Rejected petition We dont think that pay per mile has legitimate aims of revenue only & oppose it

We oppose the Chancellors Pay per Mile on the basis that it violates the right to privacy article 8 of the Human Rights act 1998 & therefore we do not want it introduced. The only legitimate aim of taxation is £ & there.is no need to implement our personal tavel details & information Into revenue.

More details

On Page 103 of the Blackstones guide to the Human Rights Act 1998 by John Wadham & Helen Mountfield

It states these criteria for the test of article 8:

(a) that an interference corresponds to a pressing social need (Sunday Times v United Kingdom);

(b) that it is proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

There is no social need for pay per mile, the existing system works fine.
We believe the government has ulterior motives in addition to taxation moving us towards a China Gov model

This petition was rejected

Why was this petition rejected?

There’s already a petition about this issue. We cannot accept a new petition when we already have one about a very similar issue.

You are more likely to get action on this issue if you sign and share a single petition.

Do not introduce pay-per-mile road charging for UK drivers: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/749667

We only reject petitions that don’t meet the petition standards.

Date submitted 7 November 2025
Get petition data (json format)

About petition data

The data shows the number of people who have signed the petition by country as well as in the constituency of each Member of Parliament. This data is available for all petitions on the site. It is not a list of people who have signed the petition. The only name that is shared on the site is that of the petition creator.