Lizzie, may I refer you to your posts #7, #22, #41 & #52 in this thread ??
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/index.php?topic=111491.0
I assume you have now changed your mind and expect all the passengers to pay for the infrastructure costs ??
Or is "OK" as its a rail thing ?? but "road" things are bad ??
Confused of Wiltshire .... 
Yes, sorry Entwood, I can understand how I am confusing you
I do tend to have two principles on these matters as, I believe anyway, the subject is a complicated one when trying to draw a line between the responsibilities of private individuals / companies and those of the government of our fair land.
With railways they should be viewed as the way mass transportation of both passengers and freight should be in the rest of the 21st century. Passengers, and the companies using the railways for freight, should pay for the travel and towards the upkeep of the railway system. The complication comes with the matter of catching up with the rebuilding of that infrasture that was for at least 50 years left to decline without the investment it required. British Railways were formed on 1st January 1948 with the government of the day taking on the liabilities of the system. However railways were becoming rapidly less fashionable and the government left them to basically rot, unlike the BR predecessors', the 'Big Four' railway companies who used private money and much commitment in a true competitive commercial market to run and improve their investment. BR / the government ignored those principles and have created for us in 2012 a railway system infrasture that is still creaking and straining under the demands of today, with passenger numbers at their highest ever.
We, the taxpayer should pay a
percentage of the cost to Network Rail for the billions of pounds of work that is required to update the railway system to give the nation the transport choices we will need in 2050 and beyond, if not as of now!
With the car it is certain, and I am never happy as a petrol head to admit this, it's days in the form we are so used to are numbered. By 2050, with a population of 65 going on to 70 million, we can not possibly build enough motorways of sufficient size to have a swelled number of motorists travelling around between cities without huge tailbacks and general hold-ups. The government therefore must encourage, and this is already happening in many respects, greater use of public transport. This will cost billions of taxpayers money,
unless, and I strongly favour this, private enterprise to pay for the giant upgrade required to all forms of public transport, with them enjoying the
profits from their created business to reward them fully.
It would be great if we, the British, could afford all that his on our 'wish list'. Electric cars for all with all costs paid for; new and extended railway, metro, and underground systems, with buses running in great numbers locally as they do in London, and roads all upgraded to cope with any demands placed on them in the 21st century.
However, the sad truth is our government now or in the foreseeable future will not have enough of our money to pay for all this. Hard choices have to be made. This is where I end up splitting my principles Nigel. My choice is to give high subsidy from us, the tax payer, to the development of the public transport system, with rail travel given the priority. To do this we, the tax payer, cannot pay for subsides given to private transport for individuals. As from the beginning of car usage, it is the owner and user of that vehicle to pay for their running costs. That includes any new form of private, low occupation, vehicle such as electric cars. As with petrol / diesel vehicles, the owner and user should pay for the electric 'fuel' they use, as you and I pay for it in our homes, with a percentage in that price to allow for the creation and maintenance of the infrasture such as charging points. I suggest the power company's should be given the chance to enter into a competitive commercial bidding procedure to secure the business of the charging points after they have installed them without any local or national government involvement beyond usual planning and regulatory considerations.
So, in all that would be my policy if I was in government. It is a policy favouring the private commercial sector in the capitalist state we live in. As in the 'great days' of Victorian England that built so much of our wealth, power, and infrasture, we should again drive forward on those principles. Private commercialism is
usually far more efficient than any politically blinkered government.
I hope that clarifies my multi-level beliefs and 'policies' Nigel. I know they will not be welcomed by all, but hey, such is politics!
Author
Topic: Electric car charging subsidy (Read 3960 times)