AA has suggested pay per mile after 3000 miles each year

[ivykaty44]

To reduce short trips by car

I think this would make people think about car usage & only use when needed, say school run & work. But then opt for shopping home delivery and other trips by bus, walking or bike

Countryside would get more mileage free

What do others think? Would it help reduce pollution and encourage parents not to pick up secondary children from school etc?

www.theguardian.com/money/2020/jun/03/aa-president-backs-road-pricing-scheme

Article here

It would likely penalise the poorer people in society, as well as people who live in the country, many of whom are not at all rich. Much as normal then

I live rurally and my daily commute is a 50 mile round trip. I'd be screwed.

It would be devastating to rural communities.

This would cripple anyone who lived rurally.

Yet another unfair rural tax.

Sounds like an industry based on people driving cars wanting to bite the hand that feeds them. I can see offering a discount for low mileage maybe, but I thought with AA it was the individual that was covered not the car, so not sure how that would be monitored.

Also until social distancing is no longer deemed to be needed buses and public transport will be operating at much reduced capacity so it's not really an appropriate time to be clamping down on car use.

I like incentives so cycle to work scheme is good. But Britain needs to be a lot more cycle friendly - I gave up cycling to work in central Edinburgh as traffic too heavy - if they genuinely want people to reduce car usage.

Perfect for the wealthy who can afford to live in the central areas and have little commute/access to good public transport.

My commute us a 60 mile round trip as DH and I can't afford to live where my work is based. I also travel as part of my job in rural area so although it's a good idea in theory, still very flawed.

It would be great for rural communities. Rural communities are blighted by excessive, unnecessary car journeys. As are all communities, to be fair.

So what about disabled people for whom the car is essential but may well be on a lower income!

Is that quite literally what petrol/diesel achieves? You pay per mile because the more miles you do, the more gas you need to buy, the more you pay.

The answer to everything seems to be to slap £ on it rather than look at better ways to achieve it.

You want people to travel less? Look at the journeys people make and ways to support them to not making those journeys. e.g. by making it a legal right to request work from home in all jobs where it is possible.

Also, isn't that essentially what fuel tax is?

It’s a ridiculous idea.

Cross post @HaveYouSeenMyBones I agree with you on everything you've said in your post.

I do a 100mile round trip commute o.O (there are no trains from were I live to were I work that would get me to work in time, plus it would cost me £40-£60 per day in train fairs, whereas I could drive to and from for the week for that amount).

That would be devastating as my mileage is always high and its unavoidable..

Another stupid, ill thought out idea.

If we had proper bus and rail services, people wouldn't need to drive so much

Both our families live 250 miles round trip from us. We see them on average around 10 times a year.

This journey, if taken by train, takes twice the time and quadruples the cost.

This policy would only help people who live centrally in large cities. One obvious example being those living in London.

Sounds like a secret charge to me.

Sounds pretty stupid to me. People who live in cities and only use their cars for multiple short, potentially unneccessary trips could easily stay under 3000 miles per year (for e.g if they're a multi-car family and have a runaround used for shopping and another larger car used for longer journeys), but people who actually need to have a car because they live rurally are penalised.

I generally stay under 3000 miles per year and I really should be getting rid of my car as I live in a city and it would probably be more cost effective for me to just hire one when I want to do longer journeys.

Make massive investment into public transport, especially in rural areas, and give people another option before plans that will disproportionately affect those in rural communities.

It would be unfair against anyone that has mobility issues, people that live rurally and a whole host of others.

As someone who doesn't use my car much and has only done 8,000 miles in the past 4 years, it would benefit me but I'm happy to keep it as it is to keep it fair for all. It would feel wrong to pay less then someone that can't walk properly has to pay more

My car only exists because I have no alternative to get to work... a 40 mile round trip.

I would find it hugely unfair to be penalised for working.

Is that quite literally what petrol/diesel achieves?

Doesn’t the government have a plan to ban diesel and prettily cars after 2035? Therefore the revenue would have to be collected in a different manner other than fuel duty

www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51366123

Yes, it’s been brought forward to 15 years time

Surely that's fuel duty? Or am I being dense?