Changes in transport costs.

[Bmblbzzz]

That would at least bring us into line with many of our ex-colonies...

[pete75]

IME the biggest contributor to motorist miles is commuting, as such that is an area for environmental groups to attack with demands for employers to have transport plans for their employees. In families in which multiple members are employed some significant commuting might be inevitable but I think it a reasonable social expectation that at least one family member should live relatively near to their place of work.

Hopefully Covid will have changed this. Events during the pandemic have proved most desk workers can work from home for much of the time. Call centres appear to have become call networks. The government should be encouraging this to continue. It's an advantage to the urban environment with reduced pollution and congestion , to employees spared the time and expense of commuting and to businesses which will not need as much expensive office space.

[Bmblbzzz]

True, but – just as many employees welcome the chance to work from home – many miss the social aspect as well as the informal learning opportunities that come from sharing space with others.

[pete75]

True, but – just as many employees welcome the chance to work from home – many miss the social aspect as well as the informal learning opportunities that come from sharing space with others.

Those who love daily commuting can no doubt continue to do so.

[Bmblbzzz]

If their employer agrees. Same for those who prefer to stay at home.

[Carlton green]

IME the biggest contributor to motorist miles is commuting, as such that is an area for environmental groups to attack with demands for employers to have transport plans for their employees. In families in which multiple members are employed some significant commuting might be inevitable but I think it a reasonable social expectation that at least one family member should live relatively near to their place of work.

Hopefully Covid will have changed this. Events during the pandemic have proved most desk workers can work from home for much of the time. Call centres appear to have become call networks. The government should be encouraging this to continue. It's an advantage to the urban environment with reduced pollution and congestion , to employees spared the time and expense of commuting and to businesses which will not need as much expensive office space.

True, but – just as many employees welcome the chance to work from home – many miss the social aspect as well as the informal learning opportunities that come from sharing space with others.

This stance might seem counterintuitive to some readers but some people do indeed miss the office and find value there, there is certainly value to find. Personally I don’t miss commuting - for me it was a necessary evil - and home working has numerous advantages, however there just are times when being in ‘The Office’ is really helpful. I’m still of the opinion that ideally a person’s place of employment and residence shouldn’t be separated by more than a short distance, but of course there will always be valid reasons why other arrangements are needed (need as in necessary) or work is predominately home based.

[Jdsk]

Hopefully Covid will have changed this. Events during the pandemic have proved most desk workers can work from home for much of the time. Call centres appear to have become call networks. The government should be encouraging this to continue. It's an advantage to the urban environment with reduced pollution and congestion , to employees spared the time and expense of commuting and to businesses which will not need as much expensive office space.

Any thoughts about the difference that this is going to expose: workers whose jobs make it possible to work from home for much of the time, and those who can't?

True, but – just as many employees welcome the chance to work from home – many miss the social aspect as well as the informal learning opportunities that come from sharing space with others.

Yes. It's the biggest social contact for many people.

Jonathan

[Bmblbzzz]

Hopefully Covid will have changed this. Events during the pandemic have proved most desk workers can work from home for much of the time. Call centres appear to have become call networks. The government should be encouraging this to continue. It's an advantage to the urban environment with reduced pollution and congestion , to employees spared the time and expense of commuting and to businesses which will not need as much expensive office space.

Any thoughts about the difference that this is going to expose: workers whose jobs make it possible to work from home for much of the time, and those who can't?

It's an interesting question because it has two aspects. For a decade or two it's been said that jobs which have to be done on site – from hairdressing to surveying to nursing to driving and more – are the only jobs immune to offshoring. In the last 18 months or so this has been partially turned on its head, with many of those jobs lost due to the difficulties of face to face working, coupled with a new impetus to "reshore" or "nearshore" some of those industrial jobs previously sent to the Far East.

[Jdsk]

Hopefully Covid will have changed this. Events during the pandemic have proved most desk workers can work from home for much of the time. Call centres appear to have become call networks. The government should be encouraging this to continue. It's an advantage to the urban environment with reduced pollution and congestion , to employees spared the time and expense of commuting and to businesses which will not need as much expensive office space.

Any thoughts about the difference that this is going to expose: workers whose jobs make it possible to work from home for much of the time, and those who can't?

It's an interesting question because it has two aspects. For a decade or two it's been said that jobs which have to be done on site – from hairdressing to surveying to nursing to driving and more – are the only jobs immune to offshoring. In the last 18 months or so this has been partially turned on its head, with many of those jobs lost due to the difficulties of face to face working, coupled with a new impetus to "reshore" or "nearshore" some of those industrial jobs previously sent to the Far East.

I'd never connected the response to the outbreak to that analysis of offshoring.

Agreed.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

"Avoiding Gridlock Britain"
https://institute.global/policy/avoidin ... ck-britain

Externalities, congestion and... road pricing.

Jonathan

[Stevek76]

That’s the problem isn’t it, we talk in terms of compensation in recompense for damage and taxation to discourage behaviours which the rich can then continue to pursue regardless. If someone wants to change behaviours then a range of tools are needed, and they certainly should include things that personal wealth does not allow people to work their way around.

Yes, but it is a necessity, particularly given the current financial and legal constraints that councils are operating under, that tools that the rich can avoid have to play a significant part. The rich have always been able to pay their way around things to an extent, if that money is going towards better non car provision then that's just basic redistributive economics, nothing wrong with that.

No point getting hung up over it else nothing will get done at all.

[Carlton green]

That’s the problem isn’t it, we talk in terms of compensation in recompense for damage and taxation to discourage behaviours which the rich can then continue to pursue regardless. If someone wants to change behaviours then a range of tools are needed, and they certainly should include things that personal wealth does not allow people to work their way around.

Yes, but it is a necessity, particularly given the current financial and legal constraints that councils are operating under, that tools that the rich can avoid have to play a significant part. The rich have always been able to pay their way around things to an extent, if that money is going towards better non car provision then that's just basic redistributive economics, nothing wrong with that.

No point getting hung up over it else nothing will get done at all.

An interesting point of view and maybe even pragmatic however it’s not one I support and it is one that IME it smacks of duel standards rather than of pragmatism. Redistributive economics is essential to the functioning of society but taxing people for the degree to which they damage others by their actions is the slippy path to legitimising fines for all types of crimes. Before you know it speeding tickets will only result in a fine (no points on your licence) and the rich can then drive as recklessly as they choose. Kill someone and it’s no time in Jail but a hefty fine and maybe some blood money, and so it goes on.

Yes, charges for congestion and pollution do lead to social changes and the sums raised might be usefully used. However the way in which those change drivers effect people are very different. The rich guy is possibly quite able and happy to pay congestion charges, they take other people off of the road and allow him an easier journey, whereas the poor guy can end up walking and having considerably longer journeys. Such situations end up penalising the poor and empowering the rich, not really the direction of travel wanted in a civilised democracy where everyone is notionally pretty much equal.

[Stevek76]

That's quite the leap to get from charges to a relaxation of driving offences and blood money...

It's not like charges aren't already quite common. London congestion charge (technically Durham also), clean air zones in several cities, Nottingham has a workplace parking levy and few urban councils do not have general & resident parking charges.

The rich guy is possibly quite able and happy to pay congestion charges, they take other people off of the road and allow him an easier journey, whereas the poor guy can end up walking and having considerably longer journeys.

The poorest guy is already walking & breathing in the rich guy's fumes. The 'poor motorist' as previously noted, is mostly a myth. Cars might be relatively cheap in terms of £/mile for high mileage uses but to the poorest in society who travel much less generally they're financially a non option due to the relatively high initial costs of owning & keeping one.

Also you're considering the car like it's the best option. It isn't, even now, cycling is objectively the best option in urban areas at most times of day, it's faster, much cheaper, makes you healthier & happier. The main barrier is the subjective lack of safety from having to share with motor vehicles. Hardly anyone actually likes driving in urban areas!

Given enabling other options will require a substantial reduction in roadspace available to private motor traffic then the need to keep that from being a permanent car park will be greater than it is now, paying a relatively small fee for occasional necessary trips isn't a huge burden (given the flexibility here, fees can be lower for car club cars & integrated into their pricing). As for the rich, if they really want to insist on getting to their destination slower, more frustrated and that much less healthy then so be it.

What's the practical & workable alternatives? Any rationing system will come with a huge quantity of administrative costs and a black market where the rich can pay to avoid anyway. Only their payments will go to relatively well off people like me, not the public purse.

[pwa]

In Wales a survey of driver opinion has been happening around the subject of how people would react to using certain key bits of road being subject to a charge. Would they be more likely to use public transport, seek alternative routes, not travel at all, or just pay up and continue as before.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-58424221

I do know of communities affected by road pollution, where the pollution does come mostly from vehicles driven by less well off people going about their daily business. So clamping down on older, cheaper cars would affect them adversely and beneficially at the same time. I am sure a lot of less well off people will find it very difficult to get to and from places of employment without a car or motorcycle, unless they are lucky enough to have a job and home on the same bus route or train line. In these times of rapidly changing employment it is sometimes difficult to arrange things that way. And if you live where the houses are cheapest, at the top end of the valleys, you can have a long trek to where the jobs are most plentiful. Wales is run by Labour, so ignoring the problems of the lower paid workers is not an option.

[Bmblbzzz]

That tells us everything apart from the results of the survey! But as it only closed 3 days ago, we'll have to wait a bit.

Any clean air zone, road charging, toll, etc, which does not actually reduce the amount of traffic, has not achieved a positive result. Costs need to be large enough to be felt, to be worth avoiding, and there have to be ways of doing so, such as taking public transport or not making the journey. The weak point of any such scheme is lack of alternative, not because there is never a decent bus, train, cycle or walk option, but because we are looking only through the perspective of traffic, not of changes throughout society.