 |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Kaben |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Kaben
World Chat Champion
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Karma : 
|
 Posted: 03:20 - 21 Feb 2007  Post subject: "Tony Blairs" Email Response |
 |
|
| Quote: | Thank you for taking the time to register your views about road pricing on the Downing Street website.
This petition was posted shortly before we published the Eddington Study, an independent review of Britain's transport network. This study set out long-term challenges and options for our transport network.
It made clear that congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that advances in technology put these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind politically, feasible.
That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about imposing "stealth taxes" or introducing "Big Brother" surveillance. This is a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national level. That's why I hope this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for you to take it further.
But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working with some local authorities that are interested in establishing local schemes to help address local congestion problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas.
One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion is bad. It's bad for business because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects people's quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government.
Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue.
Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains - helping to explain why more people are using them than for decades. And we're committed to sustaining this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned between now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving.
But all the evidence shows that improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion. This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing as a means of addressing congestion.
One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses, individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12 billion would be the direct cost on businesses.
A second option would be to try to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity.
Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other services such as education and health, or increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this approach would entail.
That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone's interests, especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without exploring it further.
It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But any technology used would have to give definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold information about where vehicles have been. But there may also be opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a "Big Brother" society.
I know many people's biggest worry about road pricing is that it will be a "stealth tax" on motorists. It won't. Road pricing is about tackling congestion.
Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall. Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the future. At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided.
Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a system that works. A system that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we don't have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would be further consultations. The public will, of course, have their say, as will Parliament.
We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage in further debate.
Yours sincerely,
Tony Blair |
Well what do you think? I dislike how it doesn't cover anything to do with how less privileged people will be able to afford road tax under this scheme. Another benefit package we, the tax payer,will have to fork out for? Will the tax on fuel be reduced?
Even the tone of the message seems condescending.....grr, bloody New Labour.
Kaben
____________________
Its Not a Melon, Its Clearly a Lime!!
Yamaha Fazer 600Now dead, MZ 125 SM
My Deviant Art homepage https://robabloke.deviantart.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
   |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 09:10 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
as said in another post , just think the opposite of what he says ,
ie I've not made up me mind
= I've made up my mind.
Just to remind you of his Straw man status , Police will not be allowed to go on fishing expenditions with the finger prints stored on the national identity database. 2005 ,
Radio yesterday lunch , police will be allowed to search the identity database to solve crimes,
remember Blairs assurances are worthless,
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| froggeh |
This post is not being displayed .
|
froggeh
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| stinkwheel |
This post is not being displayed .
|
stinkwheel
Bovine Proctologist
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Karma :
|
Posted: 09:32 - 21 Feb 2007  Post subject: |
|
|
Now lets have a look at that translated for the cynical. 
Thank you for taking the time to register your views about road pricing on the Downing Street website.
You have forced me into discussing this matter not long before a general election. I didn't want to but I suppose I have to now. Don't worry though, we're pulling the troops out of Iraq before Christmas, isn't that nice?
This petition was posted shortly before we published the Eddington Study, an independent review of Britain's transport network. This study set out long-term challenges and options for our transport network.
You should feel guilty about having filled in the petition at all. It would be best all round if you now feel you are wasting my and other peoples time by doing such a foolish thing.
It made clear that congestion is a major problem to which there is no easy answer. One aspect of the study was highlighting how road pricing could provide a solution to these problems and that advances in technology put these plans within our reach. Of course it would be ten years or more before any national scheme was technologically, never mind politically, feasible.
See, you're wasting my time. The study says so.
That is the backdrop to this issue. As my response makes clear, this is not about imposing "stealth taxes" or introducing "Big Brother" surveillance. This is a complex subject, which cannot be resolved without a thorough investigation of all the options, combined with a full and frank debate about the choices we face at a local and national level. That's why I hope this detailed response will address your concerns and set out how we intend to take this issue forward. I see this email as the beginning, not the end of the debate, and the links below provide an opportunity for you to take it further.
I want to make it clear that you are wrong. It's all far to big and difficult for you to understand so I'm not going to tell you why you're wrong.
I would now like to to shovel responsability for this matter into someone elses wheelbarrow. It's really nothing to do with me, go bother the transport minister, he can take the flack, I can then sack him when this all goes pear-shaped and none of it sticks to old teflon Tony.
But let me be clear straight away: we have not made any decision about national road pricing. Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so. We are, for now, working with some local authorities that are interested in establishing local schemes to help address local congestion problems. Pricing is not being forced on any area, but any schemes would teach us more about how road pricing would work and inform decisions on a national scheme. And funds raised from these local schemes will be used to improve transport in those areas.
See what we'd like to do is sneak this in bit by bit so as you hardly notice. Remember that ten year interval I mentioned earlier? By then all our 'local' schemes will have melded together in a big mess of ANPR, microchips and satellite tracking. You can bet your life none of the systems will be able to speak to one another and the administration will be ten times the size of an integrated national system.
We are careful not to mention what happened in the only city which followed democratic process and held a referendum on the suject of conjestion charging. Edinburgh is in Scotland anyway so it doesn't count.
One thing I suspect we can all agree is that congestion is bad. It's bad for business because it disrupts the delivery of goods and services. It affects people's quality of life. And it is bad for the environment. That is why tackling congestion is a key priority for any Government.
I would now like to state something obvious and simple so it seems like we are in agreement so far. I've managed to sneak quite a lot in so far without pissing you off, these spin doctors really know their stuff.
Congestion is predicted to increase by 25% by 2015. This is being driven by economic prosperity. There are 6 million more vehicles on the road now than in 1997, and predictions are that this trend will continue.
I will now baffle you with science along with some meaningless and unsupported numbers without citing where I got them from.
Part of the solution is to improve public transport, and to make the most of the existing road network. We have more than doubled investment since 1997, spending £2.5 billion this year on buses and over £4 billion on trains - helping to explain why more people are using them than for decades. And we're committed to sustaining this investment, with over £140 billion of investment planned between now and 2015. We're also putting a great deal of effort into improving traffic flows - for example, over 1000 Highways Agency Traffic Officers now help to keep motorway traffic moving.
We are still chronically underspending on public transport and highway maintainance. We are saving even more money by employing powerless civillians to do a job that is the responsability of the police.
But all the evidence shows that improving public transport and tackling traffic bottlenecks will not by themselves prevent congestion getting worse. So we have a difficult choice to make about how we tackle the expected increase in congestion.
We are now reaping the rewards of three terms of continued underspending on our transport infrastructure. We're not prepared to invest the massive revenue earned from taxing motorists on this because we've already spent it on something else.
This is a challenge that all political leaders have to face up to, and not just in the UK. For example, road pricing schemes are already in operation in Italy, Norway and Singapore, and others, such as the Netherlands, are developing schemes. Towns and cities across the world are looking at road pricing as a means of addressing congestion.
I will now tell a total whopper with a slight grain of truth in it so when challenged I can regale whoever asks about it with a tale of how sucessful Singapores system is until they get bored and move on.
One option would be to allow congestion to grow unchecked. Given the forecast growth in traffic, doing nothing would mean that journeys within and between cities would take longer, and be less reliable. I think that would be bad for businesses, individuals and the environment. And the costs on us all will be real - congestion could cost an extra £22 billion in wasted time in England by 2025, of which £10-12 billion would be the direct cost on businesses.
See it will cost you money if you are difficult about this. I'm doing you a favour really. Admittedly it will cost you an unspecified amount of money directly out of your own pocket if you're not difficult but we wont mention that just now.
A second option would be to try to build our way out of congestion. We could, of course, add new lanes to our motorways, widen roads in our congested city centres, and build new routes across the countryside. Certainly in some places new capacity will be part of the story. That is why we are widening the M25, M1 and M62. But I think people agree that we cannot simply build more and more roads, particularly when the evidence suggests that traffic quickly grows to fill any new capacity.
Although we haven't of course comissioned a study on how this would work. We'll just work on the assumption that it is a bad idea, after all, "I think people agree."
Tackling congestion in this way would also be extremely costly, requiring substantial sums to be diverted from other services such as education and health, or increases in taxes. If I tell you that one mile of new motorway costs as much as £30m, you'll have an idea of the sums this approach would entail.
As I said before. We've already spent the money we have milked out of the motorists on health and education. For the love of God, wont someone think of the children?!
That is why I believe that at least we need to explore the contribution road pricing can make to tackling congestion. It would not be in anyone's interests, especially those of motorists, to slam the door shut on road pricing without exploring it further.
Well frankly, it's the only option we are prepared to consider because we've decided we are going to do this without spending any of OUR money. You're going to have to foot the bill and this is the only way I can think of doing it.
It has been calculated that a national scheme - as part of a wider package of measures - could cut congestion significantly through small changes in our overall travel patterns. But any technology used would have to give definite guarantees about privacy being protected - as it should be. Existing technologies, such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes, may well be able to play a role here, by ensuring that the Government doesn't hold information about where vehicles have been. Although of course, they would need to tell us, otherwise how the hell can we send out a bill? But there may also be opportunities presented by developments in new technology. Just as new medical technology is changing the NHS, so there will be changes in the transport sector. Our aim is to relieve traffic jams, not create a "Big Brother" society.
Although you'd be surprised what we can sneak in through the back door a wee bit later under the guise of anti-terror legislation. Guys, I'm not sure about the NHS bit, you sure we should be bringing that up here? It's not really relevant to the argument and I thought we were supposed to be closing hospitals anyway? Oh right, we're trying to distract their attention away from the subject in hand, gotcha.
I know many people's biggest worry about road pricing is that it will be a "stealth tax" on motorists. It won't. Road pricing is about tackling congestion.
I would now like to try to convince you that the government taking money directly from the people on an individual basis is in fact not tax, it is clearly something different. I don't kow why there isn't another word for what it actually is. I know, lets call it 'nottax'.
Clearly if we decided to move towards a system of national road pricing, there could be a case for moving away from the current system of motoring taxation. This could mean that those who use their car less, or can travel at less congested times, in less congested areas, for example in rural areas, would benefit from lower motoring costs overall. Those who travel longer distances at peak times and in more congested areas would pay more. But those are decisions for the future. Notice how evasive I was there? Lots of 'coulds' and 'woulds'. Also notice I didn't say "abolish the current system of motoring taxation". At this stage, when no firm decision has been taken as to whether we will move towards a national scheme, stories about possible costs are simply not credible, since they depend on so many variables yet to be investigated, never mind decided.
Before we take any decisions about a national pricing scheme, we know that we have to have a system that works. A system that respects our privacy as individuals. A system that is fair. I fully accept that we don't have all the answers yet. That is why we are not rushing headlong into a national road pricing scheme. Before we take any decisions there would be further consultations. The public will, of course, have their say, as will Parliament.
See, I'm really a great guy. I agree with you entirely, I want what you want. Now go away and stop bothering me about it, I said wait, there's plenty of time. I won't be doing anything about this until you stop paying attention and I can railroad it through.
We want to continue this debate, so that we can build a consensus around the best way to reduce congestion, protect the environment and support our businesses. If you want to find out more, please visit the attached links to more detailed information, and which also give opportunities to engage in further debate.
Now go bother the transport Minister. It's his problem now and he's easily replaced when the time comes so none of this sticks to me.
I don't want you bothering me about this any more so I have deliberately left no mechanism to reply despite just having spammed 1.7 million people |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| froggeh |
This post is not being displayed .
|
froggeh
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Phil_C |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Phil_C
Nova Slayer
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Karma :  
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:00 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| froggeh wrote: |
Seems to make a hell of a lot of sense to cross-check any finger database with fingerprints collected from crimes?
Also, while Mr Blair aint my personal fave, I think we need to balance this by reminding everyone that there are very few politicians if any, that don't change their mind, or policies. |
no it doesn't over reliance on evidence rather than police work solves nothing , DNA was said to be a magic bullet a few years ago they find your DNA , = guilty,
ditto finger prints , just being around my Clan and you guys I've left prints in at least 200 homes , just cus I left my print at one point = guilt , should we sacrifice liberty because of the laziness and incompetence of police? , no we shouldn't convictions should be worked for,
and of course finger prints are no longer admissible in court due to a cop fabricating evidence against another cop in Scotland , Stinkwheel knows the case (he wasn't personally involved).
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Bella |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Bella
Nova Slayer
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:02 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| Phil_C wrote: | To put this into perspective, can someone outline the pricing scheme? |
they want YOU probably at MOT time to fix a black box like NU insurance , into the back of your car , it will track you when your car is started and if it moves , everywhere will be charged £1.34 at all times since anti avoidance revenue protections will be used (ie the government protects it revenue at all costs) , ie I can shoot down a couple back streets to avoid the traffic in Bury Road , lots of people will do this , and thus pay a lower charge so they'll move the zone to £1.34 over there,
You will pay this IN ADDITION to the petrol and road taxes ,
0.0005% will be spent on the roads,
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:08 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| froggeh wrote: |
Also, while Mr Blair aint my personal fave, I think we need to balance this by reminding everyone that there are very few politicians if any, that don't change their mind, or policies. |
read assasination market on wikipedia , this would work, thing is he is extra sleazy ie announcing it the day AFTER the election,
thing is he changes his mind all the time , top up fees , tax increases which he tried to cover up saying they were not tax increases , PR,
infact political parties are actually companies , we should be able to sue for breech of contract,
Policies should be set in stone pre election , break it and you are personally fined 20,000,0000 quid , which there is no escape from bankrutpcy.
and you are never allowed to work , buy food water or have any benefits FOREVER along with your children your childrens children their children etc al.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:12 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
weasle words:(MSN)
10 million more cars in the UK than there were a decade ago are undermined by the fact that there are only 2.4 million more drivers who can, of course, only drive one car at a time.
Ie people like Kickstart who has 18+ V5Cs but can only drive one at a time , hell even I have lots of V5Cs to my name , but they are generally bikes in LT storage , in bits and or just frames , hell my dad has 2 cars himself .
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Bella |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Bella
Nova Slayer
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:22 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
least I cite me sources unlike Blair who picks them out of the air
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| froggeh |
This post is not being displayed .
|
froggeh
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Karma :
|
| Posted: 14:59 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| Itchy wrote: | | Phil_C wrote: | To put this into perspective, can someone outline the pricing scheme? |
they want YOU probably at MOT time to fix a black box like NU insurance , into the back of your car , it will track you when your car is started and if it moves , everywhere will be charged £1.34 at all times since anti avoidance revenue protections will be used (ie the government protects it revenue at all costs) , ie I can shoot down a couple back streets to avoid the traffic in Bury Road , lots of people will do this , and thus pay a lower charge so they'll move the zone to £1.34 over there,
You will pay this IN ADDITION to the petrol and road taxes ,
0.0005% will be spent on the roads, |
It wont be £1.34 everywhere, you're scaremongering now.
IF it ever came in, that would be the figure (or thereabouts) for traffic hotspots. So to drive from say congelton to Manchester, you may pay that figure for a couple of miles of the journey.
They are also talking about reducing other road taxes.
I think if we';re debating this, then at least we shouldn't be assuming the absolute worsst possible case... It never is.
Dont forget to get this in, they have to get it through a trial (1.8 million ppl), then parliament, then the Lords.
Whatever does get in, certainly won't be anywhere near as bad as you suggest.
There's also a very good chance that bikes will be excluded. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| froggeh |
This post is not being displayed .
|
froggeh
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Karma :
|
| Posted: 15:02 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| Itchy wrote: | | froggeh wrote: |
Also, while Mr Blair aint my personal fave, I think we need to balance this by reminding everyone that there are very few politicians if any, that don't change their mind, or policies. |
read assasination market on wikipedia , this would work, thing is he is extra sleazy ie announcing it the day AFTER the election,
thing is he changes his mind all the time , top up fees , tax increases which he tried to cover up saying they were not tax increases , PR,
infact political parties are actually companies , we should be able to sue for breech of contract,
Policies should be set in stone pre election , break it and you are personally fined 20,000,0000 quid , which there is no escape from bankrutpcy.
and you are never allowed to work , buy food water or have any benefits FOREVER along with your children your childrens children their children etc al. |
Name me the last government who didn't change their policies.
And sometimes, this makes sense. Sometimes they actually listen to public opinion (not often possibly). |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| froggeh |
This post is not being displayed .
|
froggeh
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Karma :
|
| Posted: 15:06 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| Itchy wrote: | | froggeh wrote: |
Seems to make a hell of a lot of sense to cross-check any finger database with fingerprints collected from crimes?
Also, while Mr Blair aint my personal fave, I think we need to balance this by reminding everyone that there are very few politicians if any, that don't change their mind, or policies. |
no it doesn't over reliance on evidence rather than police work solves nothing , DNA was said to be a magic bullet a few years ago they find your DNA , = guilty,
ditto finger prints , just being around my Clan and you guys I've left prints in at least 200 homes , just cus I left my print at one point = guilt , should we sacrifice liberty because of the laziness and incompetence of police? , no we shouldn't convictions should be worked for, |
I agree, that care should be taken.
But I would still like to see the databases checked for serious crimes. Of course you shouldn't blindly use the fact that you were at a location that hundreds of others also were,
but if you can link a known sex-offender, to a rape scene, I'm not sure in what way that would be bad. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| froggeh |
This post is not being displayed .
|
froggeh
World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 21:22 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Itchy wrote:
0.0005% will be spent on the roads,
isn't helping dude. |
Precedent, so like when your girl + son (it was a son wasn't it?) fly out to Sweden
just how much of the enhanced green APD go on green projects? , Ethical choice
man cited 3p per person in the UK um £1800000, I'm pretty certain APD wil raise
more than £1800000.
Ditto this , perhaps you should have a look at just how big Gordo's black hole is these
days , and when I say that I mean the real one , if Gordo was a real accountant he'd lose
his charter in seconds , with his cheaty off balance sheet items and government backed
but not counted debt.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 21:22 - 21 Feb 2007 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | It wont be £1.34 everywhere, you're scaremongering now. |
Am I? , I personally don't think so human nature and economics explain it perfectly no I'm not its
about avoidance , government seeks to protect its revenue why are speed camera vandals sentences
so heavily?.
I see this all the time with tax avoidance tax goes up in area A they change to B , last year Gordo
said non corporate dividends are not allowed , so every company incorporated, he made a law
saying non corporate dividend receivers ,. so people opened up companies which owned 99%
of the shares in their original company ,and took dividends that way. You should see how many
hoops people jump through to avoid 2.5% tax. Gordo hates alphabet shares , so companies are
changing to classes of shares instead!.
Its normal human behaviour , people have enough of the UK and go elsewhere, people have enough
of Poland/Pakistan/India Africa and bugger off to come here. This is an external problem this cannot
be controled since once somebody leaves they are no longer under the juristiction of that country.
Or high petrol prices , people bought more efficient smaller cars,
Lets see , Road A is £1.34 Road B is £0.50p,
Itchy chooses Road B ,more people choose road B , government sees its revenue decrease
from road A and stats say Road B is getting busy cus of this so it makes Road B £1.34 , this
pushes Itchy onto Road C , others also go onto Road C Road C is 62p a mile , government sees
a drop in Revenue and changes road C into £1.34
At the same time Road A + B are not reduced in price, as if they would.
you might say Road D but now into mancs there are only 3 roads from Bolton, A + B + C ,
people WILL avoid taxes and thus the government will seek to protect its revenue at ALL costs,
Since there are not an infinate number of roads into manchester it is Instant monopoly
and I can choose :
Road A = £1.34
Road B = £1.34
Road C = £1.34
there are also certain choke points where EVERYBODY MUST pass , to get into Mancs I
MUST pass Whitefield/Prestwich lest I take a massive detour.
If you don't believe me sit on a motorway bridge in grid lock and watch, one lane moves
faster , people gravitate to that lane, simple supply and demand economics.
| Quote: | Dont forget to get this in, they have to get it through a trial (1.8 million ppl), then parliament, then the Lords. |
this cannot be relied upon: Please Read Orwell's Animal farm, and consider these point.
#1 most New Labour MPs are sychophants , Blair says jump they say how high?, he has a 61 Majority and there s active
bribery, not money but fact finding missions , ie they get sent to Jamacia on a government paid fact finding mission, ie
bribed with holidays and other unseen things. Human nature of ME ME ME , means MP looks after his own interests
first and foremost.
Hazel Blears is only going against party line cus shes going to lose her seat , its not constituent interests about
hospital closure protests its HER interests,
#2 The Lords has been crammed full of Sychphants, and is about to be emasculated , previously they didn't care
for party politics since they don't have to consider re-election , and thus their decisions are freer.
#3 Failed trials are considered a sucess , the ID card trial was a failure , finger prints and brown eyes were problematic
for the scanners, it was deemed a sucess. , the London C Charge is a failure , why did TfL have to pay 31million clams
to the company enforcing it?. Why are public transport fares going up so high?. Ha even the private sector does this
Seroxat an anti depression drug , actually caused suicides!.
#4 Polls can be twisted with stacked questions a favourite labour trick, Labour is notorious for stacked questions
ie you can't say no, but in saying yes you say yes to something you don't want , such a question should be
split into each separate point.
#5 He may say its scrapped , in 2009 , then go back on his promises after the next election , remember top up
fees?
#6 the British people do not have the US blow off valve, ie ability to arm itself to form militias to fight against a tyranical
government, ok sure a semi auto matic gun will not do much against a M1A1 tank , better than nothing.
| Quote: | There's also a very good chance that bikes will be excluded. |
In London , the C Charge came in , people went onto bikes , they are now going to charge for parking of bikes
revenue protection, if the UK is changed to 1980s China , push bikes will be taxed,
| Quote: | Name me the last government who didn't change their policies.
And sometimes, this makes sense. Sometimes they actually listen to public opinion (not often possibly). |
Joseph Stalin ,
This is a serious problem , in that as per last week a vote means I agree with everything you do and say for the
next 4 years , something has to change , ie to stop announcements like C charges the day after the election,
I don't think a Swiss referenda system would work, unfortunately I have no solution other than citizenship
ie non universal sufferage , however changing policy a day after election is v bad.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Kickstart |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Kickstart
The Oracle
Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :
|
Posted: 21:55 - 21 Feb 2007  Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Mister James |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Mister James
I want to believe!
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| colin1 |
This post is not being displayed .
|
colin1
Captain Safety
Joined: 17 Feb 2005
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 17 years, 70 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
 |
|
|
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.14 Sec - Server Load: 0.33 - MySQL Queries: 17 - Page Size: 176.53 Kb
|
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
rating
rating