On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 10:18:23 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

Therefore paying conveys enhanced priority. Right?

Nope. It simply conveys them the right to use said roads. They'd have no
more priority than they have now.

I think that's a "Yes", given the caveat as to the use of the word
"priority" which you snipped.

(If it helps clear up what I suspect is the cause of confusion, then I
don't mean "priority" in a Give Way sense, but in the more general
sense. Importance. Relevance. Whatever word you may prefer.)

In the Give Way sense of "priority", then bicycles have exactly the same
as any other type of vehicle - which is how it should be.

Do people in cars who have not paid VED (ie older cars, low emission
cars, disabled drivers) sit on the same perceived "normal" level of
priority as other drivers, or the perceived lower level as cyclists, in
your view?

When people in old or low emission cars start endlessly whinging about
other drivers being nasty to them and how the roads should be redone in
special way just for them, then I'll have a think about that. In the
meantime I don't give a ****.

Thank you for confirming that the VED thing is nothing more than a red
herring, and you are just inherently biased against the bicycle.