ulez

[greyhound]

how many on hear affected by this £12 charge.
FFS think its outrageous if you live in the zone just to
go to work every day will cost a bomb.

[The Mindsweep]

Only affects 10% of cars and that figure will go down in time as older cars are scrapped.

Like all costs, work out if its cheaper to change your car if it affects you, plenty of cheap ones avaliable. Failing that, save up your pennies to buy a spot on Elon"s escape module from a burning planet Earth.

[Orient Punxx]

Won’t pay it, will just leave the diesel at home and use public transport. Which is basically what it’s all about.

[The Mindsweep]

Won’t pay it, will just leave the diesel at home and use public transport. Which is basically what it’s all about.

I have a 7 year old diesel car which is exempt, its not all diesels

[Orient Punxx]

Absolutely, although my 400k one is. Not being critical of ULEZ but scraping perfectly good diesel cars is not a great thing in itself.

[The Mindsweep]

Absolutely, although my 400k one is. Not being critical of ULEZ but scraping perfectly good diesel cars is not a great thing in itself.

I also agree with ULEZ in principle, but like many things in this country there is no joined up thinking in place. The scrapage scheme as you say, plus in some areas there is very poor public transport alternatives as well as the high costs.

[Mistadobalina]

Feel for the small number of people in the parts of the ulez that have poor, radial only transport links and can't afford to buy a compliant vehicle. Does feel genuinely regressive for that section of the population who are stuck out in zone 4. But a lot of the whining is coming from the sort of motorist's who absolutely lose their sh*t over anything that restricts their 'right' to drive when where and what they want, regardless of the impact on others.

[Proposition Joe]

Always going to be a few people negatively affected but the alternative is absolutely everyone being subjected to worse air quality so ploughing on with the policy will benefit far, far more people. Absolute no brainer, not that that will stop the whingeing and hand wringing from the usual suspects. And now, it seems, the Labour front bench.

Not Khan's biggest fan but credit due for sticking to his guns on this, the national party could learn from him in terms of developing a policy and actually standing by it even when receiving criticism.

[ComeOnYouOs]

In principle ULEZ is a good thing, but if cars are polluting, they shouldnt be allowed to be used at all, in the ULEZ zone, whereas Khan is saying if you give me £12.50, then you can come in and pollute the air anyway .
A few interesting facts
I collected half a dozen car regs from around my locale.......all 2006 regs and earlier, and put them through the web page that tells you if your cars complient, and everyone of these was complient, even a 22 year old Merc

Within 18 months, the £12.50p per day will be increased to £15 per day, and probably to £20 a day by the end of the decade. I also reckon the criteria for whether a car is complient, will change, meaning many cars that are complient now, will not be complient suddenly .
As i said, its basically a decent idea, but not implemented well.
The Tories say that if they win the Mayoral Elections next May, they will get rid of ULEZ from day1. This could be a vote winner for them i reckon

[Proposition Joe]

It almost certainly will win them votes, but polling consistently shows the majority of Londoners back Ulez. Just hope they're as likely to vote as the Boomers.

[EastDerehamO]

It’s likely the poorest in society who have the older cars most likely to fall foul of the charge, which isn’t fair regardless of the overall aim. Also private jets aren’t banned from London airports, and it is that lack of consistency which I disagree with.

[Monkey Boy]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

[redintheface]

Not affected directly ( as yet) but imho it is more about raising revenue for a creaking and inept public transport system in the capital than it is about “ clean” air. The likely targeting of those who are likely to be least able to afford it is reprehensible.

[StillSpike]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Yes, it's so Londoners can breathe better air. So the rest of your question is redundant. Serious answer.

[Monkey Boy]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Yes, it's so Londoners can breathe better air. So the rest of your question is redundant. Serious answer.

[BoniO]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Nope - that’s a dumb and irrelevant question plus it’s the oft repeated simplistic argument against the UK making changes which help the fight against Global warming. Of course we also need other Countries to implement changes to fight Global warming but whether they do, or don’t, has no bearing on what we do.
In simple terms, is it OK for you to throw your litter in the street because that’s what your neighbour does? We all need to accept responsibility and do what we can, as individuals then as communities, then as a Country etc. Using the “why should we when they aren’t” argument is pathetic and has to stop if we’re going to make any headway.

[StillSpike]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Nope - that’s a dumb and irrelevant question plus it’s the oft repeated simplistic argument against the UK making changes which help the fight against Global warming. Of course we also need other Countries to implement changes to fight Global warming but whether they do, or don’t, has no bearing on what we do.
In simple terms, is it OK for you to throw your litter in the street because that’s what your neighbour does? We all need to accept responsibility and do what we can, as individuals then as communities, then as a Country etc. Using the “why should we when they aren’t” argument is pathetic and has to stop if we’re going to make any headway.

Plus it's probably fair to say that one of the reasons other countries such as India and especially China have higher impacts on the environment is that we exported our manufacturing industries, and therefore our polluting, to them.

[Monkey Boy]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Nope - that’s a dumb and irrelevant question plus it’s the oft repeated simplistic argument against the UK making changes which help the fight against Global warming. Of course we also need other Countries to implement changes to fight Global warming but whether they do, or don’t, has no bearing on what we do.
In simple terms, is it OK for you to throw your litter in the street because that’s what your neighbour does? We all need to accept responsibility and do what we can, as individuals then as communities, then as a Country etc. Using the “why should we when they aren’t” argument is pathetic and has to stop if we’re going to make any headway.

It was just a question that’s all didn’t expect the Gettysburg address in reply. Just a question

[Sid Bishop]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Nope - that’s a dumb and irrelevant question plus it’s the oft repeated simplistic argument against the UK making changes which help the fight against Global warming. Of course we also need other Countries to implement changes to fight Global warming but whether they do, or don’t, has no bearing on what we do.
In simple terms, is it OK for you to throw your litter in the street because that’s what your neighbour does? We all need to accept responsibility and do what we can, as individuals then as communities, then as a Country etc. Using the “why should we when they aren’t” argument is pathetic and has to stop if we’re going to make any headway.

It was just a question that’s all didn’t expect the Gettysburg address in reply. Just a question

Very good reply, yes you just asked a question, end of !

[Chicken Dhansak]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Absolutely agree, those four countries are the world's major contributors to global warming, and what's it all about, money.

[Proposition Joe]

So because China pollutes, London shouldn't bother trying to give it's own citizens cleaner air? Righto. I'll just tell my kid that he has to breath in emissions at their current levels because a new coal mine has opened outside Beijing and that means it'd be hypocritical of us to do anything positive.

[OyinbO]

It's going to cost me an arm and a leg to buy a new compliant motor, but I'm still in favour of the policy because my family's health will be much better for it.

[BoniO]

Question, so stopping people in older cars and there emissions for a few hundred square miles around London is going to save the planet (or is it so Londoners can breath better air?) if so what about India,China,Russia and the the USA are they all doing the same thing? Serious question

Nope - that’s a dumb and irrelevant question plus it’s the oft repeated simplistic argument against the UK making changes which help the fight against Global warming. Of course we also need other Countries to implement changes to fight Global warming but whether they do, or don’t, has no bearing on what we do.
In simple terms, is it OK for you to throw your litter in the street because that’s what your neighbour does? We all need to accept responsibility and do what we can, as individuals then as communities, then as a Country etc. Using the “why should we when they aren’t” argument is pathetic and has to stop if we’re going to make any headway.

It was just a question that’s all didn’t expect the Gettysburg address in reply. Just a question

Haha - so for you, 5 sentences equates to the Gettysburg address? Oh dear, oh dear.
You already knew the answer to your question. You were just making the same old tired references to other Countries actions/inaction. Been used by Global Warming deniers and the Right for some time now.

[Monkey Boy]

Nope - that’s a dumb and irrelevant question plus it’s the oft repeated simplistic argument against the UK making changes which help the fight against Global warming. Of course we also need other Countries to implement changes to fight Global warming but whether they do, or don’t, has no bearing on what we do.
In simple terms, is it OK for you to throw your litter in the street because that’s what your neighbour does? We all need to accept responsibility and do what we can, as individuals then as communities, then as a Country etc. Using the “why should we when they aren’t” argument is pathetic and has to stop if we’re going to make any headway.

It was just a question that’s all didn’t expect the Gettysburg address in reply. Just a question

Haha - so for you, 5 sentences equates to the Gettysburg address? Oh dear, oh dear.
You already knew the answer to your question. You were just making the same old tired references to other Countries actions/inaction. Been used by Global Warming deniers and the Right for some time now.

I’ve never posted on this before “same old references” your just one of these people on here that wants to start an argument for whatever reason. Try to grow up a little please I’m sure your find it more satisfying as you go through life. Have a nice day my friend

[BoniO]

It was just a question that’s all didn’t expect the Gettysburg address in reply. Just a question

Haha - so for you, 5 sentences equates to the Gettysburg address? Oh dear, oh dear.
You already knew the answer to your question. You were just making the same old tired references to other Countries actions/inaction. Been used by Global Warming deniers and the Right for some time now.

I’ve never posted on this before “same old references” your just one of these people on here that wants to start an argument for whatever reason. Try to grow up a little please I’m sure your find it more satisfying as you go through life. Have a nice day my friend

You too pal. I hope you have better luck with your schtick next time.