I figure we also owe him for the lies and misrepresentation in connection with the Bus Lane saga, supporting Porsche might be a nice way of paying him back. That said he shows little concern for public opinion, given that he chose to announce the new emissions based scheme before TFL has even revealed the content of the public consultation!!
His determination to cosy up to the ever-green cycle brigade (the reason they lied about the bus lanes) is also bad new for us, because they’re view seems to be that powered 2-wheelers should be banned and they present a disproportionate danger to cyclists.
“motorcyclists are disproportionately hazardous to cyclists and pedestrians: according to CTC, PTWs are about 1.5 times as likely as cars to be involved in collisions which cause serious injury to cyclists, twice as likely to be involved in causing them serious injury and about three times as likely to be involved in killing them, per mile travelled” http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=874
The congestion charge I could kind of understand but the new tariff has feck all to do with congestion, Ken has jumped on the money making green machine, it was interesting watching him at a press conference the other day and he made a slight slip up regarding congestion and pollution taxation he wasn’t sure what to call it. He should be honest and rename it “CASH POINT SCHEME”.
Whilst I’m ranting has anyone notice the petrol prices are creeping up again !?
Agree with your points about congestion, and about how the C-Charge is being used for other means, BUT I am also in favour of this new extra C-Charge to the extent that it gets oversized vehicles off the road.
You can see over/around/through most “normal” sized cars, but people carriers and 4x4s (invariably carrying one, two, or perhaps three people at most, and often with superdark tints on the rear windows) are a real obstacle to get past. Especially on London’s smaller roads.
Add to that the fact that most people driving them have NO idea as to how wide their vehicle is (i.e. they think it’s a zillion feet wide instead of just a million), so they take up twice as much space as they need to “just in case”, I’m very much in favour of anything that gets these big empty buses off the roads.
I totally agree with whats been said above. The pollution charge wont just hit 4X4 etc (Most of them can afford it anyway) But a lot of people have 2lt cars who will get hit by it. And a lot of them will be oldish cars of people who can’t afford to buy new ones.
I say down with nuns, they’re bad for the environment.
Cheesy Quavers are no better ban them too!
And don’t get me started on the Daily Mail… Goebbels couldn’t have produced a better propaganda machine if he tried!
And then there’s cheap trainers that dig into your ankles even after they’ve “worn in” - BOOOOOOO
Next we should ban computers and typing… terrible state of affairs that!
Liquorice allsorts - disgraceful.
Peas… a travesty of a vegetable.
Cats, bloody ungrateful little fleabags and get this… they walk around in their own toilets. That sort of thing shouldn’t be allowed.
Children, definitely illegal in my book.
Tourists, no tourism in general… must stop now
Smilies - ANYONE caught using a smiley, lock em up!
Blimey I didnt think the Nuns would get it! Aren’t Cheezy Quavers one of your 5 a day? It’s interesting that we got back on the subject of 4x4’s… as they’re not really the issue… you have to also keep in mind how they measure Co2, because it’s got bugger all to do with how you might drive in real life. Personally, I dont mind any driver if they show me consideration. The problem in London is that everyone is in their own bubble. I drive a large car but also ride a motorcycle, guess what I do know how big the car is and I move over for bikes. Whilst riding the bike the biggest challenge for me is judging the level of observation that the driver might possess, the size of the vehicle rarely has much to do with it. Even a Smart Car can wipe you out!
I am also on the anti CG side of the fence as I feel it is an unfair system and I fully support the Porsche stance. A fairer system doing away with the tax disc and to increase TAX on all vehicles through the Fuel duty on petrol/deisel would be fairer IMO with discounts for high use commercial vehicles through tax breaks.
I prefer to use my bike but needs must so we also drive a 7 seater and I dont understand this “Car has to be full attitude”. With a large family to run around at school time its inevitable that 50% of a journey in any car with passengers of a school age means they get left at the drop off point, namely the school so guess what an empty ish car for the return journey… mmm:hehe:Also lots of these MPV type vehicles get used appropriately as taxis so will be seen empty between fares:w00t:I expect so many more examples can be listed for and against but if you want to keep up with the pace of todays lifestyles nowadays then what are the alternatives…
I’m in favour of the additional charge for larger vehicles as they have nothing to do in Central London but causing traffic and polluting. They are also dangerous as their drivers don’t always realise the size of the vehicles they are driving. And interestingly enough, when I look into these vehicles while they’re on the roads, there is only one person in them (the driver), so why on earth are they driving such large vehicles just to transport themselves?
There is no question of charging bikes at the moment but, like everything, if they need extra money they will do. If one day this is the case, I would like to see a similar scheme as for cars… i.e. the most polluting bikes such as 600cc and above should pay the highest price and the least (i.e. up to 125cc) should go for free. Why do you need a high powered bike to move yourself in Central London? It makes more noise than all other bikes and even cars, pollutes a lot more than other bikes and cannot be ridden at its full speed as speed is limited in Central London.
To be fair, the dangerous motorbikes bit could just as easily be reversed to suggest that bicycles cause a disproportionate danger to motorcyclists. Which they often do.
It’s highly amusing when cycle lobby groups start complaining about their relative road safety when most feel the highway code and all other associated rules are completely irrelevant to them.
How many times have you had a cyclist come straight down a one way street at you into oncoming traffic?
I have no problem with cyclists but, to suggest that the problem if there is one, isn’t a two way thing is wrong I’d say. I’ve had lots of near misses with cyclists.
Of course, you’re right about the 50%/ school drop off thing, but I live next to a school where, despite the small amount of children being picked up/ dropped off, the parents almost always drive these Hummer-like behemoths!