Why should the population in general have to be subjected to a monetary deterrent to driving when it is the failure of respective governing bodies, from the top down, to foresee that ever-increasing ownership of vehicles (a product of the failure of public transport systems) will lead to more cars on the road?

If the various road-planning committees and consultants worked within my industry (type withheld), they would find themselves accountable for their short-sightedness and lack of expertise. The growth figures of vehicles used as justification for taxation have been openly available, even to the layman, since the statistic was born.

Someone, please, argue with me if my logic is ill-conceived, but the way I see it is:

Taxpayers' money is used to employ bodies that are ineffectual in designing our inner-city traffic systems.

The resultant gridlock is then used as a reason to impose even more taxes on businesses, day-trippers, conference attenders and so on.

More taxpayers' money is then used to consult more ineffective bodies on the best way to get the taxpayer to pay again, in various ways, because the bodies employed initially were not good enough.

-M Wigley, Washington Street, Brighton