25 quid congestion charge coming in 2009

[citydreams]

I think what'll happen is that band G owners that live outside the zone will simply by another car to use in the zone and keep the 4wd motor for other journeys and evening use, they won't get rid of them.

You've made a good point. We're very worried about this. We haven't done enough research into it yet.

However, it is sending a strong message that Ken is serious about the environmental damage CO2, NOx and PM-coarse is causing. We've got a couple of years to actually come up with a proposal that is more sensible than a flat £25 charge for band G.

If you've got any suggestions.....

 

[Spymaster]

If you've got any suggestions.....

Base it on usage:

1 once/week £10
2nd time £20
3rd time £40
4th time £80
5th time £100
6th time £150 (apply CC to band g vehicles at weekends too)
7th time £200

Occasional users that only have one car aren't crucified whilst fat cat exec's and piss-takers pay £250 a week ( £600 if they use it at weekends too ) .

That'll learn 'em.

 

[Cobbles]

You've made a good point. We're very worried about this. We haven't done enough research into it yet.

However, it is sending a strong message that Ken is serious about the environmental damage CO2, NOx and PM-coarse is causing. We've got a couple of years to actually come up with a proposal that is more sensible than a flat £25 charge for band G.

If you've got any suggestions.....

He (and his entourage of 10 was it?) could always get a bus to venezuela , or walk in future (they could even use video conferencing or email to sort out the cheap disel contracts) - that'd save more emissions that banning all band G vehicles. Not as much fun as a proto-governmental ego-stroking jolly, though.

 

[citydreams]

or you could stop posting shit on the internet and save us all the bother from having to read it.

 

[Cobbles]

Ummm - have you ever been to central London? Because for the average person living in the zone, it'd be about a 10 mile drive out to their nearest out of town retail centre. And the rules only apply during the day. So if I want to use my car in the evenings to drive into the zone, I can. And yes I know this is about proposing extensions but I would imagine in most big cities, the situation would be the same.

If some nutsoid mileage charge is imposed on road haulage within the GLC, sorry, TFL, zone of madness, then the price of all goods will go up wherever such a charge takes effect.

On the basis that most people will do a weekly shop and not wish to take a trolley-load home on the bus/tram/tube, if it's 10 or 20 per cent cheaper out of town then most folk will be forced to drive the extra distance to save the money added on to shopping in town by the HGV fee or whatever twaddle prevents them from shopping locally in bulk (e.g. a lack of free parking).

 

[Cobbles]

or you could stop posting shit on the internet and save us all the bother from having to read it.

So are you denying that his-greenness Ken took 5 aides and sent another 4/5 on ahead to carry out a meeting that was (a) cancelled and (b) could have been accomplished by an exchange of emails (albeit without any self-aggrandising photo opportunity) by aeroplane to South America?

A total waste of the planet's valuable resources and a benefit to nobody - if that's the moral high ground, that's where the crap's piled deepest.

 

[citydreams]

If some nutsoid mileage charge is imposed on road haulage within the GLC, sorry, TFL, zone of madness, then the price of all goods will go up wherever such a charge takes effect.

Road haulage is a nation-wide scheme.

 

[citydreams]

So are you denying that...

Did it look like it to you? This is a thread about congestion charging.

 

[Cobbles]

Did it look like it to you? This is a thread about congestion charging.

And... the only excuse for congestion charging is reduction of emissions (Ken himself pointed out in Edinburgh when he came up to "support" the hugely unpopular and bombed out CC scheme that there's no point setting one up if revenue is the goal as it doesn't generate any).

Therefore having the policy driven by someone who manifestly cares not a toss about carbon production is specious at best.

 

[ovaltina]

the only excuse for congestion charging is reduction of emissions

Why is it called CONGESTION charging and not emission charging then?

 

[Cobbles]

Why is it called CONGESTION charging and not emission charging then?

On the same basis that the Governemnt calls Green Taxes incentives to give up driving.

Congestion Charging's got 0 to do with alleviating congestion - resetting traffic light timings and getting rid of bus lanes would sort that.

If it's got anything to do with congestion (aka road space utilisation), then why is there to be a stupidly high level of charge for Group G vehicles - last time I looked, a Porsche 911 was about the same length and width as a Prius.

 

[citydreams]

<frothing at the mouth nonsense>

I think Ken has done much more to save the environment than you.

How much do you know about environmental policies at the GLA? Have you actually bothered to read any of their publications? / found out what world-class research they're carrying out? / how they've managed to transform planning regulations? / air quality &c &c.

 

[citydreams]

Congestion Charging's got 0 to do with alleviating congestion - resetting traffic light timings and getting rid of bus lanes would sort that.
.

ok.. so as well as being an environmental expert you're also more knowledgable than all the transport planners and economists in the wold.. Congratulations, give yourself a well deserved pat on the back.!!

 

[DarthSydodyas]

I'm sure there will be some people along to scream about how unfair it is to 4x4 owners. But they've got three years to change vehicle to something more appropriate for London, more than enough time IMO.

This goes way beyond 4x4s, as pointed out by the bleaters on TV it will affect things like the Mondeos, etc. Positive or not, it will have a serious impact for small businesses in and around London.

 

[moose]

can you imagine the level of transport system if each lorry had to pay £25 every day... and the descrease in the level of pollution in london...

Oh dear. You'll all be very hungry. (((londoners)))

 

[ELO]

. We've got a couple of years to actually come up with a proposal that is more sensible than a flat £25 charge for band G.

I know you work for TFL, citydreams, so it's nice to have your views.

So these are still just proposals at this stage? I think you need to come up with a final decision sooner than that, if you are gonna introduce this in 2009. People need some time to change vehicles or whatever.

 

[Wide Eyed Angel]

Congestion Charging's got 0 to do with alleviating congestion - resetting traffic light timings and getting rid of bus lanes would sort that.

Hahahahaha, you should suggest it. Seriously. *I, The one they call Cobbles has an answer to all your road way problems. Get rid of the buslanes. I believe that to be job done*.

While I should feel a mug for taking the wind up bait there is some rubbish being chatted

 

[cybertect]

Realy Ken you want to make you fucking mind upand stick to it rather than the constant fucking wriggling about how and why it's needed....

I think there's a valid point here. A bit like the parking charges that L.B. Richmond are going to impose and the VED bands for Road Tax, there's a risk of overloading of objectives going on with the Congestion Charge. The CC is a tax in all but name. If you're going to be fine about meaning, a levy. It's becoming subject to function creep.

The CC Zone had a nice, clear objective when it was first introduced - to reduce congestion in central London. Conveniently, the money raised could be used to improve public transport and create a virtuous circle, albeit one with literally diminishing returns if it was too successful in deterring drivers from entering the Zone.

Now we have it being conflated with the DVLA's VED bands to create a 'green' levy. The VED bands themselves are becoming the subject of function creep as they're being adopted by various local authorities as the basis of motor-vehicle related charges. Without wishing to veer too far from the topic, it's a nice illustration of how structures like this become extended for use in other areas - one of the reasons I'm opposed to the introduction of a National Identity Card.

There is a sustainable case for making it more expensive to use vehicles based on their carbon emissions, but I'm not entirely convinced that this is quite the right mechanism for it.

 

[cybertect]

If one were being cynical, the idea of raising yet more revenue from the CC zone (including its western extension next year) might also have strategic value for TfL in making it such a major component of its funding that they have a strong case for retaining the Charge if and when central government (inevitably, it seems) introduce a national road-pricing scheme...

 

[citydreams]

I know you work for TFL, citydreams, so it's nice to have your views.

So these are still just proposals at this stage? I think you need to come up with a final decision sooner than that, if you are gonna introduce this in 2009. People need some time to change vehicles or whatever.

These are proposals in the fact that the Mayor has to seek a variation order to the existing legislation. We've been anticipating his announcement for some time.

I agree that TfL does need to reach a final decision. We had hoped to have PhaseII analysis completed by Februaury in time for the OJEU bidding of the ReLet. That's not going to happen for various reasons - one of which is there just aren't the resources available to conduct the kind of scientific analysis we need.

I think the Mayor had to make a decision, and I think it's brave of him to set the upper figure at £25. We can now use that in our models. It's up to us to try and improve upon it.

I'm pushing for TfL to hold a repository of all vehicles in the UK to enable a congestion charge based on NOx and PM10 emissions as well as the, overly simplified, VED bands.

The UK is currently five years away from having an electric car manufacturing industry, at least. The government is slow on the uptake of offering industry tax incentives.

It is worth taking note that this next round of changes to the Congestion Charge scheme (i.e. the 2009 Relet) will be a stepping stone to deciding whether or not to go for a fully fledged distance based charge.

 

[cybertect]

Mr Livingstone was on the TV the other day saying that if the population of London didn't agree with him on this, they could vote him out of office at the next mayoral election.

How much real difference would it make to TfL's plans if that were to happen?

 

[citydreams]

It depends who was running for Mayor. Though I can't see anyone abolishing the charge. TfL needs the money to subsidise the rest of its operations.

As a side note, the new Commissioner of TfL, Peter Hendy, was quoted in New Civil Engineer this week swearing about the PPP My boss felt raped by the dirty language.

 

[cybertect]

BTW, following up on my cynical comment... is the VED banding proposal projected to be revenue neutral or not?

 

[Giles]

So long as they don't ever stop me from driving my old Triumph around London, I am not bothered. If they do, on the grounds of some tight pollution target, I won't happily accept it.

Giles..

 

[Gixxer1000]

TfL needs the money to subsidise the rest of its operations.
.

Shouldnt waste so much money then should they.
having to alter junctions for the wholey inappropriate bendy buses springs to mind.
Shame Ken never went to Rome on one of his jollies to see how they deal with public transport.

 

[citydreams]

Shame Ken never went to Rome on one of his jollies to see how they deal with public transport.

Rome is half the size of London. It has had a Mayor since 1870. And it doesn't have the inner-city deprivation that London faces.

 

[Gixxer1000]

Rome is half the size of London. It has had a Mayor since 1870. And it doesn't have the inner-city deprivation that London faces.

Thank you for those interesting facts, the relevance of my comment is that they have appropriately sized buses for their equally narrow streets

 

[Roadkill]

Congestion Charging's got 0 to do with alleviating congestion - resetting traffic light timings and getting rid of bus lanes would sort that.

So congestion has nothing whatever to do with a lot of vehicles trying to use limited roadspace?

 

[Loki]

Thank you for those interesting facts, the relevance of my comment is that they have appropriately sized buses for their equally narrow streets

Everyone knows bendy buses are a shit idea for London, I presume they were brought in because they were so much cheaper than more appropriate alternatives.

Anyway I thought they're being phased out cos of safety concerns.

What this has got to do with the 25 quid charge for over-motorised cars is beyond me though.

 

[Roadkill]

Everyone knows bendy buses are a shit idea for London, I presume they were brought in because they were so much cheaper than more appropriate alternatives.

Far from it. The bendy buses were AFAIK extremely expensive.