Feb/March 2007

The final tally of signatories to the anti-road charging and tracking petition on the office of the Prime Minister's Downing Street Web site was 1,809,720 when it closed on 20 February. But there was little indication that the petition had achieved any direct impact in terms of changing Government policy.

The E-Petitions Web site (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk) was launched only last November, and most petitions prior to the infamous one on road charging were attracting only handfuls of signatories.

This changed with the posting of the road charging petition, which was placed by Peter Roberts, a 46-year-old salesman from Telford with no apparent history of large-scale public lobbying.

It simply read: 'We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to scrap the planned vehicle tracking and road pricing policy.' Its sub-text continued: 'The idea of tracking every vehicle at all times is sinister and wrong. Road pricing is already here with the high level of taxation on fuel. The more you travel, the more tax you pay.'

 

A succession of politicians interviewed in the press and media refuted the concept of 'government by referendum' implicit in the petition - a stance held by some to confirm suspicions that the site's whole purpose had been to serve as a 'safety valve' by taking the steam out of contentious policy issues, not as a genuine conduit for debate.

Eventually the question of whether petitions in general should be taken into account by governments started to eclipse the specific points raised by this one.

The petition did however prompt the publication of a fairly detailed if noncommittal official reply, purportedly by Tony Blair himself, which emphasised the point that no decision had yet been taken on future road charging policy. 'We have not made any decision about national road pricing,' it reads. 'Indeed we are simply not yet in a position to do so.'

The reply rehearses various arguments in favour of controls on traffic growth - notably the increasing congestion, and the high cost of road-building and other measures. But it avoids dwelling on environmental issues such as global warming, keeping the debate mainly within the realms of cost and convenience.

Interestingly, Tony Blair's reply also hints at a way of tracking drivers that it claims would keep the information out of the Government's hands. 'Existing technologies such as mobile phones and pay-as-you-drive insurance schemes may well be able to play a role here,' he suggests.

If nothing else, the episode has spurred the UK Government into emphasising that no firm decision on the issue has been taken, although the 'limbering up' tone in the Prime Minister's message makes it clear that it is still strongly on the agenda.

Peter Roberts has tried to perpetuate the debate by launching his own limited Web site (www.traveltax.org.uk), and the cry has also been taken up by an existing lobby group, the National Alliance Against Tolls, which has now posted its own petition on the Downing Street site.

This one, which is still open, had picked up 10,284 signatories when we looked. It reads: 'We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Scrap all existing and planned tolls, 'road pricing' and so-called 'congestion charging.