Hasn't Howard thought of...
Discussion
...the motorists' vote?
1. curtail the deployment of speed cameras and increase the number of junction cameras to deter the increasing number of prats that seem quite prepared to take a gamble
2. reduce the amount of freight that occupies lanes 1+2 on motorways by putting it back on the rail - use the extra space created to increase the national motorway speed limit to 80
3. introduce tagging for people caught driving without insurance
etc..etc..
Most motorists are pretty much up themselves about their car - surely he could mobilize their vote?
1. curtail the deployment of speed cameras and increase the number of junction cameras to deter the increasing number of prats that seem quite prepared to take a gamble
2. reduce the amount of freight that occupies lanes 1+2 on motorways by putting it back on the rail - use the extra space created to increase the national motorway speed limit to 80
3. introduce tagging for people caught driving without insurance
etc..etc..
Most motorists are pretty much up themselves about their car - surely he could mobilize their vote?
While I'd agree that backing the motorist would be a positive thing for the electorate, it provides a foot in the door fot the 'la la la I'm not listening' environmental brigade to attack him. As the Conservatives have been remarkably quiet on the environment and have made no 'positive' noises, this would put them in a negative light almost immediately with some very influential people. Also, the environment is a more popular issue than you might think.
They have got some good policies for the motorist, but plugging them would only lead to unnecessary flak.
They have got some good policies for the motorist, but plugging them would only lead to unnecessary flak.
Jaglover said:
...playing the iraq card. 
Its political dynamite and could swing the elction. Admittedly i supported the war but if it wins the election then it wins the election...
It would be a bit hard given that the Conservative party backed the war!!
Or at least backed the justification for war on the evidence provided...
So let's see...Environment, car; Environment, car..Gosh, it's so hard to decide!
Seriously, though, I agree - there is a need to strike a balance in gaining support from both environmentalists (freight to rail is a step in the right direction - especially if you live in a small viallage and have the pleasure of the company of 48 tonne 16 wheelers!) and motorists.
So why not please both by ripping out a bunch of non-productive jobs created by labour in the civil service (whatever that is these days
) and establish a road fund licence reduction for the top 10 percentile of fuel efficient/low pollution cars.
>> Edited by hut49 on Wednesday 20th April 22:45
Seriously, though, I agree - there is a need to strike a balance in gaining support from both environmentalists (freight to rail is a step in the right direction - especially if you live in a small viallage and have the pleasure of the company of 48 tonne 16 wheelers!) and motorists.
So why not please both by ripping out a bunch of non-productive jobs created by labour in the civil service (whatever that is these days
) and establish a road fund licence reduction for the top 10 percentile of fuel efficient/low pollution cars. >> Edited by hut49 on Wednesday 20th April 22:45
I’ve never quite figured that there would be much benefit in putting freight onto rail. Just how much road miles could be saved?
In most instances goods need to be transferred to rail-fright yards by trucks and then at the other end transferred to shops warehouses factories etc by more trucks. So motorway truck journeys reduce at the expense of local roads where truck journeys increase.
In most instances goods need to be transferred to rail-fright yards by trucks and then at the other end transferred to shops warehouses factories etc by more trucks. So motorway truck journeys reduce at the expense of local roads where truck journeys increase.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff