At first I thought this’ll never fly, but they’ve already brought in charging for the tunnels.
But the policy document is full of errors. It makes no sense even if you agree with charging! (Obvs not).
Look up ‘London politician wants to charge for safety benefit’
Or it’s on mag-uk
I can’t believe it is worth going after bikes for either ULEZ or CCZ.
I’m back from a European trip and visiting a friend in Frankfurt I had to check that bikes are not included in Frankfurt’s environmental scheme - luckily they’re not - but a few days later I was visiting another friend near Reims and had to do a detour around Reims because now you have to display a Crit’Air sticker which only costs a few euros but you have to order it in advance - which I couldn’t do when on the road - failure to display is a €150 fine.
Bikes are such a minority on the roads, it would be better if all these well-intentioned schemes simply excluded them as Frankfurt sensibly does.
This YouTube video is worth a watch.
https://
youtu.be/Tcn0YM2AkXs?si=0egp-rB2RnI899Kz
well done thanks for reminding me - Crit air ordered for end of month - although i seldom go into cities when touring buy you never know
One comment sums it up
“You can practically hear how the conversation went “10% of motorists have swapped from cars to motorcycles, which are exempt from the congestion charge, that’s a 10% loss in revenue, we’ll just have to start charging motorcyclists too, we’ll claim it’s for safety reasons”
