Dartford Crossing fee rises are ‘revenue raiser', motoring groups claim
Motoring groups have criticised the decision to increase Dartford Crossing charges by 40%.
Transport minister Lilian Greenwood announced fees for the crossing, which features a bridge and two tunnels connecting Thurrock in Essex with Dartford in Kent, will rise from September 1 to 'manage traffic'.
Examples of increases for one-off payments in from £2.50 to £3.50 for cars, from £3 to £4.20 for coaches and vans, and from £6 to £8.40 for lorries.
It is the first time prices have gone up since 2013.
With up to 180,000 vehicles using the crossing on the busiest days, Ms Greenwood described the traffic levels as 'well in excess of the crossing's design capacity, causing delays for drivers using the crossing, congestion and journey disruption to drivers on the M25 and a range of knock-on impacts for local communities'.
Steve Gooding, director of the RAC Foundation, said: 'The claim that this 40% increase in the charge is all about managing traffic will raise more than a few eyebrows given that those making the crossing have little alternative but to do so.
'Most people will, understandably, and probably rightly, see this move as nothing else but a revenue raiser.'
Edmund King, AA president, said: 'Long-distance travellers from the UK and Europe, freight, business and regional users have all been sold down the river by successive governments through the unnecessary perpetuation of tolls and lack of future capacity at Dartford.
'Tolling was supposed to pay for the Dartford Bridge and then end, which would have been in 2003.
'However, it became a nice little earner which raised tens of millions of pounds every year.
'Ramping up the tolls by an extra pound, when the majority of users have no alternative about the time and place they cross the Thames, is simply road charging and a bridge too far.'
James Barwise, Road Haulage Association (RHA) policy lead, said: 'Dartford remains the only practical Thames crossing for HGVs and coaches in the South East.
'It's therefore regrettable that the charge increase has been so significant.
'This adds to running costs at an already financially challenging time for many businesses in our sector (HGVs, coaches and vans) and ultimately pushes up prices for consumers.'
The Government has given the go ahead for the Lower Thames Crossing, which it hopes will reducing congestion on the Dartford Crossing
The new crossing will connect the A2 and M2 in Kent to the A13 and M25 in Essex via a 2.6-mile tunnel under the Thames, which would be the UK's longest road tunnel.
Work on the project has been ongoing since 2009, and more than £800 million of taxpayers' money has been spent on planning.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Britain's £100billion benefits timebomb that no one is brave enough to defuse
TO the hand-wringing Labour MPs plotting to torpedo the government's £5billion in welfare cuts, some facts. Even with that squeeze, we are still hurtling towards a £100billion sickness benefits bill EVERY YEAR by the end of the decade. 4 4 That is roughly equivalent to the entire size of Slovakia's economy — or the annual output of the City of London. It is more than the combined yearly budgets of the police, prisons and courts — and twice that of what we spend on defence. You could buy every Premier League club several times over and then some. And that is before you even scratch the surface on public money for jobseekers and the elderly. Britain is a nation that looks after people — at ease with the language of safety nets, support and compassion. But we have to be honest about what we have become: a nation hooked on handouts that is driving our economy on to the rocks. Painfully clear A creaking welfare state — with a price tag no government can control and no taxpayer can sustain — is ready to burst. The parliamentary bill to reform it — introduced yesterday by Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall — was meant to be the moment Labour got serious. It tightens eligibility for Personal Independence Payments (PIP), slashes Universal Credit for new claimants and freezes it for existing ones. On paper it is a package designed to 'make the system sustainable' and save the Treasury £5billion a year by 2030. Five key changes to PIP & Universal Credit as Labour's benefits crackdown unveiled But when you actually read the figures, it becomes painfully clear just how little difference it will make. Britain is still projected to spend £100.7billion a year on health and disability benefits by 2029–30 — up from £64.7billion just last year. That is a 55 per cent rise in just six years, driven largely by soaring costs in working-age sickness and disability payments, with PIP fuelling the surge. Once meant to help those with serious long-term physical and mental conditions live independently, PIP is now claimed by more than 3.7million people — and demand is only accelerating. The number of new applications has shot up by 70 per cent since 2018, with more than 1,000 new claims A DAY thudding on to DWP desks. The bill for PIP alone has already ballooned from £12billion in 2019 to more than £21billion today, and it is predicted to hit an eye-watering £42.3billion by 2028–29. Driving this explosion is a marked rise in claims linked to mental disorders — now the main condition for nearly 70 per cent of new applicants under-35. Combined with long Covid, chronic fatigue, and musculoskeletal complaints such as back pain, we have arrived at a staggering projection: that by 2030 nearly one in 12 working-age Brits will be economically inactive due to long-term sickness. International comparisons lay bare just how much of an outlier the UK has become. We now spend more on working-age disability benefits as a share of GDP than almost any other advanced economy. Most European countries — including France, Germany and the Netherlands — have seen their incapacity benefit caseloads remain steady while ours is still climbing. Is it any wonder why critics start to mutter about the UK becoming the ' Sicknote Man of Europe '. But far from marking a moment of unity for Labour, the new bill has lit the fuse on a major rebellion and split the party in two. More than 100 Labour MPs are squeamish about the proposals, and many have already threatened to vote it down when it comes to a vote in the next few weeks. Supporters of the reforms say the real betrayal would be pearl-clutching backbenchers pretending the current system can continue. One Labour insider told me: 'You can't call yourself progressive if you ignore a system that's spiralling out of control. This isn't about cruelty. It's about honesty.' The internal row gripping the party was not unexpected — but the scale of it was. A far tougher package was meant to be unveiled at March's Spring Statement to lance the boil in one fell swoop. But after internal leaks and pushback from Labour left-wingers, No10 blinked. 4 The result? A lightweight version, rushed out early and designed to placate mutinous MPs. One senior Government figure admitted to me a few months ago: 'We had one shot to fix this, and we bottled it. These are half-measures. They won't be enough.' The deeper danger now is not just the cost but the fact political will to act is slipping away. We are an old population, with flatlining productivity, who have very few babies. We cannot have a generous welfare state and a national social care service, and a massive in-work support system Backbencher Some inside the party get it. They know the writing is on the wall: an ageing population, low birth rates, flatlining productivity and soaring demand on every part of the state. Commons humiliation As one influential backbencher put it: 'We have to get serious about reforming the state. "We are an old population, with flatlining productivity, who have very few babies. We cannot have a generous welfare state and a national social care service, and a massive in-work support system. 'We need to change expectations about what Government does in a radical and sustained way. I do not see us being serious about that right now.' Behind the scenes, the whips are in damage control mode, trying to keep a lid on the rebellion. Abstentions might help Labour avoid a Commons humiliation but they will not solve the underlying dilemma. This is not just about one benefit, or one Budget line. It is about what kind of state Britain can be in the 2020s and beyond — and how much we can afford. For too long politicians have ducked the debate, layering new promises on top of old ones without ever confronting the trade-offs. Now, the bill is landing and it's not just a financial one, it's political, too. Labour may win the vote but its bigger test is yet to come: can it finally level with the public, not just about what needs cutting, but what kind of country we want to be? 4
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Birmingham councillors clash over 'arrogant' vision for city
Birmingham City Council's ruling Labour group has come under fire from opposition councillors over a vision for the city's authority's new corporate plan sets out its priorities for the next three years and how it intends to address governance and financial challenges, after it declared effective bankruptcy, in say they want to make the city fairer, greener and healthier, by exploring issues such as housing need, unemployment and child a meeting where the plan was unveiled, leader John Cotton said the vision showed a "determination to right previous wrongs", but the Conservative group said it was "arrogant" and a possible "Labour election pitch". Tory councillor Deirdre Alden proposed an amendment stating that any long-term strategy should be based on the mandate delivered by voters following all-out elections next said the administration should focus until then on balancing the books, resolving equal pay and ending the bin strike, among other priorities."Time and resources should not have been spent now on developing a strategy for the years after 2026," she said."It's arrogant and it starts to look as if council resources have been spent on a Labour election pitch." Cotton described the plan as a "milestone", adding it was a "clear demonstration of our ambitions for Birmingham".Liberal Democrat group leader Roger Harmer suggested the Labour administration was instead a "millstone around the necks of our city".Green Party councillor Julien Pritchard argued the council's plans did not "seem to survive contact with reality". 'No apology for ambition' In response to the Conservative amendment, Cotton said it removed "forward-looking ambition"."I certainly, as leader of this council, make no apology for being ambitious for Birmingham," he told the chamber."I've never stood in this chamber and speculated about what happens in future elections, I think that's a fool's game," he said."But I do know Brummies will not accept a politics and a vision that's built on negativity." The effective bankruptcy declaration triggered a wave of cuts to services and plans to raise council tax by about 20% over two that contributed to the council's financial crisis, according to external auditors, include an equal pay row, disastrous implementation of a new IT system and inadequate housing a bin strike that started with one-day walkouts in January, is now in its sixth corporate plan was approved but the Conservatives' amendment was not passed. This news was gathered by the Local Democracy Reporting Service, which covers councils and other public service organisations. Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Welfare cuts vote could be the government's biggest parliamentary test to date
Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, said today that the welfare system was at a crossroads - and that the road she had chosen was the one of "compassion, opportunity and dignity". Dozens of Labour MPs feel that what was promised as a plan to support disabled people into work has instead turned into a cost-cutting exercise to shave £5bn off the budget. Kendall announced the reforms in March, saying that the welfare bill was "spiralling" and "unsustainable". The figures are striking: nine million working-age people are economically inactive. Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claims per month have doubled in just five years. Many MPs agree the system needs reform, but worry the government is acting without fully thinking through the consequences. Today saw the legislation published - the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - setting out a tightening of criteria for the main disability benefit in England, PIP. It also sets out plans to cut the health element of Universal Credit and delay access to it until age 22. Forty-two Labour MPs have signed a letter saying they cannot support the changes - and the names include newly-elected MPs who have not been critical of the government before. They say concessions, such as a longer grace period before benefits are removed, are not good enough. Cat Eccles, MP for Stourbridge, who spoke to Sky News today, has been on sickness benefits herself - after an unexpected illness saw her forced out of her job. She said she was worried about people who rely on PIP for the costs of working – such as petrol, and those who would lose it, but not be ready for employment. "It's really not good enough because we know so many people this is going to affect," she said. "We know PIP can be a gateway to getting other benefits like carers allowance which really help families just survive. We're not even talking about people having some great lifestyle, they're literally barely surviving on these payments. It all just doesn't feel very Labour to me." Other MPs who have not yet spoken publicly are concerned. "It seems as if we're getting all the bad stuff first – before we hear about the job schemes and child poverty strategy", one said. Several MPs say while the £1bn for tailored support in job centres is welcome, they worry it will not help all those losing out; and they worry about the economic outlook and employers being willing to take people on. Government insiders believe the rebellion can be contained. But it poses a challenge, and both Ms Kendall and Stephen Timms have been devoting time to one-on-one meetings to win around individual MPs. PIP – paid at a basic rate of £73.90 a week at the standard rate, and £110.40 at the enhanced rate – would be restricted from people who do not score four points on the daily living criteria. Disability groups say people who struggle to feed and dress themselves could lose out. 1:34 Kathy Laprell, from Eastbourne, who suffers pain and mobility problems following a serious car accident, has been receiving PIP for nine years. She currently qualifies for the enhanced rate, but fears she would not meet the new criteria and lose £440 a month if reassessed when these changes take effect next year. "People are terrified, we're angry, that yet again we're the scapegoat, we had it with the conservatives for 14 years", she told Sky News. "I use it to help pay for my carer's expenses because I pay her, I use it for petrol for the car so I can get out and about, and obviously extra winter fuel; the increase in bills since April has been astronomical. Losing it would mean I would be at food banks to actually be able to eat. "We're not scroungers. If I could work I would work," she said. 1:23 Yesterday, employment minister Alison McGovern faced down some angry Labour MPs who had called for the money to be taken from the wealthiest instead, saying the government had already put taxes on private schools and private jets, as well as increasing inheritance tax. MPs are also concerned that after spending months defending the decision to slash Winter Fuel Payments from pensioners, the government was forced into a U-turn. With many yet to be convinced, the first vote in two weeks could be the biggest parliamentary test the government has faced yet.
