q.  Should we have a European ID Card?

Gordon Brown will issue his 11th and last Budget as Chancellor on Wednesday. Some reports suggest that the Chancellor is to raise road tax substantially on the least fuel-efficient cars to about £400 a year.
Environmental lobbyists have called for road tax to be raised to more than £1,000 for the worst polluting vehicles. Friends of the Earth have claimed that substantial measures to tackle climate change are required if Mr Brown is to leave a "green legacy as chancellor".

In a leaked memo to Mr Brown, David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, proposed a further hike for the least fuel-efficient cars after criticism that last year's Budget changes had not deterred enough people from buying them. Mr Miliband said: "The success of company-car tax reforms in encouraging switching to more fuel-efficient vehicles has demonstrated the power of these levers. We can now expand this to the market more generally and explore a substantial increase in vehicle excise duty for higher-emission vehicles, aligning for all car owners the incentive to choose lower-emission cars.”
Lobbying by the motor industry forced Mr Brown to drop the idea from his pre-Budget report in December.

A YouGov survey showed that 21 per cent of people regard David Cameron to be "greener" than Gordon Brown. 40 per cent of those polled said "neither" were green.

The Green Party has released its own "carbon-costed" budget - aimed at helping to lower UK emissions by about 90% by 2050. They say they would charge £1,800 in tax for the worst "gas-guzzlers."

q.  Should road tax on less fuel efficient cars be increased to £400 on Wednesday as some reports suggest?

Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips, England and Wales's top judge has said the use of on-the-spot fines should remain limited and crimes such as assault needed to be looked at "in the round" by a judge or magistrate. Lord Phillips said there was concern about a "slippery slope" on which more crimes were "diverted" away from courts.

Fixed penalty notices are used for offences such as speeding, graffiti, public disorder, noise nuisance and theft. In 2005, more than 146,000 were issued.

Last September a leaked consultation paper suggested extending their use to cover offences like assault and threatening behaviour, to ease pressure on the courts.

Responding to the proposals being considered by the Home Office, Alan Gordon, vice-chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, says:
“It’s absolutely disgusting and beyond belief that a proposal which could see thugs who assault a police officer receive a mere £100 fine is even being considered by the government. Especially when only earlier this year a survey of our 141,000 members showed that over 40 per cent of respondents had been assaulted in the last two years.“
“What sort of message does this send to society? The government talks about a respect agenda. Well, someone assaulting an officer getting the same fine as someone who drives into a bus lane doesn’t seem to show any respect for the police. This also contradicts plans in the guidelines on sentencing included within the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which rightly seeks to tackle and address the issue of growing numbers of assaults on emergency workers.”
“Let’s look at the reality of fixed penalty notices as well. Currently a third go unpaid and those who receive them get no criminal conviction. Under these proposals someone assaulting an officer or shoplifting will not get a criminal conviction; it’s madness.”
“What this seems to be about is money. Rather than increasing the prison population if needed, the government can actually make money by increasing the number of offences which see cash go straight to the Treasury. All this at a time when police officers are demoralised enough, with a failure by the government to honour a pay agreement which has existed for the last 27 years and continual moves to erode the Office of Constable by outsourcing to different agencies many aspects of policing.”
“The Association of Chief Police Officers should also be ashamed of themselves for supporting these Home Office proposals which are a green light to offend for those who flout the law and have no respect for the police.”

The Police Federation also claimed that police are overusing the fines to meet targets. A few weeks ago it warned that some persistent offenders were avoiding picking up a criminal record for crimes like shoplifting, as details of fines did not have to be put on the police national computer.
Mr Gordon, says: “The Sentencing Advisory Panel suggestion that shoplifters could avoid jail no matter how many times they commit the offence is a disgrace. It sends out the wrong message at a time when the police and the public alike are sick to death of a criminal justice system which is far too lenient on those who break the law.
The term shoplifting is misleading. It is stealing, and stealing is a crime and should be dealt with as such. The ultimate deterrent to any criminal is a prison sentence. We need more prisons, not a short term fix which will only encourage crime, not tackle it.”

On Thursday, a Home Office spokesman said: "No decision has yet been taken on whether to extend the scheme and any new offences would have to be approved by Parliament.

q.  Should the use of on-the-spot fines be extended to more serious crimes such as assault?