funding the roads, it’s an emissions tax, cycles don’t have any, nor do pedestrians or horses & that’s why they don’t pay either. Conveniently forgetting of course the millions of cars on the road that don’t pay any form of taxation either but don’t let that stop you.
So this didn’t happen then? 
In the budget of 1909, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George announced that the roads system would be self-financing, and so from 1910 the proceeds of road vehicle excise duties were dedicated to fund the building and maintenance of the road system.
Claiming it’s an emission tax is just sidestepping, and I don’t see pedestrians walking down the road (often) when there is a perfectly good pavement to walk on. Maybe if you want to claim it’s only an emission tax, you should do the same as the pedestrians and use the pavement. However don’t get me wrong, I’ve nothing against cyclists, as I am a cyclist. I just don’t like BS.
BillyHunt:
I’m impressed, it took five entries before cycling came up, for cyclists it’s never been about funding the roads, it’s an emissions tax, cycles don’t have any, nor do pedestrians or horses & that’s why they don’t pay either. Conveniently forgetting of course the millions of cars on the road that don’t pay any form of taxation either but don’t let that stop you.
Its not an emissions ta, its a tax on vehicles that has been going into the general tax coffers and then some is used on the road network. Governments use the tax to try and encourage or discourage certain things, the wanted to encourage diesel over petrol, as I believe it produces less co2, but now they’re concerned about no2, so up goes that tax. Or could be to many diesels, so loss of revenue. They want to encourage other forms of power so they don’t tax them, but if the became so popular that it meant a major loss of revenue I bet they’d get taxed regardless of no emissions the same would happen with cycles if there were so many it effected revenues.
However I personally don’t think cyclists should be taxed and would like to see it encouraged as every cyclist going to work or the shops or school means less cars. I personally think we need to look at certain parts of Europe for ideas on how to integrate cyclists and motorised transport.
Evil8Beezle:
BillyHunt:
I’m impressed, it took five entries before cycling came up, for cyclists it’s never been about funding the roads, it’s an emissions tax, cycles don’t have any, nor do pedestrians or horses & that’s why they don’t pay either. Conveniently forgetting of course the millions of cars on the road that don’t pay any form of taxation either but don’t let that stop you.So this didn’t happen then?
In the budget of 1909, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George announced that the roads system would be self-financing, and so from 1910 the proceeds of road vehicle excise duties were dedicated to fund the building and maintenance of the road system.
Claiming it’s an emission tax is just sidestepping, and I don’t see pedestrians walking down the road (often) when there is a perfectly good pavement to walk on. Maybe if you want to claim it’s only an emission tax, you should do the same as the pedestrians and use the pavement. However don’t get me wrong, I’ve nothing against cyclists, as I am a cyclist. I just don’t like BS.
Then you’ll know it was abolished in 1927 by Churchill who said he didn’t want drivers claiming the roads wwere theirs as they paid for it.
If it’s not an emissions tax the could one of you explain what the E in VED stands for.
It’s not bull to say it’s the one thing that vehicle drivers shout at you the most when on a bike without having a clue as to what it’s all about. It shouldn’t be called road tax at all, it’s a vehicle tax based on emissions, if you don’t like that then it’s tough. As said, there are millions of cars on the roads that are exempt, why not have a pop at them? Unless of course you drive one, you probably want to keep that to yourself though.
BillyHunt:
Evil8Beezle:
BillyHunt:
I’m impressed, it took five entries before cycling came up, for cyclists it’s never been about funding the roads, it’s an emissions tax, cycles don’t have any, nor do pedestrians or horses & that’s why they don’t pay either. Conveniently forgetting of course the millions of cars on the road that don’t pay any form of taxation either but don’t let that stop you.So this didn’t happen then?
In the budget of 1909, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George announced that the roads system would be self-financing, and so from 1910 the proceeds of road vehicle excise duties were dedicated to fund the building and maintenance of the road system.
Claiming it’s an emission tax is just sidestepping, and I don’t see pedestrians walking down the road (often) when there is a perfectly good pavement to walk on. Maybe if you want to claim it’s only an emission tax, you should do the same as the pedestrians and use the pavement. However don’t get me wrong, I’ve nothing against cyclists, as I am a cyclist. I just don’t like BS.
Then you’ll know it was abolished in 1927 by Churchill who said he didn’t want drivers claiming the roads wwere theirs as they paid for it.
If it’s not an emissions tax the could one of you explain what the E in VED stands for.
It’s not bull to say it’s the one thing that vehicle drivers shout at you the most when on a bike without having a clue as to what it’s all about. It shouldn’t be called road tax at all, it’s a vehicle tax based on emissions, if you don’t like that then it’s tough. As said, there are millions of cars on the roads that are exempt, why not have a pop at them? Unless of course you drive one, you probably want to keep that to yourself though.
VED stands for Vehicle excise duty. It has nothing to do with emissions. That is just BS
BillyHunt:
Then you’ll know it was abolished in 1927 by Churchill who said he didn’t want drivers claiming the roads wwere theirs as they paid for it.
If it’s not an emissions tax the could one of you explain what the E in VED stands for.
It’s not bull to say it’s the one thing that vehicle drivers shout at you the most when on a bike without having a clue as to what it’s all about. It shouldn’t be called road tax at all, it’s a vehicle tax based on emissions, if you don’t like that then it’s tough. As said, there are millions of cars on the roads that are exempt, why not have a pop at them? Unless of course you drive one, you probably want to keep that to yourself though.
Winston Churchill did not abolish it in 1926, he just changed the dynamics of things. The money went to the government, and the government paid for the roads while they siphoned money off for other things. I’ve no objection for that, as if it wasn’t for the Vehicle Excise Duty we wouldn’t have such lovely roads to cycle on! 
“Excise” is a duty or tax for buying/using something, so I don’t understand your point about what it stands for. I use the road in my car and pay about £150 a year for the privilege. No issue to me, as I’m happy to pay that for the car I drive, and if I wasn’t, I could get a different car. I pay that tax whether I use the road or not, so if you want a true emission tax, and be able to call it a REAL emission tax, it should be on the fuel. Again, I have no problem with that.
I don’t shout at cyclists that they should pay road tax, I shout at them for being bell ends and doing stupid things. But they are not alone, as there are plenty of bell ends in vehicle. Just like the pratt that decided to use the hard shoulder to undertake me this morning, rather than waiting in a queue for 10 seconds.
So in summary, I don’t hate cyclists at all! My mate owns a bike shop, which I help him with from time to time. But what I do hate, is this stupid argument between cyclists and motorists about who has the right to use the roads, when the real discussion should be about BOTH sides working together to reduce road deaths.
From 2020 they said,getting in their carrots on sticks well before the next general election…
If you believe that revenue raised from tax on vehicles is to be used on roads you will also believe that tax on beer will be used on making your beer drinking experience better. Wake up Tory voters …turkeys…christmas.
BillyHunt:
I’m impressed, it took five entries before cycling came up, for cyclists it’s never been about funding the roads, it’s an emissions tax, cycles don’t have any, nor do pedestrians or horses & that’s why they don’t pay either. Conveniently forgetting of course the millions of cars on the road that don’t pay any form of taxation either but don’t let that stop you.
I think you missed the bit about it like road fuel duty being all about ‘selectively’ ‘disproportionately’ taxing a ‘certain part’ of the population to pay for the services of all.Bearing in mind the fact that VED just goes into the general tax tax pot.On that note cyclists are just an ‘example’ of those exempt from paying for the services they use.In which case those who do pay have every right to complain about ‘all’ of those who don’t.Which would obviously include electric car users or in fact anyone who uses the services paid for by others but which they aren’t contributing to themselves.
In view of which even the publicity stunt of going back to ring fencing VED for road funding only reduces ‘the amount’ of freeloaders taking advantage of services paid for by others.
Juddian:
Buttering up ready for the VED increases that are on the way, especially if you’ve got a Diesel car.
Osborne said current rates will be frozen and the new rates which will replace them in 2017 will be just 3 bands with the middle band that 95% of cars will be in being lower than it currently is. My VED will drop £25 a year for my Mondeo.
Of course you’re assuming the money ring fenced from VED is more than what is currently spent from general taxation, it could just be a way of reducing spending on the roads
Here you go, a little clarity on what, at first glance, had the anti cycling brigade breaking out the champers. Not so I’m afraid.
bettertransport.org.uk/blog/ … i-motorist
BillyHunt:
Here you go, a little clarity on what, at first glance, had the anti cycling brigade breaking out the champers. Not so I’m afraid.
bettertransport.org.uk/blog/ … i-motorist
How much credibility the CBT has is debatable, but from reading one of their people’s ill-informed babbling about longer trucks and the alleged perils they would cause, I’d say it would be around about zero.
http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/blog/better-transport/latest-european-mega-trucks-alert
All of her points about them causing more crashes, congestion, pollution and road damage are easily dismissed, regardless or not of whether she thinks she is ‘well placed to react’ to the issue.
Will Shiers, please note.