Letter: Half-truths from the anti-car lobby
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The statements made by Transport 2000 appear to be supposition, based on nothing more than an estimation of indirect motoring costs. How can they substantiate costs such as noise pollution and global warming in real hard cash terms?
The Government must declare all income from the motorist, such as the road fund licence and fuel tax, and is accountable to the road user for every penny spent in hard cash terms. These figures are based on fact, not fiction.
When comparing expenditure on our roads with the cost of supporting the railways, Transport 2000 would do well to bear in mind that more than pounds 60m has been lost to industry in the last six weeks alone during the rail strike. At least the road users are not subjected to road strike problems.
Yours faithfully,
DAVID KNIGHT
Managing Director
PHH Vehicle
Management Services
Swindon, Berkshire
26 July
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments