Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Road tolls a 'replacement tax' not extra cost, claims Tavish Scott

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
23 February 2007
TAVISH Scott, the transport minister, defended his controversial plan for road tolls in Scotland yesterday, claiming it would be a replacement tax on motorists, not an additional tax.
He confirmed the Executive was considering the introduction of road-user pricing in Scotland - despite the 1.8 million-strong petition from across the UK opposing the scheme on a Downing Street website.

Mr Scott told MSPs: "We will consider using road pricing as a mechanism to address traffic congestion both with the UK government and using our own devolved powers."

The Liberal Democrats want Scotland to take control of existing car taxes and fuel duties, cutting both and bringing in congestion charging instead.

"Road pricing is a replacement cost, not an additional cost," Mr Scott said. He stressed action had to be taken to tackle congestion - pointing out that in 2005 a quarter of all rush-hour journeys were held up by traffic jams. And he asked: "Does Scotland's economy grow if the country's roads are gridlocked? No, it does not."

But the minister insisted he did not want motorists to pay more. "We want to tackle congestion, not penalise motorists," he said. "The solution to congestion and climate change is not more motoring taxes. The public will not accept that. But what people will consider is a balanced approach. They will consider road-user pricing charges if they are balanced against motoring taxation cuts."

He said a road-user pricing scheme, if it replaced existing taxes rather than added to them, could be a win-win situation for Scotland. He said the money could help provide better public transport alternatives for people in big towns and cities. And in rural areas, where public transport was not always available, road pricing could mean motoring becoming cheaper.

He also said such a scheme need not infringe on people's civil liberties. "That is about the system chosen. There are options which respect personal freedom and do not track a vehicle's every move," he said.

He added: "It is sensible that transport policy does consider road-user pricing. But, above all, that must mean tackling congestion while not penalising motorists."

The debate was brought by the Tories, who have launched a website petition against road tolling in Scotland. By yesterday, the petition had attracted 5,000 names.

David Davidson, the Conservative transport spokesman, claimed the debate was about "Tavish's toll tax". He said: "Tavish Scott wants Scotland to go it alone on this matter. He wants Scotland to be the guinea pig in this, in an experiment. Well, Scots don't want that."

The Tory motion calling for no road tolls was defeated without a vote. An Executive amendment calling for road tolls to be considered was passed by 65 votes to 41.

Page 1 of 1

 
1

Androsthenes,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 02:19:56

Mr Scott's Master in London doesn't share his views.
And if Mr Scott or the anti-Scottish LibDems thinks Holyrood will gain control over petrol duty they're away with the fairies.

2

Mev Brown,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 02:25:22

Uh-huh. Not an extra tax…

I’m trying to remember the Labour party manifesto pledges about raising taxes.

Nope – don’t remember them saying they would hike taxes or introduce what, 60? Or is it 100+ new taxes? I’m sure I would remember reading that.

Labour and their LibDem partners are both “tax and spend” parties at heart, both are notable for their ideas for taxation, and both are short on ideas for wealth creation.

Any twit can spend money. It takes intelligence to create wealth.

Watch this space: www.mevbrwn.org.uk

3

Suck-McCrunchie,

Bonny Bonny Banks of Overcharging 23/02/2007 03:01:17

Yeah - Tavish knows we need more taxes - to pay the mortgage on the house thats jointly in his wife's name but had her name removed before he got expenses on it.

If a benefot claimant had tried this they would be banged up - so why not MSPs?

4

I'm no really here,

23/02/2007 04:33:19

But it would be a higher cost, therefore it would be EXTRA.

Thinking that N0.10 is sending out 1.8m emails. I know programs like Outlook Express only allow about 15 email addresses per email. So if his staff work 8hrs a day non-stop, seven days a week, it is going to take them several MONTHS to send them all. So if your waiting for yours - don't hold your breath.

5

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 06:21:54

TAX SPEND BAN WASTE - Well voted Caledonia!

6

Ubi,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 06:22:03

Of one thing we may be certain. It will represent more tax. Why bother replacing one tax with another to raise the same amount of revenue ? One tax will be confused with another in order to make it difficult to carry out a like for like comparison and to make it easy for lobby fodder ministers such as Mr Scott to stand up and lie about it.

7

Jozef Goj,

Colo Heights NSW Australia 23/02/2007 06:52:00

On Wednesday the 21st February, Prime Minister Blair challenged critics to come up with a better solution to the growing problem of traffic congestion.
I accept that challenge.
Furthermore we can achieve this without tolls.
He has been informed of this today by e-mail on his Downing Street website.
We can change any cities traffic infrastructure to give Liquid Flow Traffic.
If the road infrastructure cannot achieve free and uninterrupted vehicle flows no technology will help!
The solution to traffic jams is not the size of the road but the ability of an intersection to work correctly.
Traffic lights just stop traffic, roundabouts are for light traffic and freeway intersections are fundamentally flawed. They have been like this for over 80 years as, supposedly world’s best practice.
If it worked why do we get jams and gridlock?

At www.ubtsc.com.au we have models of intersections that work at 100 percent efficiency.
They allow all vehicles entering an intersection to exit that intersection left, right or ahead without stopping all day every day without fail.
Yes even during the worst peak period you can imagine.

None of this is worth anything if government at all levels dismisses it!
Think outside the square for solutions and look for the positives of what this means.
I did.
Imagine being able to cross town in peak hour traffic without stopping at a single intersection.
Jozef Goj, CEO, UBTSC Pty Ltd

8

SouthernSkye,

Currently Köln 23/02/2007 07:15:35

......"That is about the system chosen. There are options which respect personal freedom and do not track a vehicle's every move,"

OK, tell us, here and now just HOW a system that, by its very nature, requires to know the location of the vehicle in order to apply the correct chage (is the vehicle in a congestion zone at peak time?) and the identity of the vehicle so it is known to whom the charge is applied, can be done without following the vehicles every move?

9

AB_R,

23/02/2007 07:31:27

What tax will it replace?

10

Sgritheall,

Switzerland 23/02/2007 08:32:04

"The Treasury does not work out what it needs and then think how to raise the money. It pitches for as much as it can get away with and then thinks how to spend it."

From "Yes, Minister".

This sums it up nicely, doesn't it?

11

JayJay,

Glasgow - ish 23/02/2007 08:37:37

Tavish needs to wind his neck back in and start addressing the basics here.
Scotland's roads are not truly congested. We get jams at pressure points (Kingston Bridge, Forth Road Bridge) but these are not M25 style jams unless some tube allows his dumper truck to blow up on the M80. Scotland's roads have also lagged well behind the rest of the UK in terms of upgrading. The M8 is not a motorway, the M74 only becomes a motorway as you leave Lanarkshire and aside from that we have a rag tag of A roads, with the A9,A1 and A96 barely passing muster as dirt tracks.
So Tavish
a) are you planning the investment that would see Scotland's roads brought up to scratch? As a minimum, a 3 lane M8, a two lane A9 and A96, and possibly a new Forth crossing that doesn't cost an absurd sum (tip:get the French to manage the project - they appear to build bridges pretty effectively over there)
b) are you planning to improve public transprt before you price the roads...or is this something that will happen after road pricing? If the former, you can start by cheapening the peak time fares right now. If the latter, what sort of a timescale are we talking about?
c) Presumably the private sector public transport providers (and there's an oxymoron on all sorts of levels) will need to be subsidised for all this shiny new investment in fleet, staff and routes they currently can't be arsed providing. How's that going to work then?
d) are you categorically saying, in a "sack me/I will resign if I lie" style that this will not see a net tax gain to the Executive?
e) are you happy to commission the investment in IT required to undertake road pricing? How much will that cost?
f) who do I sue when I hit the many holes in my newly priced road?
The level of thought not put into this issue by Ministers is simply staggering. This will cost heaps to set up and administer (and will be a real cash cow for consultants everywhere) and will cos

12

Henry Gray,

Scottish Borders 23/02/2007 08:38:56

If as Mr Scott says he is NOT going to increase costs for the motorist HOW is he going to finance the improvement to public transport ?

13

Albawolf,

St Andrews 23/02/2007 08:40:28

Mr Scott's logic is flawed
He needs to get into the real-world.....

Mr Scott CLIAMS to be a Liberal
Liberal means en-powering the individual to take responsibility for his (or her's) actions/lifestyles

Yet Mr Scott want's to install a "black" box (maybe (unlike Henry) he will give it to you in any color you want.....)
in your car to charge you (for what you have already paid for)

Also what roads will he apply his congestion charges on

The A9 which is currently very busy (and dangerous) because the government he is a part of, wouldn't make it what it should be.

Instead they "queue-jump" whatever" central-belt scotland wants to the top of the queue......

Now they will hit the A9 with their congestion charges.
Yet it is only congested because they wouldn't make it what it should be.

Watch
"the" Highland council
HIE
Hi-trans
role over and allow this to go thru

God alone knows what we need those bodies for......

This just gets worse and worse......

Please Mr Scott get into the REAL-WORLD......

14

paulr,

23/02/2007 08:47:11

Tavish Scott like the rest of them is up for reelection soon, how many votes does he think this will win him? 0 maybe?

15

The Facts,

23/02/2007 08:57:14

Vehicle Excise Duty, VAT and Fuel Duties have not been been devolved to the Scottish Executive so this pratt can't adjust them.

He should have a look at the Noddy Parliaments powers before spouting forth ill founded garbage.

Taxi for McTavish (or is he fiddling these expenses as well?)

16

A.A. Andrews,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 09:01:45

Does Mr. Scott want to get rid of Road tax and Fuel tax out right or just reduce them by 10-15% so that we still have to pay them along with this new tax?

17

Mine's an 80 bob,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 09:04:38

Mr Scott has obviously put a lot of thought and consideration into this before announcing

"Road pricing is a replacement cost, not an additional cost,"

thoughtful considered response to the above....... hahahahahahaha.... really, who are you trying to kid

18

JG,

Fife 23/02/2007 09:05:00

I'm running out of people I would be willing to vote for!! What a bunch of charlatans!

19

Fed up,

23/02/2007 09:23:08

#11 Agree with you totally. This would be one of the worst ideas ever foisted on Scotland. There are an estimated 2 million untaxed and uninsured vehicles in the UK. Will the owners of these vehicles buy the 'black box' - somehow I don't think so. What about visitors to Scotland? At the moment, they pay the same fuel duty the rest of us do but this scheme would only be applied to Scots. What about commercial vehicles? Does Lavish Tavish think for one minute that the companies involved will not pass on the cost to the customer? I understand that the satellites involved are mostly owned by the US military. Are they going to let their satellites be used for this with or without payment?

Too many questions without any sensible answer.

Get out and live in the real world and think things through before you coming up with idiotic plans like this Tavish.

20

Scaramouche,

23/02/2007 09:28:06

Ahh .... here's where that parody should've gone. Not page one. Sorry people .... but I got right now .... so here it comes again ..... (Hmmm, another song I have to parody. The Tremeloes,eh?) Oops .... sorry .... was having a .... oh shut it Scaramooth .... get on with it.

I've not been driving much in my car,
It's not quite a Jaguar
I bought it in Primrose Hill
From a bloke from Brazil
It was made in fifty-nine,
In a factory by the Tyne
It says Morris on the door,
Royal Mail owned it before
There is nothing that it lacks,
Except now I gotta pay Toll Tax
And I really have to care,
Not to drive so much in open air
It's a bit old but it's mine,
I mend it in my spare time
Just last week I changed the oil,
the rocker valves and the coil
I no longer swerve to avoid the toads
Cos I pay for mileage on the roads
I also have to save a lot more cash
Cos soon it'll cost me if I'm in a crash!
I've not been driving much in my car,
I promise I do not go far
Don't even go into the town
And I avoid going up the Mound
I drove her along Newington
Got her going up to 8!!!
This polis stopped me the other day,
you're mistaken what could I say
The tyres were a little worn,
They were okay, I could have sworn
I don't like driving in my car,
Paying by the mile to get so far ....
I've not been driving in my car,
it don't look much and it don't go far
I no longer drive now with a smile
They're screwing me by the mile
I don't like driving in my car,
Even though it's not quite a Jaguar
I'm giving up driving now you see
And I'm going to shoot some MSPs!!!
(I hate bloody buses!!)
(I hate MSPs)
(I hate Tony Blair!)
(We'll, you have to, don't you?)

*Adapted from &qu

21

A.A. Andrews,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 09:29:14

#7 Jozef Goj

You can't be serious? That is one of the funniest websites I have seen. Thanks for making my day.

22

Dougie, Edinburgh,

23/02/2007 09:44:54

Nobody believes this clown. If the government needs more tax money it should be honest about it. The most stupid thing about this new tax in particular is that it will cost almost as much to administer as it will raise.

23

IWright,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 09:56:02

"Road tolls a 'replacement tax' not extra cost, claims Tavish Scott"


Aye, right!

24

stonepark,

Lanark 23/02/2007 10:12:54

What congestion?????

other than the m8 corridor and a few city centres, Scotland doesn't have congestion (and having lived in the North of England for a number of years but occassionally gone to central southern england) and then come back to scotland, I can catoragorically state we don't need a congestion tax.

25

Alexander,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 10:15:54

Funny, Bliar told us the fuel duty was helping finance the health service. Now we are going to replace it with road tolls to be spent on public transport.
Time to sign in on if you haven't already!
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/notolls/
OK, your vote will be ignored, but at least shows it up the hypocrisy of public consultation.

26

n1vek,

edin 23/02/2007 10:26:07

Its the school runners that are responsible for rush hour congestion. The holiday periods are much quieter. So keep the school runners off the road instead of taxing the workers essential use. These people are space cadets, I choose to work not too far from home as a quality of life decision, but these nutters are talking about charging me at least 20 miles a day. Are they going to put my salary up?

27

Hadrian,

23/02/2007 10:27:31

# 11 Jay Jay

# 19 Fed Up

Totaly agree with both.

Let us hope that after May we have a complete change of personell
in government instead of these fools with their insane ideas.
Are they totaly incapable of understanding that if a road is built that can just carry the current traffic, and you then put a 1000 house development at the end of it, it will be seriously overloaded. If they cant see the obvious, they should be employed elswhere where they can do no more damage.
Interesting that the Tory Party is the only party wholly against
road tolls, some of us may have a rethink of our voting intentions if some other parties dont make their policy intentions crystal clear. As a country, we are overtaxed,we have had enough of taxation without representation, people should not be afraid of their government, the government should be very afraid of the people.

28

n1vek,

edin 23/02/2007 10:34:54

Don't get sucked in by the Tories. Evil trolls. Anyone see the letter in the news suggesting a tunnel to the East of Edinburgh. Great idea.

29

Pete39,

Tassy 23/02/2007 10:50:20

I know I cannot vote for him, but I reckon he is a lot better than the guy with the honest sonsie face , you know (te dum, te dum, te dum, te dum). Ach do your own thing, it will give us a laugh at least.

30

ChrisA,

Pennycook 23/02/2007 10:59:14

Of course it will be an additional tax - they always are. The worst thing is that each new tax means more workers to deal with the administration of them and hence more money spent. Why not abolish all the others and just have a tax on fuel to cover it all (or is that too simple and would leave thousands of civil servants out of a job)

31

TheGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 11:21:39

THere's only one thing we can do. Vote this shower of clowns, bullies and gravy train letches out. We do not need numpties wrecking our country.

Honestly, I'll be taking my family off to New Zealand if we don't have radical change.

HE is basically saying that if you are rich enough, it will make no difference. There we have it, the labour administration that we voted in are now going to penalise us but let the rich continue to pollute and do what they want. F CK THAT!

32

Franklin,

23/02/2007 11:34:22

The Tories have jumped on this issue because of the e-petition. Don't trust them. They're still the party of toffs and privilege for their selected few.


Another great song, Scaramouche. Don't know how you do it, or where you find the time. I just think your talent is really unappreciated here. You should be having these printed. The Scaramouche Song Book. I'd buy a copy!

33

Lock,

23/02/2007 11:53:21

Idea for independence:

Scrap all taxes and start again from scratch.

Get rid of NI, road tax and all indirect taxation (exceptions can be made for alcohol, cigarettes, petrol etc.).

Lets have a flat rate of income tax for all (open to debate). It may be have to be high but at least it will be transparent so we will know exactly how much tax we all pay (face it, if we all calculated our exact tax bill we would probably have a heart attack). Plus it is the simplist and cheapest way to calculate and pay your tax.

Unfortunately accountants and tax men may lose out in this efficiency drive...

34

Allan(handofgod137),

23/02/2007 12:08:14

28 & 32, you represt the reason we have this shower of numpties in the first place, the blind mass of sheeple who faithfully vote labour because of what they once stood for, regardless of the fact that for the last 30 - 401 years they have systematicaly shafted the working man. 33 excelent idea!
Tavish Scott is a complete numpty, if he really wanted to cut congestion, why not ban the school run, during school holidays my normal journey time to work is reduced by 20 - 25%.

35

IWright,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 12:09:33

#33
Lock - Alternatively we could abolish general income tax and have only hypothecated taxes: e.g. all motoring taxes to be spent on roads, etc and an NHS tax to be spent on only the NHS. WE would know how much we are spending on each subject.

36

Rob,

23/02/2007 12:41:01

If you believe this, you'll believe anything. The whole idea is to penalise to prevent - you will go precisely nowhere if the total tax remains neutral. It's disingenuous to say the very least, but then having watched our wonderful leaders on Question Time last night that's only to be expected. I've never seen such a hopleless collection - there's no-one you could even think about voting for. Until it costs less to go somwhere on a bus or a train than it does in a car then nothing will change. Although the populous is considered by politicians of all parties to be economic incompetents, people just aren't that stupid. They have obviously concluded that since they can't make public transport any cheaper then you raise the price of motoring to try to achieve the incentive for using public transport. It will all be wrapped up as saving the planet, health and safety, ecological beneficial, good for the economy etc etc - meanwhile, the real intent is to raise as much money as possible and spend it on the usual emotive causes (health, education and security - not to mention their privileged pensions) in the hope of being re-elected. Spending on transport - you have to be bloody joking.

37

ScotsLass58,

Red Kens Toon 23/02/2007 12:49:19

I am confused with this one. I am sure that I read somewhere previously that Tavish "Mctavish" Scott was a Liberal ? Democrat?? If this is indeed the case then is any reputable psychiatrist out there in blog land who can explain the rationale why someone from the Lib-Dems ( or should that be Fib - Dems ?) would jump onto one of the obvious up and coming LABOUR policies? I guess when we read Lib - Dem in future we should see this as a misprint and realise they meant Labour and when we read Labour we think Labour. :)

38

Rod the Mod,

Hard shoulder 23/02/2007 13:00:02

Edinburgh Council has been creating congestion for years - speed bumps, narrowing roads, delaying traffic light sequences, replacing roundabouts with complicated lights - all in the pursuit of "traffic calming". This is also a dept. of transport policy and councils are encouraged to adopt these congestion creation measures. Hard to believe? - have a look at this link http://www.derbygripe.co.uk/congest.htm

39

JG,

Fife 23/02/2007 13:06:26

I saw a feature once on a town in England where they were stowed out with traffic light, road signs, paint on the roads etc., and (it was also quite a pretty place) the locals were getting cheesed off with it all. A forward thinking person/council decided they would remove everything (apart from essential signage). Result? Free traffic flow, less accidents and fewer pedestrians knocked down - people were forced to pay more attention as there were no road signs to tell them what was coming up next!

40

Dod fae Orkney,

In the hoose 23/02/2007 13:21:05

Tavish should really start thinking about a career out of the public eye. He makes an a*** of himself every time he opens his mooth!

41

TheGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 13:30:39

#39 Spot on regarding Edinburgh Council. The recent bout of congestion creation has been incredible.

A meeting in Edinburgh, circa 2004...

Idiot on Edinburgh Council transport committee #1 : "Do we actually have a congestion problem?"

Idiot on Edinburgh Council transport committee #2 : "Erm, Not really"

Idiot #1 : "Let's create one then we can charge the public to solve it!"

Idiot #2 : "Good idea. Lets ban left turns, lets put speed bumps everywhere! Make them high and brutal in the poor areas and low and gentle in the affluent areas."

Idiot #1 : "Wait a minute, will that not create an un necessary increase in air pollution levels?"

Idiot #2 :
"WHo cares? The green rep says the money is more important."

Idiot #1 :
"OK. Lets also close the centre to motorists, the shops are making too much money as it is."

blah blah blah...

42

sed109,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 14:25:42

I thought the idea of road tolls, was to reduce taxation on petrol (a road toll - the further you drive the more you use) and the current road tax system.

Since these are currently collected by the westminster government and not scottish exec how is that going to work. Can't cut petrol taxes north of the border? - you'd have all of the English in the North coming over the border to fill up.

So it must be an EXTRA tax burden for the Scottish people. What a surprise.

43

I'm no really here,

23/02/2007 14:42:09

#7: Looked at your web-site. Started to get worried that there were lots of "100% efficiency" and "0% polution" statements. My guess is that ALL of this is theory, with not one practice demonstration. Well nothing is 100% efficient, it's a physical impossibility, and nothing is 0% pollution - Heat is ALSO pollution.

The real corker though was the Nuclear Fusion Space Drive. According to your ideas, Einstein's Special and General theories of Relativity are wrong, and in space all you have to do is go faster and faster and you eventually you will go faster than the speed of light.

Come on, what have you been watching. Star Trash or Blake's 7.

44

Unbeliever,

23/02/2007 14:45:54

Since current road tax & fuel duty equates to approx 12 per mile how does 1.28 stack up. and since fuel duty is essentially a mileage & engine size based tax, why replace it at all.
Of course if the tax is the same for all cars and is revenue neutral then the larger vehicles will be the winners and the smaller, losers.

45

BAWSY,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 14:47:41

will not cost us any more??? i beleive in the tooth fairy & santa claus why not try this brain storm south of the border first after all WE WERE SO BLESSED WITH THE POLL TAX FIRST GIVE OUR POOR SOUTHERN COUSINS A CHANCE AT THE GOOD THINGS IN LIFE/or even in his own patch outer space for thats where he must come from to think we are going to swallow that one
MOTORISTS UNITE IF THEY WANT GRID LOCK LETS GIVE IT TO THEM AROUND THE HOLYROOD(JOKE FACTORY) never mind roll on MAY 2007

46

BAWSY,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 15:13:14

I AGREE WITH MCTAVISH HE KNOWS WHAT HE,S DOIN HE WILL GET THE SAME ADVIERS/CONSULTANTS/EXPERTS WHAT BILT DA HOLLYWOOD/ROOD THING AND THEN WE COULD SAVE ANOTHER £16000000(SIXTEEN MILLION)
YOUVE GOT MY VOTE SUNSHINE///

47

petrol head,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 17:05:50

So he plans to replace the existing road tax and fuel tax with road tolls then?

OK. At the inception, the amount you pay will probably remain the same---or possibly even less in some circumstances. Then once they start collecting data and analysing it, it will start to become obvious where they can make loads of money.

Then, guess what, the charges in those areas at those times will rise. Wishing to avoid the increase, you change your travelling plans. Then they analyse it again and slap more tax on. So you change your plans again... ad nausium...

The way I can see this working is that whatever happens they will increase tax by stealth. In 5 years time everyone would end up paying at least two or three times what they do now for motoring, with still no viable options.

Congestion will be deliberately created to justify increases in tax. By controlling traffic lights they are easily capable of doing this on a time basis.

If they imposed those kinds of increases via petrol tax and road tax there would be a national outcry. They can do just that by stealth taxing miles travelled without upsetting the apple cart too much. Is it any wonder that this is the way people like Tavish Scott want to go?

This whole thing stinks.

48

Andrew Allan,

23/02/2007 18:43:53

If people genuinely wish to do something to help the environment, and think there needs to is something done about the traffic and you don’t want road tolls. Do you allot distances per week per driver? Apart from the costs to those people like Doctor and Nurses etc… these taxes tend to be the most fairer taxes we have, as the richer you are, and so travel the most, the more tax you pay. People believe now, because we have been doing so for so long, that it is a right to travel by car as far as you want, yet you wouldn’t go into a shop for endless supplies of food without having to pay for it in the end, and now we are paying for the pollution now.

49

Miss Jean Brodie,

23/02/2007 22:48:04

Time to get these 4x4 and off road vehicles intae action - stuff payin the pooches o the folks that cannae day anything except make yae pay for everything!

Drive oor fields and stuff and dinae wurry aboot the road tolls - freedom and liberation! ha ha ha ha


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.