Congestion charge going up to £25 for big motors (4X4 and sports cars)

I find it baffling how people don't think any money is spent on public transport (in London esp) - actually it's all of the fares income + revenue from things like congestion charging/red route parking tickets/bus lane fines + some from council tax too.

That's literally billions of pounds going into improving buses, tubes, etc (on top of the work that's been done in recent years). A further ?50m has just been announced to improve cycling facilities as well. This isn't going to change things overnight, as the network is HUGE and there is a lot to be done, but at least it's a decent step in the right direction.

I'm all for debate, and anyone is entitled to their view on what policy should be, whether we should give a damn about the environment at all, etc, but it helps if that's based on facts rather than just random rantings

Originally Posted by Xan173

1. Irrespective, it's saying if you have this, you'll pay this. Better to put an additional tax on the purchase of a new sports car or 4x4 rather than punish those who made their buying decision prior to the introduction of the "charge".

If you really want to improve air quality in London, move it away from Heathrow.

Taxing new car purchases would be less effective at curbing emissions in the short to medium term, plus I think people think more about £25/day than a one off £1K charge on a £50K 4x4. Plus the charge is not saying you can't own one at all, just that they aren't really the best thing for central London.

I do feel something for those who bought those cars before the idea was even discussed and who live near to/inside the zone. However tbh why do you need to drive it during weekday peak times in central London? It isn;t like there aren't other options to travel in Zone 1...

you do have a point about air travel though, it's currently getting away with a lot! It seems that politicians are shying away from taking significant action due to potential impact on the economy though...

[Biker Biggles]

Not saying they havnt spent money on public transport previously,but the emphasis is moving I think.Hence the talk about cycling and walking(which is not public transport)two examples of how to travel in a very limited radius.

I must say the only reason I use the bike in London is cus I live outside of zone six... if I was closer zones 1-4 say I think it would be tube most days. The only other problem with this is that out side the congestion zones the traffic is bloody awful, it was a nightmare Thursday and I was on the bike. So don't be surprised again when they start congestion charging on a 'road by road' basis.

[Biker Biggles]

Another issue with public transport is that very large numbers of people cant use it to get to and from work even in London.Those who need to carry equipement,those who work shifts,and those who work at different locations,or places where public transport doesnt tend to go from where they live to where they work.Many in my line of work fulfill all those criteria and they are asked at interview if they have the required means of transport to work with the flexibility required.And that is a public service job.Christ knows what damage these policies will do to the wealth creating small firms that London needs to survive.And how long before the big firms move out to pastures cheaper?

Originally Posted by Grinch

I must say the only reason I use the bike in London is cus I live outside of zone six... if I was closer zones 1-4 say I think it would be tube most days. The only other problem with this is that out side the congestion zones the traffic is bloody awful, it was a nightmare Thursday and I was on the bike. So don't be surprised again when they start congestion charging on a 'road by road' basis.

I live in zone 4 and when I was working in central London, it was almost quicker to bike into work that it was to walk to the nearest tube station and wait for a train.

The bike worked out about twice as quick as the tube, and I never needed to worry about getting a seat on the bike

[timwilky]

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

Another issue with public transport is that very large numbers of people cant use it to get to and from work even in London.Those who need to carry equipement,those who work shifts,and those who work at different locations,or places where public transport doesnt tend to go from where they live to where they work.Many in my line of work fulfill all those criteria and they are asked at interview if they have the required means of transport to work with the flexibility required.And that is a public service job.Christ knows what damage these policies will do to the wealth creating small firms that London needs to survive.And how long before the big firms move out to pastures cheaper?

My brother moved his company out of London, transport was a major factor. The C toll, Fed up of Ken's policies plus high office rental costs. Although he only employed 10 engineers. they need to be in the office daily and then on the road earning. The C charge was a crippling overhead sufficient to justify the move.

[Biker Biggles]

Exactly.Your brother Tim and thousands of others I fear.
My lad works for a firm that hires out stuff all ocer London(and beyond) but that involves delivery by van and setting up,then taking down and removal.
That already involves congestion charge,and parking tickets as effectively a form of extra taxation.Shortly it will require a new van fleet as the London emissions zone will apply to all comercial vehicles.Dont laugh,it will be cars next.This will make the company no longer viable,and BB junior is already looking for alternative work.

[Biker Biggles]

Anyway sorry about the unreasoned ranting,but the point is that these creeping policies do actually affect real peoples lives in quite a big way.
At one time Ken used to be aware of that sort of thing,but I fear its all gone to his head now.

I recognise the impact that these things have on businesses, and i'm in no way taking away from the fact that this is the case, or that it may have a big impact on some individuals.

However just to throw a few points into the pot:

It generally takes a financial incentive to get people to really think about how they operate and change their behaviour to be more environmentally sustainable. These sorts of charges are improving the efficiency of freight/delivery operations and the use of the road network, which has a positive impact on the environment/congestion overall.

At the end of the day your competitors are all in the same boat - if you have to raise prices to cover delivery charges in London, well they also have to pay the charges and will have to up their prices as well.

It's a new area for TfL but we're currently making an effort to work more with businesses on things like freight operations - helping as well as causing trouble!

And if someone relocates their business outside London because they can, well as long as they don't go under, is that necessarily a bad thing for society as a whole? Plus the policy has worked because emissions/congestion in central London will drop. (Now whether that is a goal worth pursuing at the expense of impact to individuals is a point for debate!)

Also, the Low Emissions Zone only impacts older, more polluting vehicles. It also excludes smaller vans (under 1.205 tonnes) so a lot of small businesses and tradesmen won't be affected at all. I for one will be celebrating the end to old tourist buses churning out clouds of black diesel fumes into my face while riding my bike...

I guess it's all about striking a balance at the end of the day - impact on some individuals re pollution, increased levels of childhood asthma, etc vs someone else with a business trying to make a living / wanting to drive their 4x4 everywhere.