Douglas Alexander Listens
Douglas Alexander is said to be furious that his attempt to introduce trials for his poll-tax-on-wheels scheme has been derailed by a Downing Street e-petition, which is approaching one and a half million signatures - up 100,000 in one day."We cannot be seen to bend, but we have to listen. There is a difference between listening and capitulating," said an anonymous government source yesterday. The unnamed source (not a million miles from Douglas Alexander) is said to have claimed that "whoever came up with this idea might be a prat". Guido emailed his friend Tom Steinberg of MySociety for a comment about that on Monday, but unusually no reply has been received from Tom. He is presumably very busy.
Ooofy Wegg-Prosser is the "web-genius" at No. 10. He apparently saw the e-petition plan as an answer to the interactivity and popularity of WebCameron and, err, Guido. Well that worked brilliantly didn't it Ooofy?
73 comments:
Douggie alexander should be careful around Wegg-Prosser, Friend of Mandy, and grandson of a Solicitor who stood for Mosley's New Party in Limehouse I think....when Labour implodes and the New New Party arises from the smouldering ashes.....
They are simply trying to identify the "wrong un's" by collecting their email addresses. The police state will then remove them society.
If you haven't done so you can sign the petition at:-
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/
Whilst at it why not also sign:-
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/historiccartax/
like all NuLab ideas they can't be trusted
Typical left-wing "other world" mentality.
"When you enter the socially engineered utopia that the Labour Party will create for you, you will all realise how wrong you are, the uber-society we create will rise above all others and become a model for other countries!!"
- er try reading the Unicef report, your utopia is a nightmare for kids. You're all twats.
They don't like it up 'em! Democracy, that is.
You can view all the transport e-petitions at
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/list/open?cat=521
The least popular (with 206 signatures) is - surprise, surprise - to "go ahead with the road pricing policy, and invest the money raised in public transport and cycle networks."
nulab having just been told by an insider that their NHS patients computer record system will never function, you would think that it might ring alarm bells about their ability to produce a working system.
FFS, nulab can't even get 2 million of their their own grunts to buy a car license from the 'computerised' dvla.
"We cannot be seen to bend..."
Not so I've heard.
The one I liked was the one to limit PM's to a 2 term max in office!
Its to save them going mad and loosing their reputations - honest!
Sign it here
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/pmtwotermsmax/
Alice Miles' article in The Times today is good on this. The government are being punished for refusing to rule out all sorts of ridiculous ideas - such as the Mail's mythical £1.50/mile charge, which would be a very expensive poll tax on wheels.
If it didn't involve black boxes tracking us around the country, and the cost wasn't stupid, and didn't apply at all times on all roads...and if money raised was used to help reverse WorstGroup's et al's train capacity reduction policies...
Then I could see something in the road pricing idea.
Us Tories really have to face that we need to find ways to raise money, to pay off all of the PFI schemes that NuLab are lumping us with - and thanks to Gordon, we can't fund it by selling off some gold reserves.
You have to pay more at peak time in London on the trains - it doesn't seem so unfair to have to have to pay more on the roads likewise.
But then, I don't drive, so I have to admit to being a bit biased. Trains would be fine if only they were run properly (ie, actually learnt how to operate in snowy weather after numerous decades of experience of snow on the rails dating back to the invention of the steam engine, actually sticking enough carriages on the rails for people to find standing room outside of the toilets, etc).
the "scrap the bbc" petition
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/bbcmonopoly/
I've met Douglas. Nice guy of sorts, but a twat of the highest order.
Perhaps Guido could ask Dave what plans Tories would consider for road pricing and congestion charges later in the piece, should their impression management ever hoodwink the electorate sufficiently for them to be in power.
Cuddly Nu Tories - for Huskies
Cuddly Nu Tories - for PR cycling
Cuddly Nu Tories - for penguins
Cuddly Nu Tories - for trees
Cuddly Nu Tories - for road building
Cuddly Nu Tories - against public transport
Cuddly Nu Tories - against reducing congestion
Cuddly Nu Tories - against all taxes
Cuddly Nu Tories - against Huskies
Cuddly Nu Tories - against PR cycling
Cuddly Nu Tories - against penguins
Cuddly Nu Tories - against trees, but like Bush
(hilarious double entendre)
Cuddly Nu Tories - against road building
Cuddly Nu Tories - for lots of taxes when in power
Enough of this already. Like a never-ending belt way around a clogged city centre, this is becoming infuriating and is choking the planet.
This was/is an impression management problem. Ask people the right questions and they will be more supportive. Stick out a whole plan but sans numbers i.e. not a whole plan.
As various people are (sometimes) fond of saying electronic petitions are a total waste of space (when it suits them that is).
Watched him on tv a day or so ago ,very good picture of him ,you will do as I say ,are these people stored in a coal mine somewhere and switched on when a tv camera comes around to interview them .
"We cannot be seen to bend" what totalitarian bollocks. You are meant to represent the people and their wishes, not push through something NO ONE WANTS! Do any of you political cretins actually know what democracy is?
No one wants it, so end it now before you look like even bigger fools.
Interesting how, as far as I can see, the petition has had 1,304,050 signatures since two o'clock yesterday.
Why would people have stopped signing it? Unless...perhaps...number 10 have got scared and switched it off?
Douglas Alexander recently suggested on the Today program that a petition *in favour* of road pricing would gather just as many signatures, if not more, than the petition against road pricing.
1. Such a petition exists.
2. I wonder who is really behind it?
3. Douglas Alexander seems to have shot himself in the foot bearing in mind the number of people who have signed to support him.
Could this be Labour's "Poll Tax" - I hope so.
I've seen the future of British politics and their names are Alexander, Milibland & Balls......GOD help us!
Well, Dougie, you might say that there is "a difference between listening and capituating", but you clearly do not know the difference between "hearing" and "listening".
You, Dougie old boy, appear to be just "hearing" the petition. That, or you are indeed listening but dogma overcomes your conscious self.
Make up your mind, if you have one of your own, that is.
Alternative - let us see Road Pricing piloted in...Scotland.
word verification: stekthaheed
The ease with which they just dismiss the thing and say "We can't be seen to bend" is depressing.
As far as I understood the concept, the policies of a democratic government should reflect the prevailing wishes of the electorate.
What is even more depressing however is I was speaking to a colleague about this and was told "But that's not how democracy works". When I asked how, then, democracy was SUPPOSED to work they didn't know.
Usually I'd say this was a scare tactic - you give people a fright by talking about GPS tracked eye-in-the-sky type systems and then when people spit the dummy you say "Oh well then, we'll have tolls instead". However with THIS shower of shit in charge all bets are off
But what about the BIG issues of the day!?
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/juggle/
What makes them think the public would rather be taxed to death than put up with congestion?
Watch Peter Robert talk about his petition here:
http://www.ukip.tv/?page_id=3
Now that the United Nations has placed Britain last in a "quality of life for children" league of 21 indusrialised nations, perhaps Gordon Brown will shut his big fat hypocritical mouth about "ending world poverty by 2020" and providing "a place in full time education for all the world's children" and do something about the festering sores growing ever larger on his own doorstep.
He should be feeling embarrassed and ashamed this morning though I doubt it.
Road congestion always seemed to me to be a pretty egalitarian method of sharing out a limited resource. So I can't understand why they are so keen on taxing us for using the roads. Wealthy dudes like me would actually benefit from it - since it will keep the chavs out of my way at little cost. The only reason why I'm against it is that I don't really want the government to know just how often I visit Polish ladies in Earls Court.
Me again. Just as an additional point, when this scheme was reported on the bbc six o clock news, they were talking about taxing roads at a higher priceat the busiest times and less at the quiet times and so on.
Point is though.....not one of us is choosing to go on the roads at that time. We simply have no fucking choice!! If you work 9-5 (what a way to make a living) then you have to be driving from around 8am to work and 5pm from work.
They act like we are clogging up the roads on purpose, and this tax will make us see the error of our ways.
I'll say it once again nice and slow for the Guardian readers here. WE HAVE NO CHOICE WHEN WE DRIVE. ITS THE ONLY WAY TO GET TO WORK YOU STUPID STUPID IVORY TOWER BASTARDS!!!
Rant over. Thank you.
"What makes them think the public would rather be taxed to death than put up with congestion?"
Well...a lot of people would be prepared to cough up cash if they got results from it. I'd be happy with a high tax state if I thought a high tax state would use my money well on things I thought worth paying for. It's just that I can't name a high tax state that's been like that, ever.
Please note that in 1997 Labour did get elected with a big majority. I don't think people are disillusioned with the concept of paying lots of money to fund a good health service, say. They're disillusioned with paying lots of money for a troubled health service ridden with debts. Sure, people like tax cuts. They like free houses and holidays and beautiful women who never say no too. They don't necessarily expect it, or, when pressed to the point, think they deserve it...
The classic Tory argument is that states don't spend your money well, ever. In theory, if they could spend your money well in a given instance, there's no reason Tories should oppose it in particular. Not to say that NuLab have yet convinced anyone that road taxing is an example of a brilliant policy, but in theory.
You have to remember also that the congestion issue is an economic one as well as just, something that annoys people on the way to work. The Tory economic committe interim report thingy talks about it and favours some road pricing. Just as the national economic interest has to come before gratifying Hainesque wishes to tax 'em til they squeaks, national economic interest has to come ahead of even a million road-tax grumblers. Remember that the UK population in over 60 million. 1/60th of the population isn't much of a majority.
I'd also like to add that lots of people oppose road taxation flat out, a few people want road taxation with added tinsel and bells, and lots of people favour some degree of road taxation dependent on the government's final plans. I'm in favour of some form of road taxation, but I won't sign the pro-road taxing petition because I don't know what sort of a policy I'm really supporting yet.
Sorry if this is too serious a post and you can delete it/edit it down if you like, but lumping it in one saves me from an exchange interrupting other comments, me saying exactly the same stuff in the end.
Memo to Douglas Alexander, son of the manse (just like Gordon):
'Vox populi, vox dei'
May I be the one to remind Douglas Alexander that Roads policy is a devolved matter and thus the devolved administrations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland would need to be persuaded to adopt a Whitehall inspired solution to a problem in England.
(In fact a lot of recent UK government policy statements only seem to involve England, Ruthie is another prime offender!)
Anon said: He should be feeling embarrassed and ashamed this morning though I doubt it.
I doubt it too. He has a higher calling, Britain and her problems are too parochial.
I note that there is another prat having his pathetic little say on the story!
11:20 AM
Goto to give mcbroon and bliar a chance maybe they can come up with some new spin ,on how to end world poverty by 2020 ,and how to end Britains even more shameful poverty in 2007 ,if you dont get this one right ,your future's will be very bleak in the world of politics ,even for this 3rd world country.
There's over a million voters out there , now waiting for answers ,if he tries to dump it onto the councils ,or does a spin ,I believe we are due for council elections soon , oh joy.
It's poverty of aspiration amongst the benefit addicts that needs urgent solving.
What makes them think the public would rather be taxed to death than put up with congestion?"
"Remember that the UK population in over 60 million. 1/60th of the population isn't much of a majority".
No but its a damn siight bigger than the 206 actively supporting the policy.
Since when has anything introduced by NuLab and vaguely IT orientated worked?
Come to that, a book describing NuLab failures would be thicker than the Bible (Nu and Old Testament)
@unhappy callicles
Oh dear, not very good at arithmetic are we? 60million people is it? Well lets assume that most kiddies aren't that interested in road taxation. That gets us down to about 40million adults I would say. Of tat about 25% have ful access to the internet. That gets us down to 10million. So 1.5million adults out of 10million that could bother themselves to register a preference stuck two fingers up at the government. Pretty significant I'd say.
Oh, and you are right about it being an economic issue. Increasing taxation to reduce demand on the roads means lower economic growth due to the difficulty in moving goods around.
Google Stockholm congestion charge. It was run for six months last year. All cars could have a debt card mounted in the windscreen and the charge varied on a 30min basis from 79p up to around £2, which peak prices at peak times.
Between 9.00 and 3.00pm it was 79p flat rate.
You got two weeks to pay and there were no massive fines.
Traffic fell by 22 percent, it worked perfectly and the resulting referendum was pro keeping the system.
That's how to run a road toll. In Britain, of course, we get Red Ken, social engineering, massive fines and big clunking fist of a set-up that costs £120m to run - £4.75ish per vehicle per day.
What a shit country this is.
The ease with which they just dismiss the thing and say "We can't be seen to bend" is depressing.
The question is:
Are we being Governed (as in Government), or
Are we being Ruled (as in dictatorship)
WE HAVE NO CHOICE WHEN WE DRIVE. ITS THE ONLY WAY TO GET TO WORK YOU STUPID STUPID IVORY TOWER BASTARDS!!!
Rant over. Thank you.
Its worth saying again, also NOT EVERYONE EARNS AS MUCH AS YOU! YOU ARE PRICING THE POOR - WHO ARE POOR BECAUSE OF TAX - OUT OFF YOUR WAY!! YOU STUPID STUPID BASTARDS!
I didn't know that Douglas Alexander was a DJ?
I knew Ooofy Wegg-Prosser's dad. I seem to remember he had rather uninspiring facial hair. But perhaps I'm thinking of someone else.
a.trollope [11.50 AM] Like you, I am rich, and can afford to pay any road charges the government may choose to impose. Moreover, my motoring enjoyment will be very much enhanced if all the poor people have to walk. I can always sound my horn if they clutter up the roads. Hooray for socialism! Bring it on.
Brown Badger,
Let's be fair, the previous Tory administration stuffed up IT projects with equal ease. It seems to be an institutional failing and I suspect that the Civil Service has something to do with it.
Still, one could have hoped that NuLabour might have learned and cut back on the number of 'big sexy' IT projects it commissioned, at least until it had the problem sorted out. Sadly, they seem even more enamored of Big IT than their predecessors hence the plethora of cock ups and pending cock ups.
Failing to learn from others' mistakes may be forgivable. Failing to learn from one's own is the sign of true fuckwits.
Off topic: Puttnam currently on 5Live - text 85058 to ask whether he still thinks Yates' investigation is "bullshit".
If only the 1m+ signatories to the roads petition had also put their names to:
"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to RESIGN, DISSOLVE PARLIAMENT, CALL ELECTION."
Alas, this petition has only about 300 signatories at the moment, considerably fewer than:
"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to enter Ultimate Frisbee in to the 2012 olympics." (over 500 signatories)
Go it Dougie - fight your corner - see to it that the rich polluters pay towards the harm they cause the rest of us.
If your can't get your brilliant road tax through, make it compulsory for them, every time they renew their licences, to buy a leaflet priced at £172.80 called "How to use a bus".
(Never felt this vindictive before till non-smokers told me I couldn't use my pub.)
Jon Snow likened this piece of people's democracy as similar to a Nazi referendum from the 1930's.
Clearly the idea will be to ignore it and treat it as some sort of avian flu, i.e. bury it and forget it ever happened.
Road charging? Bring it on......I can't wait for a bit of (un)civil disobedience.
Unhappy Callicles said...
You have to pay more at peak time in London on the trains - it doesn't seem so unfair to have to have to pay more on the roads likewise.
How about this? Those of us who travel into London in peak times take ALL our money and emigrate from the UK, leaving sad, sanctimonious wankers like you to tax the poor into oblivion and pontificate why you can't raise all the money you used to be able to do.
Honestly, people like you really fucking annoy me. The sooner we get those crucifixes up and running in Wembley stadium the better off we'll all be ...
On a lighter note, can anyone provide a copy of Ooofy Wegg-Prosser's birth certificate. I stll have a problem believing that anyone with that name is not actually a character from a PG Wodehouse story.
I always thought labour in any guise was for 'the people'. How silly of me.
However, I too will enjoy motoring on less congested roads, while all the poor people are restricted to the areas they live or have to travel on shite public transport.
Does anyone think there will ever be a government in power in the UK ever agin, that actually serves it's electorate?
Can't see it somehow, the only thing that remotely gives one a chance a surviving NuLab is having enough money.....enough to avoid invasive and controlling state handouts, but not enough to warrant punitive taxation. Strange really.
Brown Badger - "No but its a damn siight bigger than the 206 actively supporting the policy." As I said, I'm in favour of some road taxing, but I won't sign that petition because I don't know exactly what I'm signing up for. Am I signing up for a £2 a mile charge? Am I signing up for a black box tracking me wherever I go? It's easier to blanket rule out an idea than to support an idea which you may or may not support, depending on what proposals actually come out.
Ryan18 - I can do the maths perfectly well - last time I referred to the 60million stat in my blog I knocked off 15 million on grounds of age - I doubt a third of the UK population is under 16? But anyway, I didn't go into this for simplicities sake, and the 1/60th was a bit of rhetorical exaggeration - my point still stands.
No-one is qualified to take a final stance on Labour's road taxing plans because we haven't even seen what they propose, and what they propose to do for the rail system, and so on...it might be a terrible idea, but it might not.
As for being an economic issue - well, some businesses want their goods moved fast more than they want their goods moved cheaply. If a big lorry pays as much as a car to go on a motorway, then maybe extra speed of transport of the entire contents of the lorry will make a big enough saving to make the road toll negligible.
2002 NAO/OGC on common causes of major IT project failure. I guess Nulab couldn't be arsed to read it.
NAO/OGC Common causes of project failure
1. Lack of clear link between the project and the
organisation’s key strategic priorities, including agreed
measures of success.
2. Lack of clear senior management and ministerial
ownership and leadership.
3. Lack of effective engagement with stakeholders.
4. Lack of skills and proven approach to project
management and risk management.
5. Lack of understanding of and contact with the supply
industry at senior levels in the organisation.
6. Evaluation of proposals driven by initial price rather than
long term value for money (especially securing delivery of
business benefits).
7. Too little attention to breaking development and
implementation into manageable steps.
8. Inadequate resources and skills to deliver the total
delivery portfolio.
bunch of cunts the lot of them!!!
"I don't think people are disillusioned with the concept of paying lots of money to fund a good health service, say. They're disillusioned with paying lots of money for a troubled health service ridden with debts."
I think you'll find that many of these people actually like having other peoples' money spent on them. Otherwise there's no logical reason why they wouldn't be willing to pay for private healthcare. Believe it or not there are those of us out there who do not believe that some people are automatically entitled to live off of others.
"1/60th of the population isn't much of a majority."
Millions of those 60 millions are too young to vote.
Millions of those 60 millions won't have access to the internet.
Millions of those 60 millions won't bother signing because other members of their household have.
The fact that only one million have signed doesn't mean that 59 million are against.
I'll be blocking and reporting gov.uk to worldwide spannets if the bugger emails ME.
Unhappy C,
Can you write essays elsewhere?
This is for tittle-tattle, gossip and rumours.
'This is for tittle-tattle, gossip and rumours'
I hope this is a merely a rumour, then...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/12/road_pricing_and_surveillance/
Anon 5:27
Well, that's a start. But then again, the same complaints could be levelled at quite a few private sector IT projects as well.
I notice there's no mention of possible unhealthily close relationships with certain IT contractors though. Didn't Master F mention something about that some time ago?
'Unhappy C,
Can you write essays elsewhere?'
He does....cure your insomnia here
http://petitionanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/02/on-e-petitions.html
Sorry - got somewhat carried away replying there...never meant to post more than the first post. In fairness, I wouldn't write an essay on DC and cannabis or Lembit Opik and his cheeky girl and other such stuff here - it's only because people seemed to be talking about a policy.
If No Longer Anonymous wants to have a reply he can say and I'll e-mail him one...
German road-toll firm gave 'donation' to New Labour
Ooofy? Come on, you're totally making this shit up, aren't you? You won't sneak that one past ol' raincoaster here, nosiree.
"If No Longer Anonymous wants to have a reply he can say and I'll e-mail him one..."
I appreciate the offer but at the end of the day I expect our differences come down to a different philosophical approach to taxation and public spending.
Incidently I probably wouldn't be hit by the road pricing scheme but I find the idea generally distasteful.
In private business, when employed buyers buy goods or services that are of poor quality, or are simply not fit for purpose it normally means one thing.
Somebody is getting back handers from the suppliers. Other wise the goods or services would not get paid for.
In government why does an IT system that does not work cost us anything?
Answer; They are incompetent and corrupt, its not their money anyway, so they dont give a toss how much of yours and your childrens they waste.
But what really bothers them is.
That the car that we are paying for gets them around the country quick enough, for them to visit Madame Sins or the The young boys club, before the partner catches on.
"That the car that we are paying for gets them around the country quick enough, for them to visit Madame Sins"
Ah yes, I once visited a lady "de la nuit" called Imogen of Cardiff who claimed that every Labour Party conference she would spend the whole week with a Welsh Labour MP . Sadly she didn't divulge the name or I could have checked out the car he was driving. At £5000 a week for a call-girl he was obviously well able to pay for a fast car.
Don't know if anyone else has noticed the crackdown for today, but it would seem Mr Blair is not happy that public servants are using public computers in public time to make sign that very same petition.
You have to pay more at peak time in London on the trains - it doesn't seem so unfair to have to have to pay more on the roads likewise.
Might I state that that is an incredibly glib and unthoughtful statement to make about motorists, who already pay an exhorbitant level of taxation on fuel, on the purchase of a car and for permission to use their car on roads.
Perhaps if public transport got cheaper, instead of having annual price rises gauged to Ken Livingstone's personal crusades index, as opposed to inflation, then you might have some grounds for that argument.
Trains have never been cheap and they never never will be. They are a 18th centuary idear that simply can not compare favourably in anyway with mass produced private road transport. Road transport also takes goods and people door to door so we have to have roads anyway. But we dont need train lines anywhere.
However socialists do need to hold the Large transport unions and the moving public by the balls. Tories like the idear that they can drive their new BMW about without the prebs getting in the way. Which is why this country still has this crazy obsession with public train transport, and often very painfull testicals and no spare cash.
Ooofy? Come on, you're totally making this shit up, aren't you? You won't sneak that one past ol' raincoaster here, nosiree.
'Ooofy' Prosser was popularised by the unparallelled Sir Pelham Grenville Wodehouse. He was famed for being ugly and a miser. Despite having vast amounts of cash at his disposal, he would never use any for a useful cause, despite being desperate to claw back as much as he possibly could from everyone else.
As such, 'Ooofy' is a totally unacceptable and inaccurate nickname for any member of a Labour Government, famed for their magnanimity and laissez-faire attitude to taxation.
mr gisoad, thank you for the enlightenment. As you say, it makes perfect sense in the context. Oops, I mean no sense at all, of course.
How rich do you have to be to have three identical consecutive vowels in your name? Is it like personalized license plates where you pay a flat fee?
I signed the petition as it infuriates me for so many reasons I can't begin to go into them
but
my husband and son also signed -they live -surprise, surprise at the same address (son cannot afford a mortgage under the present conditions so it is necessary!)
we also share the same email address with differing folders
the petition will not accept their signatures!
Dougie is just another Scottish Carpet Bagger (just like Gordon) on the make in England.
Has anyone produced a list of Scots MP's holding Ministerial office and worked out how under- represented the English Taxpayer is?
Roll on English devolution!
I have tried to sign the petition with 2 different email addresses several times and have not got the email through (have looked in junk/spam and not there either). Has this petition been sabotaged by number 10 to prevent more people signing it? Wouldn't be surprised. Anyone else have this problem.
Post a Comment