Forum Topic

ULEZ

Sign a petition Stop Mayor Khan's ULEZ Extention to the North & South Circular. He even want's to extend it to the M25. Just google and sign, Thousands have already as it's putting ordinary Londoners out of business.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d59 Comments

Is it Islamophobia or simply anti-Labour I never can tell.

Michael Winstanley ● 1684d

Yet several Santander bike racks are on the pavement nowhere near the road. Canary Wharf for example.

Ed Robinson ● 1685d

Yes, that's Boris' BS.  The trouble is that there are anti-social unthinking people who can't use them responsibly.  I expect there are people who don't understand the signs here:https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-e-scooters-forbidden-london-tube-railway-stations-b941890.html

Philippa Bond ● 1685d

Yes Philippa, electric scooter are very common for commuters coming from Spain to Gibraltar.There is a reluctance I imagine to support escooters due to enforcement issues. We already have a very negative tribal situation regarding cyclists. I'm not sure about the "British people's love of freedom" recent legislation and events would indicate that it is over stated.

Ed Robinson ● 1686d

Ed:  How many members of this forum have tried riding on an e-scooter?I don't understand why the Govt took so long to sort out the trials.  They talked about them a year earlier and since people travel - virtually if not physically - we are nearly all aware of what is happening in other countries. Well I know there was the pandemic but that is exactly why they were so important.  Did they think that "the British people's love of freedom" was more likely to encourage people to try something illegal than legal trials?  Are you talking about working in a different country?

Philippa Bond ● 1686d

"..radically new to them eg the e-scooters.."Philippa e-scooters are not radically new. They are standard transport for a lot of people - for journeys of less than 10 miles, in other countries of course.They are not legal on the road or pavement if you are in one of the boroughs which are taking part in the trials. Only the ones through the chosen hire companies are legal on the road or shared paths in those boroughs.So we have a form of transport that has been around for a fair few years and the government gives a monopoly to a few companies. Very radical!E-Scooters can be bought for £250 are ideal for home to transport hub journeys. Can easily be folded and can put under the desk at work. They were the choice of transport for around 8% of people I used to work with a few years ago.

Ed Robinson ● 1686d

Don’t waste your time. He’s delusional.

Freddie Francis ● 1686d

Thank you Paul.  Your silence speaks volumes!!!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1686d

Paul,So you think that the traffic is Putney is made up solely of Putney residents???????????????????????

Ivonne Holliday ● 1687d

None of the pictures I posted was of an e-scooter which are only legal on the road or pavement if you are in one of the boroughs which are taking part in the trials - and I'm not sure that those actually work if you stray out of area.These methods of transport are radically different to the way a lot of people only used to travelling in a car on four wheels have been travelling, but as I pointed out elsewhere cars have not been around that long and one of the first of the Rileys was a three wheeler -  and it really didn't look that different from some of cycles around now. Lots of cyclists are also drivers but they tailor their method of transport to their trip.

Philippa Bond ● 1687d

Philippa e-scooters are not radical - apart from the hire ones they are illegal.They could have been legalised just like the hire ones. It would of course require regulations and enforcement which neither main political party are willing to do.The countries with good regulation and enforcements will reap the green benefits - something the cycling lobby strangely overlook.

Ed Robinson ● 1687d

No but buying a second hand compliant one is going to be cheaper than an electric.  I think a lot of people will just take the opportunity when their old car needs changing and the time is right to change it for something cleaner.  Some just may not be able.  Hopefully more people will try something really radically new to them eg the e-scooters, e-bikes and cargo e-bikes.Just in case you thought you knew what a bike looked like - here are a few you may not have seen: http://thepizzabike.co.uk/the-bike/https://www.pashley.co.uk/bikes/carrier-cycles/e-p2.phphttps://paulandernst.com/food-bike/http://www.nihola.com/products/dog.htmlhttps://gearjunkie.com/biking/best-electric-cargo-bikeshttps://twitter.com/Chris_Boardman/status/1406981803194339334?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Philippa Bond ● 1687d

Paul, Your attitude stinks, can actually tell your not very old, I have R/Arthritus and sometimes find it hard to walk. My other half is a builder, who needs his van all the time. Hope you don't need a builder because you have a leak or a new brick wall, or patio. Because they will tell you they are adding 12.50 a day to your bill. Hope all your leaks are big ones. That's not the food ones.

Barbara Stevens ● 1688d

"My old petrol Golf was compliant, surprisingly."Jonathan I did not say it was not compliant. In fact I said "VW 53 Golf - Euro 4 models". Euro 4 means it meets the ULEZ standard. However ULEZ is looking to reduce NOx. What I was highlighting, from the TFL recommended site for checking NOx values, is that the TRUE NOx levels for that car are either POOR or MODERATE (depending upon engine) and not the recommended GOOD.In short it will get you off paying the charge but goes against the whole principle of the ULEZ."Selling a non compliant 16+ years old car and spending £500 on one like my old one is not exactly a big financial cost."Not for us Jonathan no, but it will be for some!

Ed Robinson ● 1688d

My old petrol Golf was compliant, surprisingly. I checked. It was a good reliable machine but my 68 petrol Golf is a lot more frugal on fuel as you might expect. Selling a non compliant 16+ years old car and spending £500 on one like my old one is not exactly a big financial cost.

Jonathan Callaway ● 1688d

Why do people living in Putney need a car? There's adequate public transport.You argue that you should be free to clog up the roads, whether driving or parking, not paying a thing for the huge inconvenience you cause.Now you complain that you have to pay to stop the massive pollution you cause on top of this. Your attitude is that I've paid a large amount for my piece of tin & nobody is going to stop me from using it whenever I want.And you get all annoyed when the rest of us view you as selfish little nimbys.

Paul Rolink ● 1688d

We need better public transport and fewer personal cars - as there isn't room for everyone to drive.  That's one of the reasons why there is more of a push towards walking and cycling.  Cars have not been around that long.  I think it was in the 1890s that Percy Riley was eventually persuaded by his sons to change from building bicycles to cars and one of the first was a three wheeler.  Children used to cycle to school.  We can now have electrically assisted cycles and there are cargo bikes for taking children to school and we will all be healthier if we have a less sedentary and more active lifestyle - and have cleaner air!

Philippa Bond ● 1688d

I’ve been predicting this for quite a long time here, certainly for more than a couple of years. Stuff hitting the fan now when it’s too late and there’s the sudden belated realisation that this is upon us even though it’s been public knowledge for several years. It’ll be a bigger storm as more of the (less well off) public wakes up and finds out they’ll have to either pay £12.50 every day or have to stump up a sizeable chunk of cash to buy a replacement car they weren’t planning on buying to get to work or take their kids to school.

Freddie Francis ● 1688d

How much do you think that it would cost to ship just one  scrapped car to Pakistan?  Anyway they don't want our rubbish and I'm sure they will have restrictions on the age and state of cars being imported.

Philippa Bond ● 1688d

I think you'll find he's following Govt directions.

Philippa Bond ● 1688d

More than a year but being talked about all this year obviously since we have now reached 2021.https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/ultra-low-emission-zone-to-expand

Philippa Bond ● 1688d

I don't recall Matt transgressing the rules of the forum? (I'm assuming you're referring to Matt rather than something he possesses?)

Michael Ixer ● 1688d

I think it was ascertained some time ago that there's no moderation of this forum. Aside from the racial slur I think one of those comments is potentially libellous.

Michael Ixer ● 1688d

I'm surprised  your allowed on here Matt. Causing trouble everywhere you think you can cause it.

Barbara Stevens ● 1688d

It's a mystery to me why such blatant racial stereotyping is allowed on this forum.

Matt Palmer ● 1688d

TFL seem to have a like to https://www.trueinitiative.org/true-rating which aims to give a more realistic NOx rating.Assuming my lookup is correct, VW 53 Golf - Euro 4 models are listed as having a MODERATE or POOR rating.It may escape a charge but doesn't sound particularly clear either. The engine is needed to see which one it is.POOR: vehicles that we are confident have NOx emissions that stay above 180 mg/km in a wide range of driving conditionsMODERATE:vehicles that we are confident emit between 90 and 180 mg/km of NOx in a wide range of driving conditions, as well as vehicles that do not clearly fall into (1) or (2)

Ed Robinson ● 1688d

Ate you saying we’ve only had a years notice of the extension?

Freddie Francis ● 1688d

Of course the Govt wanted to extend the Congestion Charge out to the North and South Circulars...It is only because the pandemic that there has been no income from fares for such a long time.  The Govt bailed out the privatised rail companies ages ago and it looks as though they will be running them.  The fragmentation of those caused plenty of problems. There was at least a year's notice of the ULEZ extension.  Remember Govt lost in the High Court three times I think over the dire state of air pollution in this country and also lobbied at the EU for the figure considered bad to be reduced so the figures here looked better than they are.

Philippa Bond ● 1688d

"Buying a car that old is not going to challenge anyone who can already afford to run a car."There is an assumption in that statement that some people are not already over the edge financially given the economic crisis due to the mishandling of the pandemic and following a decade of austerity.Putting aside if someone could find a 15 year old car with low mileage well maintained and service history for a reasonable price it would still be a gamble given the car's age. One high maintenance bill could see the investment wiped out.This will obviously hit some people hard. How many? I have no idea. We definitely need clean air but the pricing model and scrapage scheme fall short IMO. The lack of imagination and thought shows unfortunately.

Ed Robinson ● 1688d

Take a look at residential streets and the numbers of cars that just sit there clogging the space and hardly used.  We all like the idea of being able to go out at the drop of a hat but we obviously don't all need to do that - or do it!  There definitely isn't a need or enough road space for that.  It was always an aspiration of all youngsters to own a car but not any more. Times have changed.We need to look for other alternatives for personal travel.  Where cars are involved there are car shares and you can also join a car club. Or get a taxi - there are different sorts. Anyway I thought that you were complaining about the number of cars going down your street?

Philippa Bond ● 1688d

A 15 year old petrol car will avoid the new ULEZ charge (eg my old 53 Golf).  Buying a car that old is not going to challenge anyone who can already afford to run a car.

Jonathan Callaway ● 1689d

Your missing the Point Matt. Many People won’t be able to afford a newer Car so he’s got them by the “Short & Curlies” as they will have to pay £12.50 per day into his Coffers! & that includes Key Workers!

Vic Condon ● 1689d

So they don't all have to cling to the top of the trains.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

Probably shipping them out to all his family abroad.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

Where is exactly is the financial gain for this ELECTED mayor in 'forcing' people to sell their cars at a lower cost?Does he own a chain of second hand car dealerships that we aren't aware of?

Matt Palmer ● 1689d

This jumped up Mayor is implementing this crazy Scheme  NOT for Cleaner Air but for Financial Reasons! He is hitting the poorest by making them sell their Vehicles for practically nothing like their real value!Cleaner Air? Forget it. With his Ltn’s and ridiculous cycle Lanes ( eg A 505 )Euston Rd , down from 2 Lanes to one it is causing MORE Pollution by Stationary Traffic!

Vic Condon ● 1689d

We live in London and public transport is better here than in the countryside.  It is a bit of a Catch 22 situation in that if you don't use the public transport then it doesn't pay for itself and in other countries it is more heavily subsidised.  Not all cars are non-compliant.  Not everybody has to change their cars right now - or decide whether to still own a car or not.  Right now it is your turn and it is tough but I expect we will all have family and friends who we will have to warn won't be able to drive to see us.  I know we have - and it will be the nudge many of them need to rethink their modes of transport.

Philippa Bond ● 1689d

Ed. Turnout is an issue; however, I'm not sure there's an easy resolution to that. Perhaps it's to do with the FPTP system that means a lot of votes effectively don't count? Well, the government plans arexto change local mayoral elections from STV to FPTP so I suspect that won't help! Perhaps more people would vote if they could do it on line but I still think there's a trust issue with that.The number of spoilt papers in the London Mayoral election was surprising and of concern. I suspect the problem was that the bollot papers were designed more with a consideration of ease of reading by the counting machines than being understood by the voter? However, it is a rather worrying indictment of the UK's standard of education if the problem was that people couldn't read, understand and complete the form properly. Interestingly, I don't think any of the major parties have suggested the form was designed in a easy to "fix" the election by invalidating a large number of votes. (If one assumes Tory voters are more likely to have been privately educated and might be considered to have better reading skills than the average than Labour voters then such claims might be considered nonsense unless one thinks better educated people are more likely to vote labour 🙂) Being serious, I suspect if one could anaslyse the spoilt votes they would probably be roughly equivalent to the proportion of those voting for each party after excluding those deliberately voided?

Michael Ixer ● 1689d

Michael,The number of invalid ballots in this and previous Mayor elections is too high and turnout too low. That is the issue.Of course the Great British argument of no change needed will be wheeled out as usual. Other ​countries manage and everything from tax to passport application are online.Democracy must be based on being as inclusive as possible, the current system does not appear to be delivering.Of course there will be those that suggest, as I have seen on previous threads, that completing the forms correctly is some form of qualification to vote. I would simply question the democratic principles. Repeating the same process and expecting a different outcome doesn't sound wise to me.

Ed Robinson ● 1689d

The returning officer at each location as they do at all elections. also they have to do this in agreement with the candidates agents,

Andy Pike ● 1689d

Well who had the authority to void all the votes.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

There is no credible evidence whatsoever that Khan’s re-election was “fixed”.  This notion is up there with the Trumpian belief he was re-elected in a landslide.

Jonathan Callaway ● 1689d

Do you think people would trust online voting, Ed? Given the recent Solar Winds and Microsoft breaches by (allegedly) Russian hackers I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with that. Then there's the issue of how secure audit trails are and the rigour of controls over who can view them legitimately and how well protected they are against unauthorised access ... and what happens if someone launches an attack to take down the polling site? Or in fact if it goes down under the load - like the Glastonbury one! (It's probably quicker to nip round to the polling station to vote than to book tickets waiting in the Glastonbury site queue ... )Anyway, I still fail to see the problem with the last London voting papers and why people think that's a fix just because people fail to follow instructions. If the supply of voting machines were contracted to one of Mr Gove's or Mr Johnson's friends would you expect a default blue box to make selection easier? 🙂Still, I hope the suppliers of US voting machines succeed in their law suits against Trump's henchmen who made seemingly unsubstantiated claims of election fraud against them. But as I said, it's all about trust?

Michael Ixer ● 1689d

No, it's a long time ago. You will not remember those that complained about the cost of buying the new electric heaters and the failed Change.org petition against the Clean Air Act. There was no mayor in those days - we voted for the London County Council. Its leader, Isaac Hayward, was the son of a miner. He put aside these family work ties to support the new environmental legislation and this is something we all could learn from.

Michael Winstanley ● 1689d

It's about time we were able too vote online. Of course we still need postal voting but online will mean less errors.

Ed Robinson ● 1689d

An interesting observation, Michael. In the 50s my mother was happy to swap from coal fires to instant, clean electric heaters in our London Victorian terrace house.  Must admit I don't remember much else about it 🙂

Michael Ixer ● 1689d

I've voted once already. I don't feel the need to vote again. These petitions are a total waste of time as they don't offer people the option to vote against. I've already disposed of one non-compliant car and the 2nd one is to follow. It has taken the ULEZ to nudge me into doing this and it is a bloody good idea.Yes, owners of non-compliant cars, like me, will suffer a cost, but so what? Are they all so selfish? People are choking to death. There is a climate emergency. What part of "emergency" is so difficult to understand? In the 50's, we had to change the fuel we were burning in London as the resultant smog was killing people. This cost some people money. Did you campaign against that?

Michael Winstanley ● 1689d

Except the 87000 votes that were void, due to not being filled in properly. My cousin was helping in the evening in Sutton , even she said it was chaos. Nobody I know wanted him in it was a fix.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

I'd say that those thinking of signing this should think about the affect that pollution has on children and how it may adversely affect their future health. ULEZ is there to protect them, as Ed points out it's not perfect but better than nothing, and as Matt says the majority of Londoners supported it by voting Khan back as Mayor. If you considering signing this, pause and think about the effect pollution has on the health of young children.I've no personal interest: I do not own a car or have children. Just thinking about the best option for Londoners. 

Michael Ixer ● 1689d

Barbara, he literally just won an election with that being one of his central policies.I thought you were a big believer in respecting the vote??

Matt Palmer ● 1689d

159,226 have signed it - I assume over two years.Revenue will need to come from somewhere to pay for the buses etc.The ULEZ has two aims: one to reduce emissions and the other to raise revenue. Getting the pricing model right is critial to both.I haven't seen the DVLA figures although TFL should have them too as they get a monthly feed from the DVLA.

Ed Robinson ● 1689d

Philippa, what do you think we are going on about WE ARE IN THE ZONE. We have to pay £!2.50 a day to drive out of our road. Everydody in the North and South Circular. If their vehicle isn't compliant.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

I don't believe that cars do actually have to be scrapped unless you are scrapping them as part of a scheme - they just can't be driven in certain areas eg the ULEZ and other clean air zones.  Take a look at France and lots of other countries.

Philippa Bond ● 1689d

Thank you Martine. There appears to be thousands who have signed, I only saw it by chance, I was looking to see if the DVLA had any idea how many cars would have to be scrapped.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

I’ve signed it, Barbara.

Martine Guy ● 1689d

Me too.Although I consider it a regressive tax, you can't pay tax if your dead. Clean air is vital. I wish he'd been smarter on the pricing - having two bands: free and full price just seems daft considering the amount of detail they have on each vehicle.It has lots of flaws but I think it is better than no action.It would make sense for the Mayor to to have a joined up policy and sort the bloody road out works out. That's expecting a bit too much sadly :(

Ed Robinson ● 1689d

Ditto, Sean.

Jonathan Callaway ● 1689d

You might get cleaner air when they have worked on Hammersmith Bridge, because loads more buses are being diverted from Chiswick as well to Putney.

Barbara Stevens ● 1689d

I'll be affected, but I'm also affected by polluted air. I'm afraid I won't sign as I am in favour of cleaner air

Sean Hodges ● 1689d