![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
End piece
Questions questions -
2008 offer ... This month’s guest contributor is The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (UK). This was their first news release for 2008. Each week The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT) produces an electronic newsletter containing a relevant, and at times, controversial poll. These polls have created heated feedback and a few raised eyebrows! To mark a year of these polls, the Institute reveals some of the results. We asked the question: Do you agree with plans for national road charging? and more than 70% of Institute members who voted said no! This is obviously a subject close to everyone’s hearts and the result was quite convincingly against these plans. There was a large response to the question: Should centre lane hogging be an official driving offence?, with 72% of voters saying yes. This question raised the comment: “….there appears to be a far higher risk of accidents if the majority of vehicles are required to dodge in and out of the inner lane when vehicles in the middle lane are travelling in excess of 70 mph, than it is for the minority of vehicles travelling in excess of 70mph to dodge in The subject of road charging reared its head when the Editor asked: Should road charging REPLACE the fuel tax? This time we had a complete 50/50 split amongst CILT members, but it did encourage many of them to air their views. “Anyone would think that tax on fuel is a good thing; it isn’t, and the sooner we get rid of it, the better for Britain. Bit like the government really and why should we pay more than the continent? Start to campaign for some proper roads instead of 19th-century lanes for a 21st-century Britain”, said one respondent. In October the issue of prosecuting smoking drivers was addressed. It was a close thing, but in the end 58% of voters agreed with the prosecution. On 31st October we asked: ‘Is using the hard shoulder as an extra lane a good idea? This prompted our biggest response yet, with 55% of respondents saying no. This member felt particularly strongly: “…in my opinion, the idea is a good one. After all it provides a 25% increase in capacity, at what I would imagine is a fraction of the cost of providing an extra lane. At the same time, there will need to be rigorous enforcement of compliance to the ‘signalling’ system, possibly with the provision of cameras. Hopefully at some time in the future they will no longer be required, when we have a more responsible attitude to the use of the roads by many more drivers.” On a different note, one poll that only created small interest was: ‘Should the legal driving age limit be raised from 17 to 18?, which is particularly surprising as ten years ago there were 13.8 deaths for every 100,000 drivers aged between 17 and 20; in 2005 that rate had climbed to 19.2. We will continue to ask these relevant, and sometimes provoking, questions on our newsletter, which is available to all members with an email address. Visit the website at www.ciltuk.org.uk
|
|
|
| BACK TO TOP > |