Letters to Editor: Pedalling a fair way of charging

Pedalling a fair way of charging
I have read with interest the letters expressing anger at the provision of cycle lanes on our roads and the annoyance that the funding for this is provided by road users other than cyclists.
This argument is seductive. Why should road users, and in particular those who never ride bicycles, have to pay for their use especially when they are inconvenienced by their construction?
The user should pay for their infrastructure, why expect those who don't benefit from it to pay for it?
By the same logic why should drivers who use their cars less than those who rely extensively on their cars have to pay the same?
Users should pay their share. In this case cyclists who are also drivers, and the vast majority of cyclists are these people, are therefore being unfairly charged for their road use.
In the same way, why should drivers who never use certain roads have any responsibility to pay for their creation or upkeep?
Country roads are a case in point. Pedestrians and child cyclists must also be charged for the infrastructure required to create paths and roads.
By this logic, the fairest method is of course tolling.
Every single road and facility should be tolled so that users only pay for their use. No one would ever be over charged and it would be completely fair.
Or, if this does not suit, perhaps we could just focus on building a road network that benefits the health and productivity of its society and in particular its most vulnerable users.
Chris Ratcliffe, Napier
No lights on car
A typical Thursday night, travelling home from work at 6pm, and as we all know, Hawke's Bay in the wintertime is pretty near pitch black in darkness at 6pm.
Even so, it isn't uncommon to see cars driving along as normal, with no lights on.
It seemed to be an elderly woman driving home, and she had forgotten to switch her lights on.
This may be all right for a time, but after being flashed at by various cars through the 50km/h and 70km/h zones with still no change, and the night getting darker still, oncoming cars and pedestrians were virtually blind to the lightless car.
But even better still, as the driver approached the roundabout and indicated left, then carried on through the roundabout, heading straight, while still indicating left.
Now I may be over reacting slightly, but driving at night with no lights on, and incorrectly indicating at a major roundabout in very busy traffic is just not good enough.
Attempts by other drivers to tell her failed. Driving during heavy traffic requires more concentration than usual, so what is the excuse for not realising that you are the only car on the road that doesn't have lights turned on.
The little orange lights on both sides of the car aren't just for decoration, so please use them, especially at roundabouts.
And, even though you may be able to see in front of you without your lights on, other road users can't see you very easily.
Darkness comes a lot faster this time of year, and the roads are commonly wet, so there are enough things to worry about when driving in peak traffic. Motorists don't need to worry about cars they can't see.
Tom Sykes, Havelock North
Double standards
The recent Reader's Digest Poll (HBT 21/6/11) on who we are most likely to trust has many named politicians, including John Key, at the bottom of the list of 100 individuals.
However, politicians as a group are not listed as one of the ten least trusted professions in the poll. Is this right?
The release of this Poll information coincides with the admission by John Key to The Australian newspaper that the safety standards surrounding the Pike River coal mine were different to what would have been allowed in Australia.
Pike River would not have been opened or operated under Australian regulations. Hence, there is a strong suggestion that New Zealand standards are wanting. Were the Pike River mine workers aware of this?
John Key has made a plea that there is a difference between construction and safety standards with regard to Pike River in his current delivery to The Australian, yet his statement to the country on November 24 last year indicated, "questions must be asked and answered about how such a tragedy was able to occur and how we can prevent another happening in the future".
Are mining safety standards the issue, or is it a matter of who we trust?
A Thomas, Taradale