RUC's for all road vehicles, this will be fun.

[neels]

The Minister did warn of this when he announced it. He said that it was due to decreasing income due to EVs and more efficient vehicles.

They need to collect more, and RUC is how.

Interestingly, when you look at the income from the various government indirect taxes, it very much appears that to the end of 2024 Fuel excise and RUC income have sharply increased back to or higher than previously, presumably from the adding of RUC to EVs and removal of the fuel tax discount at the end of 2023. Don't think the June 2025 figures have been published yet, so there might be something nasty that they know about and we don't.

In short, the combined income from fuel excise and RUC has not significantly decreased, so the justification is bollocks. But you can be sure that when it's changed, the govt won't end up with less money.

What is notable is the decrease in tobacco excise tax income, when the anti-smoking campaigns work they have to replace that income from somewhere, and the increase in alcohol excise indicating it's driving us all to drink.

[rastuscat]

Interestingly, when you look at the income from the various government indirect taxes, it very much appears that to the end of 2024 Fuel excise and RUC income have sharply increased back to or higher than previously, presumably from the adding of RUC to EVs and removal of the fuel tax discount at the end of 2023. Don't think the June 2025 figures have been published yet, so there might be something nasty that they know about and we don't.

In short, the combined income from fuel excise and RUC has not significantly decreased, so the justification is bollocks. But you can be sure that when it's changed, the govt won't end up with less money.

My guess is they are looking at the anticipated increases in the cost of building their pet project RONS. Somone has to pay, and inevitably, that's us.

The consultation on tolling is going on for the Woodend bypass and nearby Pineacres-Smith Street widening. The Electronic RUC thing is going to be a useful way for them to collect tolls.

[neels]

My guess is they are looking at the anticipated increases in the cost of building their pet project RONS. Somone has to pay, and inevitably, that's us.

So why not just say that they need more money for building more roads that people want, rather than telling porkies about decreasing income when evidently it's not.

The consultation on tolling is going on for the Woodend bypass and nearby Pineacres-Smith Street widening. The Electronic RUC thing is going to be a useful way for them to collect tolls.

What's interesting with that proposal is adding a toll point to the existing motorway section that already exists and is currently free to use, it's a legitimate concern that's been raised that people will rat run through Kaiapoi to avoid it, or continue to drive through Woodend rather than pay to use the new road defeating the purpose of building it.

[rastuscat]

So why not just say that they need more money for building more roads that people want, rather than telling porkies about decreasing income when evidently it's not.


What's interesting with that proposal is adding a toll point to the existing motorway section that already exists and is currently free to use, it's a legitimate concern that's been raised that people will rat run through Kaiapoi to avoid it, or continue to drive through Woodend rather than pay to use the new road defeating the purpose of building it.

They are expanding it to two lanes in each direction, so are going to toll it to pay for that.

Thing is, I suspect it is a ruse. They are consulting on it. I reckon they will drop that proposal (Pineacres to Smith Street) and toll the Pegasus to Pineacres.

That will allow them to say they counsulted, and listened to what people said. Cynical me.

[Moi]

So why not just say that they need more money for building more roads that people want, rather than telling porkies about decreasing income when evidently it's not.

Why, cause the minister ls a flounder...

When he appeared on the news saying the FED would be removed and replaced by RUC and in the next sentence said it would mean/need electronic collection and monthly bills then red flags and alarm bells should have begun ringing.

Those who go round saying we must have GPS enabled transponders are buying into the mis-truths. You only need GPS if you intend to track vehicles - if you have a fleet then that makes sense. If you are talking about Mum and Dad with two, maybe three cars, then why are you wanting to do that?

If you want to do tolls with e-tags you don't need GPS - you need a standard e-tag for the whole country and need to be honest about extending the toll system. They won't be honest because tolling is seen as an additional tax and in a time when the economy is not exactly bouyant.

And if you just want RUC then the current system would work. The licencing system works with labels, so the RUC system will also work - same number of vehicles for each. For those operating a fleet of vehicles then the present e-Roads or similar is their port of call. For those of us with a private vehicle or two then we just have to keep track of things. For those who say that's difficult, then just stay in the rest home.

[R650R]

For a long time in modern era we have had screams about equality.

Well folks this is what “equality” looks like even if it is coming from a right wing govt.
First you have another layer of beauracracy and enforcement but every single person will pay the SAME amount of tax to travel, that gorgeously fair isn’t it.
You wanted equality you got it.
Best of all travel will be slightly cheaper for the poor who mostly make short journeys where fuel efficiency is lower.
The wealthy who regularly drive long distance to holiday baches or rick concerts, rugby games etc they will pay the MOST travel tax.
A LOT of people on here should be happy about that!

[BMWST?]

I think that for those who till buy petrol keep the tax on it. Its virtually free to collect it like this. Then the RUC will only involve a fraction of the vehicle fleet
The upkeep required on the roads is probably fairly proportiaal to the fuel cosumption, They need to introduce ruc for hybrids and dial it back a bit for PHEV

[nerrrd]

Yes, there’s something else going on here if the existing system can be adjusted to suit.

A cynical person might imagine they see it as an opportunity to funnel public money into private hands. Remind me how much more efficient the private sector has been at building roads again?

[Moi]

Interesting...

[sugilite:Me]

Yes, there’s something else going on here if the existing system can be adjusted to suit.

A cynical person might imagine they see it as an opportunity to funnel public money into private hands. Remind me how much more efficient the private sector has been at building roads again?

I'm still reveling in the cheap power bills the private sector have provided us.
Why, just yesterday - I was able to afford one of those fancy new European heaters for the house.

[rastuscat]

Much respect for Simon Kinghams views.

https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/08/19/r...CuubK84FTRPdmA

[pete376403]

Much respect for Simon Kinghams views.

https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/08/19/r...CuubK84FTRPdmA

Oh yeah - especially this paragraph "For instance, around 300 people die each year in road crashes, and thousands more are injured. This costs NZ$9-10 billion annually. To help pay, New Zealand could collect higher road-user charge rates for vehicles more likely to cause crashes, based on safety ratings."

Don't try to tell me that doesn't directly attack motorcycles. Is there a single two wheel vehicle that has any sort of safety rating? (meanwhile, cyclists will escape any sort of charge, just as they do today, even though they they plenty due to accidents eg "In 2023, there were 7 fatal, 153 serious, and 460 minor injury crashes involving cyclists.")

[rastuscat]

Oh yeah - especially this paragraph "For instance, around 300 people die each year in road crashes, and thousands more are injured. This costs NZ$9-10 billion annually. To help pay, New Zealand could collect higher road-user charge rates for vehicles more likely to cause crashes, based on safety ratings."

Don't try to tell me that doesn't directly attack motorcycles. Is there a single two wheel vehicle that has any sort of safety rating? (meanwhile, cyclists will escape any sort of charge, just as they do today, even though they they plenty due to accidents eg "In 2023, there were 7 fatal, 153 serious, and 460 minor injury crashes involving cyclists.")

Simon Kingham is a thinker. He comes up with theories based on what is known. His article is a bunch of his thoughts.

When the Minister dropped the very incomplete details of the RUC plan, it left a gaping vacuum for such theories to exist.

Simon was the head science advisor to the previous government, so I wouldn't expect his theories to gain much traction with the current government.

Interesting that you have taken the chance to attack cyclists again. Kind of displays a bias of sorts.

Given that many risks for cyclists also exist for motorcyclists (e.g. SMIDSY) I'm kind of a bit disappointed at the backlash toward cyclists.

[sugilite:Me]

Simon Kingham is a thinker. He comes up with theories based on what is known. His article is a bunch of his thoughts.

When the Minister dropped the very incomplete details of the RUC plan, it left a gaping vacuum for such theories to exist.

Simon was the head science advisor to the previous government, so I wouldn't expect his theories to gain much traction with the current government.

Interesting that you have taken the chance to attack cyclists again. Kind of displays a bias of sorts.

Given that many risks for cyclists also exist for motorcyclists (e.g. SMIDSY) I'm kind of a bit disappointed at the backlash toward cyclists.

I'm not very keen on the following.....
The same could be done for noise pollution. And if the electronic road-user charge device is GPS-enabled, vehicles travelling near the most vulnerable citizens – such as near schools during pick-up and drop-off – could be charged more.

In the early 70's I walked the one mile to school alone from 5 years old. It is a very different world now and I would not like to see my grandkids do the same.
I'm not sure Pete was attacking cyclists, more just a statement of fact. If they bring in vehicles such as motorcycles need to pay more to cover the cost of injuries, then I do not see how bicycles can be left out of that conversation. I have zero ideas on what the mechanism would be to charge them, that is one for the pollies and advisors to work out.

[jellywrestler]

Interesting that you have taken the chance to attack cyclists again. Kind of displays a bias of sorts.

lets change that word to maybe skier, or rugby player then and see your reply