On an autumn day in 1986, Margaret Thatcher snipped a ribbon on a Hertfordshire road to open the final stretch of London's orbital motorway - the M25. With a sideswipe at those who carp and criticise, she described it as a "magnificent achievement".
Almost 16 years later, the M25 is bursting, is the "road to hell" for commuters, and is a symbol of all that is wrong with Britain's roads. Searching for ways to get traffic moving, deputy prime minister John Prescott commissioned an independent study on it. To the government's dismay, the authors reported this week that the solution would be to impose a charge on car journeys across a huge area of south-east England, from Reading to Brighton and Southend.
Congestion charging is the biggest hot potato in an oven of problems facing the new transport secretary, Alistair Darling. Britain is too fond of the car - traffic has grown by 80% over 20 years. The government predicts that between 2000 and 2010congestion will grow by 28% on inter-urban roads and 15% within big cities. According to a poll by the Commission for Integrated Transport, 54% of car users already experience regular congestion in towns, while 34% routinely spend time in jams on motorways. Gridlock is becoming a way of life in Britain. Most organisations agree that doing nothing is not an option.
The government's transport guru, Professor David Begg, complains that the taxation system on motoring has barely changed since the early days when the automobile was the preserve of the few. Drivers pay for their travel through an annual tax disc, and fuel duty.
Contrary to popular perception, British motorists do not pay much more than those in Europe - as the table shows, the cost is near the European average. With car prices falling and the fuel tax escalator ending, the real cost of motoring is forecast to fall 20% over 10 years.
Many transport strategists suggest motorists should pay for each journey the way that they pay for a trip by bus, train or plane. Road charging, however, is controversial. Fearful of upsetting motor-ists, the government has put off the issue through a series of epic multi-modal studies, such as this week's examination of the M25.
Three approaches to charging are under consideration. Motorists could pay motorway tolls; they could be charged for entry to towns and cities; or, most radically, they could be billed for every mile they travel on Britain's road system.
Motorway tolls initially appear the simplest option - most drivers have experienced paying at giant booths that straddle major roads on the continent. But our road system works against this. The AA points out that while the French motorway system has long, straight roads with few junctions, Britain's network has dozens of by-passes and link roads constructed incrementally over decades. Faced with a motorway toll, many vehicles will take A and B roads, as the gap in quality is often marginal.
The government has paved the way for urban charges, passing legislation two years ago that allowed local authorities to apply to levy fees on cars entering specified areas. London mayor Ken Livingstone's scheme, due to begin on February 17, has been given the go-ahead but just one other application, covering one street in Durham, has been submitted. Politicians in Edinburgh and Bristol are considering congestion charges, but most are likely first to see if the London plan succeeds in raising £130m a year to spend on upgrading buses and tubes.
The most overarching solution, a national charging scheme, was proposed earlier this year by the commission for integrated transport - a government think-tank. It put forward a £180bn proposal under which every car would be fitted with satellite technology to register the distance, type of road and time of each journey.
Motorists would be billed according to a sliding scale of fees, with the highest rate for rush-hour journeys on major trunk roads and the lowest for the school run in rural Somerset. An average weekday journey along a motorway would cost 3.5p a mile - which would mean £7.40 to travel from Manchester to Birmingham. The commission believes the plan would cut congestion 44%, with average speeds up 3%. The plan involves a dramatic cut in fuel duty and car tax, so that the overall burden would be barely different.
Motoring organisations, including the AA and the RAC, favour road charging as long as motorists are given relief on taxation in other areas. But they question whether the government can be trusted - since a future administration could choose to generate more revenue from the pump.
The Freight Transport Association, which represents lorry drivers, concurs, and its view is soon to be put to the test. In an attempt to force foreign lorries to contribute to British taxation, the government announced plans in this year's budget to introduce a "vignette" system under which freight vehicles will be metered.
British lorries will effectively get refunds through tax relief in other areas, while overseas drivers will bear the brunt. But drivers are already preparing defensive tactics. A story this week suggested that, by sticking a glob of tacky stuff on the sensor, lorry drivers could block the signal. In his 10-year plan, John Prescott pledged to reduce road congestion by 6% by 2010. He has already been criticised for failing to meet one pledge: that the number of car journeys would fall between 1997 and 2002. Now Alistair Darling faces a huge challenge in avoiding the prospect of more egg on the deputy prime minister's face.
