Comments on: Operation Freeflow – Car Free Zones http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=operation-freeflow-car-free-zones Politics, Kildare, Work and Play! Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:29:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: David http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-94 David Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:28:39 +0000 http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-94 The introduction of the congestion charge is a great idea. It has reduced traffic in London to levels before 2002. But more importantly it has resulted in a modal shift, of 5% towards buses. Such has never been achieved in Ireland. But the introduction of a congestion charge, should be introduced to reduce traffic, not to increase government revenue. The recent move towards taxing items that are perceived to be bad, is awful. What would the government do for revenue, if citizens behaviour completely changed? Taxation is a means to distribute wealth, not to reduce consumption or use. Congestion charge is a method that makes citizens aware of their externalites. Such as congestion on routes that results in lower economic productivity or emissions that results in global warming. The level of pricing should be in proportion to the level of damage. Can you imagine the effect of a congestion charge in Naas. Imagine all the stupid journeys that we could take of our roads in the morning or on all Saturday. I was in town last Saturday, traffic was incredible. The ring road will not take these trips off and even it did we decided to pile them all back on with a stupid shopping centre, when there is one just 20 minutes away. The introduction of the congestion charge is a great idea. It has reduced traffic in London to levels before 2002. But more importantly it has resulted in a modal shift, of 5% towards buses. Such has never been achieved in Ireland.

But the introduction of a congestion charge, should be introduced to reduce traffic, not to increase government revenue. The recent move towards taxing items that are perceived to be bad, is awful. What would the government do for revenue, if citizens behaviour completely changed? Taxation is a means to distribute wealth, not to reduce consumption or use.

Congestion charge is a method that makes citizens aware of their externalites. Such as congestion on routes that results in lower economic productivity or emissions that results in global warming. The level of pricing should be in proportion to the level of damage.

Can you imagine the effect of a congestion charge in Naas. Imagine all the stupid journeys that we could take of our roads in the morning or on all Saturday.

I was in town last Saturday, traffic was incredible. The ring road will not take these trips off and even it did we decided to pile them all back on with a stupid shopping centre, when there is one just 20 minutes away.

]]> By: Conor McGarry http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-78 Conor McGarry Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:53:41 +0000 http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-78 But is the congestion charge really a carbon tax then? So I earn €100 per week. Of that, I pay tax of €50. I spend the remainder. For the €50 of tax, what is the CO2 emmissions per euro? For the €50 I spend myself, what is the CO2 emmissions per euro? Until the government can prove that their €50 spent on your behalf emits less CO2 than the €50 you spend yourself, there is no basis for introducing a carbon tax. See, if I travel by car to Dublin everyday, it costs me €X and I emit Y CO2. If I travel by train, it costs me €(X-A) and I emit (Y-B) CO2. This means that I have €A left in my pocket and essentially a CO2 credit of B. When I spend €A, there is only a CO2 saving if €A emits less than B CO2. Can the Government prove that this is the case? They need to seriously rethink what the "congestion charge" is for. But is the congestion charge really a carbon tax then?

So I earn €100 per week. Of that, I pay tax of €50. I spend the remainder. For the €50 of tax, what is the CO2 emmissions per euro? For the €50 I spend myself, what is the CO2 emmissions per euro?

Until the government can prove that their €50 spent on your behalf emits less CO2 than the €50 you spend yourself, there is no basis for introducing a carbon tax.

See, if I travel by car to Dublin everyday, it costs me €X and I emit Y CO2.

If I travel by train, it costs me €(X-A) and I emit (Y-B) CO2. This means that I have €A left in my pocket and essentially a CO2 credit of B. When I spend €A, there is only a CO2 saving if €A emits less than B CO2.

Can the Government prove that this is the case?

They need to seriously rethink what the “congestion charge” is for.

]]> By: James Lawless http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-77 James Lawless Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:57:13 +0000 http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-77 If we have a situation where there are multiple modes of transport, providing the right combination of radial and orbital routes, then there is little valid reason for someone taking their car right into the city centre. It comes back to the principle of "The polluter pays" - In a recent conversation someone took issue with that approach asking why couldn't fares be cheaper for public transport users and free for cars - which in turns begs the question of how the fares could be cheaper when they are operating at subvention already - meaning the taxpayer would end up footing an even greater bill. The polluter pays principle applies a charge at the point of use (or abuse) and is an equitable one in my book. If we have a situation where there are multiple modes of transport, providing the right combination of radial and orbital routes, then there is little valid reason for someone taking their car right into the city centre. It comes back to the principle of “The polluter pays” – In a recent conversation someone took issue with that approach asking why couldn’t fares be cheaper for public transport users and free for cars – which in turns begs the question of how the fares could be cheaper when they are operating at subvention already – meaning the taxpayer would end up footing an even greater bill. The polluter pays principle applies a charge at the point of use (or abuse) and is an equitable one in my book.

]]> By: Conor McGarry http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-76 Conor McGarry Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:35:29 +0000 http://jameslawless.ie/2008/02/27/operation-freeflow-car-free-zones/#comment-76 I'd have to disagree with you. Taxing as a deterrant is wrong. FF are getting more like Labour every day! I'm starting to get tired of voting FF. I’d have to disagree with you. Taxing as a deterrant is wrong. FF are getting more like Labour every day!

I’m starting to get tired of voting FF.

]]>