Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ULEZ Checker
Comments
-
I wasn't going to comment anymore on this thread but the level of misunderstanding on the subject of road pricing compels me to do so.
Since ULEZ was introduced, I have always said that it was a trojan horse for introducing road pricing in London. And it is. Anyone who thinks that the vast array of cameras that have been put up to detect vehicle movement is going to sit idle or be dismantled in 2026 when TfL have now admitted ULEZ is expected to not raise any money is deluded. And it is those cameras that gives the ability to introduce road pricing.
Sadiq Khan says that road pricing will not be introduced whilst he is Mayor. Fair enough. But in TfL at the moment, there is a section of about 100 people (some earning six figure salaries) who are working on the introduction of road pricing in London. The team was increased in numbers last year. I have heard nothing following Khan's statement saying that members of this team are being re-deployed or made redundant. And until that happens I will have severe doubts that all plans for introducing road pricing are off the table.
In fact, I heard a really interesting scenario the other day. One possibility is for individual local authorities to be encouraged to come forward and say that they themselves support road pricing. Given that many authorities in London are under Labour control and seem to be comprised of car-hating councillors (Greenwich and their CPZ anyone?) it won't take much encouragement! Khan could then say he himself didn't want to introduce road pricing but the councils themselves want it and he has to take account of their wishes.
One final point. Any serious work on road pricing assumes that the existing Fuel duty and VED would be replaced by road pricing charges. But Khan can't do this as he has no power to scrap VED and Fuel Duty. So any charge would be in addition to these charges. That is quite a thought.8 -
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.7 -
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.
1 -
I'm going to assume that you're quite young? And that you're not aware of the manner and criteria under which life peerages are (or used to be, at least) assigned? It's not based on whether or not you lost an election 🤦🏽♂️cafc999 said:
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.4 -
IncorrectLeroy Ambrose said:
I'm going to assume that you're quite young? And that you're not aware of the manner and criteria under which life peerages are (or used to be, at least) assigned? It's not based on whether or not you lost an election 🤦🏽♂️cafc999 said:
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.
Ps
The OP made the original comment about losing an election, is he wrong too?0 -
She's against ULEZ, but only in outer London as it effects the poorest who never drive as far as the South Circular and are unable to use public transport. 🫡
0 -
cafc999 said:
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.
The comparison is ludicrous because Kinnock was a political heavyweight with years of experience in the legislature when he was made a peer. It's easy to see how he could make a contribution to shaping future legislation in the Lords. I'm not sure the same could be said of Shaun Bailey.
5 -
Or indeed any of the current crop of MPs on all sides. That’s the root problem. Only there for themselves no real ability to manage for the good of the country.Gillis said:cafc999 said:
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.
The comparison is ludicrous because Kinnock was a political heavyweight with years of experience in the legislature when he was made a peer. It's easy to see how he could make a contribution to shaping future legislation in the Lords. I'm not sure the same could be said of Shaun Bailey.5 -
He wanted to abolish it, then took a place when offered. Says it all for me. That's when I lost respect for him.Gillis said:cafc999 said:
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.
The comparison is ludicrous because Kinnock was a political heavyweight with years of experience in the legislature when he was made a peer. It's easy to see how he could make a contribution to shaping future legislation in the Lords. I'm not sure the same could be said of Shaun Bailey.
Agree with your.point about Bailey0 -
A reasonable interview with him on the Newsagents podcast last week coincidentally. Easy listen.cafc999 said:
He wanted to abolish it, then took a place when offered. Says it all for me. That's when I lost respect for him.Gillis said:cafc999 said:
The original.poster made reference to a person that got rewarded for losing an election by being made a Baron.Leroy Ambrose said:
I can't believe I have to spell this out - but Neil Kinnock was leader of the opposition for eleven years. He was an immensely respected politician, on both sides of the house. Attempting to draw some sort of parallel between him and Bailey is absolutely ludicrous.cafc999 said:
Why?Leroy Ambrose said:
That is an absolutely laughable comparisoncafc999 said:
For every Baron Bailey there is a Lord Kinnock.seth plum said:Shaun Bailey
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Bailey,_Baron_Bailey_of_Paddington
Was the previous Tory candidate for Mayor, now (FFS) he is Baron Bailey of Paddington.
Good gig that eh Susan (who stole the purse I dropped?) Hall? Fail in the election but get made Lady Hall of Hounslow or wherever and have a paid job (attendance allowance) doing sfa for life.
Correct if I am wrong here but I am certain Kinnock lost an election, and also got rewarded, no? (I'm sure he lost more than 1 election too)
So how comes my comparison is ludicrous?
Pretty certain he wanted to get rid on unelected peers too, albeit I am happy to be corrected on that.
The comparison is ludicrous because Kinnock was a political heavyweight with years of experience in the legislature when he was made a peer. It's easy to see how he could make a contribution to shaping future legislation in the Lords. I'm not sure the same could be said of Shaun Bailey.
Agree with your.point about Bailey0 - Sponsored links:
-
Kinnock was/is a national figure, Bailey is barely known in London.0
-
I am looking forward to the hard evidence that Sadiq Khan is going to introduce road pricing.Nobody criticising him on this thread seem concerned about children suffering from the pollution caused on our roads by vehicles.0
-
Hasn’t he now conceded it is / was under investigation but has now simply said not going to introduce (yet)?seth plum said:I am looking forward to the hard evidence that Sadiq Khan is going to introduce road pricing.Nobody criticising him on this thread seem concerned about children suffering from the pollution caused on our roads by vehicles.
my ‘criticism’ (as you ask) is not the overall benefit of improved air quality but the way the extended zone was introduced I.e. minimal notice at a time of financial hardship for those most likely to be affected.I’m also still perplexed why we have no data and analysis of compliance since the latest extension.1 -
The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/
2 -
As for peerages, it seems to me that if Shaun Bailey gets one, Rosamund Kissi Debra should get two.
As a grieving mother she has already made a richer contribution to society than ‘a party during lockdown’ Shaun Bailey.
2 -
It is wrong to say the latest expansion was introduced with a lot of warning. It was not. Even more so amidst a cost of living crisis.seth plum said:The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/This should not be glossed over. Further the scrappage scheme had to be improved from the initial offering.So the point on pay per mile remains. it is the case he has spent significant sums to date on it and now been forced to state it wont yet be introduced. The evidence you queried is effectively there as a lesser study would surely have sufficed if the plans were not more advanced.Any observations on why we still await any detailed analysis on compliance / fines issued?1 -
Why would someone spend £150m into something without wanting to implement it?seth plum said:I am looking forward to the hard evidence that Sadiq Khan is going to introduce road pricing.Nobody criticising him on this thread seem concerned about children suffering from the pollution caused on our roads by vehicles.2 -
Well as I said above, if there is evidence about road pricing could you provide a link? Including the spending on stuff for road pricing directed by Sadiq Khan. He has made a statement, if you think it was forced out of him that is an opinion certainly, whether it is fact is open to debate.valleynick66 said:
It is wrong to say the latest expansion was introduced with a lot of warning. It was not. Even more so amidst a cost of living crisis.seth plum said:The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/This should not be glossed over. Further the scrappage scheme had to be improved from the initial offering.So the point on pay per mile remains. it is the case he has spent significant sums to date on it and now been forced to state it wont yet be introduced. The evidence you queried is effectively there as a lesser study would surely have sufficed if the plans were not more advanced.Any observations on why we still await any detailed analysis on compliance / fines issued?The warnings about the introduction of both ULEZ schemes and whether there was enough of it is down to opinion too. I personally believe it was dragged on too long before introduction, increasing the suffering of those affected by dirty air.
In terms of compliance and fines I don’t have any link to data on that. Nor do I have a link to how much cleaner the air has become.
Khan has been excellent during all this, because the car lobby is more vociferous and powerful than the concerned parent lobby, but he has walked a tricky path between the two opposing forces very well.
There is no evidence that previously Shaun Bailey, and currently Susan Hall give a damn about the pollution or the death of little Ella, or the suffering of others.1 -
I am interested, can you provide a link to the £150m spent so far on road pricing? With some kind of break down on specific cameras, locations, monitoring stations, staffing, and revenue collection systems?cafc999 said:
Why would someone spend £150m into something without wanting to implement it?seth plum said:I am looking forward to the hard evidence that Sadiq Khan is going to introduce road pricing.Nobody criticising him on this thread seem concerned about children suffering from the pollution caused on our roads by vehicles.
Was it an amount spent all in one go, or the accumulated spend on keeping something under review over the years?2 -
It's been widely reported across the media that he has done this, so stop being daft.seth plum said:
I am interested, can you provide a link to the £150m spent so far on road pricing? With some kind of break down on specific cameras, locations, monitoring stations, staffing, and revenue collection systems?cafc999 said:
Why would someone spend £150m into something without wanting to implement it?seth plum said:I am looking forward to the hard evidence that Sadiq Khan is going to introduce road pricing.Nobody criticising him on this thread seem concerned about children suffering from the pollution caused on our roads by vehicles.
Was it an amount spent all in one go, or the accumulated spend on keeping something under review over the years?
0 - Sponsored links:
-
The evidence is that he has spent on feasibility studies / recruited staff for this purpose. Posters on here with knowledge of TFL have also confirmed this. khan has not said that no money has been spent on it.seth plum said:
Well as I said above, if there is evidence about road pricing could you provide a link? Including the spending on stuff for road pricing directed by Sadiq Khan. He has made a statement, if you think it was forced out of him that is an opinion certainly, whether it is fact is open to debate.valleynick66 said:
It is wrong to say the latest expansion was introduced with a lot of warning. It was not. Even more so amidst a cost of living crisis.seth plum said:The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/This should not be glossed over. Further the scrappage scheme had to be improved from the initial offering.So the point on pay per mile remains. it is the case he has spent significant sums to date on it and now been forced to state it wont yet be introduced. The evidence you queried is effectively there as a lesser study would surely have sufficed if the plans were not more advanced.Any observations on why we still await any detailed analysis on compliance / fines issued?The warnings about the introduction of both ULEZ schemes and whether there was enough of it is down to opinion too. I personally believe it was dragged on too long before introduction, increasing the suffering of those affected by dirty air.
In terms of compliance and fines I don’t have any link to data on that. Nor do I have a link to how much cleaner the air has become.
Khan has been excellent during all this, because the car lobby is more vociferous and powerful than the concerned parent lobby, but he has walked a tricky path between the two opposing forces very well.
There is no evidence that previously Shaun Bailey, and currently Susan Hall give a damn about the pollution or the death of little Ella, or the suffering of others.There was not warning that ULEZ would be extended to its latest boundary.0 -
And yet some people still refuse to see itvalleynick66 said:
The evidence is that he has spent on feasibility studies / recruited staff for this purpose. Posters on here with knowledge of TFL have also confirmed this. khan has not said that no money has been spent on it.seth plum said:
Well as I said above, if there is evidence about road pricing could you provide a link? Including the spending on stuff for road pricing directed by Sadiq Khan. He has made a statement, if you think it was forced out of him that is an opinion certainly, whether it is fact is open to debate.valleynick66 said:
It is wrong to say the latest expansion was introduced with a lot of warning. It was not. Even more so amidst a cost of living crisis.seth plum said:The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/This should not be glossed over. Further the scrappage scheme had to be improved from the initial offering.So the point on pay per mile remains. it is the case he has spent significant sums to date on it and now been forced to state it wont yet be introduced. The evidence you queried is effectively there as a lesser study would surely have sufficed if the plans were not more advanced.Any observations on why we still await any detailed analysis on compliance / fines issued?The warnings about the introduction of both ULEZ schemes and whether there was enough of it is down to opinion too. I personally believe it was dragged on too long before introduction, increasing the suffering of those affected by dirty air.
In terms of compliance and fines I don’t have any link to data on that. Nor do I have a link to how much cleaner the air has become.
Khan has been excellent during all this, because the car lobby is more vociferous and powerful than the concerned parent lobby, but he has walked a tricky path between the two opposing forces very well.
There is no evidence that previously Shaun Bailey, and currently Susan Hall give a damn about the pollution or the death of little Ella, or the suffering of others.There was not warning that ULEZ would be extended to its latest boundary.1 -
If it is widely reported surely it would be easy for you to find and post relevant links.cafc999 said:
It's been widely reported across the media that he has done this, so stop being daft.seth plum said:
I am interested, can you provide a link to the £150m spent so far on road pricing? With some kind of break down on specific cameras, locations, monitoring stations, staffing, and revenue collection systems?cafc999 said:
Why would someone spend £150m into something without wanting to implement it?seth plum said:I am looking forward to the hard evidence that Sadiq Khan is going to introduce road pricing.Nobody criticising him on this thread seem concerned about children suffering from the pollution caused on our roads by vehicles.
Was it an amount spent all in one go, or the accumulated spend on keeping something under review over the years?
As I said above my ‘daftness’ is because I live close to Rosamund Kissi Debrah and I have taken an interest in this car events, including complaining to my local councillors about the traffic restrictions (this led to a removal of cameras by the two railway bridges near the Hither Green rail yard on Manor Lane).
In order to prove that Sadiq Khan introducing road pricing is not a rumour or an urban myth by his political opponents I am simply asking for hard evidence.
Naturally because it is me asking I will get my usual collection of passive/agressive lol’s, including the personals that have others calling me ‘daft’ and worse.
What is so wrong in asking for hard evidence, could it be that it doesn’t exist?2 -
It is probable that the GLA and TFL has spent money on keeping all aspects of road travel ‘under review’ (their words).valleynick66 said:
The evidence is that he has spent on feasibility studies / recruited staff for this purpose. Posters on here with knowledge of TFL have also confirmed this. khan has not said that no money has been spent on it.seth plum said:
Well as I said above, if there is evidence about road pricing could you provide a link? Including the spending on stuff for road pricing directed by Sadiq Khan. He has made a statement, if you think it was forced out of him that is an opinion certainly, whether it is fact is open to debate.valleynick66 said:
It is wrong to say the latest expansion was introduced with a lot of warning. It was not. Even more so amidst a cost of living crisis.seth plum said:The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/This should not be glossed over. Further the scrappage scheme had to be improved from the initial offering.So the point on pay per mile remains. it is the case he has spent significant sums to date on it and now been forced to state it wont yet be introduced. The evidence you queried is effectively there as a lesser study would surely have sufficed if the plans were not more advanced.Any observations on why we still await any detailed analysis on compliance / fines issued?The warnings about the introduction of both ULEZ schemes and whether there was enough of it is down to opinion too. I personally believe it was dragged on too long before introduction, increasing the suffering of those affected by dirty air.
In terms of compliance and fines I don’t have any link to data on that. Nor do I have a link to how much cleaner the air has become.
Khan has been excellent during all this, because the car lobby is more vociferous and powerful than the concerned parent lobby, but he has walked a tricky path between the two opposing forces very well.
There is no evidence that previously Shaun Bailey, and currently Susan Hall give a damn about the pollution or the death of little Ella, or the suffering of others.There was not warning that ULEZ would be extended to its latest boundary.
I think some people extrapolate from that that Sadiq Khan is on the brink of bringing in road pricing.
I simply ask for credible links to prove that, not hearsay.0 -
Have I offended you by calling you daft @seth plum0
-
My question on compliance was about the reason for the lack of data. I did not suggest you may be able to locate it.seth plum said:
Well as I said above, if there is evidence about road pricing could you provide a link? Including the spending on stuff for road pricing directed by Sadiq Khan. He has made a statement, if you think it was forced out of him that is an opinion certainly, whether it is fact is open to debate.valleynick66 said:
It is wrong to say the latest expansion was introduced with a lot of warning. It was not. Even more so amidst a cost of living crisis.seth plum said:The introduction might have had ways to improve it, but @cantersaddick has explained quite often the scheme was introduced with a lot of warning, and a scrappage scheme. What other things might have been done?
If we want an environment with cleaner air one way or another is it will cost us all financially and a change in lifestyles.
As for Sadiq Khan and road pricing he has said the GLA always keep road pricing ‘under review’, is there anything wrong with that? He has also said that whilst he is Mayor he would not introduce road pricing.
It is up to each person to decide if Khan can be believed on that.
That always brings me back to Ella’s mother Rosamund Kissi Debrah and her ongoing campaign to keep the health issue up there with the car issue.
https://www.ellaroberta.org/about-us/our-people/This should not be glossed over. Further the scrappage scheme had to be improved from the initial offering.So the point on pay per mile remains. it is the case he has spent significant sums to date on it and now been forced to state it wont yet be introduced. The evidence you queried is effectively there as a lesser study would surely have sufficed if the plans were not more advanced.Any observations on why we still await any detailed analysis on compliance / fines issued?The warnings about the introduction of both ULEZ schemes and whether there was enough of it is down to opinion too. I personally believe it was dragged on too long before introduction, increasing the suffering of those affected by dirty air.
In terms of compliance and fines I don’t have any link to data on that. Nor do I have a link to how much cleaner the air has become.
Khan has been excellent during all this, because the car lobby is more vociferous and powerful than the concerned parent lobby, but he has walked a tricky path between the two opposing forces very well.
There is no evidence that previously Shaun Bailey, and currently Susan Hall give a damn about the pollution or the death of little Ella, or the suffering of others.Put another way do you have any view on why none is published?
My concern, to reiterate, is not that we won’t see some marginal gain in air quality but that ULEZ will become a cost drain too soon. I am a lone view on this.My interest in the compliance data is to see who pays (not just gets fined) and changes behaviour versus the ad hoc ‘day trippers’ who pay once or twice only and therefore don’t reduce emissions within London.0 -
Just look up Project Detroit (it's an official project)
No doubt some people won't have time to search for it, but will have time to post long winded posts denying it3 -
I am used to it and worse, it's called playing the man not the ball.cafc999 said:Have I offended you by calling you daft @seth plum0
