All councils

A recent announcement by the Transport Secretary, Grant Shapps, has made it clear that he’s ready to issue all councils the right to implement and charge for moving traffic violations, previously the remit of the police. Essentially, this is all about those yellow box junctions.

After the Commons transport committee stated that the police were ‘too thinly stretched to enforce everyday traffic violations’, Shapps has placed the responsibility of these minor infringements in the hands of local councils, and will be allowing them to keep any monies ‘earned’ from them.

Road improvements

It would be nice to think that all local councils have an understanding of where their traffic hotspots are, and make improvements to aid the flow of traffic, thereby negating any possible need for box junctions, but cynical as I am, I can’t help feeling that there will only be enough budget to place a previously unseen / unneeded box junction in place of other traffic improvement measures. The fact that they can now make money from them of course won’t influence their decision.

Nicholas Lyes of the RAC thinks that there may be a conflict of interest: “Local authorities know where congestion might require some form of enforcement, particularly in the case of box junctions, so it stands to reason they should be able to improve this through the use of enforcement.”

“However, we remain concerned that cash-strapped authorities may see this as an opportunity to extract more revenue from drivers.”

It’s worth noting that a report by the National Audit Office in 2018 stated that local authorities have had a 49.1% real-terms reduction in government funding between 2010/11 to 2017/18. Northampton County Council have been effectively declared bankrupt, and Norfolk, Surrey, and Lancashire County Councils aren’t too far behind them.

Northampton council have been given special dispensation to raise their council tax by 5% this year.

Between 2017/18, Transport for London collected up to £16 million in fines from drivers who fell foul of a yellow box junction, but nearly 80% of respondents to an RAC poll said that it was purely down to poorly structured traffic management; being forced to stop in the box junction due to poor sequencing of traffic lights beyond the box itself.

Discourteous driving

Box junctions were first introduced back in 1967, so impatient drivers aren’t a new phenomenon, but it does seem that as traffic volume builds, driving standards are falling. With the increase of ‘surveillance’ technology, the crime of ‘failing to supply information as to identity of driver when required’ has skyrocketed – from just 12,056 convictions in 2006 to 82,029 in 2016.

This is clearly an indication as to the proliferation of monitoring devices, and with technology advancing at such a rate, this soon will be outdated and unneeded; the car will automatically monitor and send data where needed, and as we’ve seen, adjust your speed accordingly.

But as with all technology, there will be downsides: Just the same as speed or safety cameras, there will be no discretion, no allowance for external influencing factors, and no escaping the penalty notice. To a degree, these box junction cameras are already at that point – blaming poor road design, or in-built blockages that seem almost designed to stop you in your tracks is no excuse, you will get fined for any indiscretion, minor or otherwise.

Scale of charges

A number of campaigners are suggesting that a warning notice would be an appropriate response for the first-time offender, perhaps with a sliding scale of charges – repeat offenders that are blatantly trying to cheat the system should face severe penalties.

However, if councils invest money from their ‘spend to save’ budgets, you can guarantee that they’ll want to see those savings immediately, so it’s unlikely that we’ll see a softly-softly approach when it comes to revenue generation. The full force of the law will be applied, with no doubt a lengthy, tenuous, and drawn-out appeals process.

Will we see a rise in box junctions with this new legislation? Do you think it will be aimed at creating a solution for traffic congestion? Or just a simple, quick and dirty way of making money? Let us know in the comments.

Photo © Copyright David Dixon and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.

“Tackling the climate emergency is essential, but this is about more than what we must do to meet that challenge, it’s also about our health, and the sort of towns and cities we want to live in.”

A cynic may say that with such focus on health, air pollution and congestion, rather than encouraging or incentivising other forms of transport or motive power, it’s pretty much guaranteed that “this isn’t about pricing drivers off the road” will pretty much exactly equate to that.

Paying more?

Research by the RAC has shown that 75% of motorists are worried that any change in how we pay for the roads will result in them paying more, and with sales of new Battery Electric Vehicles rising by 122% in the first nine months of 2019 (despite there being an overall 2.5% downturn in new car sales), we can clearly see that the government will need to implement a new pricing strategy sooner rather than later.

It’s long been argued that whatever form of taxation (such as the current VED) is added to the price of fuel; motorists who use the roads, will pay for the roads, but it’s quite possible that adding a surcharge to fuel will price hundreds of thousands of families off the road, and that still wouldn’t be a solution to the whole electricity debate.

Further still, it’s not quite as simple as adding tariffs to our domestic energy supply either – what of those motorists that haven’t been able to afford, or want, to make that switch over to ‘green’ motoring? It’s pretty clear that there must be some overlap between the systems.

Previous attempts

Back in 2005, an attempt was made to introduce, or at least, discuss, a new way to charge to motorists for using the roads. The idea being that small cars on small or uncongested roads would pay less than large cars using large or congested roads.

The examples used at the time were £0.02 per mile on uncongested roads, and as much as £1.34 where traffic was a problem. Each car would be fitted with satellite technology, which could track and calculate charges as the car was driven.

Unsurprisingly, 1.8 million motorists (around 6% of all drivers at the time) signed a petition against the scheme in 2007, and it was duly dropped. Fears of extra stealth surveillance and taxation were the main concerns.

Modern day

Worryingly, we’ve become so used to in-car technology, and the interference with our driving, that it will soon be mandatory to allow it to limit our speed, which of course means tracking our movements. As Lilian Greenwood points out – we’re much more aware of issues such as climate change, pollution and congestion now. So could this be part of the next attempt to monitor driving and apply charges?

There has been talk of ‘charge neutral’ and ‘congestion neutral’ pricing, but reading between the lines of the earlier statement by Greenwood, it would seem that congestion and air pollution are two of the hottest topics to be covered, so it’s doubtful that congestion neutral pricing will happen.

Given that any pricing structure would need to cover congestion, air pollution, emissions, road usage & maintenance, fuel duty and electric charging, it would seem doubtful that we’d be looking at the lower end of per mile charging.

National debate

The Transport Committee have proposed a national debate take place in 2020, in which these issues can be discussed, and put forward to the public for their input: “This isn’t about pricing drivers off the road, it’s about making sure that as many people as possible have a say in future plans so that we can manage the changes to come. The Transport Committee want to kickstart that conversation.”

Rarely have charges been introduced that favour the motorist, we often hear about stealth taxes and how it’s the motorist that’s being made to make up any shortfalls of revenue, we’d suspect this won’t be much different.

How should the government tackle this problem? What would be a fair pricing scheme? Do you think it could price some families off the road? Let us know in the comments.

Driven to distraction

Campaigners for road safety and MPs say record levels of road congestion and a lack of traffic police is the reason around 10million drivers continue to reach for their mobiles—to relieve the boredom of sitting in traffic.

According to the motoring organisation’s annual report, 23% of motorists confessed to still making or receiving calls on a hand-held phone while driving. The figure shot up to 51% of drivers between 17 and 24 years of age. Thirty-five per cent of the same under 25-year-olds age group said they checked email, social media, and text messages while driving. That percentage alone is terrifying, but even more so when you learn that this selfish and unnecessary move can up the chances of an accident by up to 24 times. In drivers over 25 years old, the figure was a lower, yet still worrying, 17%.

Government advice is that we should keep our mobile phones in our car’s glove compartment, but the RAC’s survey of 1,753 motorists discovered that only 15% are heeding this warning—25% say they keep their phones on the seat or the dashboard, instead, and 24% admitted to leaving their mobiles on audible, increasing the chance of distraction.

To compound matters, the number of Traffic Officers in England and Wales dropped from 3,766 in 2007 to 2,643 in 2017—that’s almost 30% over just a decade. In contrast, data from the Department for Transport reports that traffic congestion in Britain increased by 6.5% in the past ten years.

Not much cop

Lilian Greenwood MP, Chair of the Transport Committee, said:

‘In 2017, there were 773 casualties—including 43 fatalities and 135 serious injuries—in road traffic collisions where a driver using a mobile phone was a contributory factor.

‘Every one of these casualties could have been avoided if drivers had been paying attention to driving and not their phone.’

Tim Rogers, the lead on roads policing for the Police Federation of England and Wales, said:

‘Often they’re doing it in traffic, but inattention at any speed is lethal. These people will say they rarely see police on the roads, that they’ve never been stopped by police, so they perceive no risk in doing it.’

‘There’s also a problem with chief constables who cut dedicated traffic officers then claim “all our officers are traffic cops”.

‘Why do we accept it is OK for six people a day to die on our roads? It’s certainly not acceptable. We need more traffic police to reduce the number of causalities [sic] on our roads.’

The RAC says that the first thing the police need to do is catch mobile phone offenders in the act, but they also want both the government and the police should look into cars having the technology that can enforce the law against using hand-held devices while operating vehicles.

Look, Ma, no hands!

To stay within the law while driving or riding a motorcycle you must have hands-free access to your mobile (although MPs are proposing a ban on all hands-free devices in cars) or sat-nav and use a Bluetooth headset, voice command, a dashboard holder or mat, a windscreen mount, or a built-in sat-nav and the same applies whether you’re stopped at traffic lights, sitting in traffic, or are supervising a learner driver.

Unless circumstances dictate otherwise (like your job), the best bet is to keep your phone in your glove compartment, on silent. It’ll be near enough to you in an emergency. Research also shows you’re a better driver when driving in silence but if that bores you to the point of phone temptation, maybe consider the radio or an audiobook—or perhaps listen to Led Zeppelin?

Any device you use mustn’t block your view of the road ahead and you must stay in full control of your vehicle at all times. If the police stop you because they think you’re distracted or not in control, you could face prosecution.

While police numbers are down, in 12 months of ‘Operation Tramline’ alone, officers across the country in three so-called ‘supercabs’ caught and recorded motorists committing 1,062 offences of using hand-held devices while driving.

And, yes, modern life is busy but nothing on our phones is worth incurring penalty points, a fine, a prison sentence, or losing your licence. Even less so if it means risking your life.

Do you agree with the RAC’s findings? Have you noticed fewer police cars on the roads? Tell us your thoughts in the comment section.

1/3 cheaper to run

There seems to be a lot of misinformation when it comes to costs associated with going green, least of all a clear understanding of what it actually costs to run an all-electric vehicle; when averaged out per charge, how much will a single mile cost you?

To be clear, this isn’t about purchase price, maintenance cost, battery leasing & purchasing, but just mile for mile cost of energy – electricity versus unleaded and diesel if you will.

None of us would be surprised to hear that electricity miles are cheaper than fossil-fuelled miles, but being able to put it in to context does give us a little more insight and understanding.

The most frugal electric vehicles (the KIA e-Niro and Renault Zoe) offer a range of 33.1 miles to one pound (£1), the best diesel (Honda Civic Saloon 1.6i DTEC and the Ford Focus 1.5 EcoBlue) aren’t even close; 10.8 miles for each pound (£1) of ‘energy’.

Make up to an £11,740 difference

It could be argued that the price differential between the KIA e-Niro (£32,995) and the Honda Civic (£21,255) would buy you an awful lot of miles – nearly 128,000, but what of the Renault Zoe? The list price of the Zoe is actually less than the Civic, only by £35, but that’s not important; it isn’t just getting close to traditional ICE vehicles, it’s beating them. (And that’s before we look at any assistance to buy).

However, taking the Zoe as an example, you hire the batteries, and the bigger than annual mileage, the bigger the financial charge; with annual mileage of 10,500, you’d be paying £99 per month for the hire of the battery – nearly £1,200 on top of the purchase price.

Further still, the obvious comparison between the practicality, styling or just plain old ‘want’ of the vehicles isn’t to be underestimated. The Zoe is a small hatchback, ideally suited to town driving and loading up with shopping, whereas the Civic has more space, more range, looks smarter (although of course, that’s subjective) and is made by Honda, which means it should outlast the cockroaches that see off a nuclear holocaust.

Cheap motoring

For a long time, people have complained that electric vehicles don’t have enough range, are too expensive to purchase, not as practical, won’t fit their need because they can’t tow the Moon behind them – there’s always been a reason (usually financial) as to why they just don’t work (for them).

But today, the electric vehicle market has evolved into something that’s closer in price, with some models beating traditional ICE vehicle prices, a viable alternative for many motorists with range anxiety, and they offer all the performance that’s realistically usable on our road network.

Without doubt, there will be some motorists that an electric vehicle won’t suit, or isn’t yet a viable alternative, and even for those it does work for, you can’t help feeling that even now, there’s a compromise to be made if you choose electricity over internal combustion.

But let’s not forget, mainstream battery-electric vehicles have only really been in production for around ten years, and within that timeframe, battery prices have dropped to around a tenth of what they were, ranges have doubled, even tripled, performance has gone up, charging times have come down, and the breadth of the compromise is narrowing with each day that passes.

As a performance car engineer, I really never thought I’d see the day where electricity could take on fossil fuel in a straight fight and win, and while we’re still not quite there yet, you can guarantee that within this next decade, fossil fuel will be outdated and outclassed.

Perhaps the time is coming where the only drawback to owning an electric vehicle will be the tariffs imposed on us for charging them, and using the roads – much the same for fossil fuels now.

What do you think to electric vehicles? If price wasn’t a consideration, would you own one? Are they practical enough right now? Let us know in the comments.