By Steve Ranger, 6 June 2005 13:05
NEWS The Conservatives have raised concerns over the technology behind the government's plans to cut congestion by charging motorists for every mile they travel.
Under the proposals outlined by Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, drivers would be charged for every mile of their journey. The price would depend on the level of congestion and satellite tracking would be used to enforce the toll.
Prices would start at around 2p per mile on quiet roads outside of rush hours and go up to £1.34 per mile on busy motorways at peak times.
A pilot scheme could be set up within five years and the system could be rolled out within 10. There are currently around 30 million cars on the road in the UK.
But the Conservatives said there are still concerns around the technology behind the system.
Shadow Transport Secretary Alan Duncan said: "There are also key questions about the technology surrounding the scheme. We know that the government is struggling to develop a charging system for lorries. What is the status of this 'spy in the sky' technology?"
Duncan added: "How will the government deal with the civil liberties issue when Big Brother can trace your every move?"
Yet Robin Duke-Woolley, director of analyst house e-principles, said the technology is already being used successfully in Germany.
Since the start of the year, the satellite-based 'Toll Collect' system has been charging trucks using Germany's autobahns 0.12 per kilometer, with 400,000 vehicles now using the system.
"The principles of the technology are being proven on a fairly massive scale. I think this is more a question of the politics - that's why they are thinking 10 years away," he said.
"It has nothing to do with the technology not being here because it is. It is much more a political timescale than a technical one," he added.
Comments
There are 8 comments. Join the discussion
1. Ken Munn
Let's see - what's this going to need?
1. A GPS receiver in every vehicle with enough storage to record exact time and route co-orodinates for long journeys
2. A transmitter in every vehicle that can be polled to upload accumulated GPS data
3. A national network of roadside receivers to poll and receive downloaded data from passing vehicles.
4. A national network to relay that data to a central processing site
5. A central processing site with terabytes of storage and teraflops of processing power
6. A billing and payment system
7. An enforcement system.
8. Bullet proof security at every point - anti-hack, anti-fraud, anti-vandalism
9. A ship load of high value banknotes to pay for it all
10. A creative genius to spin the reasons for failure.
Not saying it's impossible, and the IT industry certainly won't say that because it can see a major pay-day coming over the horizon, but surely there are easier ways of skinning this cat.
Just tax fuel more heavily, so that those who drive furthest, or on more congested roads (=poorer fuel consumption) pay more. Oh and that would incentivise people to buy more economic cars as well, cutting down pollution.
2. Jeremy Perkins
Could someone explain how foreign drivers are to be charged? Or how people will be prevented from going under the covers of their car and disabling the box the government has installed there? I can see a whole new industry being created, even as I write.
Oh, and one other thing. You can bet your bottom dollar that government ministers will not be included in the scheme, just as senior party members in the Sovet Union (or Tony Blair in the ridiculous M4 bus lane) managed to escape the effects of their own legislation. Of course they'll cite security and the worry that a hacker might publish Tony Blair's movements on the internet, then go on to reassure us that our movements really are safe in their hands as long as we have nothing to hide.
I write as someone who supports the idea in principle as long as car tax and fuel tax are scrapped when the scheme is introduced and the whole thing is then revenue neutral (I know - fat chance from this government), and that the very serious privacy issues can be resolved. But as is so often the case the devil is in the detail (in this case of the technology).
The system as proposed sounds like a recipe to fleece the law-abiding motorist and encourage all but the most honest members of society to abuse the system.
3. Lee Mayhew
Given that people get stung for the London Congestion charge even when they can prove that they were up North at the time, how will I be able to check all my journeys made in a billing period have been recorded correctly? Will the EXACT route I took for every trip be accessible?
I can also envisage a "mad panic" time when you are going down a motorway and realise that in 2 minutes the charge increases from 50p to £1.50. People will speed up to try to make sure they are off the expensive road and, I would imagine, cause more accidents.
Will cars have a taxi type meter on the dashboard giving you a running total of how much you have been fleeced so far on each journey?
If I were a route planning software company I would be rubbing my hands with glee at this charging proposition as you could write route planning and diverting navigation software to give you a "cheapest" route as you are driving along. A roads and B roads will become more congested the nearer you get to city centres as drivers understandably try to avoid the huge costs incurred in their attempts simply to get to work.
4. Simon Hallows
Some aspects of the proposed solution I find attractive. Particularly that it is not London (or large City) centric. Those of us who live and work in rural areas are penalised with the blanket tax rate applied to fuel. You could put the tax up 3 fold and many people would have no choice but to continue paying as public transport just is not an option. You only encourage exodus from the country side of businesses and people. However I think that the proposal is the wrong way to approach this problem. It will be expensive to implement and I suspect a 'jammer' would be very simple to produce. I would propose a scheme where the fuel duty was scaled, higher in the cities and lower in rural locations. Obviously some would make a longer journey to buy fuel but only within reason (people are lazy), and some petrol stations would find themselves a few hundred yards from a rate change. However I would expect stability fairly rapidly (after a few years most fuel stations are redeveloped). A similar scheme could be applied for Road Tax, cars registered to addresses in congested areas would pay a higher rate. City dwellers on a shift pattern (outwith normal transport hours) could be compensated (via their paye?) as otherwise they would be unfairly targeted.
5. anonymous
My GPS system, which warns me of speed cameras, can tell what speed I'm traveling. So will this car-toll system also be used to detect speeding motorists and issue tickets?
6. Ken Hall
Aw come on, see the big picture. This scheme has NOTHING to do with congestion. Congestion is caused by the government's and local council's transport policies. they restrict routes, time traffic lights to be on red longer, put in road bumps, all to cause congestion so that they can charge you more for it. then they come up with an idea to track you from the sky? add this to the scheme to track you via an ID card, and to the same government that wanted to lock up anybody they wish without charge and without a trial.
You have a governemnt that wants absolute power over every little detail of our lives. They do not listen to us, but they do want to control us totally. Tracking us everywhere and all we do.
I say NO!
7. Martin
has anyone actually defined what congestion is ? why do so many people participate in daily congestion if it really is so bad? why do they not use flexitime to travel at other times of day?why do they not telework?why do we halve the capacity of roads with bus lanes when only a (small)minority want to use the (indifferent) service that they(bus companies)provide? add to that one-man operated buses,slow or what?
then there are speed limits...obvious safe ones..30,40...maybe but each time you reduce the speed limit you reduce the capacity of a road to carry traffic ! what about design? even a 5 year old child can work out that 3 (lane motorway) plus 2(lane motorway)does not add up to 3(lane motorway ...in Birmingham...M5:M6 junction)some of the best congestion ever devised.Then there is theM5/M4/severn bridges/industrial estate fiasco to the west of Bristol...need I go on ?? there is still a massive potential for improvement without going for these, patently stupid, proposals , but maybe thats not so sexy a solution for a simpleton,sorry politician.never let anything get in the way of a good (?) idea then.
8. Dave Brown
Far too expensive to impliment and run.
Just stick road tax on fuel.
How about a vote? let the people deside.