Did Uxbridge just vote for Climate Change?

[Tatami]

By 495 votes? The reason for the narrow Tory win appears to be down to a campaign against the Ultra Low Emmission Zone. Cleaner air, doing something positive about Climate Change, helped by access to the best Public transport network in the country? Nah, more of the same please; dirty air and dirty politics. FFS Uxbridge.

i can give you the version for cars as well.
ulez cars suffer the same microchip issue as vans.
although supply is marginally better as there is more of them. Unless your budget is small
ulez cars have quadrupled in value over night. Old shitters that were worth a few hundred are now worth thousands.

there’s also a road tax issue. Small old 55 plate diesel car E.g renault clio is £30 a year to tax. Replace it with a small 55 plate fiesta it’s £200 a year to tax.

it’s even more money to find after the £1000 cost to change.

7 seaters and larger family cars are gold dust as no one bought them in petrol years ago. So their cost has again, quadrupled.

the local small shops know it’s going to hit the customer base hard as people from the mile up the road will not visit them anymore as it’s going to cost an extra £12.50.

If you read my answer, I did not specifically reference ULEZ, I said:
It is a worrying result because it will galvanise the anti-environmental wing of the Tory party.

However we have to just keep going. A growing majority of people understand that climate change is real and we have to transition from fossil fuels.

The OP asked 'Did Uxbridge just vote for climate change?' - I was attending to that question.

Uxbridge having ulez will not make the slightest difference to climate change when you have countries like China. Ulez affects the poorest in the area hard. I would not vote for any party pushing a ulez zone in my area.

How are they mining for all the electric cars?
is that with massive diesel machinery?
what about the co2 production of the new car?

keeping well maintained older cars on the road is not always the worse thing for the environment.

It wasn't just about ulez, although it played a huge part.

The tories but a local councillor who people knew up. The labour candidate came across as being very sure that he'd win.

I voted Labour this time, just to try to get tories out, not because I liked the guy.

Labour put a big effort into canvassing but it was just based on not being tory

I do happen to agree with ULEZ because I have seen for myself how it changes peoples habits re driving older cars into London, which can only be good for the air quality. Appreciate that this causes problems for people with older cars who can't afford to upgrade, but it's also true that the very poorest in society are less likely to own cars at all and more likely to live in congested parts of the city like along main roads etc.

But I also agree with your suggestion re charging people extra to drive high end cars like Landrover Defenders into cities like London.

This. They voted in Boris Johnson- they're clearly a wee bit touched in the head.

There are climate impacts from improved air quality - for example the carbon reduction in not having to treat the estimated additional 300,000 people who would develop respiratory disorders without ULEZ is significant. There is a quality of life issue which is important. ULEZ doesn't hit the poorest hardest, as the poorest are already on public transport. However the economic impact on small traders needs consideration. If we need subsidies to enable those at lower income points to transition that is what should happen. The Tories will not subsidise because they oppose the change itself, being as they are in favour of oil profits.

The thing is we are in a period of transition, the transition will have to come but the anti-environmentalists in the Tory party will oppose, of course.

I’m in a ULEZ area and won’t be voting for Kahn again (I always have before). ULEZ is just another tax. There’s cameras everywhere, so if you’re car’s not compliant you wont be able to drive a mile to the local supermarket without paying a charge. As soon as this goes through, I predict we’ll see a year on year expansion of the number of vehicles that aren’t compliant (they’ll find other reasons to make them not compliant) and it’ll be used as another money-making scheme. And I say that as someone who doesn’t drive and uses public transport to get anywhere.

Repeating what I said to someone upthread:
If you read my answer, I did not specifically reference ULEZ, I said:
It is a worrying result because it will galvanise the anti-environmental wing of the Tory party.

However we have to just keep going. A growing majority of people understand that climate change is real and we have to transition from fossil fuels.

The OP asked 'Did Uxbridge just vote for climate change?' - I was attending to that question.

It is worth noting that the size of swing in Uxbridge would likely be enough if it occurred nationally for Labour to be the largest party assuming Lib Dems took some Con seats as well. It does depend it that scenario a little on how many and to whom SNP seats ar redistributed.

If you don't drive and you don't use public transport, why are you opposed to ULEZ?

This seems illogical, I would be interested to understand how poor air quality and traffic congestion benefit you personally?

Yes easy done, just increase (punitively) the duty on cars e.g. over 1500cc but i guess our leaders don't want that as it means they'd have to pay more.

Some of the responses here are a great example of how wedded people are to their cars. Why are they driving a mile to a supermarket? That's a perfectly cyclable distance! For larger orders, there are deliveries, and don't tell me you're buying sacks of rubble from Wickes 3 times a week.

The whole point of the ULEZ and congestion charging is to get people to change their behaviour. It is not sustainable to drive short distances everywhere, or for your default answer to be "get in the car".

Electric cars are twice as heavy as other cars and so the pollution from tyre particles is much higher.

They also cause more potholes because they are heavier.

Most people dont need to drive a mile to go to the local shops. That people have to drive such short distances is ridiculous.

The poorest are not on public transport in the outskirts. They are in their older cars scraped together.
public transport is cost prohibitive and restrictive as to where you work.

my work does cover hillingdon so I know the demographic well. Public transport is quite disjointed there, so it’s a bus into Uxbridge town and out again to the next part of Uxbridge for most people. Its £5 to get the bus. It adds huge amount of time and it doesn’t work if you’ve got to get the kids too or from schools. It’s an area with great schools and terrible schools, so the school run could be quite a fair distance from home or work.
then there’s secondary. It boarders buckinghamshire and hertfordshire so you may find yourself wanting to use one of their schools to maintain your children’s friendship groups or it’s nearer. There won’t be a school bus.

ive talked to my essex and kent counterparts, it’s the same issues replicated at every boarder with ulez.

No they will drive further to save themselves that 12.50. As it’s raining, what they want is heavy. Or they need to go on the way or from work etc.

Maybe if Central Government had been honest over the past 13 years, charged polluters for the pollution they cause and funded local government properly there would be no need for the ULEZ.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · Today 07:23

“I'm not sure why anyone would expect the Constituency that previously elected Boris Johnson to make decisions that are in any way sensible.”

Well said.

Half of the world is suffering under extreme heat. It’s only July, may well be us next. But hey, who cares as long as they can stick it to Khan.

Fools.

The air quality is good where I live. I’m opposed to the expansion of ULEZ because I genuinely believe it’s a money-making scheme. I can see the advantages of trying to cut down on air pollution in more congested areas of London (I used to live in zone 2, where there were clearly problems), but where I am now, there aren’t major congestion issues. I have friends who have to drive to get to work and their vehicles aren’t compliant so they are worried from a financial point of view. The outer edges of my borough are not well-served by public transport like inner London. I also object to cameras on every bloody corner.

You cant walk or cycle in the rain?

Like I said ridiculous.

How is my window cleaner going to change his behaviour? He knows he needs a new van, but could not afford it before ULEZ, and even less now, with the daily charge?

Have you ever actually been to Hillingdon or tried to get around it by public transport? There are farms in Hillingdon and villages with poorly joined up and intermittent, slow bus services at best.

The transport, like most transport inside the M25 is primarily designed to get you into central London. Fine if you are off to the city in the morning and corporate spouse can drop you off at the station. Useless if you work shifts or locally or in Bucks/Berks/etc as most people do in that part of the world. Most people need to drive to get to work, schools and childcare (unless they have half a day to do the journey).

The constituency is also exactly the demographic which both the Tories and Labour need to win - pockets of significant deprivation, some areas of affluence and a large chunk of those who are self employed, on zero hour contracts, the "just about managing", the first generation owners of modest homes, hospital workers, carers, airport shift staff.

Its a swing seat under the new boundaries tested first by Johnson, who won partly on his record against Heathrow expansion (which he then hid from) and as part of a country wide swing to the Tories.

Khan is imposing ULEZ on outer London without discussion, without the air quality justification of inner city areas, without enhancing within area transport, the scrappage offered is a joke compared to the cost of new vehicles, the lead time was totally inadequate.

So basically dumping a huge bill on a section of the public who are most hit by rising prices and interest rates over the past year.

Even those who can afford to buy new cars can't get them because long wait lists and escalating second hand prices.

And my reply to you wasn’t just about ulez. But the demonisation of perfectly good useable cars.

not the stinky shit box diesel who has had its DPF removed. But perfectly good cars whose tail pipe emissions are lower than those made today. But demonised because they are older.