London congestion - zero to £25 per day

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone,

announced yesterday afternoon that he will take forward the
policy of reducing London's C02 emissions by introducing
emissions-based charging to the existing congestion charge scheme.
The proposals, to be consulted upon, could see the highest
CO2-emitting cars paying £25 to enter the congestion charging zone,
and the lowest A &B VED band vehicles qualifying for a 100 per cent discount.

Under the proposals, the following daily charges would apply:

- VED band charges A and B (less than 120g CO2 per km)
which meet Euro IV standard: £0 (100% discount)

- VED band charges C, D, E, F: £8 (as now)

VED band charges G (above 225g CO2 per km): £25

Subject to consultation, it is proposed that the 100 per cent
discount for band A & B vehicles will be introduced in 2008.
The surcharge for band G vehicles that emit the most C02 is
expected to be possible from 2009/10, although the Mayor has
asked Transport for London to examine the possibility of an
earlier start date.

The 90% resident's discount currently entitled to those living
within the congestion charging zone, which is to be extended
westwards on February 19th 2007, will be withdrawn for vehicles in band G.

Ken Livingstone, said: "Londoners are becoming increasingly
aware of the need to tackle climate change and reduce C02 emissions.
Most vehicles that will be charged £25, in Vehicle Excise Duty
Band G, are high priced models. Those who buy them can afford
to choose from pretty much the whole of the mainstream car
market but have chosen to buy one of the most polluting vehicles.
By making these changes to the congestion charging scheme we are
encouraging people to take into account the impact of their
choice of new car on the environment and the planet.

"We are already cleaning up London's fleet of public vehicles
through measures like the introduction of hybrid buses. These
new proposals will tackle pollution from private vehicles, and
ensure that London is leading the way in the fight against
catastrophic climate change."

Interviewed by BBC Radio, which like other media, described
the proposed new maximum charge as an attack on 4x4s or
‘Chelsea tractors’, Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders
chief executive Christopher Macgowan described the proposed
maximum charge as outrageous, environmentally irrelevant
and based on “the politics of envy”.

The SMMT issued a news release listing VED band G-rated 10 vehicles –
people carriers, estates and family saloons – that will be liable
for the proposed 212% increase in what it called the ‘central
London motoring tax’, ranging from a number of 2.0 litre petrol MPVs
and estate cars to the 3.0 litre petrol Citroën C5 saloon, quoting
the models’ VED ratings from the Vehicle Certification Agency site
www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk

If its right i could go free,
as my fiesta 1.8 diesel (could only find a listing for 1.6)

But i had a rating of 119

Bollox - Just checked my Registration Documents
and its listed there 136 CO2 per km

So its £8 congestion charge for me if i went.

And cared lol

Cant really see it affecting anyone around here to be honest webby. And you would have to be mad to take a lesuirely drive through London at peak hours, so its only gunna affect commuters, the people who can afford it (most of em drive £50,000+ vehicles).

Public transport is fine in London, as it is anywhere so long as you give yourself the time to use it.

Yeh but what happens in london soon spreads,
as london isnt the only city that runs a conjestion charge.
So its only a matter of time.

Well if you have a better solution to cut conjestion, then I would love to hear it. Its the only thing that will stop drivers from using cars and start using public transport or sharing cars.

They have had the conjestion charge for 3 years now and it hasnt yet spread. Interestingly Birkenhead has been labelled as a possible trial area for some time in the future.

Im a lot more concerned about the governments new plans for road use charging, which are expected to start trials in 2007, with the recent announcement in the Queens Speech indicating this idea.

It is only the heavily congested areas that have the charge (such as westminster), most of it can be avoided and there is plenty of underground car parks about.

The only people that seems to drive in these areas are fat cats in BMW's and Merc's and delivery drivers. It doesn't affect Joe public as the people who live in london rely alot more on the underground than what we do.

Liverpool would have to severally upgrade their public transport links before they should charge.

To be fair, Liverpool's transport system isnt too bad, there are plenty of busses, award winning bus stations and a rail system that is far better then that in many comparable cities (maybe Sheffield and Manchester have the edge with their metro-link service though).

The biggest problem with Liverpool transport is conjestion slowing busses down, drivers not allowing buses to exit but stations and bus stops etc...

Liverpool will need a scheme in the near future to cut conjestion as at the present time, it is beginning to get out of hand.

Also, the police need to learn to handle incidents better, only a few weeks ago they bought the entire city transport system to a complete standstill thanks to them messing up and shutting off routes that were unnesescary due to a suicide attempt.

I disagree, i think the Liverpool transport system is pretty diabolical, the amount of times the train loop gets shut down because of "signal failures" It seems as though if you live in the Wirral Liverpool transport can charge you the earth. Most people forget that Birkenhead is closer to Liverpool City centre that most of Liverpool is.

Also, Wirral commuters are still paying to use the tunnel, which was meant to be paid of years ago.

Commuters paying through the nose to get to Liverpool doesnt really have any bearing on the quality of the transport system itself.

The Merseyrail service is actually amongst the most reliable in the UK.

With regards to pricing for rail fares, it not the local government or council that sets these, but the train operator. I personally have a grievance with the fares because when Serco/NedRailways, the current franchise license holder for the merseyrail network, took over after Arriva built the network up quite good, they pledged a 0% price increase policy for 15 years. Yet in the 4 years they have operated, they have increased prices at least 3 times!

Transport pricing is expensive everywhere though, as is the cost of petrol. Driving through Liverpool at peak hours is awful, in fact its not very pleasent most times of the day. I would much rather get a train there then drive there, if its possible for my destination.

So overall, the public transport system isnt bad. For a conjestion charge to work though, they would have to lower tunnel fee's (which would be part and parcel of such a scheme anyway), and provide cheaper parking spaces, possibly with some sort of discount for park and ride users.

With regards to the tunnel fee's, they should have been fully paid for by 2001, but they never budgeted for improvements, and this is why the toll's will never be removed, as they need money to keep the ongoing improvements. Unless the money was to come from elsewhere (ie. Conjestion tolls).

The public transport in this country is next to useless.

why? Because it's all run for profit.


If Thatcher never privatised public transport, and instead invested in it, like the French did, our public transport system would probably be regarded as the best in the world nowadays.

The only was to improve public transport and thus improve congestion is to re-nationalise the public transport sector, but it's never going to happen. So everyone who dispises public transport, like me, and who thinks congestion charges are unnessesary (only neccessary due to privatisation of public transport), like me, then you have the Tory government to thank. Oh, and also the Blairites as they too have not done shite all about it.

do the charges cut conjestion???? i dont know, i reckon theyre doing it to make money,not to cut traffic,they dont care about traffic,they just care about lining theyre pockets,same with this 4x4 road tax going thru the roof next year,theyre doing it to make money,they dont wanna reduce the number of 4x4s on the road,they want it to increase,and they wanna make well over 200 quid per offroader per year the fuckers. This country is shite

to be fair, there is hardly any trafic in the areas i vist in central London where congestion charges exist.

Yer but to be fair, there is absolutely no need for most of the people who drive 4x4's to have them. 9 out of 10 people who have Land Rovers don't even know what off roading is, never mind need one.

At the end of the day, its a choice to have a 4x4 and like most things in life, if you cant afford to have it and run it etc, then you dont buy it. Id love an MR2, but I cant afford the insurance on it, so I can't have it.

I dont moan about it though, I just get on with it...

But if you could afford a big expensive car, are you telling me you wouldn't buy one?

People buy these big expensive cars because of "safety" because they are rich, because they feel more dominant and higher up the social ladder maybe and maybe they just like the look and drive of them.

At the end of the day, why does anyone need anything other that a 1 litre?

Your missing the point of my post completely

I meant, people who choose have a 4x4, will do this knowing that they have to pay extra tax.

If I could afford an MR2, I would have one like yesterday. But I, like everyone else, have to work out what I can afford. These 4x4 drivers cannot moan as they too have to work out if they can afford it, and if they can't, then they should get a different car.

Also, they may like the safety it provides for themselves, but have you seen the damage it causes to pedestrians? And yes, the EU are planning to get very tough on 4x4's not being used by people who need them (like farmers etc). It wont be long before the goverment add the saftey to pedestrians as part of the tax (maybe 2009), and this is partly the reason the car's now are being built with pedestrian safety in mind. Also, new EU laws demand this.

I went through main London last year - the congestion charge hasn't changed a thing, it still took me two hours to leave the area because of the traffic.
Livingstone is just raking the money in, his little immature policies haven't been thought out at all, and he really needs removing.