Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Congestion charge increase - And back Monday!

Congestion Charge to go up to £15 from Monday. And from June 22 extended to 10 PM 7 days a week!
Sadiq Can't really f***** me over now!

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sadiq-khan-congestion-charge-tfl-bailout-government-a4441361.html
«1

Comments

  • Free travel for schoolchildren taken away and over 60s now have to pay during peak times.

    Sad that it has come to this.

  • Over 60s should never have been given free travel in the morning peak anyway, that was something Boris brought in when he was Mayor

    Buses are effectively free at the moment anyway for everyone
  • Congestion Charge to go up to £15 from Monday. And from June 22 extended to 10 PM 7 days a week!
    Sadiq Can't really f***** me over now!

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sadiq-khan-congestion-charge-tfl-bailout-government-a4441361.html
    Reintroduced on Monday but the Increase takes effect from 22nd June.

    The C-charge, suspended on March 23 as part of the lockdown, will be re-introduced on Monday, about two weeks earlier than expected.

    It will increase from £11.50 to £15 — a 30 per cent hike — from June 22 and will be enforced seven days a week, rather than just on weekdays at present.

  • Huge ramifications for me.

    We work 12hr shifts. We set our pattern up so that we avoid it.
     I have to drive due to poor availability of trains at weekends from my end. I'm not too near to a station either. The extra hour plus weekend charges will cost huge amounts. We'll possibly have to pay twice on night shifts.

    Totally Failing London
  • edited May 15
    Plus the extortionate parking costs of working in the city.  £12 for two hours around Holborn for instance and have to move every two hours to a different zone.  
  • I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
  • Good balanced piece on the why, written before DfT gave the money last night 

    https://www.londonreconnections.com/2020/tfl-the-impossible-finances-of-fighting-a-pandemic
  • If you cant work from home go back to work but dont use public transport.

    I can just see it now, all those brickies, sparkies, plumbers cycling up town with cement mixers and tools on their backs.
  • TfL will temporarily extend the congestion charge reimbursement scheme for NHS and care home workers.

    However, it has introduced other temporary measures such as stopping free travel for children and only allowing people over 60 or with a disability to travel for free outside peak hours.

    Fares on buses - scrapped to help protect drivers from COVID-19 - will also be reintroduced.

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-londons-congestion-charge-to-rise-30-next-month-after-huge-tfl-bailout-11988726

  • I thought over 60’s free travel was only after 9:30 anyway ?
    Do the new rules mean that they can’t travel free in the afternoon peak (4:30 - 7pm ?) ?
  • Sponsored links:


  • LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
  • I thought over 60’s free travel was only after 9:30 anyway ?
    Do the new rules mean that they can’t travel free in the afternoon peak (4:30 - 7pm ?) ?
    It's over 9.30 on trains during the week but you can travel at any time on tube, Overground, DLR, tram and buses.
  • Congestion charge my arse..... its more congested than ever these days, mostly thanks to the 1000s of Toyota Prius' driven by Uber cabbies, who don't have to pay, and most of whom couldn't drive a nail in.
    This badly affects my son who works nights in Waterloo, has to drive in before 10pm but is usually finished by 3-4am when no trains are running. What a shitshow, just another tax on the working person.
     There are huge amounts of the London workforce that work in these hours to avoid these extortionate costs.
  • The only benefit is taking away free travel for kids, maybe they'll walk more and cure the obesity crisis.
  • Chizz said:
    LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
    And what about the people who work night shifts that mean they cannot use public transport but who are now going to have to fork out £15 a day extra? 
  • Chizz said:
    LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
    And what about the people who work night shifts that mean they cannot use public transport but who are now going to have to fork out £15 a day extra? 
    The congestion charge was brought in to reverse the damage created, in the most part, by others.  It's intrinsically unfair.  

    But that doesn't mean it isn't necessary.  
  • Congestion Charge has been too cheap for a while anyway in my person opinion, and the hours were wrong. 

    Yes the Fare Freeze hasn't helped, but nor had TfL having its central grant removed by Osbourne was worse, especially as the previous mayor had left some financial holes like a Bridge to nowhere etc, but Johnson did some good like ULEZ and the cycling network. 

    Shame the Tories have picked such a shit candidate for next year, and Rory Stewart isn't running, not because I don't want Khan to win, but because its ruined what could be a useful debate over London's future post COVID. 

     
  • Sponsored links:


  • Chizz said:
    Chizz said:
    LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
    And what about the people who work night shifts that mean they cannot use public transport but who are now going to have to fork out £15 a day extra? 
    The congestion charge was brought in to reverse the damage created, in the most part, by others.  It's intrinsically unfair.  

    But that doesn't mean it isn't necessary.  
    Agree in principle but it wasn't necessary to change the time to 10pm, thereby directly affecting a significant proportion of working people who don't have the option to use public transport. I suspect most people wouldn't have too much of an issue with a price increase or it being extended to seven days a week, but the extended hours is a step too far imo. 
  • edited May 15
    Chizz said:
    LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
    Don't try and blame this on Boris. 

    I can tell you 100% categorically that Khan was warned by his senior officials that his proposed fares freeze (which was of course anything but for anyone who used a travelcard) would have a very severe impact on TFL's finances. Khan ignored that advice and went ahead anyway. 

    This from the excellent London Reconnections post I linked too

    There is no doubt that this decision has cost TfL upwards of £650m in cumulative revenue in his first term. Khan and TfL point to savings made elsewhere to counter this, as well as claiming that it has offset what would otherwise have been a fall in passenger numbers due to decreased cost of travel.

    On this, we remain unconvinced. What is true, however is that the Fare Freeze has no real impact on the unprecedented situation today. TfL do not have £12bn of debt because Sadiq Khan decided to forego £650m of farebox revenue over the last four years. Claiming otherwise is the kind of basic mathematical failure that would make a Year 3 schoolchild blush.

    In a similar vein, the government easily cannot reasonably point at TfL and say that it is their own fault that their existing borrowing is so high. 

    It is true that recently much of it has related to Crossrail overruns, for which TfL must ultimately take the blame. Despite their occasional protestations to the contrary, the buck stops with them and the Mayor. That they were forced to borrow to deal with those overruns, however, was something on which the last Conservative government insisted. 

    On top of this, a considerable amount of TfL’s legacy debt has been incurred dealing with the ruthless cuts in funding that happened under the ‘Austerity’ Conservative governments of David Cameron, or on projects directly pushed by Boris Johnson as Conservative Mayor for London. This includes the Garden Bridge, as well as the cancelled Metropolitan Line Extension to Watford, to focus on just a few big-ticket items.

  • C hizz said:
    Chizz said:
    LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
    And what about the people who work night shifts that mean they cannot use public transport but who are now going to have to fork out £15 a day extra? 
    The congestion charge was brought in to reverse the damage created, in the most part, by others.  It's intrinsically unfair.  

    But that doesn't mean it isn't necessary.  
     What does that even mean?

    .At the very least they could stop calling it a congestion charge
  • Chizz said:
    LenGlover said:
    I am no fan of Johnson and his mob but unbelievable cynicism by Khan and his henchmen, in my opinion, to make political capital out of a crisis in the hope and belief that Johnson rather than he will attract the resulting opprobrium.

    It seems to me that political advancement trumps the welfare of the people. 'Twas ever thus I suppose regardless of whether the incumbents were red or blue.
    TfL needed a bailout, unquestionably. But that, vital bailout came with attachments, ie that the money had to be repaid.  If it's cynical, it's a cynical plot by the Prime Minister, who would want nothing better than to see a Labour Mayor of London being forced to put up costs.  

    But it's not cynical, on either part.  The government have had to bailout TfL.  The money had to be repaid.  And the right people to pay back a bailout to the government are those that drive, not those that use public transport.  
    Don't try and blame this on Boris. 

    I can tell you 100% categorically that Khan was warned by his senior officials that his proposed fares freeze (which was of course anything but for anyone who used a travelcard) would have a very severe impact on TFL's finances. Khan ignored that advice and went ahead anyway. 
    Pre Covid19 I think it’s fair to say all bets are off. 
  • edited May 15
    It’s also worth noting that given a lot of people’s finances because of Covid19 they are now being forced back onto public transport despite what the government are saying.
  • I'm starting to think the notion of staying in and spending very little money while feeding on beans and toast everyday was a prerequisite for the rest of our lives!
  • It's says in the metro report that these measures are temporary.

    https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/15/congestion-charge-rise-15-day-next-month-12707667/

    Of course.
  • Wasn't income tax a temporary measure many years ago.
  • Congestion charge my arse..... its more congested than ever these days, mostly thanks to the 1000s of Toyota Prius' driven by Uber cabbies, who don't have to pay, and most of whom couldn't drive a nail in.
    This badly affects my son who works nights in Waterloo, has to drive in before 10pm but is usually finished by 3-4am when no trains are running. What a shitshow, just another tax on the working person.
    All private hire drivers (including ubers) have to pay cc. Taxis are exempt
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!