I have finally seen how the Big Society might work

Stephen

Here, government can help co-ordinate

shaun

Not bad idea go to any heritage railway most of the work form track laying to building refurbishment is carried out by volunteers. In weardale they have started running using a older train aa a commuinity rail service into the Bishop Aukland, replacing a rail link lost forty years ago. Some small investment such as training was needed but they are running a service that could not be done by a normal train company as the economics only make sense with volunteers providing some of the manpower. A local rail service replaced and the enthusiasts still get to run the real love of their lives the steam trains on a weekend. also apart from the replacement of the link to the national network and the ocaasional small grant for tring grants no real cost to the tax payer.

Carlton Reid

Fairies, Mr Parris. Fairies

As a group, cyclists are extremely good at organising in a self-help way. For instance, there are lots of loosely-organised mountain bike trail building groups. Some are known as 'trail fairies' because they do lots of work but are rarely seen.

Matthew's ignorance extends into matters of taxation, too. 'Road tax' was abolished in 1937. Motorists do not pay for roads, everybody pays for roads. Motorways and trunk roads are paid for via general taxation and local roads are paid for by council tax.

Given that in 2007 Matthew said - in jest (I've not stopped laughing yet) - all cyclists deserve to be garrotted with piano wire, I'm very surprised he's gone back to drink at this particular well. Is he ill?

24tom

Department of Transport? Road Tax? Really Matthew?

The Department of Transport hasn't exist for 15 or so years? There have been numerous titles, but I believe they are now the Department for Transport. Nitpicking on my part, I know.

But more fundamentally. Road Tax. It doesn't exist. It hasn't existed for over 70 years. Motorways and all purpose trunk roads are funded out of general taxation. Local roads are paid for from council tax.

I'm a cyclist. I pay for all the roads I ride on. I'm motorist. Coincidentally I pay for the roads I drive from. My Vehicle Excise Duty doesn't directly go towards this.

I don't disagree with some of the sentiment of your article, but lets not turn it into an excuse to bash cyclists, hey?

Julian

Matthew, you poor unresearched fool, road tax was abolished in the 1930s. This scheme will be paid for out of general taxation which we all pay.

Incidentally, a mile of new motorway costs £30m, but I don't suppose you want funding for that restricted to motorway users?

Tor d'France

What a splendid idea. And, given that motorists don't pay road tax either - nobody has since 1937, cyclists, motorists and all other tax payers paying for the upkeep of the roads for general taxation - how about getting car drivers to club together to pay for and help to build bypasses?

John Marchant

Matthew, interesting and provocative article. However, for maximum credibility, you need maximum accuracy and there you score a big zero! "They pay no road tax" nor does anyone, since there is no such thing and hasn't been since 1937. Roads are paid for out of general taxation. What you call "road tax" is actually vehicle excise duty and is in effect a tax on vehicle ownership. There are plenty of taxpayes who don't own cars but who pay for YOUR roads. Maybe its time to string piano wire across YOUR drive!!!

woody

Yet another example of a poorly researched article designed to cause an argument. Well done Matthew.

Richard Fairhurst

Interesting idea. Wouldn't it be great if there was a national organisation that worked on traffic-free trails for cyclists and other users, and which had an extensive network of supporters that helped fund its work? Better still, they could recruit to create and maintain these trails.

Well, blow me down if there isn't such a thing already. It's called Sustrans, it created the National Cycle Network, and it has 2,500 Volunteer Rangers. Between them they maintain one, or two, or actually 12,000, miles of network (not all traffic-free, granted, but with some lovely country lanes in there).

Anyway, as a cyclist, I'm happy to pay my bit towards the £2.6m; but only if you, as a motorist, will cough up for the £260m of the nearby A46 dualling. If 'road tax' paid for road building and maintenance, which it doesn't, that single project would swallow 1.8m vehicles' worth. Good luck funding the rest of your new roads and maintenance from the remainder.

Thom Callan

Matthew this is just shameful ignorance on your part. As nearly every other commenter has posted NOBODY PAYS ROAD TAX! and we all pay for the roads through general taxation, even those of us without cars!

I'll happily take your suggestion forward of organizing to fund cycle trails if you petition the thinkers behind this big society to stop using general taxation to fund motorways and bypasses I do not use and get the motorists themselves to club together to pay for them.

I'm sure we'll get a lot more for our money than you motorists.

Dan B

Judging by the comments, you now should know something about taxation and how it affects cyclists. Out of the hundreds of cyclists I know, only the smallest fraction do *not* have a car. So cyclists *do* pay VED on their cars if they choose to (close to 70 production vehicles are currently exempt, up from just two a few years ago) as well as paying income tax and council tax. They insure themselves through household insurance and some take the extra precaution of extra insurance through the BCF.

Like a lot of people these days, I'm watching my pennies. I can't say I'll use the tunnel in question, but then again, I can say the same about the M11. Can I get my money back on both, please?

Olof Palme

Have to agree with the above...Matthew Parris logic merely suggests that all, and I mean ALL, motorways should forthwith become toll roads. Pedestrian-only city centers should have `70s-Belfast-like turnstile gates with Oyster type swipe abilities since footers don't pay pavement tax.

Cole Stone

Yet another display of ignorance populated by the lesser informed journalist. 'Road Tax', that sword of righteousness flailed about by those who would love to see the entire country become a car park, has not existed since the 30's.

Other news just in...the worlds largest passenger ship the RMS Titanic is reported to have struck an iceberg resulting in substantial loss of life to all on board.

Oh yes, and Elvis has died.

Quite how a cyclist or any other individual choosing a responsible form of transport with no CO2 emissions (for the benefit of us all remember) is expected to pay for non-existant emissions on a sliding scale is beyond me. How about we tax pedestrians and wildlife as well?

I drive. I cycle. I pay various types of taxes that actually fund the roads. At all times I am subjected to various levels of risk that could result in the loss of my life or being left with severe injury.

I do not ever fear a cyclist hitting me. I constantly fear a drunk, or a drug addled motorist hitting me. As a cyclist, more so than when I'm driving I rely entirely on the maturity of those around me in their cars to appreciate that their licence is a privilige and not a right.

For those who choose to use their licence and various outdated excuses to bully those around them the response of many is simple. Grow up, you've left the playgroud now.

Yes some cyclists are a pain in the behind but the reality is those same cyclists are likely to be equally idiotic behind the wheel. It's not the transportation choice, it's the intelligence of the user.

Yes they have hurt people but if you want to compare the scale of death and destruction left by those incapable behind the wheel to those who are equally incapable on a bike the figures will speak for itself.

So what next Mr. Motorist? Pedestrians can't cross 'my road' as they don't pay road tax.

Cars smaller than mine should get out of my way as they have less priority than me because 'I 've paid more road tax for my huge saloon than that moron in the Prius in front of me'.

How about all of those who don't drive a car have the option of pulling their taxation away from those that do? How about the fanatical motorist picks up the tab for the shortfall there?

How about motorists have a whip round the next time they're demanding a 4 lane section of road is widened to 6 lanes at a cost of £12 million?

The argument is a nonsense. We all own the roads. We all pay for the roads. We should all share the roads. The fact the majority of society is forced to share the roads with a minority who try to justify their childish bullying nature by arguing 'they've paid for it so they can' is pathetic, even if it were true.

Chris Hill

Mr Parris must be a contortionist - how else could he type such a long article with his foot wedged so firmly in his mouth?

Anthony

Matthew,

Good idea. And perhaps the AA and RAC can club together to pay for this:
http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/8312488.Work_to_start_on_widening_M40_junction

After all anyone who can afford to run a car can't be short of money to pay for it.

And by the way, as a cyclist I pay just as much "road tax" as a car with equivalent CO2 emissions.

Dexey

"This is a brilliant idea because bikes, like trains, don’t like the steep inclines which tunnels avoid; ..."

It is generally infirm, or lazy, cyclists that do not like inclines. Bikes tend not to have an opinion. My elderly folder seems to cope quite well.
Isn't it about time that Matthew retired? Does he still serve a useful purpose? Has he been so long inside his own little world of Derbyshire house with exotic animals and London flat with lodger that he no longer has anything usefu to say?
Such a pity, he used to be worth reading.

Scared Amoeba

Once upon a time, journalists were expected to do research and to aim for accuracy. It seems that not for the first time, Matthew Parris took aim and has shot himself in both feet.

Scared Amoeba

If Mr Parris had done his research diligently, he would have discovered that band 'A' cars; those that emit up to 100 g/km CO2 qualify for ZERO Vehicle Excise Duty.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524

As mentioned above, Road Tax was abolished in 1937. Roads are funded out of general taxation, so pedestrians, horse riders and cyclists pay as much as motorists. There being no hypothecation of tax for roads.

What next? Perhaps Mr Parris will be calling for cyclists to be garotted? But of course, he's already done that: -
"A festive custom we could do worse than foster would be stringing piano wire across country lanes to decapitate cyclists...."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3097464.ece

The question is: What have cyclists done to trigger Parris' anti-cyclist campaign? Yes, clearly SOME cyclists do disobey the rules [and that is both regrettable and reprehensible], but so do SOME motorists and SOME pedestrians. But it seems only cyclists that all get tarred with the same brush.

Maybe, just maybe Matthew Parris should get on a bike. It would most probably give him a new perspective on how badly motorists treat cyclists on a daily basis and absolutely no Lycra would be required. If asked, I feel sure that the Cycling Tourist Club; the London Cycling Campaign or his local cycling group would welcome him with open arms and show him what cycling is all about. I'm also convinced that it would be true eye-opener, he might even become a convert.

mike cavenett

The London Cycling Campaign (www.lcc.org.uk) has been providing its members with:

- discounts in bikes shops
- free third-party insurance
- discounts on theft insurance
- public liability insurance

and many other benefits for decades.

We also organise hundreds of free guided rides every year (open to non-members too), and have hundreds of volunteers working in every borough to improve cycling facilities across Greater London for all cyclists.

I'm sure others will point out the work that CTC and Sustrans do, much of it also with volunteers.

Mike Cavenett
London Cycling Campaign

Mike Goode

Oh how I laughed. As a non-driving cyclist, can I please have my money back for all the dual carriageway and motorway schemes that I will never be able to use?

Nothing to see here. Just another old school tory firmly wedged in the dark ages...

PhilD

I think it's a great shame that this article has been so rubbished by a few pedants whose main gripe seems to be that Parris has made the common mistake of calling VED "Road Tax". Or maybe it's because he's a Conservative?

Surely there is reasonable merit in the suggestion? To compare this amenity facility with a major transport highway is pointless. And as has already been shown there is plenty of precedent through the work of Sustrans and similar.

In fact I think many of the comments made illustrate why this government will find such dificulty in moving forward with the Big Society

(This writer is a cyclist, driver and tax-payer, and also willing to be involved with community-based projects, whether financially or physically.)

John Bartholomew

A shame that most of the comments here have homed in on the road tax debate and ignored the main thrust of Matthew's article. Like Matthew, at first I was sceptical about the "Big Society", but I can see how it could work.

I dedicate roughly one day a week to supporting start ups and small companies with business planning and other commercial activities free of any charges, to "put something back" into society; if we can all put something back, however small, what changes could we bring about? Isn't this what the Big Society means? www.businessplaninteractive.co.uk

Will Bramhill

@Carlton Reid: Matthew hasn't been drinking from a well ... he's been gulping in mouthfuls of Old Father Thames - perhaps the pollution has turned his head. Maybe he should join a Big Society group to get piano-wire swimming lanes from south bank to north bank - he wouldn't be swept so far off course.

David Bouvier

Indeed - pre-incensed or hypersensitive cyclists seem to have ignored the fact that Mathew was preaising them as fit, healthly, social, people who could be a fine example of social progress.

There is clearly a cycle-lobby primed to attack comments about taxation and cyclists.

Lets stick to the Big Society point...

paulg

You would need a toolkit, that could be generic in principle, that can be down loaded. This would explain: H&S, insurance, a SMART strategy, accountancy package, useful numbers, etc; as you would need when drawing up a business plan.

The rest you could leave to social networking sites, for the volunteers to organise for themselves.

personally I would invite all the cyclists to your disused tunnels, wave them in, then when they are about two miles into the tunnel, start bricking up the the entry and egress points. Hey presto! the big society without annoying cyclists.

Ian

I wonder what Mathew is actually doing to contribute? Or is it "You lot should"?