Forum Topic

state of the roads

Driving around on some errands today, I was appalled at the state of some of the roads.  I think we should start a name & shame list to encourage the council to fix some of the worst problems.Twyford Avenue - very uneven road surface due to patchy repairsAbbey Road - incredibly uneven road surface, with big dips from HGVsBut the WORST offender is the intersection of Gunnersbury Ave/Gunnersbury Lane.  The potholes in that intersection are big enough to suck in a small child (should it be in the road).  Very dangerous!Any other nominations?Kim

Kim Bobsin ● 5180d13 Comments

Dangerous for cyclists, who are often forced by traffic to take a path they'd rather avoid.

R Bell ● 5180d

Agreed.Maybe they should make a contribution to the upkeep of roads via a cycle tax as they would benefit from higher standards of maintenance.

Keith Iddon ● 5180d

Keith, the upkeep of the roads is financed out of general taxation not car tax. Therefore cyclists (many of whom also pay vehicle excise duty on cars / motorbikes) already pay towards road upkeep.Following your line of logic, perhaps pedestrians should also make an additional contribution to upkeep of the pavements?

Chris Martin ● 5180d

It is your logic that is a bit skewed Chris as we are all pedestrians and already pay specifically for the upkeep of pavements via our council tax so the fact that we all use the resource of decent paving is accounted for by taxing everyone who uses the pavement.The same should apply to roads imo.Seems like you want the benefits without being willing to pay a little more for them.Motorists have to pay much more in general taxation than any cyclist via fuel duty(plus fuel vat),mot testing,vehicle insurance(all have vat) and road tax.Without all or any of these a motorist is not allowed to use the road.

Keith Iddon ● 5180d

On the other hand, motorists (of which I am one) damage the roads far more than cyclists (of which I am also one) because of the far greater axle weight. But the logic fails when you consider that vehicle excise duty (NOT "road tax") is not hypothecated. Governments, local and national, maintain the roads as a general public good out of general taxation, much as they (reluctantly) fund schools as a general public good and I'm happy that my taxes are used for that even though I have no children.

Roy Gillett ● 5180d

I am happy to do the same too Roy. I just think that as road users cyclists should contribute a bit extra as motorists  do.

Keith Iddon ● 5180d

Very dangerous path to go down. Once you (effectively) start charging for the use of common facilities you've essentially admitted that they aren't common facilities.Motorists don't pay more because they use the roads more, or because they damage the roads more. They pay more because they have shown that they are *willing* to pay more. Same as drinkers and smokers. Excise duty on booze and fags doesn't rise relentlessly because generations of chancellors have decided that *they* should to pay for the NHS, or even (despite what the chancellors say) to discourage them from indulging, but because drinkers and (particularly) smokers will carry on paying whatever they're asked.

Roy Gillett ● 5180d

In what sense do you use the word willing? Call me subversive but willing to me implies a choice.Taxed until the pips squeak would be more like it.All it takes for a group to be 'willing' to pay tax is the govn. to impose a tax on it.Just like on airline tickets.In fact cyclists are the only group of travellers who do not have to pay a tax(Dale Farm etc. excepted ;-)) There HAVE to be motor vehicles on the road.It is not as if they are not needed for society to function.Ditto air travel.

Keith Iddon ● 5180d

I've paid road tax all my life.

R Bell ● 5180d

There are also plenty of cars these days that are exempt from raod tax.  Should they be allowed to use the road?

Nigel Williams ● 5179d

Forcing cyclists to pay 'road tax' would be a step backwards.  We should be encouraging more use of bikes over cars and any additional taxation on bikes would be regressive.  While I can drive, I don't own a car because in all my life I have never really needed one and I don't own a bike because I have nowhere to keep one without it being stolen.However, I do use public transport a huge amount, so I am a road user.  I also buy things like food from shops, so again, I am a road user.  Roads are not just used by car drivers, but car drivers use them more than others, so it's right that they should pay more.  It's also right that they should pay for the pollution they cause, which bikes don't.

N Roberts ● 5179d

Well....too many to name in Ealing AND Acton !!

Beryl Bashford ● 5178d

These subjects always end up in the same way i.e. Cyclists should pay road tax etc. I feel that most car drivers would benefit from using a bike at least once a year to see it from the cyclists point of view, that would get rid of a few drivers who drive perilously close to cyclists, but off course this can't be implemented seriously. I cycle sometimes, not as much as I used to, but I think good road awareness and eye contact between cyclists and drivers pays dividends as you are using the bike as a mode of transport. Cyclists should also follow the Highway code the same as motorists and get fined when they go through red lights etc I think that maybe having a cycling test to make sure you know what to do on the road would be a good idea, it may get rid of a lot of cyclists who want it all their own way. I am not sure if they should pay to use the roads, most of them are in a bad condition somewhere making them dangerous, also whoever designs "cycle lanes" should probably be an active cyclist, as many of them are too unsafe to use.

John Pollastrini ● 5177d