Width tax already rejected

I shouldn't have to point out that width tax was rightly thrown out during the big debate and not wanted.

While he claims he has been inundated with complaints of pavement surfing, he has predictably aimed criticism at large vehicles... they are the main cause of surfing, he says.

It's nothing new, it occurred quite regularly when I first came to the island in 1989, but what he has failed to say is that any increase has come from our larger bus fleet in the main. I don't recall anyone complaining too much about pavement surfing when we had the shuttle bus fleet before CT Plus days, and they could pull over in laybys that our Environment Department has removed because the current fleet is too large, they say.

Where I used to live in South Devon, a tiny hamlet called South Brent, most of the roads are single lane, not unlike what we have here around the island, and in most cases you either had to pull into someone's drive to let other traffic pass or, when you were able, mount the pavement, or in some extreme cases you had no choice but to reverse until the road allowed you to pass. And this was not an issue, that's how it was and still is.

It's worth restating that the general public have no control over how cars are manufactured, and as the EU loves to impose its will on others, manufacturers have no choice but to comply with new safety standards, and thus the public can only choose from what's on offer.

I now have two vehicles to run, my family car and my works van. I have no problems in saying that my family chose a Land Rover Discovery – it's safe, it takes our children, both adults and pushchair and shopping... but above all we feel safe. My works van is a small Suzuki, fun, gets you from A to B, but in the big picture I don't feel all that safe, a decent smack on the front end and it's a good chance I can say goodbye to my legs. If it's all the same to Deputy Roffey and his fellow 'green Guernsey' people, my family will continue to choose what we feel is the best vehicle for us.

Probably the worst-kept secret is the meetings that have been held by deputies Roffey, Brehaut and De Sausmarez with former Environment head Yvonne Burford and some other enthusiasts with a single idea to pursue... that of making life as hard as possible for motorists so it can serve their utopian dream of having a cup of tea in the middle of the seafront.

However, I believe Deputy Roffey has topped this, with his blatant attempts at usurping Paul Le Pelley, also attempting to undermine Deputy Mary Lowe, now he's decided (on his own, or with outside guidance?) to jump on this bandwagon.

Now I will agree to a point, in most cases when cars continue on the pavement when they don't need to should be addressed, but exactly how is a width tax going to achieve that? Especially when in both my car, and works van, I have seen plenty of small cars doing exactly what he accuses larger vehicles of doing when there is no oncoming traffic, or more annoyingly when I'm in my car, the smaller cars mount the pavement and continue onwards yet I haven't needed to mount the pavement at all as there was room... he remains silent on that, so I'm curious to know why that is... or is it because it just wouldn't be politically correct for him to do so?

A width tax will achieve nothing except to reignite the passionate feelings of the Guernsey people who turned out to protest against this shameful attack on the working men and women of the island.

Does he seriously think no one will bat and eyelid at this – and everyone knows any taxes will be abused by a government that has nothing original to offer.

We all know what happened to Yvonne Burford at the last election, her policies cost her her seat, now I'm sure Deputy Roffey will run out the usual line of 'deputies shouldn't be scared of this' etc. etc., but in doing so he would be failing to see the point that the public have been making on numerous occasions...

Do something else. Many candidates wanted to diversify our economy – when is that going to start?

We want a fairer tax system, instead we've had increases, milk costs rising among others but no positive action in other areas, a smaller and more cost-effective civil service without gargantuan pay packets, but we always come back to policy ideas that had been kicked out previously. Why?

Its tactics like this – that Deputy Roffey has taken – that tar other deputies who do genuinely want to concentrate on other issues. For all the claims that we don't have party politics, we do.

You can see this by the way certain deputies vote on issues during Royal Court sessions... this is a dangerous road we are being taken on, the few seem to feel that their wants outweigh the rest of the population's. Sadly many people voted for them and this is why we have this item being brought down on us yet again, by some members who are using their positions for their own personal agendas.

If Deputy Roffey wants to go this way, then I'll start arranging another protest... after all, it's the done thing to go over old ground, isn't it?

Once again we have a government that refuses to listen to those they serve, or claim to.

A width tax is just that, a fundraising exercise to abuse at will and it will do nothing of what he claims... but more so, he should really be ashamed of how he is telegraphing the point that he simply wants a pay rise and doesn't seem too bothered on how he gets there.

He is ignoring the fact that if he was wanted on some of the committees after the election, then surely he would have been voted on one, no? A very bad example to set.

RAY MARSHALL,

St Peter Port.