political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
It was the handing over of an email address that put me off signing. For those that have handed it over, the Roads Minister was on the radio this morning promising to keep all the signees advised on the issue as the 'debate' progresses....
Tony Blair never said "whiter than white". It is a misquotation.
And what a novel idea - we can ignore the petition because its timing was out. You should have waited for the Eddington study to be published.I loved the line "As my response makes clear, this is not about..." More of the "I'll tell you how it is" syndrome. How patronising.
(I hope Iain's regulars saw the very spooky Michael Cockerell programme on Tony Blair last night. Re-living his crucifixion by the WI was a treat)Man in a shed's take on the petition email is entertaining..http://atoryblog.blogspot.com/
Once the Blair tosh has been sent they're allowed to use the email addresses one more time. So expect another bit of spam shortly giving you the date when road pricing will start in your area, and where to go to have the compulsory satellite tracker fitted.
Oh dear, I bounced mine back as a spam email without reading it. If enough people hit the 'spam' button on the web mail page of Yahoo (for example) the IP address that sent the mail will be blocked by the ISPs automatic filters, disrupting any future mailings. That would be a shame...
Ok, so what's your solution to traffic congestion?
There's a solution to possibly spammy websites that want your email address: time-limited email addresses.They work for a while, then they bounce all email. Great for use as a From: and Reply-to: header when talking to politicians...
Am I right in thinking that e-mail addresses would only be used by Number 10 to respond to the specific petition signed?While I have signed up to 'road pricing' and 'ID cards', I have not done so for 'Parliament budget'. Odd then that I got a reply acknowledging my signing and directions to the Number 10 response. My confidence in government IT plummets to new depths.I wonder how many others have also had responses to petitions they didn't sign?
I think the Downing Street letter should refer to "furrowed brow" rather than "furrowed brown." Freudian slip?
I hope Iain's regulars saw the very spooky Michael Cockerell programme on Tony Blair last night.Cleverly timed to clash with Life on Mars. Is it on "watch again" somewhere?
Queueing is inherently democratic, if somewhat wasteful. Pricing people off the road only hits those that need their car the most.The real cause of congestion has been the planning process where businesses and shops have relocated to out-of-town and motorway sites, and not city centres which are usually accessible by public transport. Now a car is essential unless you are in central London.If you've ever been to Phoenix Arizona, you'll see the ultimate expression of this, where you can't even walk to the local shop across the road.PS Do mark it as spam - gmail are pretty good at getting rid of the stuff too if a few people send it to the big internet black hole...
And apologies to Tim Ireland for not crediting him with the Blair pic used on this post from the start. Until he pointed it out to me I wasn;t aware it was his.
Blair actually uses the words - yours sincerely at the end - which is one thing liable to cause real doubt.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a firmer line from the Conservatives on road pricing (mass surveillance) than the Blairite waffle you've quoted?Take a look at the question I have put to David Cameron on the subject over at WebCameron!SELECT PrivacyIan
Hehe! Don't tell Tony, but I used my chief accountant's address and a now deleted second e-mail address.Ooops. Did I say that out loud?
Well, the game's up. I can't compete with that.
the Scottish Parliament can afford to “scrap car tax and cut fuel duty to sweeten the pill of a new road toll. nuff said
Blair's carefree insouciance on this issue is quite astonishing. There are some 45 million people on the Register of Electors and some 35 million who have full car driving licences. Of course the two numbers don't completely coincide, but that's still quite a few car-driving voters, especially when viewed against the small number of votes needed to tip marginals. One might almost think he's demob-happy and setting up a Brown administration for defeat at the polls.
London Tory..the anally retentive types like me decided to watch "Life on Mars" on BBC Four (I am taking money on Annie being the Police Commisioner when Sam gets back to the present) in order to avoid such a clash, having negotiated at the outset of the week with Mrs Weasel over such things as the clash between "Top Gear" and re-runs of "West Wing".The Video Recorder is currently inoperable due to my fiddling about with it some weeks ago and my inability to follow instructions.
For David Boothroyd:That misquotation in full:"We have got to be whiter than white to rebuild trust"Tony Blair, 1997 election victory speech
i got one of those emails.funny how the Galileo satellite system is never mentioned.more info here
Oh, all right. Since you're so huffy about it I'll scrap road pricing and tell Ken to scrap the congestion charge, as from tomorrow morning.
Blair's political capital is zero, his credibility is zero and his trust-worthiness is less than zero. So when he protests that road pricing is not a stealth tax or a form of survaillance then no-body belives him. If Blair stood up and said grass was green - i'd need to look outside to check, bears shit in the woods - i'd need to check with David Attenbrough and the pope is a catholic - i'd need to ask at the local church
"Queueing is inherently democratic, if somewhat wasteful. Pricing people off the road only hits those that need their car the most."This is interesting. It is effectively a socialist arguement.Using the same logic for consumer goods, fuel - and even food - we would still be rationing meat, waiting 3 months for new BT phones and scrounging petrol tokens. Price is the only effective way to match supply and demand in order to make the most efficient use of a resource - including roads.Price, by equating supply & demand rapidly, ensures best use of human resources, stimulates innovation, competition - hence efficiency - and maximises economic growth. Ultimately, everyone benefits.The real question, is why we persist in this "queuing" philosophy with both the NHS, education system and roads?Queuing is inherently wasteful. Its democratic nature is a falsehood as it greatly restricts production, innovation, quality and growth, which is more damaging in the long-term, even to the poorest.Any free-marketer would logically support road pricing. The real issue is civil liberty, the tax burden and a severe lack of supply.If road tax/excise/petrol taxes were reduced substantially, private companies ran franchised pricing networks (in competition) and new roads/railways could be built easily to match demand this would meet no objections from me.
It is a shame that this highly important debate has been allowed to be dominated by the petrolheads. There is a very powerful argument in favour of road pricing as a tool for tackling congestion. That said, the government needs to come out and say it will be revenue neutral when it is introduced or risk those who hate the idea simply claiming it is another stealth tax.It is not the sole answer to congestion - staggard school oping times, flexible working and better/cheaper public transport are all required but the concept has merit and should not be so readily dismissed.
For the benefit of kris, def con one, and all the anonymous NuLab trolls:Road pricing is not the problem, it is the method of road pricing that most of us don't like. Specifically, a road pricing system based on Galileo satellite tracking is the problem. Technologically risky, expensive to set up and run and a massive attack on civil liberties. Get the message yet?As for "revenue neutral", that will have to be "exclusive of operating costs", otherwise the Treasurey will lose billions - and that aint going to happen.
I am surprised that no one has mentioned so far that the road pricing stunt is driven by EU and its plans to fund the Galileo satellite system, which is to make the EU an independent military superpower. For that reason Tony, Gordon or Dave will not be wishing or able to stop it.
Some of the backtracking on road pricing is due to the realisation that anything Whitehall want to do will be "national" (ie England) not UK wide as the devolved assemblies will make their own decisions on road charging in their areas.
david boothroyd - you are of course correct. But since he did say 'purer than pure' it is disingenuous if one does not acknowledge that he did use 'words to that effect'. Although whether his 'promise' to be 'purer than pure' was an 'intention', a 'target' or merely an 'aspiration' is something I shall leave others to judge..
Blair claims traffic delays will cost business £10 - 12 billion unless congestion is reduced by road pricing.However the resultant inflation (stagflation?), substantially reduced sales and profits and consequent unemployment - will cost UK's GDP upwards of £50 bilion to £100 billion, Mr Blair.Almost every item in our shops is delivered by road. Rail deliveries are unreliable and would be hugely more inflationary - even in relation to road deliveries with road charging.SMEs - 97% of businesses, providing 60% of employment - are totally dependent on site visits all over UK for sales, service and deliveries. A large portion of UK's SME sector, already strangled by red tape and continually increasing overheads, will go bust if road pricing is introduced.If it is essential as Blair claims - why are politicians to be exempted from road charging?Get your snout out of the public purse trough, Mr Blair, and come into the real world once in a while.Your road pricing policy is unsustainable - and so are you!
I think it's time we educated people to stay away!
He doesn't understand - don't poke the bear.
Mark Williams: You have proved nothing. Which victory speech? The one in Sedgefield Labour club at 2:30 AM? The one in front of the Royal Festival Hall at 6 AM? The one in Downing Street at 1 PM? The one at Church House a week later in front of the new PLP? Where was it reported? I have searched for this quotation and have never found it.Anon. at 3:20 PM is correct, Blair did say that, on 7 July 1998, in the context of people "trying to make all sorts of claims of influence". Highly relevant given the exoneration of Des Smith, which proves it was true then and is still true.
am I the only one with more than one e-mail address? [I know one address I'll be ignoring for a while]
Truly awesome from b3ta.comhttp://www.b3ta.com/board/6884221
I would echo what "Ian" posted regarding the Conservative position regarding Road-Pricing. I read yesterday on two other forums that Cameron has said he will reverse it, yet I cannot find anything about strong opposition from the Conservatives, let alone any statement from Mr Potato-Head. I daresay his position will be much the same as Blair's (he's copied everything else!)and he will be keeping out of the way right now in the hopes he wont be asked his opinion. Another opportunity missed...when will the new-brooms ever learn?
Post a Comment