Your comments on the latest programme... Sunday 19 November 2006

Ludicrous charging scheme when we're already the most charged motorists in Europe. It will have the effect of pushing a percentage of motorists off the 'safer' dual-carriageways and motorways onto B roads and worse. It will not stop the amount of journeys people need to make - it will just make them more unsafe in general.
Mr Alun Simpson, UK

To get from Huntingdon to Cambridge on a weekday at peak time, I have 5 alternatives. 1) Car. It's warm, dry and almost 100% reliable. It takes 45 mins on average, door to door. Fuel cost, �6. There are other costs of running a car, but I pay most of them even if the car's unused. A congestion charge looms, but it'll have to be huge to ease me out of my car. 2) Train. Cold platform, overcrowded train. Change at Stevenage. 88% reliable. Train journey time 1h 38min. Walk to station is 45 mins from my house. Total travel time 2h 23min Cost �19 return. 3) Bus. Cold bus station, crowded bus at peak times. No relaibility figures available. Bus journey time 1h 20mins. Walk to nearest bus stop 40 mins. Total journey time 2h. Cost �5.70 return. 4) Cycle. Road between Cambridge and Huntingdon unbelieveably dangerous. 294 casualties in 2004, I won't be one of them, so I won't cycle it! It's free and would only take about 1h 30min. door to door. You get very wet when it rains, cold too! 5) Walk. Would take 4 hours, and you get cold & wet. The police have been known to advise walkers along the road from Cambridge to Huntingdon to find another route 'for their own safety!' as the A14 is so dangerous. So, there are my options. Not only is the car the cheapest and fastest, it is most comfortable! The government also taxes the motorist to the tune of �40 billion per annum. A congestion charge is only more taxes, it won't solve the problem of congestion. I think the motorist pays enough in tax. What is needed is a convenient, cohesive, fast and inexpensive public transport system. It needs to MUCH cheaper than fueling your car, because it will never be as fast or as convenient as a car. We need incentives to leave the car at home, not penalties for using the car. If the government co-ordinated public transport and subsidised it, more people would use it.
Martin Goode, UK-Cambridgeshire

I think it's a joke. To get to work by public transport I have to get 2 busses which don't connect properly and walk around 2 miles in total. The whole journey takes almost 2 hours. By car I go door to door in 15-20 minutes. If I could get around using public transport instead of my car I would, and indeed did when I lived in Greater London, but here in Milton Keynes the bus service is so diabolical and the cycle paths unsafe it leaves little choice.
Jill Stanley, UK

I live in Peterborough and work in Thrapston 20 miles away. I have to be at work for 7am. There is no bus at that time of the morning and no trains running. Half way to Thrapston is the Oundle bypass this is a lovely bit of road. Its level with a slight curve at one end got good visibility and can be driven along rather briskly. Actually its part of the old trackbed of the Northampton to Peterborough Railway. Its high time the Government came up with some alternatives to the car rather than using the motorist as a revenue raising machine.
David Pond, U K

This government seems to think that drivers are 'fair game' to tax and tax again. This is about raising revenue not about 'green issues'. How is it going to benefit anyone if people cannot get to work, either through time or cost contraints if they have to pay yet another charge. The 'anti-car' lobby in Cambridge is run by people who live in Cambridge with narrow viewpoints and a lack of understanding of everyday commuting. The parking is appalling, public transport is sporadic and now they want to charge us to come to work!! It won't help congestion it will just mean even less people willing to work here and tourists staying away.
Pauline Taylor, England

Great idea, BUT not without upfront and very major improvements in public transport. Without those this will indeed be another blunt instrument for battering working people who happen to need their car for work because the public transport infrastructure in this country is so dire.
Jos Costello, UK

So drivers will move onto small rural roads to save money and will clog these up, causing yet more accidents in the process. I thought dual carriageways and motorways were there to reduce the numbers of cars on smaller roads... Yes, it is just another way of taxing the motorist, when for many of us, there is no alternative to the car.
mat, England

I'm really furious about the council bringing in congestion charges and other stupid ideas in cutting down traffic in Cambridge. If you put all the heads of councils together, you still wouldn't get one brain cell. I work on shifts for the university and know many other people who work on shifts as well and find public transport into Cambridge ridicules and unreliable. I know people waiting for buses and because the buses are running late, drive pass and point to say another one is coming behind only to find the other bus is still 5-10 minutes away. So how can you rely on buses? I start work at 7am and finish at 11pm and sometimes there isn't a bus. I know university staff that start at 6am and finish at 2.30am, but no buses run. So they like myself have to rely on our own cars, which we don't want to. I would love to give up one of my cars to come into work by bus. So tell the Cambridge council to get their heads out off the clouds and live the real world and sort out the t! ransport situation first and don't punish the drivers. Another thing, most council staff work 9am to 4pm. I bet you get a lot of council staff come in by cars. But they don't get charged, as most council buildings are out off the congestion charge zones (Why not do a census on council staff coming in by cars) I can't see Cambridge MP's come into work by bus.
shaun lucas, cambridge,uk

Yet another means of taxing the hard-working British populace. This is outrageous and is takling the issues at hand from the wrong direction.
Sean, UK

Lets see 4 x 4 driving a hundred miles a day into london thats �125 for kenny boy and �650 (1.30) per mile thats been suggested to the greedy councils (yeah that really works) if that does'nt bring the government and the councils down then i'm a dutch man
Eddie ORiordan, Essex

I already avoid Cambridge as much as possible as it is - even the current restrictions can greatly increase the journey time by car by forcing motorists to use a few, heavily congested routes. Given the abysmal public transport (one or two buses a day if they bother to turn up) and the lethal cyclepaths outside of Cambridge itself, there is no real alternative to the car most of the time.
Dave, UK

Will the charge be a standard national rate or will the Government allow subsidies for areas with poor public transport due to rural communties, where driving along heavily congested roads is a day to day requirement purely because there is no effective alternative. In areas such as Cambridgeshire it can take over an hour to complete a journey using public transport that could be achieved in 30-40 minutes in a car. Therefore motorists will be forced into paying extra money to complete an essential or social journey purely because the alternative method of public transportation is simply unworkable, poorly organised, grossly inconvenient and time wasting.
Martin Godfrey, UK

I listened with interest to your article on public transport in the East. As a resident of Histon, and a daily commuter using the bus service I feel the need to comment. 1. The rep. from the TGWU is really not on the case if he thinks regulation is the solution. Regulation wont make the traffic any lighter in Cambridge at rush hour. 2. I have commuted into Cambridge from the outskirts daily for the last 11 years. For the past 7 years I have used the bus service. I dont know which bus service the Cambridge Councillor was referring to, but he made outrageous claims as to its efficacy. My experience with the service is that it is very unreliable. Until recently I lived in Cherry Hinton. A bus journey from there at rush hour took typically 40 minutes at rush hour for a journey of 4 miles. From Histon it is worse. A journey that is scheduled to take 33 minutes takes from 50 minutes to 1 hr 20 minutes. In Cherry Hinton, the cause is the school run; during the summer holiday one finds that the service is reliable; the main cause of delay is a simple bottle neck along Cherry Hinton High Street caused by inappropriate road priorities giving priority to drivers who are returning from dropping their kids off at the local school, and rat-runners trying to circumvent Cherry Hinton High Street. I imagine that school runs also contribute to delays to the buses coming in through Histon too. I find it frustrating as a bus user, as these issues are fairly self evident to me, a daily observer of the route. I see no reason why it's not self evident to 'the-powers-that-be'. Instead, the council just seems to live in an ivory tower with the mis-conception that the service is reliable. I hope that some of the people who are receiving the �345,000 to 'think about' improvements may actually try riding on the buses at rush hour, and perhaps talk to the drivers & regular commuters. 3. The Park & Ride Service I've never understoond the pricing policy on the Cambridge Park & Ride. It seems odd to charge for travel and make parking free. I've always felt that they should charge to park and make the bus service free (or cheap, say 50p return). Currently, for 2 people to drive to the park & ride in a single car and take the park & ride is expensive (�4) as compared to their parking in the centre, especially if the 2 people are only heading into Cambridge for a shorter period of time. By charging for Parking, one encourages car sharing. It also makes 'cycle & ride' an option for people living out in the villages around Cambridge.
Jason Cole, UK

I already "pay as I drive" - it's called fuel duty.
Derek Law, uk

I'm suprised, that you've neither mentioned the need to reduce the 'need to travel', or, especially considering much of your piece came from Cambridge, the value of 'cycling' to reducing congestion. Reliability, and a simple fare systems is vital. Currently many Staecoach buses in Cambridge are being fitted with GPS, but management seems incapable of using the data to make buses more reliable. I cycle, and often am passed by 3 buses 'in convoy' on the same route. Presumably this means people are waiting 30 mins for '10 minute service! Why not look at the 'benfits' that Cambridge and the environs gain by having the highest levels of cycling in the UK. Cambridge has the 'healthiest' population in the UK, so consider the 'benefits' in savings in NHS budget. In addition ask the planners what the extra costs in congestion would be if, say, half of all cyclists started using cars (that would bring cycling use down to the levels of 'Oxford' Jim Chisholm
jim chisholm (for Cambridge Cycling Campaign), UK ...(Cambridge)

Not another tax! We already have a 'pay as you drive' tax, it's called petrol prices. Why not just put the extra on that? Why make life even more complicated and reliant on technology?
Janet Wilkin, UK

If just the revenues from road fund license were spent on the roads we would all be driving on Autobahns. Despite this the government continues to exploit the motorist charging for inferior infrastructure and providing little. Want to reduce carbon emissions? How about more roads thus reducing congestion and traffic jams where engines operate at an efficiency of zero? Then you get egotistic people like Livingstone given way too much power to tax the motorist. Increased taxation on heavy fuel use? As if paying VAT on petrol already taxed at 60% is not already a nail in the coffin of the motorist? Will it ever occur to the government that people may have to use their vehicles to get to work etc? The net result of this will be a reduction in the economy of the UK. I think this one is going to end up like the poll tax. If enough people get ticked off they will go to war with the government.
Barry Clark, Bury St Edmunds, UK

Completely against road pricing. As a pensioner who still enjoys driving I see this as an unfair imposition on older people
Selwyn Green, UK

All this is is another back door TAX to hit the working person. Norwich is surrounded by a rural area with not the best travel links in the are and now the local council has stopped doing return fares on the buses which just make is a more expenses option. Norwich isn't like london where you have an underground system and regular buses!!!!! Were will these cost stop!
Gavin Hall, Suffolk, England

I think everyone realises that something has to be done about congestion but do we have to make it a money making solution. Why do we always descriminate against the less well off in society. Surely road users pay enough tax on petrol and road tax without being asked to pay to drive on the roads that they paid for in the first place. It seems that government has run out of new ideas and that taxing people for anything applies to everything. When in doubt tax it seems to be the slogan.
fred says, UK

Once again it seems the motorist as a captive audience is being targeted for a treasury top up. Will this mean a reduction in tax on road fuel? Is this another way of scaring the general public into paying for a situation that nobody can agree on and is being blown out of all proportion for the purposes of generating income for councils who have been known to squander their tax payers money on ridiculous schemes and costly consultations?
John Matless, UK

the problem with this is those with plenty can go were they want those that have to get somware can not always aford it public transport is a joke out of peak times and there has not been a politican yet that would not use it to raise more tax
brian baker, essex

I am in full support of schemes aimed at reduction of traffic and/ or reduction of pollution. I think appropriate tarrifing will work to curb both problems. My only concern is that the schemes adopted should restructure rather than increase the total tax burden.
David Thwaite, England

Before one can even think about introducing more charges, there has to be an alternative for the mass population to use. Public transport systems, countrywide, at the moment are a joke. You will get a situation where people just become annoyed. Also, if you push towards more and more "greener cars" what happens when people use these in city centres, and you get the congestion of old back again?
Genius, uk

You're not going to solve Cambridge's traffic problems by taxing cars. You'd need to tax the bikes.
Alex, Cambridge, England

As usual, our Govt short-sightedly pursue a punitive approach to managing traffic congestion. I simply cannot get to work by public transport, & am already taxed disproportionately for being a car owner. How about a cohesive cross-transport approach, linking bus & train time-tables, cycle routes, green tax breaks, etc?
Stuart Connolly, England

If Cambridge charges for not using the out of town park and ride schemes we and I expect a lot of other people will simply shop somewhere else. Who wants to carry bulky shopping onto a bus. I bet the Grand Arcade hasn't factored that into their financial forcasts. It will be a white elephant. Cambridge will then become a typical doughnut city with all the shops in out of town retail parks which will provide free parking on site.
Peter Turner, England

in norwich the council deliberately engineers traffic congestion. some of the lights change on a 4 second cycle. what are people in the surrounding villages supposed to do? i'm sick of having my quality of life destroyed by these people. i've paid twice over to use the roads-fuel tax, car tax, road tax, andnow yet another tax by local political zealots.
h.johnson,

I'm disgusted that Norwich has been picked as a potential road-pricing pilot, given that Norwich and Norfolk has one of the worst public transport services in the country. This could be the final straw that prices us out of our home county for good.
Chris E, UK

I live in a village four miles away from the nearest town or village. There is a bus service to Ely and back on Thursday mornings, Saturday mornings and Sunday afternoon. Otherwise the village is completely isolated from the rest of the world. What is the government and/or local council going to to to provide a sensible public transport system to and from our village before it imposes what is in effect a tax that we will be unable to avoid paying?
Pamela Joyce, UK

I live in Cambridgeshire and public transport is a disgrace, almost non-existent. In our village we have one bus on a Thursday and one bus on a Saturday. So we have no choice but to continue to use our cars as normal and pay whatever tolls are imposed. What a pathetic policy this is.
Stephen Joyce, Cambridgeshire, UK

if the government can afford all these surveys and are hell bent on clearing the roads for who,why not get more on to trains one train can get thirty lorries of the road also why build out of town shopping centers no buses go to these places and what is going to happen with recycling centers it will be more cost effective for the public to fly tip
d a thorpe, uk

I feel that until countries like India And China (who are the biggest contributors to Global Pollution) start to take measures then the comparatively tiny and very expensive changes we make in the UK are totally POINTLESS. We are suffering financially now and our children will suffer financially and in many other ways in the future. Once again the hard working man is penalised again. As far as I am concerned it is another stealth tax until the major offenders start to put their house in order. It is all very noble to say we have to start somewhere but with Businesses folding daily due to legislation and people having to pay even more to drive their already grossly overtaxed cars and the knock on effect to the rising prices of everything, do the Politicians REALLY think that the Ozone layer over the UK will remain intact and be fine because the Good Old Brits have done their bit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
brian silvester, england

GIVE US GOOD PUBLIC TRANSPORT.Short sighted politicians!!Beeching started to axe trains decades ago. Thatcher also had a good go at demolishing public transport and the Labour party have also lined the pockets of business men who had no intention of providing any sort of safe, reliable or cheap public transport.
claire, UK

Trying to tax away our freedom.
shane dunn, UK

If you are going to do this, make sure you penalise the supermarkets and other businesses for bringing in goods from outside the UK not just for the miles they clock up inside the UK.
B Barker, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk

Pay as you drive on main roads is fine.....as long as Road Fund Licence is abolished! Also, more Park & Ride schemes should be in place to encourage people to leave their cars outside of the Cities. The problem is that people do not want to walk anywhere anymore!
Keith Pitcher, UK

Does this mean the end of petrol tax? Surely we can't be charged twice for the same thing? As petrol duty was introduced by the Government to stop us driving and has obviously failed, an honest Government would withdraw it. They managed without the funds previously.
colin whyles, UK

Making driving expensive is not the answer to getting people out of their cars; making public transport more convenient and comfortable is. Right now public transport is vastly more inconvenient and unwelcoming compared to driving, and is usually slower to boot. I'd rather be stuck in traffic in my warm and comfortable car than stuck in traffic on a cold bus with hard, dirty seats.
Jay Schlackman, UK

It is another system that takes money from the pockets of the public. With the introduction of the toll charges would there be a decrease in the tax taken from the pumps or would there be a reduction in the road fund or would it simply be another income for the government. Would this charge go anywhere that would actually help anyone or would it go to the giant pot in the sky, where MP's swan around sith self importance in their large cars without having to pay as fully as others. MP's may run this country, they certainly don't consult widely enough, but they are just humans, they breath the same air as I do, they ride the same trains as I do and drive on the same roads as I do. I am a police officer and I get no money off perks for doing my job, why the devil should the MP's.
Hal, England

Just another tax on drivers! Living in East Anglia I almost exclusively drive on rural roads, so any pay as you drive scheme might actually reduce my costs. However, it would put me off going to places like Norwich & Cambridge completely (some might regard that as a success!). I don't like the idea of the government knowing where I am driving either with the little black box in the boot.
Michael, United Kingdom!

Yet another tax on the motorist, If ministers are that against CO2 emmissions, Maybe they should start with the amount that emits from their mouths. It's not as if any money they make from us even goes into helping the climate.
David Griffin, England

If anyone has ever been to Norfolk then they will notice that the public transport is very poor and unreliable. If the road pricing scheme is to ensure more car users turn to passenger vehicles then the Council should start there first! Also I find it quite disgusting to see that Norfolk taxpayers have to fund Norwich. I travel to Norwich from King's Lynn probably once every other month and can't see why I should fund the scheme.
Alistair Quinn, United Kingdom

Disclaimer: The BBC may edit your comments and cannot guarantee that all emails will be published.