麻豆社

Although I think that petitions may be a good way of gauging support for an idea or concern about an issue, online petitions are not anything like as meaningful. They require significantly less work - and contact with people to argue for the petition's purpose and intentions - and significantly less commitment on behalf of the person signing up. I could sign up for Blair singing while standing in a barrel of custard as in your example, while also signing up to another that calls for an end to online petitions.

The petition regarding road charging is a very serious matter which I would expect Newsnight to treat as such. Instead, with your jokey petition, you have cheapened and disregarded the genuine fears and concerns that a vast proportion of the population have over severe restrictions on their future lives. What are you trying to prove? Your antics (do I sense Michael Crich's childish influence?) would be more in line with a Private Eye satirical website, not a serious news programme. Keep in touch with real people, don't let the trendy, wealthy, "to hell with the real people" among you take over completely.

I voted yes but the petition says that so far 100.00% are no, despite having only 72 votes cast.

either its rigged, broken, or hasnt yet added my vote

By the way, i'd love to see the PM sing while standing in custard, wish it gordon brown instead of good ol' Tony though, that would be better.

Joe

Right, who's voting no and on what possible grounds!

I've a better Idea, how about every yes vote pledges a pound for Comic Relief and if more than 1 million people vote then he actually does it.

That's what I'd call democracy in action!

I suspect you are cheating--artificially inflating the sample. Every time I voted for the P.M. to stand on a barrel of custard the number of votes rose by 4 or 5.

A far better indicator of public opinion and the strength of those opinions are demonstrations. Going to a demonstration takes a lot of effort and organisation, especially when it's cold and raining and when people turn up from a long way away. The government should take demonstrations far more seriously.

If you're not going to take people's names, addresses and emails for this petition, and then email back to verify the signature, you are not conducting a fair test.

It seems to me you've already got a hypothesis "government is wasting our time with these non representative petitions" and are trying to prove it by "simplifying" things for your own example petition.

I am sceptical about whether these petitions are truly representative, but the results of them are interesting, and I would suggest that government could use them as a basis for further independent research.

When I was a kid I admired the cole miners who where striking in england!Today When my kids ask me why people put bombs in the subway in london I cannot blame it all on Islam and global warming , it wouldn t be fare ! Thank you Newsnight for asking questions , it s the only thing we have left !

To suggest that the general public is weak-minded enough to support any old petition and that the road charging one falls into that category demonstrates an arrogance that does not become the 麻豆社.

People will sign light-hearted or frivolous petitions but the fact that 1,220,000 people have signed the road charging one is surely indicative of a true strength of feeling.

Ian Mansfield has missed the point.

Any petition on the No. 10 website requires the signatory to give their name, postal address and email address.

After signing the petition, an email is sent to their email address which they have to then click on in order for their signature to be accepted.

It's not just a case of clicking on a link.

Perhaps you should do a poll asking if Newsnight is Bias towards Tony Bliar and his Corrupt administration.
My Vote would be Yes .... It sticks out like a sore thumb

Spoke about this to twelve friends over the weekend - all of whom own pc's. Eight were totally unaware that an online petition existed; three had got to know about it at the last minute through emails from friends and one had stumbled across it by chance.

The figure of 1,000,000 signatures therefore isn't a realistic reflection of the opinions of millions of motorists and as such is fairly meaningless.

Conduct a 'proper' poll throughout the media and elsewhere, ensuring that the majority of people are aware and I would suggest that the 1,000,000 figure would increase by a minimum of tenfold and probably a great deal more.

Oh come on, NewsNight! Get with the programme!! There is absolutely no comparison with the Petition you quote in your e-newsletter re how authentic and useful it is, and the vote re the Petition on roadcharging. The anti-roadcharging Petition has a real purpose !!! I know because I live in a rural area, albeit only 50 miles from London and your tv studio (I realise this might as well be the Dark Side Of The Moon to you) and there are no buses after 6.30pm and none at all on Sundays. Therefore one needs a car - and, as a 60+-er, not to be charged an arm and a leg to use it!!! We ought to know MORE about these Downing Street Petitions - perhaps you would like to run a piece on them, once a week? - if everyone had signed one against the Iraq War (2million marched in London), and if the Government (ha!) had taken any notice (as they are now of the anti-roadcharging viewpoints), then we would not be embroiled in Iraq at the moment. And on and on .... Such petitions are useful sounding board not to say antidote to the increasingly daft stuff streaming endlessly out of Downing Street.

Surveys can be rigged to get the answers required by the people who initiate the survey. I believe that is how Lewisham now has a Mayor and an ALMO. I believe the results of surveys should not be considered enough evidence that the majority of people want changes to the rules. In a democracy we should be allowed to vote on important issues.

Whilst I'm sure it would be great fun to have any prime minister stand in a barrel of custard and sing an old music hall number I'm afraid I voted against for the tedious, if rather important, reason that this kind of petition devalues the idea of citizen participation.

Mind you, given the meteoric rise of TV shows that depend on premium-rate phone-in votes I suppose it's only a matter of time before the treasury proposes that petition voting should also be by premium-rate number.

Tax the garrulous. How's that for an election promise?!?

It is very sad and depressing that Newsnight treats this petition in this trivial way. Many people such as myself are concerned that the government seems to be using the environment as a reason for increasing the level of taxation and to intrude upon the way we live our lives.
If you are really concerned about congestion then why not get the government to explain its railways policy where new franchise specifications ask for a reduction in services as with First Great Western, fares are increased above inflation, no new railawys are being built in England (unlike Scotland), there is no expansion of electrification and there is a virtual standstill on the construction of new trains.

A petition demanding a decent and integrated transport system would be more appropriate.

Road pricing is all about making money amd those objecting to it, simply car eonly about thier own pockets.

What should be happening is that public transport should no longer be allowed in private hands and be palced back into public ownership and a decent and 21st century system as they do have in Berlin, put in place.

That would please everyone and rmeove the need for road pricing whilst at the same time benefiting the environment.

All too advanced an idea for the minds of our politicians and those of the british public.

Newsnight should stick to serious issues and leave the jokes to those more witty.

The million votes say more about personal greed than the environmental welfare of our nation. Of course many will vote for a none increase of tax. Those who justify their yes vote by claiming congestion is not a problem or that cars don't significantly pollute the atmosphere are only deluding themselves.

Road taxes and fuel duty do not cover the cost of maintaining and running our roads. Therefore ordinary tax payers are subsidising drivers. Road charging is the best way to redress this balance and to reduce congestion as long as the only roads that are charged for are ones where decent public transport services, at reasonable prices, have first been established.

Steve Knowlson misses the point also:

It's not just a case of clicking on a link.

While it might not just be case of clicking a link, you still don't have to demonstrate any actual knowledge or understanding of the proposal.

It's easy to go through a form and a click-back if you're fired up about something - that doesn't mean you have to understand.

Steve Knowlson misses the point also:

It's not just a case of clicking on a link.

While it might not just be case of clicking a link, you still don't have to demonstrate any actual knowledge or understanding of the proposal.

It's easy to go through a form and a click-back if you're fired up about something - that doesn't mean you have to understand.

On line petitions sound great and I am happy to sign up for anything that might make Mr Blair aware that there is only so much he can squeeze out of the hard working people of the United Kingdom before we have nothing left to give! I would be wonderful if Mr Blair and his Government listened to what the voting pubic wanted but he is so far off track it is astonishing he and his associates are still in charge. Is this about the environment and conjestion? Or is it really about funding more ineffective costly policies

this's another form of tax - like the tax on rubbish - the first time in hstory that rubbish has taxed rubbish!

For heaven's sake! There was one bastion of the 麻豆社 where the dumb hadn't invaded - and that was Newsnight. Now you are asking us to vote on a facile and ridiculous opinion poll as some kind of gauge of their usefulness or not. How about this question:
"We the undersigned believe that the 麻豆社 has been infested with "yoof" producers who have little knowledge of, or interest in, serious political matters any more and we request that they should parade through the streets of Shepherd's Bush in sackcloth and ashes so that we may jeer at their foolishness."

A new petition has appeared on the Downing Street website today, it asks the Prime Minister to RESIGN, DISSOLVE PARLIAMENT, CALL AN ELECTION. it has just gone on-line and already there is 277 signatories. If the Government won't listen to a million motorist lets see how many people will sign this petition which is a vote of no confidence in Tony Blair and New Labour, Please sign the petition and spread the word.

I am self-employed and drive all over Leeds as part of my job. I need to take equipment with me to do my job and it would be impossible to travel by public transport, if such a thing existed around Leeds. Like IR35 this is just another tax to hit people like me trying to make a reasonable living! If this Government is so set on this tax why did they stop the introduction of a new tramway for Leeds? We were much better served by public transport when trams, and trolley buses, ran through Leeds and Bradford. I can remember them, and the idiots who scrapped them along with miles of local rail links which are so babdly needed now!

It is a pity that Newsnight has cast a seed of prejudicial doubt on the road tax petition.
Instead of belittling online petitions with a crass one of your own you could have provided a link for people who have just heard about it, should they wish to sign. I am sure the majority of us still believe that WE employ Ministers to work for US and in defence of the common law and our constitutional rights and liberties. We do not want to be snooped on everywhere we go or have a tax on our freedom. It was governments who destroyed 2/3 of the railway network and now with the same short-sightedness plan to charge for necessary journeys now they have destroyed our town centres and post offices.

Whether or not petitions are taken notice of depends on whether a given petition supports the governments line. This government has established form when taking note of public opinion. It has ignored what I believe to be the two biggest demonstrations this country has ever seen - The Countryside Alliance march and the Stop the War march. Why then should we expect the government to take notice of public opinion over road pricing? Douglas Alexander stated this morning on Radio 4 that he welcomed the debate on the subject. He also said that governments have to take tough decisions that might not please everyone. This is coded language for telling the public that the government will listen and then go ahead and introduce road pricing anyway. Democracy has never been "New" Labour's strong suit.

There would appear to be plenty of brain dead eco-fascists contributing to this blog trying their hardest to rubbish the petition on road pricing. It is not about taxation it is about state surveillance of the majority of the population and amounts to all the worst combined human rights aspects of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. Despite all the pro road pricing propaganda spewed out by the 麻豆社 over recent months over a million people have already spoken their minds. This could double over the next week, I understand that the web site " crashed " this morning under the pressure. I expect that Newsnight will continue to tow the 麻豆社 propaganda line, but what can you expect when once thoughtful but perhaps now brain dead through increasing wealth left wing commentators like Polly Toynbe support road pricing. Its all the rich trying to enslave the poor, but perhaps Peter Hain has seen the light with his comments about City Bonuses at the weekend.

If everyone in the country with internet access had known about the petition one month ago, when I added my name, I feel quite confident that there would have been millions more names on it now.
To argue that it is too easy to register your protest via the internet is facile in relation to such an issue that involves peoples lives, time, frustration and cost of living.

If everyone in the country with internet access had known about the petition one month ago, when I added my name, I feel quite confident that there would have been millions more names on it now.
To argue that it is too easy to register your protest via the internet is facile in relation to such an issue that involves peoples lives, time, frustration and cost of living.

we should also include in the
petition, for the removal of sll
the speed humps that is appearing
all over the country, costing millions of pounds, . A speed camera at these sites would be a more feasable proposition

While the petition on road pricing has a great deal of relevance, I can't see what would be acheived by getting the PM to stand in a barrel of custard and sing.
I suppose it serves to illustrate that fact that he is as unlikely to take notice of one as the other.

Newsnight is absolueltly right to question the validity of petitions as a reflection of public opinion.
Petitions are probably the most flawed form of democracy in existence. Who sets the question? Who is asked? ... these are just the most obvious flaws.
Where for example is the petition to support road pricing? Many people (perhaps milions) support it but have not been herded into 'signing up' their support.

The only thing which will help avoid road congestion is for petrol to be rationed for all motorists. All households should be given ONE ration book for their car - whatever its size. Gas guzzlers should not have more than anyone else. To alleviate the problems by charging people with these monsters is, simply, to allow the rich to pollute - needlessly - with their money, to the detriment of our whole environment. Universal car usage is NOT necessary, as many of us are old enough to remember. There was a time when the streets were safe and quiet, unlike the hell that they now are, and people used their own two feet. Vive la public transport.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we already have a pay as you drive tax. That being in the price of fuel, with about 80% of the price being pure tax. Then of course there's the 拢185 or more purely for the privelage of having a vehicle on the road, and we mustn't forget the tax that is a part of your vehicle insurance, not to mention the ever increasing cost of an MOT.
And with the state of the roads wrecking our cars, greedy Gordon syphons even more money off us in VAT, on the repairs every time something on our cars get wrecked due to the appaling state of our road network.
With the amount of cash that is milked from the motorist each year we should have a road system able to cope, and with sufaces like carpet. Also a public transport system that gets people to where they need to go, that runs at all hours, and not just at the times that generate most profit, and at a price that would encourage us to leave the car at home.
If we had some evidence of our money being wisely spent on the roads and public transport system, I doubt that many motorists would complain at the current levels of taxation.

The fact is, if the government had adopted sensible policies on transport, employment, and housing, then congestion would not be an issue with jobs and housing being spread evenly around the british isles, and not all crammed into the south east. Were that the case, then the infrastrucure would cope, rather than the situation we have, where ever more is asked of a system that has been overstreached for years.
Of course there's the other issue, which is big brother. This government want to know where we all are at all times, and try and control where we go and what we all do.
The fact is, this government have ripped us all off wholesale, having raided our pension funds and introduced ever more and higher taxes, and then wasted virtually every penny they'e taken on nonsensical schemes, targets, administration, non jobs, botched repairs on things they've wrecked through their utter incompetence, such as the pension system, etc, etc, etc. And having blown all that money, they are coming back to the good old motorist, who is seen as the most convenient cash cow, using the environment as their excuse, to milk us further.

As a former transport planner, it is 100% clear to me that the only way to encourage people to make long-term location choices for their work and home that are economically and environmentally sensible is, indeed, to introduce road pricing.

If we don't do this then large sections of the public will continue to make location decisions that are detrimental to the public good, because they have a free option to clog up any parts of our road network that they wish to! The only way to persuade them to stop doing this is to introduce road pricing schemes which gradually raise the costs of anti-social motoring [whilst reducing the costs of those of us who do not abuse car ownership!]

Of course it will be absolutely essential for the road pricing scheme that is introduced to leave motorists as a group tax-neutral [ie money raised via road pricing should be balanced by money saved by reducing petrol duty, road fund licences etc] otherwise the alarmists would be justified in complaining about extra taxes.

But if we don't get road pricing introduced we will continue to have our road networks increasingly clogged by those who don't give a fig for their impact on the rest of the public [most notably the "Cheshire Set" of avid motorists, who have been busy clogging up my email inbox with entreaties to sign this wretched, anti-democratic and utterly misguided petition!]

These petitions are just click-through nonsense that are in danger of obfuscating the issues and distracting the Government from taking a rational approach to difficult and unpopular problems. You can't govern effectively via opinion polls - and what this country needs is some proper leadership from its politicians, not approval-seeking lightweights who blow with the wind of whatever the latest opinion poll has been! Small wonder that people have no confidence in politicians to come up with the right answers, when they appear intent on parrotting back whatever populist nonsense the latest pressure group has come up with!!

As a former transport planner, it is 100% clear to me that the only way to encourage people to make long-term location choices for their work and home that are economically and environmentally sensible is, indeed, to introduce road pricing.

If we don't do this then large sections of the public will continue to make location decisions that are detrimental to the public good, because they have a free option to clog up any parts of our road network that they wish to! The only way to persuade them to stop doing this is to introduce road pricing schemes which gradually raise the costs of anti-social motoring [whilst reducing the costs of those of us who do not abuse car ownership!]

Of course it will be absolutely essential for the road pricing scheme that is introduced to leave motorists as a group tax-neutral [ie money raised via road pricing should be balanced by money saved by reducing petrol duty, road fund licences etc] otherwise the alarmists would be justified in complaining about extra taxes. But if we don't get road pricing introduced we will continue to have our road networks increasingly clogged by those who don't give a fig for their impact on the rest of the public [most notably the "Cheshire Set" of avid motorists, who have been busy clogging up my email inbox with entreaties to sign this wretched, anti-democratic and utterly misguided petition!]

These petitions are just click-through nonsense that are in danger of obfuscating the issues and distracting the Government from taking a rational approach to difficult and unpopular problems. You can't govern effectively via opinion polls - and what this country needs is some proper leadership from its politicians, not approval-seeking lightweights who blow with the wind of whatever the latest opinion poll has been! Small wonder that people have no confidence in politicians to come up with the right answers, when they appear intent on parrotting back whatever populist nonsense the latest pressure group has come up with!!

The "Sigfried Line" petition proposal advanced by the anonymous Tex can hardly be taken seriously for the following reasons:
- Blair would not know the words
- He would need to be told what the Siegfried Line was and to appoint an expensive Parliamentary Committee to advise an independent view
- He would be charged with uttering words likely to incite racial hatred and therefore has a perfect get-out
- his protest would soon be shut down by the boys in blue in line because of his own legislation covering embargoed areas close to H of P

He wouldn't do it:
- He doesn't know the words
- Someone would have to tell him about the 39/45 conflict - but no one in New Labour is old enough to remember it
- He would be charged with "inciting racial hatred"
- The boys in blue would be required to treat him like the unfortunate Mr Dow for the same reasons
- First he would demand a Royal Commission (or advice from Lord Goldsmith) as to its legality

Question is: did Blair sign up to the "spy in the sky " petition? The nation should be told

He wouldn't do it:
- He doesn't know the words
- Someone would have to tell him about the 39/45 conflict - but no one in New Labour is old enough to remember it
- He would be charged with "inciting racial hatred"
- The boys in blue would be required to treat him like the unfortunate Mr Dow for the same reasons
- First he would demand a Royal Commission (or advice from Lord Goldsmith) as to its legality

Question is: did Blair sign up to the "spy in the sky " petition? The nation should be told

Nice try Tez, but red in tooth and claw Blairites aren't going to be drawn by a foul attempt to ridicule the leader. In any case:
- he wouldn't know the words
- no one in New Labour is old enough to remember the 39/45 confloict thanks to the recent pulping of modern history textbooks
- Lord Goldsmith wouldn't allow him to commit himself so firmly again
- Anthony Blair would be guilty of"inciting racial hatred"
- Political protests are banned in the area where he would perform

Joe Soap (comment no.5) - this is a fantastic idea! I suggest that you set up a promise on the Pledgebank website that reads:

I will pledge 拢1 to Comic Relief if the Prime Minister sings "We're Going To Hang Out The Washing On The Siegfried Line" through a megaphone while standing in a barrel of custard outside Parliament BUT only if 1 million people to likewise!

I'm sure we can find 1 million people to sign up to that

Wealthy, city based media and political elites don't seem to have the slightest conception of how unpopular these proposals are. Road pricing is an unfair tax which disproportionately targets the less well off and those in areas without good public transport provisions.

If there are doubts about the polls validity it would be easy for the government to analyse a sample and work out what proportion of votes are genuine. They collected names and adresses, unlike your poll which is unverifiable as well as fatuous. This unfounded speculation just smells of bias on the part of the 麻豆社.

Actually internet petitions are potentially more valid than conventional ones because people are not pressurised into signing up by fervent doorstep activists.

Why doesn't Newsnight ask Douglas Alexander if there has to be an experimental area to carry out the proposed road pricing scheme why does it have to be Manchester or Birmingham. If Mr Alexander's scheme is so good and benefits the country and industry, why doesn't he do his trial in his own constituency of Paisley & Renfrewshire South, or maybe Airdrie & Shotts John Reid's constituency, Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeat Gordon MP's are likely to lose their seats North of the border. The reason over a million people signed the road pricing petition is we know that the proposed scheme as nothing to do with congestion and everything to do with Gordon Brown filling his pockets yet again with the taxes paid by motorists of Britain. This idea should be thrown out just like New Labour Gordon Brown, John Reid, Tony Blair and Douglas Alexander.

the newsnight petition is stupid - even if the PM did as requested it would solve nothing whereas the original road petition had a valid point. Most people are fed up with the governmental abuse of its power and persecution of the working population in the persuit of ever increasing taxes. On-line voting/signing is the ideal medium and anyone saying it is just a click clearly has not looked at it as you are required to validate yourself and have to respomd to to an email to sign. the only trouble is that, just like everything else, if it is not what the government want to hear then they ignore it!

All for an affordable Road Pricing if:

1) suitable exclusions

2) properly thought through

3) MOST IMPORTANT: its exclusively for Environmental & Global Warming related investment (research, solutions, projects etc)

But suspect dear old Tax & Spend habits of Gordon Brown & the Treasury see this as just another means of raising revenue ..

... then blowing it (based on track record) on:

- numerous failing schemes
- propping up Browns economic mirage

vikingar

of course a petition reflects public opinion. People do not sign a petition for the fun of it, they think about about it and if they support the petition, they sign it. Blair get in that custard

Custard I'd use Tar and then feather him!

of course a petition reflects public opinion. People do not sign a petition for the fun of it, they think about about it and if they support the petition, they sign it. Blair get in that custard

Petition online?
No 10 has a look at their server web logs, they have your IP address which was recorded when you signed the petition. Cross reference this with your ISP, they now have the name and address of you, the poster. Never has it been so easy for a government to know who opposes them and who to watch.
George Orwell rules.
I'll never sign a petition, but the 麻豆社 know who I am now!

How do I access the petition in order to view it and eventually sign it? Thankyou

of course a petition reflects public opinion. People do not sign a petition for the fun of it, they think about about it and if they support the petition, they sign it. Blair get in that custard

I signed the road petition because I am fed up with motorists being penalised and would like to see hypothecation introduced overall, but especially in this area.

I signed the 'custard' petition because in my opinion it's all Tony Blair (may I add the rest of this Government please?) is good for.

I wish we had the Swiss system so that those of us who opposed the war on Iraq and this Government's continuing stealth taxes could be heard within a democratic system.

I suppose when a chance for ordinary people to express an opinion comes up, we can expect the 麻豆社 to trivialise it, take the mickey out of it, and turn it into a joke.
The sad truth is that the 麻豆社, once a fine, widely respected organasation, is now the joke, just a tool of a left wing government.
Pity Paxo is no longer a serious commentator, quite sad really.

How could anyone possibly vote 'no'? Aside from stepping down, it would be the best thing Blair could do this year. I'd like to see Dave Cameron dressed as George Formby playing accomapaniment on the banjo whilst standing in a vat of Um Bongo. Nothing to do with anything really; just a thought....

The custard should be boiling !

The thought of the PM standing in custard fills me with trepidation especially in leading brand. Imagine the headlines 鈥� 鈥淏lair Sings as Birds Culled鈥�

I don't like the petition for a very simple reason. There's nowhere to vote against it.

Even aside from that, there's no referene to the issues from a pro and anti viewpoint.

I know a certain amount about the issue. I could easily find out more. But people who actively want to vote will vote the way their gut or their wallet tells them to.

Will I pay more or less? Will the overall take be neutral to the current method of tax but divided up more fairly according to who pollutes most? Does that mean delivery costs rise to reflect the real cost? Nothing is clear at all regarding the answers to these questions or anything else come to that.

Reduce any poll to a gut\wallet lowest common denominator and you'll get the answer you've rigged it to get. Is the petition fairly worded as it stands? I don't think it would pass any standard of fairness at all.

As such, 100, or 1 million votes doesn't make the greatest amount of difference. All it tells me is that it's a hot issue - nothing more at all.

Unfourtunately not enough off the British public know about this sight.
Also if you are non ressident unable to vote.
The British should demonstrate more publicly, when they dissagree with the government.
When they took to the streets over Maggie Thatchers poll tax.The government took notice.
Yet! under BLIAR they are paying 3 times as much.
And they just sit back letting him put stealth tax, after stealth tax.
Next he will be taxing the AIR that we breath.

I can think of alot more reason to protest.
1.INHERITANCE TAX ON PROPERTY VALUED UNDER 拢500.000.00

2.A VOTE OFF NO CONFIDENCE IN THE GOVERNMENT.

3.NO FREEBIE HOLIDAYS FOR BLAIR,WIFE OR CHILDREN.

4.NO HIGH LOANS FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT AN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION.

5.CONSCRIPTION FOR YOUNG OFFENDERS.

The above is just for starters.The British public are to meak.
unfourtunatly by the time they inherit the world.
There will not be much left.

Unfourtunately not enough off the British public know about this sight.
Also if you are non ressident unable to vote.
The British should demonstrate more publicly, when they dissagree with the government.
When they took to the streets over Maggie Thatchers poll tax.The government took notice.
Yet! under BLIAR they are paying 3 times as much.
And they just sit back letting him put stealth tax, after stealth tax.
Next he will be taxing the AIR that we breath.

I can think of alot more reason to protest.
1.INHERITANCE TAX ON PROPERTY VALUED UNDER 拢500.000.00

2.A VOTE OFF NO CONFIDENCE IN THE GOVERNMENT.

3.NO FREEBIE HOLIDAYS FOR BLAIR,WIFE OR CHILDREN.

4.NO HIGH LOANS FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT AN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION.

5.CONSCRIPTION FOR YOUNG OFFENDERS.

The above is just for starters.The British public are to meak.
unfourtunatly by the time they inherit the world.
There will not be much left.

On-line petitions - great. But look further, when Dowing Street runs one they want to link your terrestrial address with that of your email address. Why? The safeguards are already there as with this comment your actual address is not required you are varified through your provider. But now frequent chatter between certain email addresses could be monitored - then all the easier for there to be a loud knock on your door in the "early hours"

The fact that a large majority of voters (currently 76%) would like Tony Blair to be humiliated by standing in a barrel of custard whilst singing just goes to show what a figure of contempt he is to the mainstream public.

Yes, I signed the Road Tax petition and the Custard Petition. Of course, you failed with a unique opportunity on the custard petition - what you should have suggested was that he had to be upside down in something more akin to a farm yard. Then he would be in the same position as most of the people in the country - thanks to this set of money grabbers we have in power now!

Just to back up what Ian Mansfield wrote below about inaccurate emails, here is the latest incarnation of the email accompanying the petition. Almost all the information is incorrect. The Newsnight experiment is completely justified - petitions such as this don't mean anything when the people signing it haven't been given the right information.

"If you drive a car, please read -

Sarah Kennedy was talking about this proposed car tax scheme on Radio
2. Apparently there is only one month left to register your objection
to the 'Pay As You Go' road tax.

The petition is on the 10 Downing St website but they didn't tell
anybody about it. Therefore at the time of Sarah's comments only
250,000 people had signed it and 750,000 signatures are required for
the government to at least take any notice.

Once you've given your details (you don't have to give your full
address, just house number and postcode will do), they will send you
an email with a link in it. Once you click on that link, you'll have
signed the petition.

The government's proposal to introduce road pricing will mean you
having to purchase a tracking device for your car and paying a monthly
bill to use it. The tracking device will cost about 拢200 and in a
recent study by the 麻豆社, the lowest monthly bill was 拢28 for a rural
florist and 拢194 for a delivery driver. A non working mother who used
the car to take the kids to school paid 拢86 in one month.

On top of this massive increase in tax, you will be tracked. Somebody
will know where you are at all times. They will also know how fast you
have been going, so even if you accidentally creep over a speed limit
in time you can probably expect a Notice of Intended Prosecution with
your monthly bill.

If you are concerned about this Orwellian plan and want to stop the
constant bashing of the car driver, please sign the petition on No
10's new website (link below) and pass this on to as many people as
possible. Sign up if you value your freedom and democratic rights -

Pardon my language, but you're just pissing in the soup with this stunt. You might as well send spam to prove that email doesn't work. There is scope for a serious discussion of online petitions, but this isn't it.

what will mhappen on the public comment base on the arrangment of the value of words that can be used as the main important map, for the work of the matter,choose the best of the ones to be used and the other will take a liitle words to complete it,that is why there is competition of thoing.because ideas come out from many angle to make a destinction.but ideasbase on the matter of what is the best to make the map.

Rather see Blair head first in the Barrel, where he can sing what he likes.
Probably 'I'm in the Money' would be fitting.

I think this just shows how petitions force people artificially into two camps.
What about the many many people who would prefer to see the PM perform "Raw Hide" followed by Prescot doing the "wheals cha cha" danse? where do we sign?

While he's standing in a barrel he's not off doing anything that might be detrimental to the country, that's why I voted yes in the Newsnight poll. He's got no credibility left to lose.

As for the information on the original petition being incorrect as claimed by Cat, they have to track you to charge you for using roads, especially if different roads have different rates, and they need to know when you were there if the rate varies by time of day. If it was just a charge per mile, fuel tax already exists to do that. The fact that safeguards will be put into place to prevent abuse of the information shows that the risk is there and that at some point, it will be expedient to circumvent those safeguards. The cost figures may be inaccurate but even if it starts nice and low to reassure people, it will soon wind up once the system is fully operational and we will be footing the bill for it all, either in taxes or as a specific charge to vehicle owners.

There is the point that it won't work to reduce congestion because for it to discourage people from using their cars on the roads, there has to be an alternative, and for most of us that does not exist. Therefore it's just another attempt to screw more taxes out of people.

I submitted a petition to the government website. My petition was rejected as it contained a link to a factual external website.
petitions.pm.gov.uk/NoHelmets
link: www.cyclehelmets.org

However other petitions have been accepted, and remain on the site despite downing street knowing about external web links on their petitions.
e.g. petitions.pm.gov.uk/wessextrains

The whole website is inconsistent with its own rules.

My Ol'Gran c.1940s advised me :
Ask a stupid question and you'll get a silly reply ,,,,
wot I mean is,
for JP to use "Custard & Blair's Singing propensity" as a case for pouring scorn on petitions 'in general' makes light of reasonable avenues of expressing concern and plays into the hands of those who would take more extreem measures to make their point.

Malcolm.
SW England.

Keith Phair:

You're a former transport planner are you? This mess is clearly your fault!

To address your points:

1, I've read Eddington's report and he clearly states that road charging will cost at the most (80p/km) at the busiest times. People travelling to work at rush hour are not "avid motorists not giving a fig about the rest of the public". They're simply people trying to get to work to put a roof over their family's head and food on the table.

2, People don't make location decisions to "the detriment of the public good". They make them out of economic necessity. I've bought a house for my family in a country town 25 miles from Bristol because I couldn't afford one in the city.

3, Road-charging cannot possibly be revenue-neutral or it simply wouldn't work. Surely as a transport planner you must understand that? If any scheme is revenue-neutral it will not dissuade people from travelling at the busiest times. Eddington makes this explicit in his report.

4, You, and many others on this thread, fall into the 麻豆社/Independent/Government/Londoncentric media trap of denigrating all the 1.3 million signatories to the petition as "click-through" idiots who haven't given the issue any thought. You're wrong.

5, Proper investment in an integrated French, German or Japanese style public transport system is the solution to our congestion problems.

If I use 20p/km instead of Eddington's suggested 80p/km max road price, it would cost me 拢250 per month JUST TO GET TO WORK. That's almost 20 per cent of my take home pay.

Is it any wonder that I, and many others like me are opposed to road charging?

There is a need for a Newsnight programme about the taxation of private cars. Facts should include:

1. How much tax is raised on fuel and by other means?

2. How much of this is spent on roads?

3. How much extra tax would be raised by road charging?

Issues would include:

A. What would be the one-off and annual cost of introducing road charging?

B. Is fuel tax a fairer tax than road charging and if so why not increase the fuel tax if the chancellor needs more tax?

C. Why is VAT charged on fuel tax?

D. How much is private car transport penalised for carbon emissions compared with agriculture which is responsible for higher carbon emissions?

I suspect that most people would sign a few other petitions as well.

One would say "We would like our roads to be less congested". "I don't want more of my local countryside lost under tarmac/the road outside my house widened" would also be popular. As would "We should do something about the environmental damage trasnport emissions cause."

The problem is reconciling those competing views into something more workable than a petition that "everyone should get off the road except me."

There are problems with road charging, not least those cause by the Government being so timid about arguing for a particular system that wild rumours can spread about what is necessary. But kneejerk opposition will not deliver the transport system that in reality all of us - whether drivers or militant cyclists - would like. The risk is it will paralyse the Government into another 10 years of incation.

QUOTE TOPIC STORY:

"But are these 鈥渦nprecedented鈥� numbers not quite as remarkable as they appear? In Monday鈥檚 programme Newsnight will be asking how good an indicator of public opinion such petitions really are."

Theres no 'Buts' about it. Those unprecedented numbers are from the people of this country who are socially aware, have internet access, and can be bothered to fill in the form. Thats an extremely high number. Furthermore the numbers are up to 1.4million when I filled in the form.

Theres and old saying.
VOTED BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE.

While nearly all politicians and perhaps some at the 麻豆社 disregard this the voting elctorate havent.

The indication is clear. The public are sick and tired of being lied to, controled, and taxed. The taxing is bad enough, but add the electronic tracking of the population as they go about their daily business is a blatant disregard for our freedom.

Wouldnt it be lovely if the public were allowed to vote on issues via the internet. of course no democratic government would allow such a thing.

This petition doesn't show anything. Is there a counter petition for us to sign? We need a counter response to the 'car lobby' rather like the Pro-test group who set up in response to animal rights campaigners.
No one is making the point that this tax WOULD REPLACE ROAD TAX AND PETROL DUTY. It is aimed at knocking down congestion which is responsible for 20% of our carbon emissions. It is part of an ethical, green, transport policy which I, personally, support. The civil liberties issues are interesting but undoubtedly overblown.
I am, I suppose, a 鈥榞reen socialist鈥�. I would be happy with incentives for people to buy 鈥榞reen鈥� cars and disincentives for those who don鈥檛. The irony is that despite the fact that car manufacturers have designed cleaner, more economical cars in recent years, with catalytic converters and low lead output, increasing numbers of consumers still choose 4 x 4鈥檚 and people carriers etc. rather than smaller green cars. The net environmental improvement is therefore negligible.
Emissions are not just to do with engine size but also emissions are affected by when and where you travel. For example, a 鈥榞reen鈥� vehicle gridlocked on a motorway would end up spewing out a lot of carbondioxide. It鈥檚 a dual approach, green engines and green usage, if you know what I mean.
The Mail also led the outcry against recycling incentives where councils charge those who don鈥檛, basically. I totally support such initiatives and reject the 鈥榥anny state鈥� argument. Those same people who cite the 'nanny state' are the ones who want state intervention when it comes to crime. Well, for me, at least, pollution and irresponsibile behaviour regarding the environment are crimes. If you haven鈥檛 seen Al Gore鈥檚 鈥楢n inconvenient truth鈥� I would strongly recommend it.
I hope the British spirit which won the war and is responsible for people shouting for their freedoms, as with this petition, can be channelled in a green direction. I respect and love their passion but I think they are wrong and should support green initiatives.
Guy Mortensen

Robert Shand (Feb 12th) suggested petrol rationing as away of limiting carbon emmissions. In my view this idea is of limited value due to it's narrow focus. Food rationing during WW2 was an urgent necessity for very obvious reasons. We are now told to worry about our individual "carbon footprint". It seems reasonable to regard carbon emmission as a finite and limited commodity, so let's give every individual a carbon ration. That way the fliers need not point the finger at luxury car drivers and, by the same token, the hypocrisy of those opinion formers who choose to live unnecessarily in very large homes, with their consequent heating emmissions, would be spotlighted. I could go on, but surely we need to examine carefully before awarding blame.

John Bayntun

The need to target the right people who can make the changes, and not pass the buck to someone else, in this case the motorist and consumer.
Road charging is an issue which is of great concern to the majority of the population, myself included, and that I see various reasons for such mixed opinions on climate change.
National congestion charging is not the solution in my opinion. This will not reduce emissions, as it will not improve the transport that is available and that is necessary to maintain a developed industrialised economy. When used in conjunction with a solution, congestion charging would be able to provide better transport. Every day millions of commuters clog up the road network entering the major cities of the UK. This costs the economy in lost time and personal leisure. If congestion charging was introduced in urban areas in conjunction with park and ride schemes, workers could commute with greater efficiency, providing them with more leisure time and improve work efficiency. It seems too many governments, local and national are intent of finding new sources of income without providing a solution to the problems they are justifying their tax increases on. The fuel tax escalator of the 90's did not reduce vehicle use or cut greenhouse gas emissions, so if anyone thinks a congestion charge will have any effect without providing a feasible alternative, I dispute their claims. I see it important that congestion charging is not confused with the UK's contribution to climate change. The UK is responsible for only 2.3% of CO2 emissions, the problem is global and needs to be addressed as such. Road charging indiscriminately charges all motorists irrespective of their Carbon emissions. If the UK government really wanted to cut CO2 emissions from road transport, they would link it to it's source, that being the fuel that produces it. Adding a 2 to 5 pence increase in fuel duty whilst aboloshing set rate road tax would reflect the Carbon emissions that are released, based upon the polluter pays principle. The amount that a motorist pays would also reflect their wear of the road network and their proportional maintenance contribution. Similarly with domestic waste disposal. Instead of introducing levies on individuals for the waste thay are unable to avoid generating, mainly from the packaging from their food, individuals are powerless to avoid the extra taxes to which they are subjected. Producers and manufacturers need to be the ones targeted, in order to produce the necessary solutions to the problems, such as more efficient vehicles and food packaging that is biodegradeable.

There also appears to be hidden reasons for the proposals. The maintenance of the national road network has been overseen by the Highways Agency for some time. The way the Highways Agency is set up within the Government in the Department of Transport, innovations and developments are proposed by the Transport Research Laborotary. (www.trl.co.uk) Trying to obtain information from these guys is like trying to pry George Bush out of Iraq. It's a 拢20 charge just to download a pdf file on research proposals. Hardly the signs of a democratic governmental regulator. This company has been privatised since 1996. Most other privatised utilities are regulated by regulating bodies, eg. Ofwat, Ofcom etc. I doubt the Transport Research Laborotary is regulated in this manner. I suspect the company is set to make considerable financial gain from their national road charging scheme proposal.

I have tried to sign the petition with 2 different email addresses several times and have not got the email through (have looked in junk/spam and not there either). Has this petition been sabotaged by number 10 to prevent more people signing it? Wouldn't be surprised. Anyone else have this problem.

I have tried to sign the petition with 2 different email addresses several times and have not got the email through (have looked in junk/spam and not there either). Has this petition been sabotaged by number 10 to prevent more people signing it? Wouldn't be surprised. Anyone else have this problem.

Hi, and thanks for the opportunity to talk about this survey.
If the government wants to price roads they will. They have a dreadful majority. But, it is true something needs to be done otherwise we will grind to a halt.
The feasibility studies should consider licensing cars thru the RFL to drive on the road at certain times. Motorways could have a scanner which reads a barcode/chip contained in the RFL disc that would say the driver has been licensed to drive on the roads at all times. Otherwise license cars to be used after the rush hour periods, the 'go-to-work' and 'come-home' times, and midday etc.
People could then make a decision to use their cars at specified times (unless going to a hospital - and here there could be a scanner at the hospital gates to say the car has travelled there) and they pay less in road tax.
Those who want to use their cars without limit should pay more.
HGV's if they travel after dark (after the rush hour) with essential goods like NHS supplies would also pay less, or be exempt if they enter an eta for their journey based upon satellite info and road conditions.
I agree we need to combat the overcrowding, but it could be said 'eat now and be merry for tomorrow the oil will dry up!'
Again, thanks for the opportunity to give my opinion.

This is just another typical labour stealth tax,and it won't make a slightest bit of difference to congestion. People will still use there cars because they have to.
Peter Rogers.

I am against road pricing.

I have become disabled and do not qualify for incapacity bennifit as I get a small occupational pension. I am 52yrs and served this country and its public in the police service.until i retired as government policies ment i did not get any pay or a sick pension.I paid my stamp for 32yrs but having moved address i cannot get NHS dentist to register me so i had to pay for private treatment. i have a medical problem which requires warmth but get no help towards my gas bill...
...i dont want charity...but i now know what makes such things as terrorists flourish... I cannot afford to pay any moor tax. If the tax burden increases any further I eill have to become a heroin addict so i can get the free voucher proposed. I would like to see this government looking after its citizens and not those of iraq, afganistan ect.

The more people who sign the anti road pricing petition, the stronger the argument for road pricing. After all the idea is to provide a disincentive for people to use their cars and the louder the protest, the better it is seen to be working.

Does anyone else find it so exsasperating that the basics of there becoming no room left on the roads is not even mentioned,millions are coming here legally,and millions more are coming here illegally,I despair at what point it becomes totally intolerable,perhaps when inevietably the water supply will not be enough to go round.

I don't think it makes a great deal of difference to be honest. The government have been the in habbit for many many years of making false promises, ignoring public opinion and driving our economy through the floor. I don't think the government would encourage or support any scheme which highlights how much of the population are sided against them.
We live in a country that likes to brand itself as democratic, despite the only choice being that of "which dictator do you want to be the face of parliament this time?".