[Closed] New transport secretary = idiot

I'd probably have to agree with you there grum (although it goes against the grain 😉 )

Neither of you have to drive on a regular basis then? I'll agree his opinions on cyclists are a bit short sighted, but at least unlike the last crowd he knows there exists a world outside the M25.

ETA: Under the last lot we've seen a reduction in police on our roads but an increase in pointless speed cameras, mostly sited to raise income rather than improve road safety. 'HATO's who have virtually no powers, they can't even help a stranded motorist change a wheel. An increase in VED none of which has been put back into the road infastructure. Highest fuel prices whilst oil is at soe of the lowest.

if he really doesnt like advanced stoping boxes for cyclists there will probably be a few deaths n his hands before he moves onto the next post he is completely ignorant of

I was refering really to his opinion on cyclists.

Oh dear he does sound like a bit of a muppet.

And he has replaced my favourite ever Transport Secretary, Lord Adonis:

[img] [/img]
"Woof!"

odd double post - de;eted

[i]"We will end the war on motorists," proclaimed the new transport secretary Philip Hammond on his first day in office, providing an instant soundbite for Jeremy Clarkson fans everywhere[/i]

We live in a world of soudbites and so called "reality" tv. Maybe the new government feel there is some mileage in saying things that lots of people want to hear? Regardless of whether they belive it or it's achievable.

As a cyclist and cycle commuter as well as a driver, I agree with the majority of what he says, but I worry about his overall attitude to cyclists. Many of the traffic calming measures I've seen implemented have made several matters worse. Many of the cyclists I see are ****ing lethal in their cycling habits. Cycle lanes are, to me, a danger. Faster limits on safer roads at night makes perfect sense, as does reduced limits in bad weather as per France.

Anyone who uses the phrase 'war on motorists' is a moron. Motorists are still massively favoured in this country - and I am a regular driver as well as cyclist FWIW.

Next up, the government will "end the war on middle class straight white men".

Maybe the new government feel there is some mileage in saying things that lots of people want to hear? Regardless of whether they belive it or it's achievable.

My thoughts exactly, he's just saying what people want to hear.

"Newly appointed Minister caught saying things he knows will be a easy score with the people that share his belief systems" shocker...

🙄

While people continue to believe this bilge his views remain acceptable

Kieran - Member

Neither of you have to drive on a regular basis then? I'll agree his opinions on cyclists are a bit short sighted, but at least unlike the last crowd he knows there exists a world outside the M25.

ETA: Under the last lot we've seen a reduction in police on our roads but an increase in pointless speed cameras, mostly sited to raise income rather than improve road safety.

Rubbish. Cameras are sited at accident blackspots and no profit is made from them - it is all returned to the road safety partnerships

'HATO's who have virtually no powers, they can't even help a stranded motorist change a wheel.

An increase in VED none of which has been put back into the road infastructure.

Highest fuel prices whilst oil is at soe of the lowest.

Fuel prices are far too low - see above and anyway I don't know where you get your idea from that oil is cheap right now.

FFS - this is supposed to be a cyclists forum - how come so many swallow this bilge!

A shallow analysis of a few quotes.

Edit - the Bike Blog post that is.

Boris will sort him out 🙂

[i]FFS - this is supposed to be a cyclists forum - how come so many swallow this bilge! [/i]

It is but many of of drive cars too. I know it's a shock but it's a fact.

it is all returned to the road safety partnerships

WTF?

VED does not pay for roads and never has

Fuel prices are far too low

Do you reckon he's spoken to his boss before giving this interview, or do you reckon Call me Dave is sitting in the new kitchen with his head in his hands?

Any bets on how long it is before one of his boys is in trouble for spanking/cottaging/playing away?

Which planet are you living on?

The one being f***cked in the ass by lazy people planet raping all over the shop.

what is the issue exactly - thought it all sounded reasonable?

Plus you have to allow for the anti tory editing of the interview by the guardian...

A friend has to deal with this new transport minister, and whilst the guardian may be over analysing a few quotes, they happen to be correct here. He's VERY anti-cyclist and generally of the opinion cyclists shouldn't be on the roads at all as they don't pay 'road tax' (his words). also in favour of increasing public transport costs and reducing traffic jams (won't that just encourage more cars??).

He was strongly advised to tone down most of his comments, which he did, before speaking the the evening standard where the original article appeared.

Keiran - direct quote from you

An increase in VED none of which has been put back into the road infastructure.

That is not what VED is there for. It is a tax. General taxation pays for major roads, local councils for minor and urban roads.

Still don't understand your point about changing wheels - you want the civilain motorway patrol guys to change car drivers wheels for them?

...of the opinion cyclists shouldn't be on the roads at all as they don't pay 'road tax' (his words)...

Nnnn... gh.... [i]*seeeeeeeeeeeeeeth*[/i]

Must. Not. Write. Irate. Letter. Based. On. Hearsay.

Nevertheless, any transport minister who does not place cycling and public transport right at the forefront of his strategy is a right old bell end. You can argue as much as you want about the roads being for motorists and it being dangerous for cyclists but anyone who does not see the car's days as being numbered needs to see a mental health professional.

We need to start building the infrastructure that will replace the car centred system we have in place, right now. We need to start changing people's attitudes, right now, and on a massive scale, because the oil is running out (latest estimate is around 30 years left - yes?) and whether there are alternative fuels in the pipeline (sic) or not, they are not going to provide the same scale of personal freedom we get from cars for a very long time to come.

And all that aside, it's totally irresponsible to continue in any manner other than looking at the greener alternatives. Not just for ourselves but for all those developing countries who have masses of people all looking for a car, we in the west made the world like this and we need to change it sharpish and set the example for others to follow.

And on a very tentatively related note, at least the guy doesn;t look like the most dodgiest civil servant on earth who coincidentally is the highest paid civil servant.
John Fingleton.
[img] [/img]

Dear Nick,

Can I have my vote back please?

Thanks

David

anyone who does not see the car's days as being numbered needs to see a mental health professional.

I suspect it's a rather large number though & I bet most here will never see that day

Looking at the overall cost of car ownership, I think it is actually got cheaper. During the last 15 years I've been driving VED actually fell if you have a small engined car. I don't, but it didn't go up with inflation for a number of years. There is a move to get rid of heavy polluting cars off the road and if you insist on using one then it's going to cost you.

Petrol is expensive across Europe. Taxing it is a good way of raising income for the country and I don't really see peoples issue with it that much. It does have an effect on inflation though. Petrol is still fairly cheap considering what you get and the damage it does.

Car prices have dropped. Insurance seems steep at the moment. Cars are more reliable so repair costs have got less.

It's easier to be a motorist now than it was when I started driving. It used to be a luxury, but now every student and his dog has a car and is usually moaning about how there is a "war on motorists".

Oh, and not sure HATOs should be replacing the AA! Where did that one come from?

It's easier to be a motorist now than it was when I started driving. It used to be a luxury, but now every student and his dog has a car and is usually moaning about how there is a "war on motorists".

Yup.

Nevertheless, any transport minister who does not place cycling and public transport right at the forefront of his strategy is a right old bell end.

Yup

looking at mtb'ng these days it seems more people drive to trail centres, riding etc and thus for their cycling hobby spend more time in the car and more on fuel etc

'what car for the new transport minister...'

'what car for trail centres...'

'what car for all my cycling crap...'

ps cars are ace - they will be around for ages even if their propulsion changes..

taxing fuel is a great way of means tested taxation... use more fuel - pay more tax

petrol is cheap for us but costs teh people who live in oil rich countries dearly
nigeria
[img] http://www.foei.org/images/what-we-do/miscellaneous/images/goi-brian-shaad/image_large [/img]
[img] ?w=300&h=225[/img]
[img] [/img]
saudi
[img] [/img]
there are much worse images from there
venezuela
[img] [/img]

some people pay an awful lot for oil, its not us though

quick poll for the sandal wearing green ethics types...

Do you live in a city/town?
Are you aware of the lack of alternatives outside main urban areas?

If infrastructure allowed us to use Bio-ethanol, then great, or even better, march those new hydrogen powered cars into production. I'm not tied to fossil fuels, just personal transport. Don't tax me for your selfish, urbanite point of view, otherwise known as a labour voter!

But we are off topic....

Yes, Hammond sounds like a Tory from the 1950s. Anyone got an INITIATE NATIONAL PANIC button on the their keypad?

Written to my Mp to ask for clarification

You know those commons petition things that never get responded to. One of you should start one of them.

Someone pointed out recently that the amount of oil spilled in the recent disaster in the US is the same as gets spilled into the Niger Delta every single year 🙁

Do you live in a city/town?
Are you aware of the lack of alternatives outside main urban areas?

Yes, but do you think increasing reliance on cars is a good long term strategy?

Don't tax me for your selfish, urbanite point of view, otherwise known as a labour voter!

[i]*consults the [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/ ]Election Results 2010 map[/url]*[/i]

Oddly most of the remaining Labour voters appear to be "outside main urban areas" to me.

what I really hate about your argument, and the general argument for leaving the idea of motorised transport in the last century is the complete and utter lack of an alternative other then huddle in a muddy village and start your own hemp based transport policy.

If Greenpeace and friends of the earth and all those middle class pointy wagging finger type organisations supported technical development for realistic alternatives, rather than ill conceived hijacks of oil platforms and other stupidity, then we would be in a better place right now.

[\rant]

GrahamS,

You mean apart form inner London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham......

TandemJeremy - Member

Keiran - direct quote from you

An increase in VED none of which has been put back into the road infastructure.

That is not what VED is there for. It is a tax. General taxation pays for major roads, local councils for minor and urban roads.

Still don't understand your point about changing wheels - you want the civilain motorway patrol guys to change car drivers wheels for them?

TJ - I agree that it is not what it is there for. However, our road system in this country is a joke. I'm in a position where I have to drive over 750 miles per week (Sales Engineer) and the one area that i would like to see my taxes being spent has largely been ignored by the previous government - local and national, if taxes direct from motorists arn't used to maintain the systems we use then what should? Surely the fairest method would to be use revenue from VED.

On the matter of the HATO's my (now ex) girlfriend had a puncture on the motorway. She had a spare and the tools with which to change it. However she did not have the strength to undo the wheel nuts. She phoned the AA but was told, even as a lone female, that she would have to wait around an hour for a patrol.

Whilst she was waiting a HATO vehicle arrived and she asked for assistance to undo the wheel nuts only to be told that they couldn't help and if the AA didn't arrive within the hour they would have her vehicle recovered at her expense. Now what on earth are we paying these jobsworths for if they cant even help when required?

is the complete and utter lack of an alternative other then huddle in a muddy village and start your own hemp based transport policy.

a hit in one! Take a little ganja and travel in your imagination :o)

Yes, Hammond sounds like a Tory from the 1950s

Thats why he is MP for Chertsey and Weybridge. A good old safe seat for [i]one of the boys[/i] if ever I saw one.

How many Mitsubishi Shoguns were bought nationally for the traffic wombles?

There's another saving in the bank for Osbourne

NEXT!

GrahamS,

You mean apart form inner London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham......

I was more thinking of the more general lack of blue in the rural provinces such as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. 🙂

I actually agree with you that folk in't country currently need personal transport as there is little viable alternative - I just don't think that characterising the issue with party politics is helpful or accurate.

Yes, but do you think increasing reliance on cars is a good long term strategy?

No, but rather than penalising cars now they should be improving other transport. You can't penalise the car owner BEFORE ensuring there's a decent/reasonable alternative available at the same or lower cost. No party seems good at this.

AndyRT

you still miss the point about costs of motoring. all the taxes paid on car usage are far less than the amount of money car driving costs the country - VED, Fuel duty, Vat on cars - the lot of it does not come close to covering the costs of motoring.

We need to stop the massive subsidy on private motoring

It took 50 years to get to where we are now. I expect it to take 25 at leat to get back to a sensible situation. We need to start working on it now as the energy costs of personal transport is unsustainable.

Rack up the cost of petrol and use theis money to improve public transport - and over a time span of decades we will get more economical cars as well. If petrol was £20 a gallon how long till we had 150mpg cars?

Slowly over a generation steadily increasing fuel prices with that money put into alternatives will change the pattern of the way we live move and work. It is completely unsustainable that rich people who work in towns live in the country and use their cars to commute - whereas poorer rural workers have to live in towns and commute to the countryside - the economics of the madhouse!

Whith people being priced out of travelling so much by car rural village shops become viable again - and so on.

Tehre is a lot more to this but the only answer to the energy crisis is to plan for it and to change the way we live and work so as to make more efficient use of energy.

It needs to be done gradually over a generation.

No, but rather than penalising cars now they should be improving other transport. You can't penalise the car owner BEFORE ensuring there's a decent/reasonable alternative available at the same or lower cost. No party seems good at this.

The trouble is that raising taxes to improve alternative public transport makes policians very unpopular - particularly when the press says "New bus service will cost £10million and no one even uses the existing one" etc.

So instead thay have to squeeze and squeeze until drivers insist that they provide an alternative.

A nice case in point was the proposed Congestion Charge scheme in Edinburgh. They drew up budgets showing new public transport hubs, new proposals for 3 new tram routes, 6 park and ride facilites, a new train station, new bus routes and increased services, cycle routes etc.

Then said they'd fund it by charging non-residents £2 to come into the city centre by car.

Rejected by nearly 75% of votes at a referendum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_congestion_charge

TJ I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

Reliance on public transport wont help small business grow, won't help tradesman get to the site and keep their prices affordable.

Raising duty on fuel is not the answer. Yes Our infrastructure is groaning under overuse, but then if you take into consideration the population density of the UK, I don't think we're coping badly. Humanity is at its best at times of crisis. Dependance on fossil fuel for energy consumption, for what ever use is unbalancing the world at economic, geological, ecological and yes, POLITICAL levels.

I view the issues in regards to the state of our roads as endemic to the larger picture. You can treat skin complaints and ill health with vitamins and ointments, or you can wean the patient off maccy D's as their staple diet!

I think we have been suffering from too much Gov control. Too little money spread too thin is never a winning strategy. Let the potholes be resolved at their seasonal time....at the end of this financial year.

More people voted against the Edinburgh congestion charge than drive in the city. Weird,

remember that motoring is cheaper now in relation to incomes than at virtually any other time.

but we have less rich people than the old days. So raising fuel tax will hit those that are already vulnerable, the single mums and dads, the rural working and middle class, the sole trader.....

There has to be another way!

Raise fuel tax, but give tax breaks for any petrol station further than 50 miles from the nearest city?

Andy - so waht would you do then? to scarcer and more expensive and in a decade or two it will be far more expensive and scarcer than it is now. Personal transport is far too energy intensive.

We need to go back to living and working in the same locality and to use remote working where possible. We simply will not have the energy available in a generation to sustain the commuting that goes on at the moment.

So if you don't want to see more money put into alternatives to the private car how are you going to provide the energy for these cars in a generation when the oil is gone?

Too much government control? what have you been smoking? How on earth do you get a national transport policy without government control - and actually they don't have enough - the road lobby is far too influential and the government runs scared of it.

AndyRT - Member

but we have less rich people than the old days. So raising fuel tax will hit those that are already vulnerable, the single mums and dads, the rural working and middle class, the sole trader.....

There has to be another way!

rubbish - we have a greater divide between rich and poor than for generations. You point has been comprehensively disproved over the years - remember I am proposing a gradualist approach that will benefit all those groups - as those groups you mention have ( except the sole trader) are less likely to have cars, and more likely to use the improved public transport I espouse

TJ

I advocate the Hydrogen solution, which already exists, and just needs support. It would also not mean a change of social harmony, and xill use the most abundant element in the universe!

I don't have the answers, but blaming cars is not going to help. There are bigger fish to fry. Fossil fuels should not be part of our future, but resolution to change will only happen at times of crisis.

Look around, I think the world is in a bit of a mess! The balance of power will be with those that embrace new technology.

I don't think we can un-evolve(if indeed that is what we have done) or suggest cultural change that won't support our cities needs (which seemingly includes fleecing commuters on a daily basis). So we must keep moving in the same direction as the rest of the planet. Just without burning old tress and rotten dinosaurs.

Trouble with hydrogen is you need three times the amount of energy that running the car takes to create enough hydrogen. You still need to get he energy from somewhere and hydrogen use increases energy usage 3 fold.

I would rather we planned the coming transition to an economy where energy is much more expensive ( which will happen) so we can do it with the minimum pof dislocation. If we wait for the crisis it will be a lot worse

And another thing, you have started using big words.

(although hydrogen is a bigger word than espouse) and will have never been seen dead in an Alistair Maclean novel, so not in my usual vocabulary, unless I happen to glance across at the witterings of Michael Winner in my wife's sunday times.

Play fair!

[i]I don't have the answers[/i]

We can tell....

So you want cars with all the badness taken out?

ideally, yes

Too much to ask? Isn't that the role of the uneducated punter?

but we have less rich people than the old days.

😕

unless I happen to glance across at the witterings of Michael Winner in my wife's sunday times.

More of a Daily Mail man?

Actually, your viewpoint is probably an accurate representation of the way people think about transport; it's a big problem..

kieran

On the matter of the HATO's my (now ex) girlfriend had a puncture on the motorway. She had a spare and the tools with which to change it. However she did not have the strength to undo the wheel nuts. She phoned the AA but was told, even as a lone female, that she would have to wait around an hour for a patrol.
Whilst she was waiting a HATO vehicle arrived and she asked for assistance to undo the wheel nuts only to be told that they couldn't help and if the AA didn't arrive within the hour they would have her vehicle recovered at her expense. Now what on earth are we paying these jobsworths for if they cant even help when required?

not all wombles are the same!

depends on your scale. I suppose. My point was, the business world will keep on turning, writing off the costs of business, or worse, writing off the UK. If you raise the cost to conduct business in the UK, from the UK we will no longer be able to expect international firms to want to invest here.

My main argument is that although roads and transport is a mess, surely there are better places to find economic salvation for the countrys bottom line?

Actually, your viewpoint is probably an accurate representation of the way people think about transport; it's a big problem..

Most opinions I hear about transport come down to: "I want everything to be cheap and I want everyone else to stop driving".

By that standard the discussion here if pretty informed.

So much for the new caring sharing tories cutting back on excessive spending - the lazy ****er lives half an hours walk from his office but gets picked up by a driver every day. 🙄

not all wombles are the same!

No, but unfortunatly the official line is as I've said.

More people voted against the Edinburgh congestion charge than drive in the city. Weird,

That congestion charge proposal was so poorly thought out that even people who might be generally in favour of such a scheme would have voted against it. Not that it should ever have went to a vote, considering that the earlier public consultation indicated that it had no chance of success, even with the weightings given to those likely to be for such a scheme. Taking it to the vote, and starting to spend money on the implementation of the scheme, was idiocy. They'd have been better spending the money on trying to understand what might have made a charging scheme acceptable (e.g. just the inner charging zone perhaps).

@ Andy RT

If Greenpeace and friends of the earth and all those middle class pointy wagging finger type organisations supported technical development for realistic alternatives, rather than ill conceived hijacks of oil platforms and other stupidity, then we would be in a better place right now.

[\rant]

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO # REPORT-POST
AndyRT - Member
GrahamS,

You mean apart form inner London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham......

Yes I can see how inner London, Manchester, Liverpool etc. are full of those nasty middle class finger wagging types...

Do you live in a city/town?
Are you aware of the lack of alternatives outside main urban areas?

If infrastructure allowed us to use Bio-ethanol, then great, or even better, march those new hydrogen powered cars into production. I'm not tied to fossil fuels, just personal transport. Don't tax me for your selfish, urbanite point of view, otherwise known as a labour voter!

Fine, but the people I see clogging up the roads every day in Birmingham [i]do[/i] live in urban areas, and [i]do[/i] have alternatives, and the use of private cars in that environment is largely absurd. Pointing out that for some people it's different doesn't make it any less true.

Any suggestion that people use the bus and the train more is always met by someone pointing out that in some places there's only 1 bus a month and then you have to walk 10 miles to get it, but it doesn't mean reducing car use should be off the agenda.

M

. If petrol was £20 a gallon how long till we had 150mpg cars?

Physical impossibility. Motorbikes just about do this currently. It would take a step-change of about 20% in efficiency and about a 75% weight reduction to get that, it that just isnt possible. They're struggling to get 1-2% currently despite hundreds of research labs working on it.

75% weight reduction seems perfectly plausible to me. Start of the 80's, most cars weighed around 800-1000kg. Now every school run mum is dragging 1500-2000kg of 4x4 around.
I'm quite sure that with modern materials and engineering a lightweight car is not unrealistic, provided we dont insist on driving around on a leather lounge suite with electric everything double glazing aircon climate control gps guided beerfridge and heated mirrors. FFS.

exactly the point chopper. How about diesel electric? run the diesel engine at a fixed speed for high efficiency - a 250 cc engine running at park torque will provide plenty of power for a 50 mph cruise. Battery for overboost.

Of course a 150 mpg car will not have the same performance or comforts as a current car - thing 2cv for the 21st centuary or one of those French microcars.

25 bhp car will do a 50 mph cruise no trouble.

yeah, i reckon 150mpg is possible. Just check out ecomodder.com - thats just a load of nerds with no money. This guys getting 100mpg from an old civic (although it does look a bit wierd)
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/aerocivic-how-drop-your-cd-0-31-0-a-290.html

The government has to put up VED and fuel duty to control car use, its a very crude measure, but the only alternative that wouldn't penalise people not living in urban areas would be Road Pricing.

I realise that Ecomodder is a bunch of enthusiasts and anything that was mass-produced would look much smarter, but "blimey" that car you linked to is remarkably shonky-looking!

[i]Rubbish. Cameras are sited at accident blackspots and no profit is made from them - it is all returned to the road safety partnerships[/i]

And pi55ed away on paying overtime to coppers to operate the vans.

The government has to put up VED and fuel duty to control car use, its a very crude measure, but the only alternative that wouldn't penalise people not living in urban areas would be Road Pricing.

What about people like me who live in an urban area as its all I can afford and would love to cut my commute but couldnt buy a house in the country?

I hate commuting and went to loads of effort to live 5 minutes from where i work. Now the office has closed and moved 40 miles away! No trains or bus services, so forced to drive. nightmare.

anyway, if driving was much more expensive, they wouldn't have been able to do that. Not without giving everyone a massive pay rise or being forced to rehire their entire workforce.

if driving is expensive, things will change. probably.

75% weight reduction seems perfectly plausible to me. Start of the 80's, most cars weighed around 800-1000kg. Now every school run mum is dragging 1500-2000kg of 4x4 around.
I'm quite sure that with modern materials and engineering a lightweight car is not unrealistic, provided we dont insist on driving around on a leather lounge suite with electric everything double glazing aircon climate control gps guided beerfridge and heated mirrors. FFS.

Even a basic family car is 1400kg these days, that is largely due to the safety provisions that are enforced by regulations (like minimum chassis intrusion distances etc) rather than the additional gizmos. Sure you can make a very light car if you use massively expensive materials and processes and rip out most of the safety systems. Most of the electronics weigh next to nothing, the things that add weight are air con, ABS, airbags, SIPS and some luxuries like electric seats. GPS, phones, laser guided indicators add grams.

yeah, i reckon 150mpg is possible. Just check out ecomodder.com - thats just a load of nerds with no money. This guys getting 100mpg from an old civic (although it does look a bit wierd)

Yeah, 100 on a run at constant speed - that's not hard. No-one drives like that and nor would it be possible. Plus look at the size and shape of the vehicle. 100mpg on a normal commute is motorbike territory. They weigh a couple of hundred kg.

New materials (carbon/kevlar) are VASTLY expensive and planet raping. Old materials are not that light. New ways of using old materials are good but dont save that much. IC engines have been in development for christ knows how long, a 5% increase in economy in the current climate would net a manufacturer a MASSIVE percentage of the market - do you think they sit back and think "nahh, we're fine as we are"? Do you think the engineers working on it are sitting around trying not to improve? Of course not, they're working within the increasingly tighter regulations on emissions/economy and safety. They produce some vehicles with additional luxuries sure, but they always will. On average cars are much more efficient AND safer these days but there's no quick fix.

I personally don't enjoy commuting for the sake of it (I love driving, and don't even mind traffic queues) but I would love to be able to walk down the road to work, but likewise I hate living in a city, or the outskirts of a city, it really leaves me depressed and tired. I'll take the commute over permanent hatred of the place I live. Plus there's no way I could afford to live (with sufficient room for my family) near my work.

He is my MP

He lives in the same town.

My wife gets the train to London everyday her office is on Embankment near Parliment. She was getting on the train even when she was 8 months pregnant. She sometimes has to work late but it's only a 40 min train ride to Waterloo.

Philip Hammond used the maximum 2nd home allowance because he needed a 2nd home in London depsite the fact 80% of his constituents get the train in veryday to work in London.

So yes that + his motoring rant / hate cyclists = tosser!

IC engines have been in development for christ knows how long, a 5% increase in economy in the current climate would net a manufacturer a MASSIVE percentage of the market - do you think they sit back and think "nahh, we're fine as we are"? Do you think the engineers working on it are sitting around trying not to improve? Of course not

Working at imperial I've been to more lectures on improving efficiencies than on using hydrogen ! No one is talking about hydrogen anymore maybe electric cars using renewable but not hydrogen. You'd have to build a whole new infrastructure to transport it not to mention storing large quantities of hydrogen a high pressure probably isnt a good idea. On the other hand the infrastructure to deliver electricity is already there.

I still think there are things we can do to improve efficiencies. Almost all diesels use turbos now a day. Instead of using a turbo to improve power they can be used to improve efficiency as a turbo is powered by the exhaust gases and energy lost through the exhaust can be recycled. The polo TDI s currently one of the most efficient cars on the road. People are working on trying to reduce the problems with Turbos on petrol engines and they will become standard like with diesel engines once these problems have been sorted.

Also I think weight saving can be made, are we likely to be seeing any more heavy safety features in cars ? I think we've pretty much reached the end of the road on these hopefully the average weight of cars will start to reduce now.

I think the solutions to the transport problems in this country will mainly be sorted by improvements in efficiencies in standard petrol/diesel vechiles, electric vehicles for short/city driving powered by renewables(electric scooters would be ideal for London and help improve air quality).

And I think the biggest change will be working from home, once companies finally get a grasp on internet communications, they'll realise they can save massive amount of money from having much smaller offices but only have staff in a few days a week while they work from home.

Obviously this will create problems because everyone will need a home office. But if your house doesnt need to be right by the train station you can get a bigger house for your money.