Driving plans for pay-per-mile tax and the implications

If they do bring in such a thing will it be just England or the whole UK?

Will there be allowances made according to postcode or where you live? If you live in a rural area then you do a lot of miles simply to get to the shops for food, driving 3 or 4 miles to get to the local shop isn't unusual, or further for the GP.

Do I trust the government, no, I don't trust any government to do right for the majority of the people, our politics is to adversarial, to us and them, when government changes the new incumbents spends half their time undoing what the previous lot did and not replacing it with any better, just with a different ideological bent.

I disagree with Digital ID cards, this government may not have any great designs on curtailing our activities or monitoring us, but such things are wide open to mission creep. A future government could well decide that we have to have all our medical details on them to prove we can see our GP and how often we see our GP. It could decide that we do have to produce it on demand of the police. Then you've got the issue of who has access to the information, this could have huge legal implications, could your medical history be used in open court to discredit your testimony, even as a witness? 

TheCatWoman said:

If they do bring in such a thing will it be just England or the whole UK?

Will there be allowances made according to postcode or where you live?

I would imagine there would be a phased approach due to the need to retrofit old cars, but I expect they will use a ramping up of the Carbon Tax rules to force more and more older cars into scrappage and support the car industry.

If they can establish that they are creating loads of jobs (even of only for a few years) and car manufacturing is on the rise then they can claim it as a victory.

The fact it adds a big load to our pockets is our problem.

TheCatWoman said:

such things are wide open to mission creep

This was the main point of my article, It is convenient for them to be able to see everything going on and this will add a whole lot more data to their knowledge.

If you are claiming for mobility support but are still regularly travelling then your claim may be denied because you are currently meeting the need anyway. From the reasons people have quoted for why claims are denied, this seems quite plausable and of course saves the government money.

TheCatWoman said:

Then you've got the issue of who has access to the information, this could have huge legal implications, could your medical history be used in open court to discredit your testimony, even as a witness? 

Insurers can already ask to see your medical records even to take out health insurance so I am fairly sure that where the records are relevant to a court case then they can do this too. There is detail on the current rules here:

https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/ethics/confidentiality-and-health-records/requests-for-medical-information-from-insurers

As to whether they can use it to discredit a witness - that is unlikely to be easy under the current law but I wouldn't put it past the insurers if they wanted to lobby for it.

There is an interesting article on MPs influence in major companies here:

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/mps-and-outside-business-interests/

If a big insurer wanted to influence a change in the law, how do you think they would go about it?

I think it is very much like lobbying in the USA, but it is much more discreet in the UK.

The whole road tax thing needs rethinking, it seems to me not right that you can have a heavy car that does a lot of damage to the roads and yet it costs £20pa in road tax and yet a lighter car even though less fuel efficient will be £100pa more. I really think we should be ashamed of the state of our roads, many of them are in a terrible state. National A roads, dual carriageways and motorways that come under the Highways Agency seem to be better maintained than the smaller local ones that are left to cash strapped councils, I think more money needs to be spent not just on maintainance but on replacing sections where theres more patch than original surface.

I wasn't thniking of insurers having access to medical records to defend court cases, but of people who are assaulted, I don't believe the police wouldn't have a rootle through your medical records, if that meant they could find a way not to prosecute, a reason like, your mental health or anything that could be considered as a "disorder". If the police accesses any information and did use it in a case then the defence would have access to it too. How safe would our data be? We know of some appalling things done by police officers, like taking and sharing photos of the bodies of two murder victims, I'm not saying that all poiice are like this, just that some are and as the boundaries between public and private become ever weaker, how private will private be? 

I don't have a smart phone as Iain and others already know, I don't want one either, I'm a disaster with tech, the only thing I want to know about sat navs is how to turn them off, this seems to be another instance where not having a smart device will count against you, along with the whole ID thing. I'm finding people increasingly view me with suspicion for not having a smart phone or using social media other than here, ordinary people seem to be less suspicious, but businesses and government offices seem to think I must be hiding something and that my explaination that I'm a total klutz must be some kind of ruse for what I'm really doing, which must be bad and possibly dangerous. In reality my life is fairly mundane, I do post some personal stuff here, but it's never anything I'm unhappy with the world knowing, there are somethings that remain private.

It seems that society is in a position where privacy is being eroded and if you don't share everything when asked or better still volunteer it, then you must be hiding a monsterous secret life. There is a huge difference between secrecy and privacy, my bank statements are private, but not secret, I shut the door when I go to the toilet, not because I'm "up to something", nor is it because people don't know what it is I go in there to do, we all know why we go to the toilet, but we shut the door and do it in private because it gives a veil of privacy that society values. Secrets on the other hand are things that may cause harm or damage to me, another or a group of others, our passwords are supposed to be secret, things people tell us in confidence are supposed to be kept secret, except in certain situations like if you have reason to believe a child is in danger.

By the way Iain, given my technoklutznes, would you trust me to drive an electric car?

Another government could do many things - we'd be here for a very long time going through them all. They could already have decided it should all be added to our driver's licenses or passports. As I say - unless they change the actual law this can't legally happen. The data protection act exists for a reason. I really don't think it is a big conspiracy.

I don't think that's always suspicion - I'm not saying it never is. But in this day and age technology has become so ingrained in most of us that I think it is a very foreign concept that someone may not have a smart phone. I admit it is a concept that I find hard to get my head round - I wouldn't know how to do a significant amount of things without my phone. Online portals are very common for many things now as most people prefer to do it online. For me it is a huge benefit autism wise because I hate using the phone. Are you sure this person was using it as a threat and not just suprise and keeping you informed?

I'm not saying there aren't any corrupt people out there or any bad intentions from those above. But I do not believe the government is one big conspiracy against us all.

You're right to begin with digital ID won't hold much information about you, but this is what I mean by mission creep, another government might decide we need all sorts of other information held on it without clarifying who has legitimate access to it.

It's also a big part of the reason I was writing earlier about how suspicious those in any authority are about someone who has no smart phone and has no social media. When I was sorting my benefits out last week the chap on the phone to the person helping me wanted me to confirm that I wanted the person to act for me, but also to confirm that I had no smart phone or the digital skills to do everything online, he ended with the "threat" 'you won't be able to access your government portal!'. I thought, well I can't access it now as I don't know how. But this digression is to show how those with even a little bit of power will wave it like a big stick. 

Data from phones already gets handed over in many crimes. That isn't new. Phone data is already used to check your location. Social media posts to show intent etc. 

Unless another government does a total overhaul of data protection, nothing would change. The police couldn't suddenly access all of your data without permission. Yes obviously you're going to get the odd corrupt police officer that may do it anyway but they probably could now.

I think you're over estimating how this digital ID is going to work. It isn't going to hold all of your personal information that can be taken at one swipe. 

I really don't think it's going to hold much more, if any, information than a driving license currently does, that the police are already able to look up.

I was meaning the mission creep that's inevitable with such technology, if we have a digital ID card, which was what I was talking about as well as road pricing. Whilst the current government might not give permission for police or others to access our information another government could, that would be when there would be the possibilities for not investigating crimes or for handing over data from phones to the defence.

I was meaning the mission creep that's inevitable with such technology, if we have a digital ID card, which was what I was talking about as well as road pricing. Whilst the current government might not give permission for police or others to access our information another government could, that would be when there would be the possibilities for not investigating crimes or for handing over data from phones to the defence.

Another government could do many things - we'd be here for a very long time going through them all. They could already have decided it should all be added to our driver's licenses or passports. As I say - unless they change the actual law this can't legally happen. The data protection act exists for a reason. I really don't think it is a big conspiracy.

I don't think that's always suspicion - I'm not saying it never is. But in this day and age technology has become so ingrained in most of us that I think it is a very foreign concept that someone may not have a smart phone. I admit it is a concept that I find hard to get my head round - I wouldn't know how to do a significant amount of things without my phone. Online portals are very common for many things now as most people prefer to do it online. For me it is a huge benefit autism wise because I hate using the phone. Are you sure this person was using it as a threat and not just suprise and keeping you informed?

I'm not saying there aren't any corrupt people out there or any bad intentions from those above. But I do not believe the government is one big conspiracy against us all.

You're right to begin with digital ID won't hold much information about you, but this is what I mean by mission creep, another government might decide we need all sorts of other information held on it without clarifying who has legitimate access to it.

It's also a big part of the reason I was writing earlier about how suspicious those in any authority are about someone who has no smart phone and has no social media. When I was sorting my benefits out last week the chap on the phone to the person helping me wanted me to confirm that I wanted the person to act for me, but also to confirm that I had no smart phone or the digital skills to do everything online, he ended with the "threat" 'you won't be able to access your government portal!'. I thought, well I can't access it now as I don't know how. But this digression is to show how those with even a little bit of power will wave it like a big stick. 

Data from phones already gets handed over in many crimes. That isn't new. Phone data is already used to check your location. Social media posts to show intent etc. 

Unless another government does a total overhaul of data protection, nothing would change. The police couldn't suddenly access all of your data without permission. Yes obviously you're going to get the odd corrupt police officer that may do it anyway but they probably could now.

I think you're over estimating how this digital ID is going to work. It isn't going to hold all of your personal information that can be taken at one swipe. 

I really don't think it's going to hold much more, if any, information than a driving license currently does, that the police are already able to look up.