Wednesday - April 23, 2008

£75 charge for parents who do the school run in a 4x4 ‘gas guzzler’ (That’s $100 USA)

Are they doing something similiar back home? (USA) Seems I read or heard about it.

Anyway, I think it’s another way to scam the folks who can buy one of these. How about larger families? What’s next? An ASBO for a family with more then one child?  Two or three kids means ya need a bigger car.  Selfish unpatriotic planet killers.
Btw ... about 18 months ago, maybe more, a new regulation came into being with regard to the size and fit of child safety seats in cars. Even for kids as old as 10.  Now I’m not certain on this one point, but it may include 11 year olds as well.

Well, the damn safety seats which are mandatory are rather largish and cumbersome.  It’s my understanding that they won’t fit into really smaller cars, and I’ve no idea how that’s been addressed.  But, I have read that due to the size of these safety seats, many with multiple children have bought larger cars to accommodate the seats required by health and safety.

Thing that bothers me about this is that the cars in question are legal. The ppl who bought them have already paid a pretty hefty tax to own one. I haven’t a clue as to gas milage on these things, but if they’re so god awful bad then why allow their import?  If you allow them to be imported and taxed, what right does some self appointed busy body have to show disapproval by extra taxes?
But on the other hand now.  There is this.

This story centers around London. Think New York but much worse. Very narrow streets, HUGE congestion problems that never end and show no signs of doing so any time soon.

Many of these “people movers” are owned not by large families but by small ones. They are also the status symbol of the folks who can afford the luxury.
There are no garages in 80% of London.  You park in the street or often make some other arrangements.  Know too that to live in London and own one of these cars take a lot of $$$$. Or in the case here, ££££.  These generally are banking or investment types or folks often referred to as the movers and, they don’t usually have large families. Maybe one or two children.  Their very large cars take up a lot of room, and when it comes to taking the kiddies to school it’s been found that very many DO NOT car pool and in fact use these things to drop off just one child at school.

London has one thing in common with cities like NY in that many don’t have cars.  I’ve known ppl in both places who simply get around by subway (called the tube here) or by bus.  Sometimes train.  Never occurred to me to ask what they did on weekends.  I also know that some have cars they don’t use except to go further afield.  But make no mistake, the bigger cars, the 4x4s, the “people movers” do take a lot of space and really do add to problems of parking etc. This is NOT a new issue. It’s impossible to get around one of these vehicles on a London street if you needed to.  The problem of small parking spaces, narrow streets and overlarge cars in crowded spaces is a serious problem.

Having said all that .... I’m still bothered because the following article doesn’t mention all that.  No.  The problem among the busy bodies is apparently “emission
levels” of large cars.  They want to drive down, they say, the amount of carbon emissions caused by what they see as gas guzzlers.  Well, what if one 4x4 is actually being used to car pool several children. Isn’t that better then three or four smaller cars on the road?  And anyway, I have to return to my first point with regard to a car legally imported and taxed already.  If emissions are going to be the sticking point, then the tax should occur at the point of purchase all up
front. 

£75 charge for parents who do the school run in a 4x4 ‘gas guzzler’
By GWYNETH REES - More by this author »

Last updated at 20:39pm on 20th April 2008


Parents driving “gas guzzlers” on the school run are to be charged £75 a year.

Those who use 4x4s and people carriers will be hardest hit by plans to start charging parents to park in bays outside schools.

The fees will vary according to how “green” a car is, and those in smaller vehicles with lower emissions will pay nothing at all.

The scheme is currently being tested in the London borough of Richmond Upon Thames.

If it proves successful, it will be rolled out across the country.

Campaign groups and motoring organisations yesterday reacted with fury to the plans.

Sheila Rainger, of the RAC Foundation motoring charity, said: “This is yet another stealth tax that is hitting the family budget. For many parents, it is necessary to have a large car as they have three children who need car seats.

“It is very worrying that tax bands linked to carbon emissions are being used more and more frequently as a means of penalising motorists.

“At a time when fuel is going up, many people don’t have the money to pay for these additional charges.

“It would be better if there were incentives to drive smaller cars - such as parking closer to the school - than financial penalties for those driving larger cars.”

Margaret Morrissey, of the National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations, called the scheme “unfair and unrealistic”.

She said: “Mums and small children are such an easy target for councils.

“They should try offering some parking provisions and stop this nonsense. Many families have three or four children and they need the space to fit child seats.”

Previously, parents in Richmond could pick up a free permit from schools allowing them to park for free on double yellow lines or in bays for ten minutes.

But under the new scheme, to be introduced in September, those driving cars with higher carbon dioxide emissions will be charged £75 a year for such a permit.

Drivers of low-polluting cars will escape any charge.

In the trial, 13 schools will allow only parents with a permit to park for 15 minutes in a local bay.

The Local Government Association has already warned that the scheme will be rolled out across the country in the near future.

It follows a move by Richmond Council in 2006 to link the price of residents’ parking permits to engine emissions.

Those with larger cars saw their permit prices triple.

Last month, the Liberal Democrat-run council in the borough also announced it was changing its 200-vehicle public transport fleet to run on biodiesel, made from recycled cooking oil.

A spokesman for the council defended the move to charge, saying it was just following the Government’s lead.

He said: “The Government is trying to reduce school-run car use and we support it.

“We want to drive down carbon dioxide emissions and become the most sustainable county in the country.”

The council claimed that parents on the school run account for a fifth of the traffic on the borough’s roads at 8.50am during term time.
http://tinyurl.com/4ng6on

Posted by Drew458     on 04/23/2008 at 07:54 AM   
Filed Under: • Environment •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner