Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Arse: according to Ken LIvingstone my car is so unGreen I'll have to pay £25 congestion charge

241 replies

TheDullWitch · 13/02/2008 21:12

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6146442.stm

It's only a blardy Volvo estate, not a 4X4 and actually I'm Mrs Public Transport and must have only driven it into the congestion zone 3 times since charges started.(And we re getting rid of it anyway in two months.)

But that ruling will just lead to lots of richer families buying a second, runabout car which doesn t have to pay the charge. Which is hardly Green. Whilst lots of poorer families will never be able to use the one big family car they need.

OP posts:
hana · 13/02/2008 21:14

lots of the larger family cars (7 seaters) will be caught out by this - it's not jus tthe 4x4s
our new car falls just under this list

policywonk · 13/02/2008 21:16

I agree it's a blunt instrument - but you gotta admit it's an effective one. I haven't heard anyone suggest a better way of getting people onto public transport in cities.

spicemonster · 13/02/2008 21:17

The charge doesn't come into effect until October so you won't have to pay. And it only affects cars with CO2 emissions of over 226. Which is largely cars with very big engines. Do you really need a car with an engine over 2 litres?

Yes, it might lead to people buying a second car. But it might also lead to people switching to a smaller engined/lower emission car. Hell, some people might even switch to an estate which is completely free to drive into central London - now wouldn't that be great?

Original poster
TheDullWitch · 13/02/2008 21:20

Yes, but he s just made it FREE for a whole bunch of small cars. Ford Fiestas and VW Polos and the like won t have to pay the charge. Which will mean thousands of small cars will clog the streets and cause, cumulatively as much pollution.

I d say fair cop about my Volvo if the small cars were kept out too.

And all the people who were thinking of going on bikes and buses, will now just buy small cars.

It is so illogical.

OP posts:
ladytophamhatt · 13/02/2008 21:21

ohhh, ours just scrapes in under the 225 co2 emmisions thing and it sa 7 seater.

Not that I;d ever drive in london anyway but there you go....

policywonk · 13/02/2008 21:21

Hmm, agree that it's odd to let smaller cars in free. Not sure what the logic is there.

Desiderata · 13/02/2008 21:23

Cars do make the place look untidy, though.

lennygrrl · 13/02/2008 21:23

Message withdrawn

Original poster
TheDullWitch · 13/02/2008 21:23

I think the point about congestion charge is to keep down congestion. ie keep out ALL cars. If he does that the pollution/CO2 levels will go down anyway.

I m not really moaning about my car. I think it 's funny actually, as I purport to be Green. It is my dh's company car and we just chose it from a list and we are complete non-car poeple. So we don t know stuff about engine size. We chose it because it was big enough to put bikes in the back!!

OP posts:
lennygrrl · 13/02/2008 21:24

Message withdrawn

morningglory · 13/02/2008 21:27

Carmakers are finding ways to go around this. The new BMW 4x4 engine coming out has a co2 emmission in band g. I don't see much of a change happenning.

Original poster
TheDullWitch · 13/02/2008 21:30

Exactly Morningglory: that car will kill small children and block the streets just like one which pollutes a bit more. The difference between the pollution is nothing. But I thought the idea was to get away from car dependency.

It just seems like Ken is trying to play global politics, rather than solve London's problems.

OP posts:
spicemonster · 13/02/2008 21:31

Sorry, was sighing because there was a thread about this yesterday. There are a lot of people who live in the zone. At the moment, regardless of whether they drive a low emission clio or a huge 3 litre Bentley, they all get a 90% reduction. With the new plan, only the little cars will get the reduction. The big cars will have to pay 25 quid. Every day. Which I would imagine will put a lot of people off buying the higher emission car and swapping it for something that is still eligible for the discount.

Banning cars entirely isn't practical - London is just too big. This isn't a perfect solution but it's a step in the right direction. Parking is so heinously expensive that I can't see that you're going to drive into the zone just because it's free if you have a small car (and it isn't all of them - very few actually are in bands A and B) and then pay £5 an hour to park.

Original poster
TheDullWitch · 13/02/2008 21:34

I was completely against the extension of the zone, because it meant all the rich Chelsea wives suddenly had carte blanche to drive across london for bugger all.

OP posts:
lennygrrl · 13/02/2008 21:35

Message withdrawn

spicemonster · 13/02/2008 21:45

Aha dullwitch but this way those vile Chelsea tractor drivers will have to pay (well some of them anyway).

At the risk of repeating myself from yesterday's thread, I'm hopeful (quite possibly naively so) that eventually big gas guzzlers will become utterly socially unacceptable - like dropping litter or not recycling.

The cut off seems pretty sensible to me - it's in line with the car tax which leaps from 200 a year for band F to 300 for band G.

Original poster
TheDullWitch · 13/02/2008 21:49

But what I am saying is they will keep the 4x4s for the weekend. Then get a runabout for Congestion charge free ride. Doubling, in lots of cases,number of cars in London.

I say £25 for all 4x4s and my car obv
and £8 for all others, big or small, guzzly or not. Except electric toy cars. And people who live in Western zone should pay full charge to go into central zone. That is fairer.

The idea is to stop frigging cars. Not to piss about with silly exclusions.

OP posts:
Hallgerda · 14/02/2008 09:51

How do I find out which band our car's in?

I've never driven into the congestion zone, so it's a bit of an academic question, but I'm curious.

MicrowaveOnly · 14/02/2008 10:04

Hmm, seem to be missing the point..

we need to reduce CO2. By dissuading people from buying high emitting cars we encourage the profit seeking car manufacturers to make low CO2 emitting cars.

e.g. FINALLY mercedes that traditional 'i don't care if i pollute cos I'm so classy' manufacturer has just launched a car with spectacularly low emissions.

you see, they can do it if they're pushed. Its just like when we had to change to lead free petrol..the manufacturers were forced to get on and build more lead free cars.

it takes time, we have to bite the bullet for the sake of our kids.

KatyMac · 14/02/2008 10:10

Which cars are free - is there a website?

KatyMac · 14/02/2008 10:12

The VED (?) database only has info for new cars - gee that's green

justjules · 14/02/2008 10:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bozza · 14/02/2008 10:15

agree with dullwitch's latest post but also with microwave only.

Dullwitch it wasn't very green to totally disregard emissions when choosing your DH's company car, was it? We are going through the process of deciding what DH's next company car will be. And apparently the cheapest thing to get taxwise is a BMW 1 series because the emissions are so low but I am still getting my head round whether it is big enough or not. It as about the size of a golf or a focus.

KatyMac · 14/02/2008 10:17

As you can't buy my car now - it's not on that site

MicrowaveOnly · 14/02/2008 10:18

bozza we have a honda crv, yes its a naughty 4x4 but its emissions are well below the £25 mark and hence below the expensive MOT line too.

Not all 4x4s are bad!!