Do you support the ULEZ expansion?

[icecream99]

Just curious as it is due to start at midnight tonight and could potentially cause a lot of chaos. I don't support it.

YANBU - I DON'T support ULEZ expansion

YABU - I DO support ULEZ expansion

We’re in the new ULEZ zone and dh’s car isn’t compliant, but we only use his for longer journeys, which don’t happen very often, and TBH we won’t notice the charge. His car is a diesel - diesel cars go on for ever, so we’re not in a hurry to replace it - and when he bought it we were still being told that diesels were more environmentally friendly!! So much for sodding experts….

I suppose I do generally support ULEZ, because I really feel for anyone who has to live in a very polluted, trafficky area - especially if they have children.

I also feel very sorry for anyone who depends on their car for work on a more or less daily basis, like the hardworking young bloke with his own gardening business who looks after our communal gardens in outer SW London. He’s already had to replace his van, which holds all his essential kit.

What makes me mad around here is the number of fucking great cars like tanks that obviously put more pressure on road surfaces - as if we don’t have enough potholes! - and take up too much parking space. IMO at the very least they should have to pay a considerably increased road tax. It seems grossly unfair that people can drive these massive, very expensive gas guzzlers around London all day if they feel like it, and not be penalised at all.

Agree. Tougher measures on vehicle weight (unless the person has a genuine reason for needing a heavy vehicle) should come next. It’s ridiculous. They also endanger pedestrians.

“I have three kids and need to take grandma around sometimes” isn’t a reason for these monstrous heavy vehicles - get a lighter minivan if that is your situation!

I'm in favour of the scheme on the whole, but feel it is unfair as it mainly affects the poorer people as they are the most likely to have cars that are not compliant.
It would be better if the government offered very cheap or interest free loans to those who cant afford to upgrade their cars.

Electric cars are very heavy...there's even be talk as to how multi storey car parks won't be able to cope with the weight once ev's become more common.

Poorer people aren't the worst affected. They're already walking or taking the bus. The richer you are the more likely you are to drive, to drive more, to own multiple cars.

Ah, so your POV is as a person with public transport on their doorstep. Right... That explains a lot...

Me and Mr Jumping grew up in central London but were priced out to the suburbs when buying our first home 20 years ago. The journey to see our elderly in-laws, who still live in the capital, takes 40 minutes by car. That same journey would take 2 hours on public transport.

Our car is ULEZ compliant but I know lots of people who just won't be able to see relatives now, and will struggle to take their children across the expansion zone to school.

So it's great that you don't need a car but you might want to open your mind a bit to the realities of what other people might be dealing with.

I live in Zone 3 SE London - it is not central London but it is adequate We have similar issues going across London - a journey to see a friend a couple of miles away is a bus and train journey or is two trains and 55 min (or more if connections don't align) or 15 mins by car. We suck it up and get to with it.

Transport in London grew up to take people to and from the centre and not across and that is defintiely something that impacts the outer suburbs more. I would support many more cross London routes - the Overground was a start and the new proposed orbital bus routes look good.

I am perfectly aware there are many places in London where a car will be more convenient but there are hardly any were it is an absolute essential (obviously there are some isntances wher epublic transport is not suitable - some disabilties/trades etc.. ) . I grew up in a small village with two buses a day and a two mile walk along an unpaved road to the nearest train station where there was one train an hour - so Londoners going on about bad transport always make me chuckle.

Paris is penalizing SUVs as an example of further green measures that London could take: this is a cut and paste from a Positive News article:

Paris tackled ‘auto-besity’

Paris is planning to reduce pollution by driving SUVs out of the city with new premium parking rates. Research suggests that carbon emissions from the global SUV fleet outweighs that of most countries.
The ‘progressive parking’ measures will take effect from January 2024. They will account for vehicle size, weight and the type of motor, and should include concessions for large and lower income families.
David Belliard, a deputy mayor responsible for mobility and public spaces, tweeted that the proposals also aimed to improve road safety following a 60 per cent increase in the number of SUVs in Paris over the last four years. “An absurdity!” he said. “These vehicles are useless in town and more dangerous.”
Critics of the scheme say it will impact families buying SUVs to replace people carriers.

Nevertheless, Grenoble is en route to introducing a similar initiative, and Lyon has already announced higher parking rates for heavier vehicles, also due in 2024.

On the subject of outer London transport improvements required, the "Superloop" bus plans are intended to increase frequency around the outer London periphery. The first upgraded section is being increased from every 30 minutes to every 15 minutes which is a quantum leap in useability. (I can hear the occupants of my parents' village which gets two buses a week laughing hollowly at this but of course the cost per passenger of running half hourly bus journeys to and from their village would be astronomical)
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/buses/superloop

The pandemic has killed off plans for the Bakerloo extension alas. There are huge chunks of south east London for which that would have been transformational.

You don't. You pay the costs of owning and operating a car and in return you get convenience and depending on the type of car, the pleasure of owning and driving a nice thing. Some cars are very desirable. You can carry up to three or maybe four passengers, say, but if you don't want to share, you can be alone. I understand the attractions.

Anytime you feel it's not worth the cost then sell it and don't get another one. That's what I did. I pay my fair share on public transport and the cost is lower than yours because I am prepared to wait for a double decker bus that I don't own and have to fuel and maintain and then share it with up to 80 strangers at a time all paying their fare apart from children, over-60s and fare dodgers. Did you learn about economies of scale at school? Even if you didn't it's not hard to work out.

I also think public transport should be subsidised and private car driving penalised in some circumstances - stopping short of a blanket ban - for the good of the greater number of people in a community.

I understand how travelling like that might not be for you but fail to see how the prices we both choose to pay are not fair.

The government receive a lot of revenue from petrol

@DdraigGoch Thanks. I take all your points including the amount of time you spend there. A while ago I'd spend 40 minutes on the Tube but half that was above ground before I went into tunnels.

These days my usual journey is 10 minutes. The longest regular one is 25ish nearly all underground. It's to a hospital in a heavily polluted and not noticeably rich and car-owning part of East London ironically.

Their heart and lung departments are NHS centres of excellence. They probably get a lot of practice.

Yes. Have done for over 20 years.

The weight does indeed go up a bit, assuming all other factors are kept constant; the solution to this is for people to have smaller and lighter vehicles and drive less.

I'm for ulez style zones in principle. I am completely AGAINST the way this has been rolled out, especially Sadiq Khan's refusal to address people's legitimate concerns about the roll out. He's been bleating out the same talking points for months and months while refusing to acknowledge that people that are NOT in receipt of benefits may be having a tough time due to COL and they should get a scrappage allowance too. He finally opened it up to all Londoners ONE WEEK before the expansion starts, meaning no one has had enough time to apply for the scheme, scrap their car, wait for the cheque and then go and buy a new car. They are stuck paying the charge until further notice. I have voted labour my entire adult life but will NOT be voting for Khan in the next mayoral election.

One of the most annoying things to me about this debate (where there appears to be a lot more heat than light from many people, who are startlingly ill-informed) is the way people against ULEZ are blaming Sadiq Khan personally. It was, as others have said, originally a Tory policy, and it's not some strange personal vendetta against car owners.

Everyone is in favour of pollution reducing measures until it affects them personally. I get that. We are all a little bit selfish like that.

But we should be reducing car ownership to keep our cities clean and lower emissions. I understand public transport links are not as good in many outer London boroughs as they are more centrally, but the obvious choice is to vote for a government who will increase expenditure in public transport.

I've been living in the ULEZ since the first expansion. I have lived in London in both inner and outer boroughs all my life, bar a few years, and virtually everyone I know supports the expansion in principle, though some disagree with the speed of implementation, which is a fair point.

I agree with everything you said @Ontopofthesunset

I find case studies for a living and it has been possible to find people who will be adversely affected by the Ulez expansion and I have reported on them.

But blow me, when I've asked for case studies I've been bombarded with people who say: "My car is Ulez-compliant but I'm worried about the little people."

Fine. That's really nice of you to care but like people on the roads you are useless to me. Can you just get out of my way so I can find the people who really do need to drive their non-compliant cars, will be badly affected and will make good stories.

I would concur with TfL's figures that most people drive compliant cars. There are some people who don't and if they really want to change then Central Government - that one being led by Rishi Sunak - should help Sadiq Khan for the good of our health and savings for the NHS.

The rest of you bleating whataboutery and tax grabs when your car is compliant just get in the way, Much like you do when I'm on the bus.

Remember, you can spread fumes, but only if you have money.

Life for the wealthy again.

Try lobbying China to stop building coal power stations and the US to reduce its pollution.

@Exdonkeylover Would you prefer it if people were banned from driving their non-compliant cars in London? I don't. At the moment they can do it but it will cost £12.50 a day. That will hurt but sometimes things hurt for the good of the rest of us. What do you suggest as a solution to make people switch to public transport or compliant cars beyond asking nicely? Our national Government, which is Conservative, could step in at any point but don't want to. Why do you think they don't want to assist in this public health issue by a Labour administration that will ease the burden on the NHS a year out from a General, Election ?

Jumping, perhaps some people might try and find other ways of getting their kids to school

IKR?

It's really easy to comply with the Ulez. People are making it sound like you need a brand new vehicle or an EV! It's not true.

For someone who lives in the zone, might be a single parent or low income family, needs the car for work, if you factor in one day on a weekend to drove, that's £300pcm. When half the country is always struggling to get by with largest inflation for a number of years.
You say hurt, but £300 is enough to push some people in to poverty.

Having lived in London, transport outside zone 2 (central London) is not always great
All tubes head inwards and buses float in between, but traffic slows them down badly and many occasions people been more than one bus.
It'll probably cost Khan his job. He won't be spending a possible £300M a year on trees to improve air quality or reducing the cost of the tube. Congestion charge already makes that amount per year. Granted, running costs, but I never saw any effort to make public transport more affordable to those using it from that money.

@Exdonkeylover this is a public health issue. National government have been working to improve public health since at least 1948 when the NHS was founded under Labour and 1956 when the Clean Air Act were passed under the Tories.

Don't you agree those things were a good idea? If not, why not?

It's affected me for the best. My lungs are at their full capacity. I'm guessing it has helped you too. I wouldn't want a child to have stunted lungs just because she lived on the South Circular in London like Ella Kissi-Debrah. Look at her face and ask if her life was worth driving a car. Would you say that to her mum? https://ellaroberta.org/about-ella

Ulez has affected me from 2019 and I am fine with it. Just like I was in 2007 when smoking indoors was banned nationally or 1983 when it became compulsory nationally in the UK to wear seat belts. People whined about all about those things then but looking back, why would you? Would you insist on your freedom to not wear a seatbelt or to smoke indoors now?

People whined about all about those things then but looking back, why would you? Would you insist on your freedom to not wear a seatbelt or to smoke indoors now?

It's not comparable because it's not a blanket ban, there's a paid for exemption, The equivalent would be to charge people for the privilege of smoking inside or not wearing a seatbelt.