Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ULEZ Checker
Comments
-
And therein lies the trouble, of course all the other parties will run their campaigns based on scrapping it as it'll be a huge vote winner, but this will just delay it whilst another candidate gets comfy on their throne and instructs hundreds of thousands of pound of PR dickheads to come up with a face-saving way of implementing the exact same scheme and charges but with a groovier name. You know it.Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.1 -
You're not seriously denying this work on pay per mile charging is taking place, are you?Friend Or Defoe said:
Come on...Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
It's an open secret in the transport world Khan's officials are working on this.
Don't believe me, just do a google search. Here's one to save you the bother - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12297207/Now-Sadiq-Khan-draws-plans-charge-motorists-pay-mile-scheme-Londons-roads.html
As I said in my original post, TfL's own officials say the ULEZ scheme will not rase any money after 2 or 3 years. Pay per mile charging is the only way Khan can replace the income.2 -
And so what if it it goes pay per mile? It's well documented in the analysis supporting Ulez that pay per mile is a future option- no need to go to a Daily Mail report. The wider picture is to convert car journeys to other modes: chiefly cycling and walking where practicable. There's no getting away from the fact these initaives have to happen, will cost money and have to be paid for, and that isn't coming from central government anytime soon.3
-
Fair enough, if you are happy to pay every time you get into your car in London, vote for Khan.swords_alive said:And so what if it it goes pay per mile? It's well documented in the analysis supporting Ulez that pay per mile is a future option- no need to go to a Daily Mail report. The wider picture is to convert car journeys to other modes: chiefly cycling and walking where practicable. There's no getting away from the fact these initaives have to happen, will cost money and have to be paid for, and that isn't coming from central government anytime soon.
If you don't want to do that, vote for another party.
Simple.2 -
Fortune 82nd Minute said:
You're not seriously denying this work on pay per mile charging is taking place, are you?Friend Or Defoe said:
Come on...Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
It's an open secret in the transport world Khan's officials are working on this.
Don't believe me, just do a google search. Here's one to save you the bother - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12297207/Now-Sadiq-Khan-draws-plans-charge-motorists-pay-mile-scheme-Londons-roads.html
As I said in my original post, TfL's own officials say the ULEZ scheme will not rase any money after 2 or 3 years. Pay per mile charging is the only way Khan can replace the income.Howard Cox, London mayoral candidate for Reform UK and founder of the FairFuelUK campaign, said: 'The cameras he is rabidly installing across London are not just to grab ULEZ cash, they are being dishonestly put in place to support his pay-per-mile plans too.You'll have to do better than that.1 -
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jan/18/sadiq-khan-proposes-journey-charge-for-motorists-in-londonFriend Or Defoe said:Fortune 82nd Minute said:
You're not seriously denying this work on pay per mile charging is taking place, are you?Friend Or Defoe said:
Come on...Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
It's an open secret in the transport world Khan's officials are working on this.
Don't believe me, just do a google search. Here's one to save you the bother - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12297207/Now-Sadiq-Khan-draws-plans-charge-motorists-pay-mile-scheme-Londons-roads.html
As I said in my original post, TfL's own officials say the ULEZ scheme will not rase any money after 2 or 3 years. Pay per mile charging is the only way Khan can replace the income.Howard Cox, London mayoral candidate for Reform UK and founder of the FairFuelUK campaign, said: 'The cameras he is rabidly installing across London are not just to grab ULEZ cash, they are being dishonestly put in place to support his pay-per-mile plans too.You'll have to do better than that.The mayor, Sadiq Khan, said London should be a global leader in introducing smart road pricing, as a report found car journeys in the capital needed to be cut by more than a quarter to meet net zero emissions targets by 2030.
Khan said air pollution and the climate emergency were “an issue of social justice across the globe – and in London as well, it’s the poorest Londoners, the least likely to own a car, who suffer the consequences”.
He has asked Transport for London (TfL) to explore road pricing that would charge by distance travelled, time and location. However, with technology to operate a scheme unlikely to be ready soon, he has told TfL to consider other options to make drivers pay for polluting before the end of his second term in office in May 2024.
Possible options include: a daily clean air charge for all petrol and diesel cars journeys throughout Greater London; or expansion of the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez) as it currently operates with a daily £12.50 charge for older models throughout all boroughs; or a combination of these.
Tfl will also consider introducing a boundary charge to drive into Greater London. Fully electric and other zero-emission cars would be exempt under all options.
Khan said he would like to see both the London congestion charge – introduced in 2003 – and the Ulez replaced with road pricing before the end of the decade: “Both schemes are quite blunt and technology has moved on. I want London to be a global leader.”
6 -
What is the problem in paying per mile? Is it not a much fairer system that those who use the roads more pay more towards the upkeep of them? Or does it sound a bit too commie?12
-
Given how much EVs weigh, the additional damage and wear increased vehicle weight puts on cat 3&4 roads they should pay more towards the upkeep of the road itself4
-
Do they do away with car tax? What about the congestion charge? I’ve got a problem with when the Silvertown tunnel is finished it will be a toll tunnel along with Blackwall. So if you live on the east side of London, you’ll have to pay to cross the Thames. If you live west it’s free. It’s one or the other, everyone pays or no one does.colthe3rd said:What is the problem in paying per mile? Is it not a much fairer system that those who use the roads more pay more towards the upkeep of them? Or does it sound a bit too commie?4 -
Paying per mile is almost certainly going to come. Quite simply, the projected fall in income from VED and Fuel Duty makes it almost inevitable.colthe3rd said:What is the problem in paying per mile? Is it not a much fairer system that those who use the roads more pay more towards the upkeep of them? Or does it sound a bit too commie?
The question is how do you introduce it in a fair way.
The Transport Select Committee recently reported on the matter and concluded that there is no “viable alternative” to road pricing, based on telematics, if the chancellor wants to continue to tax motorists as revenue from fuel duty dries up because of the switch to electric cars".
However - and this is the key bit - it also said that Ministers must ensure that any new system:-- entirely replaces fuel duty and vehicle excise duty rather than being added;
- is revenue neutral with most motorists paying the same or less than they do currently;
- considers the impact on vulnerable groups and those in the most rural areas;
He has no control over Treasury taxation. So therefore any charge he imposes will be additional to the fuel duty and VED taxes you are already paying. It will make driving the reserve of the rich in London.
If you think that is fair, vote for him. If not, vote for someone else.
0 - Sponsored links:
-
ULEZ is forced on London by the Government passing the requirements for cleaner air to local government. This was party politics by the Tories to make predominately Labour local government in cities look bad.Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
How far ULEZ extends may be political but no one is scrapping it without coming up with an alternative to reduce air pollution.6 -
People have suggested solutions on this thread though. The alternative is London is public transport, so it can work. What local government fancy doing is bringing in a ULEZ without the public transport infrastructure to allow it.
I dont necessarily agree with all the proposed solutions but they can all be done with those horrible ANPR cameras that keep going up
If they want to get some goodwill back and sell ULEZ without somehow plucking defeat from the wide open jaws of victory at the next election they could say something like "if you bought your vehicle before XYZ date and live in ABC area it will remain exempt"
Whats sticking in a lot of peoples throats is the punitive measures taken against people who aren't driving huge V8s or old black smoke spewing shitboxes, they are against people who are driving reliable vehicles that are necessary to do things like get to work, do the shopping, pick family members up who are old. Organically in not too longer a time all vehicles will be ULEZ compliant as older ones reach the end of their life. And as others have said, what happens then? We were told the Dartford crossing would be free once it paid for itself but things like this don't become free, the charges and revenue gained will be relied upon
5 -
But it’s not just Khan is it? Pay per mile is being explored by the Government too as a way of filling a £25bn hole when all cars become compliant. So who do you vote for then Fortune?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/fuel-news/drivers-taxed-by-the-mile-to-fill-the-25bn-void-from-lost-fuel-duty/#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20The,a%20loss%20in%20fuel%20duty.
1 -
I'll beat these bastards by putting £12 of diesel in the car and letting it idle until it's gone, but not actually driving anywhere. Ha!
1 -
Please read my post 2 above.TelMc32 said:
But it’s not just Khan is it? Pay per mile is being explored by the Government too as a way of filling a £25bn hole when all cars become compliant. So who do you vote for then Fortune?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/fuel-news/drivers-taxed-by-the-mile-to-fill-the-25bn-void-from-lost-fuel-duty/#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20The,a%20loss%20in%20fuel%20duty.
Pay per mile is coming. Its just a question of how you implement it. Do you do it by reducing other motoring taxes or as Khan wants to do, making them additional to existing motoring taxes.
I know which approach is fairer to the vast body of motorists. And it isn't Khan's.0 -
Always go back to what the alternative is. Currently if I want to go and visit a mate up in Manchester or Liverpool it would cost me more going by train than the pair if of us instead met up in Madrid for the weekend.
Same to go to the west country, I've got family over in Cornwall and Dorset, it isn't even close the cost difference in driving or getting the train. Would I rather be able to train it, read a book, have a few beers and some massively over priced crisps. Yes of course I fuckng would. But I cant justify the cost.
They aren't giving anyone practical alternatives. I’ve just driven down the shops, I could have paid way over the odds and ordered the shopping online at an inflated price, seen the guy turn up in the exact type of vehicle we are apparently trying to get off the road so my carbon footprint and financial hit is still less.
6 -
I travel into London from the West Country and even with the congestion charge and parking its cheaper (and not much difference in time by the time I get off and get a tube to final destination) to drive. And that's just me on my own. If it's with the family, its not even close (and it now appears I also avoid the pollution on the underground...)Carter said:Always go back to what the alternative is. Currently if I want to go and visit a mate up in Manchester or Liverpool it would cost me more going by train than the pair if of us instead met up in Madrid for the weekend.
Same to go to the west country, I've got family over in Cornwall and Dorset, it isn't even close the cost difference in driving or getting the train. Would I rather be able to train it, read a book, have a few beers and some massively over priced crisps. Yes of course I fuckng would. But I cant justify the cost.
They aren't giving anyone practical alternatives. I’ve just driven down the shops, I could have paid way over the odds and ordered the shopping online at an inflated price, seen the guy turn up in the exact type of vehicle we are apparently trying to get off the road so my carbon footprint and financial hit is still less.
BUT - we have our shopping delivered by Asda and the prices are the same as in the shop. Our delivery charge works out at less than £2 a week and one van delivering to 15 houses is I think, better than 15 cars doing individual shops. Home delivery is the way forward. Order in front of the telly and it's delivered at 8am every Saturday morning.
2 -
You are ignoring global decisions and requirements to reduce polluted air.AddicksAddict said:
ULEZ is forced on London by the Government passing the requirements for cleaner air to local government. This was party politics by the Tories to make predominately Labour local government in cities look bad.Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
How far ULEZ extends may be political but no one is scrapping it without coming up with an alternative to reduce air pollution.
These dictate national targets.0 -
I probably should have quantified, I only had to go to the shops to get our dinner and a handful of other bits including vino that we have both now decided we are too tired to drink!SporadicAddick said:
I travel into London from the West Country and even with the congestion charge and parking its cheaper (and not much difference in time by the time I get off and get a tube to final destination) to drive. And that's just me on my own. If it's with the family, its not even close (and it now appears I also avoid the pollution on the underground...)Carter said:Always go back to what the alternative is. Currently if I want to go and visit a mate up in Manchester or Liverpool it would cost me more going by train than the pair if of us instead met up in Madrid for the weekend.
Same to go to the west country, I've got family over in Cornwall and Dorset, it isn't even close the cost difference in driving or getting the train. Would I rather be able to train it, read a book, have a few beers and some massively over priced crisps. Yes of course I fuckng would. But I cant justify the cost.
They aren't giving anyone practical alternatives. I’ve just driven down the shops, I could have paid way over the odds and ordered the shopping online at an inflated price, seen the guy turn up in the exact type of vehicle we are apparently trying to get off the road so my carbon footprint and financial hit is still less.
BUT - we have our shopping delivered by Asda and the prices are the same as in the shop. Our delivery charge works out at less than £2 a week and one van delivering to 15 houses is I think, better than 15 cars doing individual shops. Home delivery is the way forward. Order in front of the telly and it's delivered at 8am every Saturday morning.
I was comparing with buying stuff on justeat or deliveroo and having a slovakian dude in a 1999 Focus turn up, I make you right about being organised enough to get all the shopping delivered though1 -
You already pay every time you get in your car. Actually, you pay every time you don’t get in you car - road tax, insurance, etc. What’s actually wrong with paying for the amount of driving you actually do?Fortune 82nd Minute said:
Fair enough, if you are happy to pay every time you get into your car in London, vote for Khan.swords_alive said:And so what if it it goes pay per mile? It's well documented in the analysis supporting Ulez that pay per mile is a future option- no need to go to a Daily Mail report. The wider picture is to convert car journeys to other modes: chiefly cycling and walking where practicable. There's no getting away from the fact these initaives have to happen, will cost money and have to be paid for, and that isn't coming from central government anytime soon.
If you don't want to do that, vote for another party.
Simple.2 - Sponsored links:
-
I got my current BMW in 2012, ordered in May. Back then BMWs were diesel or diesel with a token petrol model. Even in 2012 the writing was on the wall for diesel so we got the petrol model. We asked the salesman what was the proportion of diesel to petrol orders - he said 50:50. Manufacturers like BMW and VW were still pushing diesel because that's what they mostly made. If you drove lots of motorway miles then diesel also made sense but environmentally but the signs were there, if you (not you specifically) wanted to read them.ForeverAddickted said:Just annoys me that we were encouraged to buy Diesel cars not too long ago because of the lower CO2 emissions - Combined with the fact I mainly did Motorway driving, those were the main reasons was why I got my Diesel car back in 2013.
Two years later and the ULEZ was announced, and we we're now being told that Diesel cars are the devil... Was nice being mugged off, as I was equally looking at a Unleaded model of the car I purchased at the time.0 -
I live just on the ULEZ side of the South Circ very close to where young Ella who died of traffic pollution lived.
I am looking forward to the ULEZ extension even though it was ordered by a Tory government, because long queues of polluting vehicles 150 meters from my home is not particularly nice.
I don’t know if there was an inner London scrap your vehicle scheme when our first ULEZ was brought in but the population of the inner London ULEZ area is large and as far as I can tell it has not devastated our community, and certainly would not be a policy issue that would swing an election in Lewisham East.6 -
This is coming, one way or another, as it is in cities across the world in one form or another. There are already various schemes in eight cities/regions in the UK.Fortune 82nd Minute said:
Please read my post 2 above.TelMc32 said:
But it’s not just Khan is it? Pay per mile is being explored by the Government too as a way of filling a £25bn hole when all cars become compliant. So who do you vote for then Fortune?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/fuel-news/drivers-taxed-by-the-mile-to-fill-the-25bn-void-from-lost-fuel-duty/#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20The,a%20loss%20in%20fuel%20duty.
Pay per mile is coming. Its just a question of how you implement it. Do you do it by reducing other motoring taxes or as Khan wants to do, making them additional to existing motoring taxes.
I know which approach is fairer to the vast body of motorists. And it isn't Khan's.https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollective/five-cities-congestion-pricing/28437/
In an ideal world, public transport would be at a level (be that cost, reliability, coverage, cleanliness) that should make using them a no brainier. Some governments recognise the importance of that in their transport systems, they understand the value they bring. Sadly. Ours doesn’t.2 -
We're getting better in fairness, Crossrail, Overground extension, Thameslink 2000 (!) and HS2. Sadly we take ages to get things rolling and have a nation of moaners, not sure it that's exclusive to us? We also made a mistake in the 60s of thinking cars were the future and dismantled loads of loss making railways.TelMc32 said:
This is coming, one way or another, as it is in cities across the world in one form or another. There are already various schemes in eight cities/regions in the UK.Fortune 82nd Minute said:
Please read my post 2 above.TelMc32 said:
But it’s not just Khan is it? Pay per mile is being explored by the Government too as a way of filling a £25bn hole when all cars become compliant. So who do you vote for then Fortune?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/fuel-news/drivers-taxed-by-the-mile-to-fill-the-25bn-void-from-lost-fuel-duty/#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20The,a%20loss%20in%20fuel%20duty.
Pay per mile is coming. Its just a question of how you implement it. Do you do it by reducing other motoring taxes or as Khan wants to do, making them additional to existing motoring taxes.
I know which approach is fairer to the vast body of motorists. And it isn't Khan's.https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollective/five-cities-congestion-pricing/28437/
In an ideal world, public transport would be at a level (be that cost, reliability, coverage, cleanliness) that should make using them a no brainier. Some governments recognise the importance of that in their transport systems, they understand the value they bring. Sadly. Ours doesn’t.2 -
Sorry. I did mean to add that about public transport. Particularly for those of us around SE18 with first the DLR and the Lizzie is definitely a game changer.Friend Or Defoe said:
We're getting better in fairness, Crossrail, Overground extension, Thameslink 2000 (!) and HS2. Sadly we take ages to get things rolling and have a nation of moaners, not sure it that's exclusive to us? We also made a mistake in the 60s of thinking cars were the future and dismantled loads of loss making railways.TelMc32 said:
This is coming, one way or another, as it is in cities across the world in one form or another. There are already various schemes in eight cities/regions in the UK.Fortune 82nd Minute said:
Please read my post 2 above.TelMc32 said:
But it’s not just Khan is it? Pay per mile is being explored by the Government too as a way of filling a £25bn hole when all cars become compliant. So who do you vote for then Fortune?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/fuel-news/drivers-taxed-by-the-mile-to-fill-the-25bn-void-from-lost-fuel-duty/#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20The,a%20loss%20in%20fuel%20duty.
Pay per mile is coming. Its just a question of how you implement it. Do you do it by reducing other motoring taxes or as Khan wants to do, making them additional to existing motoring taxes.
I know which approach is fairer to the vast body of motorists. And it isn't Khan's.https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/ex/sustainablecitiescollective/five-cities-congestion-pricing/28437/
In an ideal world, public transport would be at a level (be that cost, reliability, coverage, cleanliness) that should make using them a no brainier. Some governments recognise the importance of that in their transport systems, they understand the value they bring. Sadly. Ours doesn’t.My meaning was more about governments using public transport as a pawn and not utilising it better to boost the economy/reduce car journeys. We have some of the highest costs per mile to use trains. A state owned system, the UK instead of foreign states that is, would be able to be more progressive like the Germans did recently with their €9/month unlimited travel (now €49).3 -
Would they have the capacity If the numbers having to use tube/buses increased by say 20% ?If they reduced a zone 1-6 ticket to £100 a month, I reckon that would reduce car journeys more than the ULEZ7
-
Let's not solve one problem because there is a worse problem elsewhere? 🙃Carter said:Do you have to live in dangerous environments to be affected by them then? People spend hours and hours on the tube. We have to wear breathing apparatus when air quality hits a certain level below ground
I'm happy for that video to be completely disproved, I don't know the people who made it, it was the first video that came up when I searched for dangerous air in London but the lack of acknowledgement especially considering the volume of knowledge and opinion on this thread I was expecting someone to scientifically take it apart
No one thinks the air quality on the underground is fine. That's why lots of upgrades have been done and air conditioning air filtering has been brought in on a lot of lines and is planned on all others in the next decade.
But the air quality on the tube shouldn't mean we don't try and improve air quality above ground.5 -
I'm guessing countries like German have their national government providing sufficient funding for their local transport, unlike us hence the funding issues and high fares.MrOneLung said:Would they have the capacity If the numbers having to use tube/buses increased by say 20% ?If they reduced a zone 1-6 ticket to £100 a month, I reckon that would reduce car journeys more than the ULEZ
Although it seems not matter how cheap public transport is some people will still want (and need) to use a car.0 -
This is the contradiction though. Doesn’t Khan claim 9 in 10 cars on the road are compliant so will you see / notice the difference? Queues won’t be less necessarily.seth plum said:I live just on the ULEZ side of the South Circ very close to where young Ella who died of traffic pollution lived.
I am looking forward to the ULEZ extension even though it was ordered by a Tory government, because long queues of polluting vehicles 150 meters from my home is not particularly nice.
I don’t know if there was an inner London scrap your vehicle scheme when our first ULEZ was brought in but the population of the inner London ULEZ area is large and as far as I can tell it has not devastated our community, and certainly would not be a policy issue that would swing an election in Lewisham East.0 -
This very point has been explained multiple times on this thread in the last 2 days alone. The polluter pays principle works both in achieving the targeted reduction in pollution and doing so in the most efficient way as it gives choice and incentives. The economics and behavioural science of this are sound and proven to work.Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'm amazed that anyone really thinks that this ULEZ scheme is about tackling pollution - if it was, all non-compliant cars would simply be banned, none of this pay £12.50 nonsense and carry on driving.
No the scheme is all about trying to restore TfL's finances that Khan has trashed and much more importantly, using the ULEZ technology as a trojan horse to bring in a pay to drive scheme in London.
It is estimated that the ULEZ scheme will cease to cover its costs in only 2 or 3 years time. So what will Khan do then to cover the money he has lost?
The answer is introduce a pay to drive scheme which uses the ULEZ cameras to enforce.
Khan may deny it but I can tell you for a fact his officials are already working on such a scheme. One technology under consideration is requiring everyone to have an app on their phone which will need to be turned on when driving in London.
In fairness, many in the transport world (in which i have worked all my life) view pay per drive as the way forward as the Chancellor faces losing almost a third of the revenue he gets from fuel duty from cars before the end of the decade because of the move to green motoring. But when I worked on this issue, the deal was that Fuel Duty would be reduced as pay per mile charges were introduced. Khan, of course, can't do this as he has no control over Treasury taxes so any pay per drive charges he introduces will be additional to current motoring taxes.
So it's pretty clear. If you want to pay every time you want to drive in London, vote for Khan. If not, vote for a party that will scrap the ULEZ.
7
